From: "Todd Archer"
Brian said:
>Okay -- I have been trying to follow this thread and now I am lost. How is
>the idea that violence is necessary empirical and scientific when it
>(violence) hasn't worked yet?
I think what Charles is getting at here (although I'd wait for confirmation from him) is simply that: if there's to be a space where human beings can be(come) fully conscious as human beings, it has to be defended from those who'd prevent that space from opening up and growing, to their detriment.
^^^^ CB: Yes, and in particular on this thread, I am saying that Marx says this. I respect Ted's effort to articulate what might be termed Marx's utopian ideals ( setting aside the famous Marxist critique of utopianism), but there remains an enormous and tragic puzzle of how to get there without using very non-utopian defenses. And actually historical experience with this struggle shows the puzzle even more difficult to solve.
In other words, it is _Marx_ , not Lenin, who originates the notion that there will have to be a socialist state which uses violence to suppress bourgeois counterrevolutionary efforts to stop the building of a world in which people can be authentic humans.
^^^^^ -clip-
^^^^^^