>>> Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> 02/07 4:01 PM >>>
Alex LoCascio wrote:
>Look, I'm unequivocally pro-choice. But I'd like to arrive at a sort of
>theoretical justification/grounding for this position, rather than
>uncritically regurgitating liberal "rights" talk.
Why do Marxists believe that workers should control their conditions of labor and plan production on a conscious social basis? As contemptuous as they often are of crypto-bourgeois moralizing or crypto-liberal rights talk, there's some underlying notion of morality and right there. __________
Charles: I don't think Marxism is without morality. I think Marx and Engels downplayed moralizing because of the hypocracy of the loudest moralizing voices of the day , who are always the voices of the ruling classes' moralizers. This includes the church especially, of course. But Marxist atheism should not be understood as synonymous with lack of ethics, or principles about what is to be done, what is correct conduct. Marxism is not a dogma, but a guide to action. But a guide to action is a moral theory. The well known humanism of Marx is very moral. The reputed Marxist lack of morality is more the result that Marxism reverses the common sense notion of practice what you preach, to practice as your way of preaching or actions speak louder than words.
I agree with Doug's comment directly related to abortion.
Charles Brown ___________
Deciding whether to abort or give birth is has as much to do with consciously shaping our social and material lives as controlling the means of production, doesn't it? One of those basically human things we do that nonhumans don't, like building houses.
Doug