|
Post by jpena92 on Nov 22, 2010 21:35:28 GMT -5
Canada change his economy form agricultural production to industrial production and as consequence of that it suffer the same social problems that Great Britain in the industrial revolution I mean unempleymont, poverty and social riots. With the arrive of the capitalism the people, the art, the hobbies and actually the science turn to be a merchandise. I mean you are a merchandise by yourself I mean that one human who has more studies than a other one has more value in the market than other one who doesnt have studies. This take you to the point of the people who dont have studies the poor people they gonna stay there because of they lack of resources and their imposibility to acquired more studies leaving them poor (i don try to be a defeatist) and actually thats the base of the capitalism a lot of cheap workers and lack of studies like Marx said "the proletariat army". I took this no for marx because i dont agree in some points of marx actually i took the information from Herbert Marcuse (again) because his philosophy is better in the way of look at social problems i mean he believe in the social capitalism or the new left.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Delainey on Nov 23, 2010 10:40:04 GMT -5
You can forgive Marx for not being as informed as Marcuse I think. Marx came well before Marcuse. Marx did not and probably could no predict that capitalist societies would introduce social reforms leading to the creation of the "welfare state". I think Marx believed in the impossibility of the capitalists accomodating labour or improving the situation of the workers; whereas I think Marx underestimated the importance and influence of democratic ideas on politicians and society (mainly the middle class) at large.
So Marcuse writes almost a hundred years later. As a consequence, he in a better position to describe the relationship between man and work, man and society, etc. I don't know as much about Marcuse's thinking as you. You would describe him as a social democrat?
|
|
|
Post by jpena92 on Nov 29, 2010 11:07:42 GMT -5
In fact Marx lived in Great Britain during the first great resecion of capitalism I mean the bankrupt of the south american trade company in Great Britain who created a great deficit and an finicial emergency. In that moment Marx started to write about the comunism and socialism and he wrote that the socialism is the way to achive the comunism the problem is that he never said something about GOVEVRMENT. And like in the natural science newton said about gravity and the einstein said about the deformation in space-time its the same in social science Marx said about the equality and the Marcuse said about social democracy that means to search the equality by the democracy not by civil riots like Marx said but maybe marx had reason or maybe not thats why the History is the judge of the past and the witness of the future.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Delainey on Nov 29, 2010 15:48:18 GMT -5
Marx actually believed following the dictatorship of the proleteriat the state (government) would actually "wither away". He was definitely an idealist. I find it surprising that a man so learned would believe such a thing (state withering away and a country not having any central administration) would be possible.
Quite odd, really. Marx's usefulness in my mind is his articulation of class struggle. I think he was on to something there.
|
|