6 ms·

`maxharris` is either a moron or a liar, or more probably both. The first fragment of this sentence is genuine Marx, writing for the New York Daily Tribune, as

`maxharris` is either a moron or a liar, or more probably both. The first fragment of this sentence is genuine Marx, writing for the New York Daily Tribune, as a one-second search would have shown him. The second I cannot find; it is certainly not in the same article, as the ellipsis fraudulently suggests. If it exists the chances that it refers to a transition to socialism, communism, or whatever Marx is supposed to have favored, are certainly zero. In the Daily Tribune article, Marx is discussing emigration (mostly to America) from England, Ireland and Scotland, in the years around 1850, and the gruesome commentary of English writers of the period. The Economist, for example, he quotes as writing: "The departure of the redundant part of the population of Ireland and the Highlands of Scotland is an indispensable preliminary to every kind of improvement. The revenue of Ireland has not suffered in any degree from the famine of 1846-47, or from the emigration that has since taken place. On the contrary, her net revenue amounted in 1851 to £4,281,999, being about £184,000 greater than in 1843" I.e. they "regard ‘Net-Revenue’ as the Moloch to whom entire populations must be sacrificed..." as Marx puts the view of the Ricardians. The context can be found here on a website for true believers: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1853/03/04.htm http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1853/03/04.htm I don't see any easy way of search for ancient Economist articles, but I notice that in the same year the American writer Carey quoted the same passage as from "Economist, (London,) Feb. 12, 1853." in his book on the slave trade http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8000/pg8000.txt http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8000/pg8000.txt

maxharris 16y ago
So how do you deal with the following quote? "The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward." - Friedrich Engels A quick google search shows that this one is NOT hard to find: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1849/01/13.htm http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1849/01/13.htm http://books.google.com/books?id=Mdj3AXU2YEEC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=%22The+next+world+war+will+result+in+the+disappearance%22&source=bl&ots=_32YnN3BOl&sig=2I7SxFOy4WKIOX88aUhaO-3HfgY&hl=en&ei=NUcFTdb5IKOxnAfV7InlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22The%20next%20world%20war%20will%20result%20in%20the%20disappearance%22&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=Mdj3AXU2YEEC&pg=PA167&#... Engels was the co-founder of Marxism, and there is a great deal of evidence that the Soviet Union murdered tens of millions of its own citizens. Given these facts, any reasonable person will conclude that Marxism is an ideology that leads to mass murder.
- applicative 16y ago
  The quote from Engels (1820-1895) dates from 1849. But whatever the text may mean, it would be absurd to claim that it is an expression of 'Marxism', whatever in turn that may mean. (I would have thought that Engels invented "Marxism" -- about 30 years after writing this newspaper article.) I don't care to defend Engels early middle or late, but this text doesn't have the murder-favoring aspect you are pretending it does. It is a commentary on ultra-complicated post-1848 politics; there is little here that wouldn't have been accepted by an American observer of the time. Interpretation is again helped by the preceding sentence (at a bare minimum) which might be thought just as creepy: "The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names." The disappearance of a 'reactionary class' evidently means: the coming to a social order in which that is not one of the classes. The disappearance of a 'dynasty' doesn't mean murder of the ruling family. The disappearance of 'nations' (Nationen) and 'peoples' (Voelker) is the same: not the destruction of individuals, but the formation of some wider social unity, in which those distinctions of Volk don't arise. It is like the disappearance of the Confederacy. The language Engels is employing is indeed ugly. But it is impossible to believe that he or anyone in the mid 19th c. would be arguing for something in the nature of genocide. They were simply too naive to envisage such a thing. That the Soviet Union was a death machine that murdered millions is obvious. It has nothing to do with the materials quoted, from Marx or Engels. The question why you continue to fabricate connections is still open.
  - maxharris 16y ago
    > I don't care to defend Engels early middle or late, ... > The language Engels is employing is indeed ugly. You agree that Engels was a philosopher, and his philosophy is not defensible. But here's where we probably disagree: I believe that philosophy is something that does have an impact on the world. A vast number of people (both powerful and not) read Engels (and Marx - and Kant), and this played a major role in the decisions they made in their lives. There's definitely a trickle-down effect here: learned people get the ideas first, and apply those ideas to their own fields. Less-educated people don't read philosophy, but they get the gist of it this way. (And, of course, there are shades in between.) This is consistent also with the fact tha philosophical ideas take a relatively long time to permeate the culture. Summary: in a sense, philosophy determines the course of history. Kant originated the ideas that Marx and Engels applied to politics, which influenced Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao. (It is true that many other politicians were also influenced by Marx and Engels, but they were either not running big countries, or had countries that were behind the philosophical forefront of the era, such as the USA.) Is it any surprise that blood-soaked ideas lead to mass death? I don't think that Kant, Hegel, Marx and Engels were idiots that didn't know what they were doing or what their ideas actually meant.

