Marvin Gandall wrote:
> For those of us who remain historical materialists and
> internationalists, I
> think the best means of coping with these pressures is to recognize
> them,
> and that they are objective rather than subjective in nature, and
> that if
> and until our friends, neighbours, workmates, and relatives are
> forced by
> necessity to revive the old mass socialist movement, there are very
> real
> limits to what good intentions and political organizing can
> accomplish. It's
> unfortunate that stating this obvious fact can sometimes cause so much
> recrimination.
Here's an "historical materialist" account of how capitalism generates a mass movement of individuals capable of actualizing social relations from which all barriers to full human development (and the ultimate actualization of an ideal society this makes practicable) have been removed.
[...]
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm>
[...]
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/comm.htm>
The same manuscript provides an elaboration of what's meant by the idea of "the other human being" as "the greatest wealth".
Given that this is what is meant by "spiritual and physical poverty" and "dehumanization", capitalism has not worked to produce "poverty which is conscious of its spiritual and physical poverty, dehumanization which is conscious of its dehumanization, and therefore self-abolishing" in most self-styled "historical materialists" let alone in the "proletariat".
Moreover, Marx's account of how it would do this is mistaken. For instance, if it were true that "in the fully-formed proletariat the abstraction of all humanity, even of the semblance of humanity, is practically complete", such consciousness could not develop in "the fully-formed proletariat". =============================== Could you elaborate on the meaning you ascribe to Marx's quote in your last sentance, and how it is "mistaken"?
Also, didn't the working class - or a large, important part of it - at certain times and in certain places (eg. France 1871, Russia 1917, Spain 1936-39, liberated Europe 1945, China 1949, Cuba 1959 etc.) exemplify " "poverty which is conscious of its spiritual and physical poverty" and "dehumanization which is conscious of its dehumanization", and attempt to abolish capitalism - in some cases, successfully, albeit short-lived in historical terms? Wasn't this a qualified confirmation of Marx's insight, and doesn't it suggest the possibility of recurrence on a possibly higher level in some future capitalist crisis?
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.8/941 - Release Date: 8/7/2007 4:06 PM