| | Consistency, Comrade Marx, Consistency. In a preface to The Communist Manifesto Frederick Engels states that the Marxist proposition, that the history of mankind is a history of class struggles which will inevitably evolve into a communistic state, “is destined to do for history what Darwin’s theory has done for biology…” (Engels, 5). Whether history has proven this statement true or not is not up for consideration, but rather I wish to propose that this view has some inherent logical discrepancies that it cannot deal with.
First of all, let us expand upon the Marxist position for a bit. Heavily influenced by Darwin, Marx held a progressive view of history and society. The Marxist assumes that man has always been improving and progressing to a better stage and that history testifies to this fact. The question then moves to “what causes these improvements and progressions?” For the Marxist, coming from a strictly materialist point of view, they are the result of material forces working upon society. History is the result of pure physical combinations of matter and is well beyond the notion that ideas influence the actions of man. Not only that, but in order to interpret history, Marx claims that we must understand a society’s production and exchange as those factors that evolve a society.
“The economic structure of society always furnishes the real basis, starting from which we can work out the ultimate explanation of the whole superstructure of juridical and political institutions as well as of religious, philosophical and other ideas of a given historical period,” Engels states (Noebel, 745). Marx and Engels go on to claim that these economic structures of history, without fail, result in conflict between social classes. This conflict proceeds to create tension that eventually leads to a violent revolution. After the bloodbath drains, we are left with a new, better and more highly evolved society which will eventually repeat the process and do so again and again until we have arrived at a classless (and therefore tensionless and revolution-less) society.
Here we come to a crossroads. If Marx were to be consistent, we would have no independence as everything about us, from our actions to our desires, would be conditioned by our circumstances which would be determined by the laws of economy. Marx denies this completely however, insisting that somehow economics—while being the framework and forming all aspects of mankind and society—does not actually remove all possibility of freewill without providing us with any reasoning behind this illogical claim (Noebel, 747). Following a logical progression of the argument, history should be governed by predictable and unavoidable economic laws, laws that are beyond the realms of human alteration. Marx should be a hard determinist, and if he were correct there is nothing one can do to alter the course of history in any way. Not only this, but such a belief disallows morality and /or reason as neither will hold any effect on the world. You could not punish anyone for killing another person as it was beyond their control; their circumstances and the laws of economy fated them to perform the deed. They have no free will and could not be expected to do anything different.
Not only would they be incapable of doing anything different, but the murderous deed would be part of the natural progressive process of history and necessary for the improvement of society. The only “freedom” bestowed upon man in Marxism is the “freedom” to influence history must be a) in accordance with the laws and b) being influenced by circumstances that are in harmony with those laws. Regardless of whether or not one is in such a state or not, communism is inevitable as it is dictated by the laws that require the cycle of class tension to continue until this classless utopia evolves.
In conclusion, Marx has to deal with the fact that his view of history cannot allow for the freedom he used to promote the communist system. The very fact that he was campaigning for communism and trying to convert citizens to the proletariat cause shows the lack of consistency in his thinking. There is no freedom in hard determinism and, as history has shown, there can be no freedom in Marxism. Only the laws of economy rule; one is not free to choose.
Works Cited
Engels, Frederick., and Karl Marx. Marx & Engels: Basic Writings on Politics & Philosophy. Ed. Lewis S. Feuer. New York: Anchor Books Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1959.
Noebel, David A. Understanding the Times: The Story of the Biblical Christian, Marxist/Leninist and Secular Humanist Worldviews. Manitou Springs, CO: Summit Press, 1991.
|
| | Posted 5/7/2007 11:46 AM - 1 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- give stars
- votes0
- email
 - sent0
|
