Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
General Political Discussion
Ask a Communist?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Shadow" data-source="post: 72163361" data-attributes="member: 377228"><p>Dam, I know that feeling. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></p><p></p><p>The Spanish version of article I quoted is here:</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/65-socyh.htm" target="_blank">Guevara (1965): El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba.</a></p><p></p><p>The links below may be very useful. Its easily the best resource for original Marxist material on the internet.</p><p></p><p>Marxist Internet Archive (Spainish): <a href="https://www.marxists.org/espanol/" target="_blank">Marxists Internet Archive - Sección en Español</a></p><p>Available works of Che Guevara (Spainish): <a href="https://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/escritos/index.htm" target="_blank">Che Guevara: Escritos</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks. Its a question with far-reaching consequences and I'm not really sure which side I'm on ultimately. Its worth mentioning that the very definition of "freedom" is different in Marxist literature than will be found amongst "Classical Liberal" texts.</p><p></p><p>So using Google search, Liberty is defined as:</p><p></p><p>"the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's behaviour or political views."</p><p></p><p>The Marxist definition of freedom is different because of the background philosophy to it. I'll quote it in context so you get an idea of why it's different. Marxists believe that <em>everything</em> is governed by laws of cause and effect or necessity, and so it is only by gaining knowledge of those laws that we can harness them and use them in such a way that serves our interests.</p><p></p><p>"Freedom does not consist in the dream of independence of natural laws, but in the knowledge of these laws, and in the possibility this gives of systematically making them work towards definite ends. This holds good in relation both to the laws of external nature and to those which govern the bodily and mental life of men themselves- two classes of laws which we can separate from each other at most only in thought and not in reality. Freedom of the will therefore means nothing but the capacity to make decisions with real knowledge of the subject ... <em><strong>Freedom therefore consists of the control over ourselves and over external nature which is founded on the knowledge of natural necessity</strong></em>." (Quote from Fredrick Engels, Anti-Duhring)</p><p></p><p>The idea of defining Freedom as Control obviously raises some hair-raising questions as if freedom means control over other people effectively as slaves, making them instruments to serve anothers interests. Freedom, or rather "freedom of action" basically means Power (using Google again):</p><p></p><p>"the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way."</p><p></p><p>So its not very re-assuring when this is applied to legal and constitutional arrangements. There is no consistent position on Marxists on whether "Liberty" actually has a place in a Communist system. For example, "Freedom of Speech" under Communism means something different because it assumes a) the validity of Marxist conception of nature and society that everything is governed by casual laws and b) that those laws must be harnessed in the interests of the Communist Party representing the ruling class in the worker's state. i.e. you can only say what the communist party agrees with based on the assumption it is the source of scientific knowledge for "correctly" managing society. Speech which is regarded as distorting Marxist "Scientific" knowledge is therefore regarded as harmful and restricted.</p><p></p><p>So if the basic philosophy behind Marxism is wrong, its not hard to see how economic and political liberalism could therefore have advantages if you don't want to have a society where you are going to be compelled to do what the Party tells you to. Its a leap in the dark from what we are used to however you look at it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Shadow, post: 72163361, member: 377228"] Dam, I know that feeling. :D The Spanish version of article I quoted is here: [URL='https://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/65-socyh.htm']Guevara (1965): El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba.[/URL] The links below may be very useful. Its easily the best resource for original Marxist material on the internet. Marxist Internet Archive (Spainish): [URL='https://www.marxists.org/espanol/']Marxists Internet Archive - Sección en Español[/URL] Available works of Che Guevara (Spainish): [URL='https://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/escritos/index.htm']Che Guevara: Escritos[/URL] Thanks. Its a question with far-reaching consequences and I'm not really sure which side I'm on ultimately. Its worth mentioning that the very definition of "freedom" is different in Marxist literature than will be found amongst "Classical Liberal" texts. So using Google search, Liberty is defined as: "the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's behaviour or political views." The Marxist definition of freedom is different because of the background philosophy to it. I'll quote it in context so you get an idea of why it's different. Marxists believe that [I]everything[/I] is governed by laws of cause and effect or necessity, and so it is only by gaining knowledge of those laws that we can harness them and use them in such a way that serves our interests. "Freedom does not consist in the dream of independence of natural laws, but in the knowledge of these laws, and in the possibility this gives of systematically making them work towards definite ends. This holds good in relation both to the laws of external nature and to those which govern the bodily and mental life of men themselves- two classes of laws which we can separate from each other at most only in thought and not in reality. Freedom of the will therefore means nothing but the capacity to make decisions with real knowledge of the subject ... [I][B]Freedom therefore consists of the control over ourselves and over external nature which is founded on the knowledge of natural necessity[/B][/I]." (Quote from Fredrick Engels, Anti-Duhring) The idea of defining Freedom as Control obviously raises some hair-raising questions as if freedom means control over other people effectively as slaves, making them instruments to serve anothers interests. Freedom, or rather "freedom of action" basically means Power (using Google again): "the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way." So its not very re-assuring when this is applied to legal and constitutional arrangements. There is no consistent position on Marxists on whether "Liberty" actually has a place in a Communist system. For example, "Freedom of Speech" under Communism means something different because it assumes a) the validity of Marxist conception of nature and society that everything is governed by casual laws and b) that those laws must be harnessed in the interests of the Communist Party representing the ruling class in the worker's state. i.e. you can only say what the communist party agrees with based on the assumption it is the source of scientific knowledge for "correctly" managing society. Speech which is regarded as distorting Marxist "Scientific" knowledge is therefore regarded as harmful and restricted. So if the basic philosophy behind Marxism is wrong, its not hard to see how economic and political liberalism could therefore have advantages if you don't want to have a society where you are going to be compelled to do what the Party tells you to. Its a leap in the dark from what we are used to however you look at it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
General Political Discussion
Ask a Communist?
Top
Bottom