Karl Marx: A Life (historical Marx)

Asko Ojaluoto aojaluot at SPAMnettilinja.fi
Sun Dec 3 01:10:22 MST 2000


   (One answer. I don't know if you got the first post, it's within)      I'm
sorry. It is propably as difficult to express yourself deeply in a few sentences
in a e-mail as it in a few minutes in TV (in a foreign language, which english
still is here). And I like little complexity in text. The message was meant to
be read in the context of Francis Wheen's book. I think it raises a problem,
which many have already known but which isn't properly discussed and defined,
about relations of marxism, socialism and Karl Marx the father of all
socialistic virtues. Maybe it's question about being critical towards Karl Marx.
In this marxism ('marx as an ism') is nearer to a religion because it seems to
implicit that somehow answers are always found from Marx's sacred texts. This is
historically false and not many believe this anymore. So why it still called
marxism.     I don't know what you think about science, but I don't know, even
in the social sciences, theories or doctrines which are called according to it's
writer's name (well keynesianism, but that's economics). In the history of
science there are no lonely superminds which 'saw it all'. And I think Marx
would have thought the same.     Personally I don't mind if marxism is called
marxism, but how you explain that actually Marx would have liked to see all
non-westerners to colonized because of history or how much blood and struggle
requires it to bring communism into world. Marx wanted to be a scientific
socialist, why not let him be. Science has progressed, racism isn't scientific
anymore.   Thank you for the answers Sincerely Asko Ojaluoto

----- Original Message ----- From: x To: Asko Ojaluoto Sent: Saturday, December
02, 2000 8:50 AM Subject: RE: Karl Marx: A Life
Your message is somewjat incomprehensible so it is difficult to answer any
question you raise much less answer it.   Sincerely, x Sociology University of x

       

-----Original Message-----
From: Asko Ojaluoto [mailto:aojaluot at nettilinja.fi]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 1:48 AM
To: psn at csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Karl Marx: A Life
   Was Marx a marxist? I think this isn't just Marx-baiting (who needs it). I am
not qualified enough in marxism to judge it but I like to ask why it is still
talked about marxism and not for example about scientific socialism or
dialectical materialism. No one ninenteenth, twentieth or twenty-first century
political activist (or socialist) read just Marx. Overuse of 'Marx as a -ism' brings
a interesting subjective aspect to 'marxism' which makes it vulnerable to this
kind of reveals. Beside this even capitalism is a more objective and impersonal
concept (as it naturally is). But it is so too that you don't see at the
best-seller lists this kind of books about the great men of capitalism.   Asko
Ojaluoto     Let Marx Be Marx   By GERTRUDE HIMMELFARB
Issue date: 07.24.00
Post date: 07.14.00   Karl Marx: A Life
by Francis Wheen
W.W. Norton, 431 pp.   http://www.tnr.com/072400/himmelfarb072400_print.html





More information about the Marxism mailing list