Why Marx Was Right by Terry Eagleton

[Philosophy Now]

Roger Caldwell is unconvinced by Terry Eagleton’s loyal support for Marx.

http://philosophynow.org/issues/96/Why_ ... y_Eagleton

[spike]

Marx was right about the fact that workers should organize and demand better treated from their employers. But overall, he was not right about economics. He thought that economics could reach a state of equilibrium, where everything is balanced and fair, which is not only undesirable but impossible.

Marx wanted to take the edge and contradictions out of economic life. But without those elements we would not have an economic life that is sustainable. And that is something Marx didn't understand or address, the problem of economic sustainability. The proof is in the economic system his ideology spawned, communism, which came to an end because it killed off everything that is essential, like competition and profit, for achieving economic sustainability.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



I'm sooooooo fucking tired of people quoting & misquoting Marx.



It's become like the Bible - The lord uses the good ones & the bad ones use the lord.




Marx is meaningless.





.

[Arising_uk]

...
Marx is meaningless.
[/size]

You actually read him Bill? I doubt it.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



No. I have not read Marx. He promotes communism.

Independent, legally recognized Organized Labor agreements cannot exist in communist countries.


I have no use for communism. I don't need to know ANYTHING more about it.



........................................................................



Organized Labor can only exist in a democracy.


Organized Labor thrives in a liberal democracy.


.........................................................................



.

[Arising_uk]

...

No. I have not read Marx. He promotes communism. ...

And that just about sums up your thought processes.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





Yeah. Life happens fast.

As we are enjoying the miracle of the internet so much is coming at us.


I know that independent, legally recognized Organized Labor agreements need at least a modicum of democracy to exist.

Modern Organized Labor agreements do not exist in communist countries. That's all I need to know.



And that just about sums up my thought processes.






........................................................................................




Thank you for allowing me to clarify my position.






.

[Arising_uk]

Yup! Know bugger all about Marx but feel enabled to judge and dismiss him. Much like most of your thoughts about pretty much everything, when you actually express any that is.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


Yes. Thank you very much.



.

[richardtod]

If I want to cheer myself up I read Bill and Bob postings. I also watch Fox News. I find the fallacies in the arguments, the absurd logical twists and the fun Gifs often make me roar with laughter. The idea that you can have a sound argument and critique of a philosopher you are too frightened to read or attempt to understand is hilarious. The lessons in how to spot the fallacies are not lost on me and figure strongly in my philosophic education.

To argue that Marx is responsible for the failure of communist states is like saying that Jesus is responsible for the failure of Christianity to bring peace to Christian countries.

I cannot quote Marx's "Das Kapital" as my reading of it is still at an early stage but what I do understand is that he thought of a new way of using capital. A changed priority from profit to social cohesion and the idea that people do not need to own $billions when others starve. To me, the intention does not diminish because Stalin turned out to be a despot. Likewise the intention of Jesus to make people love, support and nurture each other is not diminished because Catholics and Protestants have been murdering and burning each other for centuries.

Perhaps, as Marx is reported to have said, his philosophical argument will change as time goes on and more people develop the ideas, perhaps not, but to render his ideas as evil not worthy of reading goes totally against my idea of the freedom of thought. If his ideas are truly evil, not to challenge Marx at the intellectual level through dialogue is cowardice of the worst kind as you leave the door open to evil to do its own thing. On the other hand, if you are frightened that you may lose the argument and discover the truth is different from perceptions developed in ignorance then you are no philosopher.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



You cannot quote Marx's "Das Kapital" because you haven't read it. I doubt if anyone here has.

Even if you did - so what?



There was a time, back in the forties, in my country America, when union members had to actually sign a statement that they were not communists.

Not because there was any association between Organized Labor and communism but just because a certain political party wanted to have members of Organized Labor be associated with the concept of communism. Association by deferment.


So, one day, you will never read a book by Marx. And neither will most people here at the Philosophy Now Forum.


So, laugh and cast dispersions in you high intellectual loft above us.


I, Bill Wiltrack, stand by my earlier statements.



.

[Arising_uk]

.



You cannot quote Marx's "Das Kapital" because you haven't read it. I doubt if anyone here has.

You'd be partially right as its a vast tome but a few here would have read at least some of it due to it being part of their education and many will have read the manifesto. Have you even read this?

if you did - so what?

