> At 03:34 PM 11/20/2008, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>
> Bill Bartlett wrote:
>> >
>> > At 6:29 AM -0800 20/11/08, Chris Doss wrote:
>> >
>> > Certainly a lot
>> > >of the ethical precepts in Marx (and Enlightenment figures in
>> > >general) are ultimately of Christian derivation, and the eschatology
>> > >has a lot of parallels with it.
>>
>> There may or may not be a parallel to be found between Marx & xtianity,
>> but this is not one. In fact it is the sharpest contrast: there are no
>> "thical precepts" in Marx. He doesn't even condemn capitalism morally:
>> it is not evil, it's history. To be destroyed, yest, but keep the moral
>> pomposity out of it.
>>
>> Carrol
>>
>
> Thanks. I was wracking my brain trying to think of very many "ethical
> precepts" in Marx's work, much less the possibility that one could find "a
> lot".
>
> shag
>
>
> "let's be civil and nice, but not to the point of obeying the rules of
> debate as defined by liberal blackmail (in which, discomfort caused by a
> challenge is seen as some vague form of harassment)."
> -- Dwayne Monroe, 11/19/08
>
> --
> http://cleandraws.com
> Wear Clean Draws
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Urr, not going to pass judgement on this straight away, but wasn't the question of a Marxian ethics or lack thereof the central issue at stake in the debates around both Marxism's relation to humanism as well as the Marxian concept of alienation? I think what many people involved were trying to show was that you could moralise (i.e. decide what was good and what was bad) without casting it in the classical (i.e. religious) terminology.