I see it like this, the manifesto was a call to arms for the factory workers of Europe; join our revolution and your life will improve.
And some did, and their lives did improve for a while, but most importantly the majority of workers (ie European workers who didn’t have a revolution) did not join and their conditions still improved (WHS laws, working hours, sick leave, PTO, pension, healthcare).
How does Marx explain this? This shouldn’t be possible according to Marx.
When I was saying people have built on Marx I was alluding to revisionists like Bernstein.
He points out that self interest is a motivating factor, once a worker has a certain level of condition then they are no longer willing to risk that in a revolution, capitalism has effectively satiated them. Revolution is no longer possible in this situation.
This is the western world I see today, a lot of people who aren’t willing to risk what they have to get something better.
My solution (which isn’t really mine) is to appeal to their self interest, sure it’s nice now, but it would be even better under socialism etc.
The entirety of Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Programme is related to this subject. He explains it in excruciating detail. Also, the experiences of the opportunism of the second and third international explains it.
The working class does, from time to time, capitulate to opportunism and sacrifices the long term goal for the revolutionary socialist transformation of society in favor of short-term gains. This opportunism arises most of all in cases of desperation. The bourgeoisie has no qualms about exploiting this by granting short-term concessions, which it knows it can claw back at a later date when the situation is more favorable, in order to avert a revolution and preserve their privileged class positions. However communism is not just about immediate results.
The answer to this is the Communist Party, the working class organized into a political party and the repository of knowledge and experience for the working class. It’s given rise by the interests of the working class materializing into a precise consciousness. The communist party fights against opportunist degeneration by sticking to the historical invariant programme of the communists and draws lessons from past successes and defeats.
I don’t think you get to say ‘hey those nice things you got while under capitalism will disappear at some point - source, trust me bro.’
That arguably hasn’t eventuated for western workers as we haven’t returned to the original or worse conditions than when we were at at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Too few are interested in dying to improve their conditions further which disarms any vanguard party.
I don’t know much about Hegel, but the bit I do know makes me very skeptical about historical materialism. Socialist philosophy is better without Hegel IMO, yes I assume you disagree with this strongly.
Hmmm well maybe we are talking past each other.
I see it like this, the manifesto was a call to arms for the factory workers of Europe; join our revolution and your life will improve.
And some did, and their lives did improve for a while, but most importantly the majority of workers (ie European workers who didn’t have a revolution) did not join and their conditions still improved (WHS laws, working hours, sick leave, PTO, pension, healthcare).
How does Marx explain this? This shouldn’t be possible according to Marx.
When I was saying people have built on Marx I was alluding to revisionists like Bernstein.
He points out that self interest is a motivating factor, once a worker has a certain level of condition then they are no longer willing to risk that in a revolution, capitalism has effectively satiated them. Revolution is no longer possible in this situation.
This is the western world I see today, a lot of people who aren’t willing to risk what they have to get something better.
My solution (which isn’t really mine) is to appeal to their self interest, sure it’s nice now, but it would be even better under socialism etc.
The entirety of Marx’s Critique of the Gotha Programme is related to this subject. He explains it in excruciating detail. Also, the experiences of the opportunism of the second and third international explains it.
The working class does, from time to time, capitulate to opportunism and sacrifices the long term goal for the revolutionary socialist transformation of society in favor of short-term gains. This opportunism arises most of all in cases of desperation. The bourgeoisie has no qualms about exploiting this by granting short-term concessions, which it knows it can claw back at a later date when the situation is more favorable, in order to avert a revolution and preserve their privileged class positions. However communism is not just about immediate results.
The answer to this is the Communist Party, the working class organized into a political party and the repository of knowledge and experience for the working class. It’s given rise by the interests of the working class materializing into a precise consciousness. The communist party fights against opportunist degeneration by sticking to the historical invariant programme of the communists and draws lessons from past successes and defeats.
Party and Class.
Yeah that’s where we disagree.
I don’t think you get to say ‘hey those nice things you got while under capitalism will disappear at some point - source, trust me bro.’
That arguably hasn’t eventuated for western workers as we haven’t returned to the original or worse conditions than when we were at at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Too few are interested in dying to improve their conditions further which disarms any vanguard party.
I don’t know much about Hegel, but the bit I do know makes me very skeptical about historical materialism. Socialist philosophy is better without Hegel IMO, yes I assume you disagree with this strongly.