So, unlike you, they'd at least have some basis for agreeing or disagreeing with his thoughts.

There was a time, back in the forties, in my country America, when union members had to actually sign a statement that they were not communists.

Not because there was any association between Organized Labor and communism but just because a certain political party wanted to have members of Organized Labor be associated with the concept of communism. Association by deferment.

How democratic of your union.

one day, you will never read a book by Marx. And neither will most people here at the Philosophy Now Forum.

In your case thats a certainty but as usual you miss what you co-respondent said.

laugh and cast dispersions in you high intellectual loft above us.


I, Bill Wiltrack, stand by my earlier statements.

As usual you miss the point. Its not that you haven't read Marx, its that you make statements about him from this position that irritates upon a philosophy forum. That you then compound your stupidity by standing by your statement is laughable.
p.s.
Its "aspersions".

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





You may interject the term aspersions if you like.


I was reminiscing of 'Castio Dispersionio.'




So, lemmie get this straight; No one here has read Marx's "Das Kapital."

ALL of us here has read the wiki:Marx's "Das Kapital"




And that makes you better than me how?


I hope you get something out of wiki on this.

For me, Organized Labor and the evidence of democracy are my yardsticks.

Case closed.



Seriously, hope you do well. Try reading Marx again - perhaps you will find something positive about it.

Try going to Cuba. Immerse yourself in Marx. And good luck to you.





...............................................................................




I'm sooooooo fucking tired of people quoting & misquoting Marx.



It's become like the Bible - The lord uses the good ones & the bad ones use the lord.




Marx is meaningless.



Why any member would attempt to use ANY written word as a symbol of status over ANY other member here defies the exercise of philosophy and reflectively, is quite shallow.



Having said that I hope you cling to the view from your imposed tower. Don't change...





..........................................................






.

[richardtod]

What I have learnt from the diatribes above is just how the whole "Cold War" thing affected America.

In the UK we had suffered heavy bombing from Germany during the war and survived, so the threat of the Russians doing the same was treated with a bit of "here we go again but lets get on with it". In America however, the fear of communism, which frankly was a lot less likely than in the UK, was treated far more seriously and must have had a profound affect on the young at that time. This explains the hysteria I hear on Fox News and from some people on this forum when 'socialism' or 'communism' is mentioned.

When viewed from this perspective Bill's position on Marx is far easier understood. It comes from that cold war education. "Duck and cover" I think was part of the brain washing the kids went through at that time. We generally ignored the threat.

In the UK I have friends who are from the very (but not extreme) right wing as well as from the very left (i.e. socialists not communists). I also know a couple of anarchists. The debate, as you can imagine does get a bit hot at times but we all laugh and drink together. My Muslim friend and my Budhist cousin along with a family of mixed Catholics and Protestants are all within my sphere of friends, family and acquaintances.

This richness of religion, culture and belief is, at times, strained but mostly amicable. I can argue and debate with all without fear or hindrance. (Although the rise of some right wing thugs is threatening that just now)

This Bill, is true Freedom. Freedom to read without fear, to debate without fear, to disagree without fear. America is such a large country in comparison to ours I know you have many enlightened folk (I have read a lot of work by some great American thinkers), but you seem to have an abundance of introversion, fear of people and ideas outside the immediate circle. No wonder many Americans take people like Sarah Palin seriously while in the UK she is a clown. Her speeches touch the hearts of the frightened looking for the comfort and security of what they know in their narrow cold war educated lives.

As far as Marx is concerned, its not his book that changes the world but his ideas. These are the powerful forces that have changed most of the world. Not reading it is no safety net against its influence. Hitler tried burning books to stop their ideas escaping, it did not work because the ideas spilled out well before the match turned the books to ashes.

Live long and prosper.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



Karl Marx ideas don't work. Never have. Never will.

Again, I believe Cuba is the only country that had been structured around the principles of Karl Marx.

It's not working and it is a faint alternative to capitalism.



You mentioned the word freedom.

For me, freedom in the world of structured government is democracy.


Organized Labor thrives in a Liberal Democracy.


That is all I care about.

There are five widely recognized communist countries that exist in the world today.


In none of them are you allowed to belong to or form an independent, legally recognized labor union.


END OF STORY.




Again, I appreciate every member who has defended their point without attacking or casting aspersions upon other Philosophy Now Forum members. It shows real class and an inner maturity.





.