Marxism #4 Revolution

[Caesercel]

Background: Historical Materialism
Dialectic
Dialectical Materialism

In the last post we saw how there's a direct contradiction between the material interests of the Capitalist class and those of the Working class under the Capitalist system. The former puts a direct downward pressure on wages which leads to a worsening state of the latter. This leads to the Working class, being human bodies with needs, desperate to improve their material conditions, repel and fight this system. And as we already discussed under materialism, that material circumstances inform and shape our consciousness; this bodily rejection of contemporary material woes/pains would lead to the development of a Class Consciousness. Thus the Working Class will finally recognise this system, recognise themselves as a single group within this system sharing the same problems and recognise the Business Class as the other end of it.

This struggle, both physical and now ideological against the system in place is termed as the Class Struggle. The end result of this struggle is the Working Class overthrowing the system which materially oppresses them, by overthrowing the institution of private property and taking over the means of production. Thus replacing the old system of production with a new one.

And through this development, the contradiction shall be resolved, as man, instead of being divided in two, owner and worker at odds with each other, will evolve into something that is neither a worker nor a capitalist. But rather a new kind of human that works but also owns his work instead of being alienated from it.

We can see here that this follows what we discussed under Dialectical Materialism, that history develops, through material changes, in the direction in which the logical contradictions underlying the material conditions of a particular era are resolved.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

Background: Historical Materialism
Dialectic
Dialectical Materialism

In the last post we saw how there's a direct contradiction between the material interests of the Capitalist class and those of the Working class under the Capitalist system. The former puts a direct downward pressure on wages which leads to a worsening state of the latter. This leads to the Working class, being human bodies with needs, desperate to improve their material conditions, repel and fight this system. And as we already discussed under materialism, that material circumstances inform and shape our consciousness; this bodily rejection of contemporary material woes/pains would lead to the development of a Class Consciousness. Thus the Working Class will finally recognise this system, recognise themselves as a single group within this system sharing the same problems and recognise the Business Class as the other end of it.

This struggle, both physical and now ideological against the system in place is termed as the Class Struggle. The end result of this struggle is the Working Class overthrowing the system which materially oppresses them, by overthrowing the institution of private property and taking over the means of production. Thus replacing the old system of production with a new one.

And through this development, the contradiction shall be resolved, as man, instead of being divided in two, owner and worker at odds with each other, will evolve into something that is neither a worker nor a capitalist. But rather a new kind of human that works but also owns his work instead of being alienated from it.

We can see here that this follows what we discussed under Dialectical Materialism, that history develops, through material changes, in the direction in which the logical contradictions underlying the material conditions of a particular era are resolved.

A communist revolution will always be crushed where the majority of the population is middle class. Communism wins where the majority are poor peasants in A backward agrarian country.

 

[Erenincel]

A communist revolution will always be crushed where the majority of the population is middle class. Communism wins where the majority are poor peasants in A backward agrarian country.

Thank you for presenting leftist content on this site. Marx was wrong here, though. He believed that revolution was only possible in wealthy countries. Besides, the middle class around the world is disappearing because it bears the brunt of taxes and is becoming poorer. They can no longer afford to avoid taxes like the rich.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

Thank you for presenting leftist content on this site. Marx was wrong here, though. He believed that revolution was only possible in wealthy countries. Besides, the middle class around the world is disappearing because it bears the brunt of taxes and is becoming poorer. They can no longer afford to avoid taxes like the rich.

Communism is evil because after communism comes capitalism again and in a more savage form than it was before. Capitalism in today's China is more brutal for the average worker than capitalism in some Denmark where there was never any communism or in France.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

Thank you for presenting leftist content on this site. Marx was wrong here, though. He believed that revolution was only possible in wealthy countries. Besides, the middle class around the world is disappearing because it bears the brunt of taxes and is becoming poorer. They can no longer afford to avoid taxes like the rich.

There is no more immoral, unscrupulous, and cruel capitalist than a former communist believer, who has gained money and power.

 

[Caesercel]

A communist revolution will always be crushed where the majority of the population is middle class. Communism wins where the majority are poor peasants in A backward agrarian country.

Maybe, but one could argue that the existence of a middle class itself is proof of some form of past successful class struggle. Not like how Marx predicts but you know.

He believed that revolution was only possible in wealthy countries.

Yeah, one can see why he believed so. The workers must first be aware of what's going on and the alternatives to change the system in their interests, which he predicted to happen in wealthier countries with a more educated urban working class. Also since communism is supposed to be a continuation of capitalism , it would make sense that more industrialised societies would reach communism first. According to this theory it should be impossible to go back to medieval dark age europe and incite a communist revolution because the material conditions of industry and capitalism were simply not there.

Communism in backward agrigarian societies was lead by thought leaders who lead the uneducated masses. But then again the only reason they got a following in the first place is owed to material conditions.

Besides, the middle class around the world is disappearing because it bears the brunt of taxes and is becoming poorer. They can no longer afford to avoid taxes like the rich.

That should just exacerbate the class struggle according to this theory. Though I don't think it's taxes that are making the middle class poor. People simply are not getting paid their fair due. Which is a core feature of capitalism and would be covered in later posts.

Communism is evil because after communism comes capitalism again and in a more savage form than it was before. Capitalism in today's China is more brutal for the average worker than capitalism in some Denmark where there was never any communism or in France.

There is no more immoral, unscrupulous, and cruel capitalist than a former communist believer, who has gained money and power.

If communism when corrupted by greedy leaders, who no longer represent working class interests/control over the society, leads to Capitalism. Then it is not really a damnation of communism itself because atleast we are admitting that Capitalism IS the evil (or atleast where evil leads to). Neither China is a shining example of practiced socialism nor France one of unbridled Capitalism. (though a lot more here can be said about the French and their empire)

 

[Rapistcel]

A communist revolution will always be crushed where the majority of the population is middle class. Communism wins where the majority are poor peasants in A backward agrarian country.

That's why communism has no future in modern western societies

 

[Pikacel]

That should just exacerbate the class struggle according to this theory. Though I don't think it's taxes that are making the middle class poor. People simply are not getting paid their fair due. Which is a core feature of capitalism and would be covered in later posts.

I don’t understand the mentality of ‘pay them the bare minimum’ and treating higher wages like it will cause equal inflation. Especially with the middle class. Who’s going to contribute to consumer market if barely anybody gets paid past living wage

Is a rich man going to buy 1000 restaurant meals a day? Or will 1000 consumers with disposable income

UK wagecucks have been complaining about low pay and small business owners over lack of customers for a while now

 

[Caesercel]

I don’t understand the mentality of ‘pay them the bare minimum’ and treating higher wages like it will cause equal inflation.

That's not really a mentality that's literally how the system works. Every employee gets paid the absolute bare minimum that is needed to retain them and not a single cent more. Marx points out that in the labour market, labour itself is a commodity that can be bought and sold. Now, as a customer you wouldn't pay a bit extra for an item that is available elsewhere for cheap, would you? No, you'd pay the absolute minimum needed to acquire that thing. Some capitalism apologists actually call this system fair. Everyone gets exactly what they "deserve".

. Who’s going to contribute to consumer market if barely anybody gets paid past living wage

One of the many running contradictions of Capitalism. I guess in the elite's ideal world they are the only true consumers of the markets while everyone else barely scrapes by. All the while slaving away producing things for the elite only consumer market.