maxharris 16y ago

So how do you deal with the following quote? "The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward." - Friedrich Engels A quick google search shows that this one is NOT hard to find: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1849/01/13.htm http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1849/01/13.htm http://books.google.com/books?id=Mdj3AXU2YEEC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=%22The+next+world+war+will+result+in+the+disappearance%22&source=bl&ots=_32YnN3BOl&sig=2I7SxFOy4WKIOX88aUhaO-3HfgY&hl=en&ei=NUcFTdb5IKOxnAfV7InlDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22The%20next%20world%20war%20will%20result%20in%20the%20disappearance%22&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=Mdj3AXU2YEEC&pg=PA167&#... Engels was the co-founder of Marxism, and there is a great deal of evidence that the Soviet Union murdered tens of millions of its own citizens. Given these facts, any reasonable person will conclude that Marxism is an ideology that leads to mass murder.

applicative 16y ago
The quote from Engels (1820-1895) dates from 1849. But whatever the text may mean, it would be absurd to claim that it is an expression of 'Marxism', whatever in turn that may mean. (I would have thought that Engels invented "Marxism" -- about 30 years after writing this newspaper article.) I don't care to defend Engels early middle or late, but this text doesn't have the murder-favoring aspect you are pretending it does. It is a commentary on ultra-complicated post-1848 politics; there is little here that wouldn't have been accepted by an American observer of the time. Interpretation is again helped by the preceding sentence (at a bare minimum) which might be thought just as creepy: "The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names." The disappearance of a 'reactionary class' evidently means: the coming to a social order in which that is not one of the classes. The disappearance of a 'dynasty' doesn't mean murder of the ruling family. The disappearance of 'nations' (Nationen) and 'peoples' (Voelker) is the same: not the destruction of individuals, but the formation of some wider social unity, in which those distinctions of Volk don't arise. It is like the disappearance of the Confederacy. The language Engels is employing is indeed ugly. But it is impossible to believe that he or anyone in the mid 19th c. would be arguing for something in the nature of genocide. They were simply too naive to envisage such a thing. That the Soviet Union was a death machine that murdered millions is obvious. It has nothing to do with the materials quoted, from Marx or Engels. The question why you continue to fabricate connections is still open.
- maxharris 16y ago
  > I don't care to defend Engels early middle or late, ... > The language Engels is employing is indeed ugly. You agree that Engels was a philosopher, and his philosophy is not defensible. But here's where we probably disagree: I believe that philosophy is something that does have an impact on the world. A vast number of people (both powerful and not) read Engels (and Marx - and Kant), and this played a major role in the decisions they made in their lives. There's definitely a trickle-down effect here: learned people get the ideas first, and apply those ideas to their own fields. Less-educated people don't read philosophy, but they get the gist of it this way. (And, of course, there are shades in between.) This is consistent also with the fact tha philosophical ideas take a relatively long time to permeate the culture. Summary: in a sense, philosophy determines the course of history. Kant originated the ideas that Marx and Engels applied to politics, which influenced Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao. (It is true that many other politicians were also influenced by Marx and Engels, but they were either not running big countries, or had countries that were behind the philosophical forefront of the era, such as the USA.) Is it any surprise that blood-soaked ideas lead to mass death? I don't think that Kant, Hegel, Marx and Engels were idiots that didn't know what they were doing or what their ideas actually meant.