5 ms·

Marx was foremost an economist and philosopher not a revolutionary, his ideas laid the basis for the later historical movements - but they shouldn't be conflate

by hurin 12y ago

Marx was foremost an economist and philosopher not a revolutionary, his ideas laid the basis for the later historical movements - but they shouldn't be conflated with them, of course the actual historical events are much stronger in cultural memory. As for prosperity: I think quality of life is significantly worse now (25 years later) in all post-soviet bloc countries outside the EU. Although yes, planned economies are very stifling towards innovation and individual enterprise and apparently cannot compete very well with capitalist economies.

pfortuny 12y ago
I do not have real data but I guess (and I am being too candid here, this being HN) that those where quality of life is significantly worse have not got a good stance on the importance of the rule of law (i.e. they are mostly dictatorships in disguise, like Russia).
happyscrappy 12y ago
So there is no example of Marxism working.
- 21echoes 12y ago
  no, there just is no such thing as "Marxism" as a nation-state level policy. Marx was a critic of capitalism, and did not propose any vision of how society should be constructed beyond "workers should own the means of production" (which, of course, has never been tried as a nation-state level policy, and was not tried in the USSR, Mao's China, etc.). for more: https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/2uegfi/karl_marxs_diagnosis_of_capitalism_shouldnt_be/co7s35m https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/2uegfi/karl_mar...
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Marx was a critic of capitalism, and did not propose any vision of how society should be constructed beyond "workers should own the means of production" Marx -- mostly together with Engels -- actually proposed much more specific policy proposals than "workers should own the means of production", in the Communist Manifesto and in other works.
- unicornporn 12y ago
  That's like saying: so there is no example of existentialism working? Marxism can't be reduced to a ready made model for how society should work.
- sgift 12y ago
  There's also no example of capitalism working. That didn't stop us from using it and trying to fix all the problems it produces - an ongoing process, which fails all the time.
pinaceae 12y ago
"outside the EU" which rules out the majority of Eastern Europe. nice slight of hand. Those countries had developed economies and education systems to begin with. This leaves countries like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyztan and similars who are barely industrialized yet alone modern. The Soviet empire was all but a thin veil of progress over a third world expanse. This includes Russia, outside of a few metro areas it is as if time stood still.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> Marx was foremost an economist and philosopher not a revolutionary, Marx was very much a political activist (if not a revolutionary in the violent sense), and pretending he wasn't isn't particularly helpful. Of course, its also not helpful to conflate his political activism with that (including the violent revolutionary aspects) of Leninists and others who sought to use association with Marx's name to sell radically different programs which even rejected the basic required preconditions of Marx's proposed program, even where they adopted some of Marx's language about the basic struggle and desired end state.
- hurin 12y ago
  > Marx was very much a political activist (if not a revolutionary in the violent sense), and pretending he wasn't isn't particularly helpful. I never said he wasn't a political activist - only that the emphasis is definitely misplaced. In popular culture people think communist manifesto and not Capital or the rather large corpus of sociological, historical and economic writings.

by hurin 12y ago

pfortuny 12y ago

I do not have real data but I guess (and I am being too candid here, this being HN) that those where quality of life is significantly worse have not got a good stance on the importance of the rule of law (i.e. they are mostly dictatorships in disguise, like Russia).

happyscrappy 12y ago

So there is no example of Marxism working.

21echoes 12y ago
no, there just is no such thing as "Marxism" as a nation-state level policy. Marx was a critic of capitalism, and did not propose any vision of how society should be constructed beyond "workers should own the means of production" (which, of course, has never been tried as a nation-state level policy, and was not tried in the USSR, Mao's China, etc.). for more: https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/2uegfi/karl_marxs_diagnosis_of_capitalism_shouldnt_be/co7s35m https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/2uegfi/karl_mar...
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Marx was a critic of capitalism, and did not propose any vision of how society should be constructed beyond "workers should own the means of production" Marx -- mostly together with Engels -- actually proposed much more specific policy proposals than "workers should own the means of production", in the Communist Manifesto and in other works.
unicornporn 12y ago
That's like saying: so there is no example of existentialism working? Marxism can't be reduced to a ready made model for how society should work.
sgift 12y ago
There's also no example of capitalism working. That didn't stop us from using it and trying to fix all the problems it produces - an ongoing process, which fails all the time.

pinaceae 12y ago

"outside the EU" which rules out the majority of Eastern Europe. nice slight of hand. Those countries had developed economies and education systems to begin with. This leaves countries like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyztan and similars who are barely industrialized yet alone modern. The Soviet empire was all but a thin veil of progress over a third world expanse. This includes Russia, outside of a few metro areas it is as if time stood still.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> Marx was foremost an economist and philosopher not a revolutionary, Marx was very much a political activist (if not a revolutionary in the violent sense), and pretending he wasn't isn't particularly helpful. Of course, its also not helpful to conflate his political activism with that (including the violent revolutionary aspects) of Leninists and others who sought to use association with Marx's name to sell radically different programs which even rejected the basic required preconditions of Marx's proposed program, even where they adopted some of Marx's language about the basic struggle and desired end state.

hurin 12y ago
> Marx was very much a political activist (if not a revolutionary in the violent sense), and pretending he wasn't isn't particularly helpful. I never said he wasn't a political activist - only that the emphasis is definitely misplaced. In popular culture people think communist manifesto and not Capital or the rather large corpus of sociological, historical and economic writings.