[lbo-talk] Blue Dogs cashing in c b cb31450 at gmail.com Fri Aug 7 07:25:16 PDT 2009
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marv Gandall -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shane M. writes: > > On Aug 6, 2009, at 4:20 PM, c b wrote: > >> Marx is also an amoralist for the following reason: morality concerns >> judging action that impacts that interests of _other_ people not the >> self-interests of the actor. Marx is trying to get the working class, >> working class individuals, to take action in their own self-interest. >> Marx does not appeal to the working class to revolt against the >> immorality of the ruling class, but to act in its own self-interest , >> which is an amoral motive. > > > But the "self-interest" of the proletariat, as Marx conceives it, has > nothing to do with "interest" (economic advantage) as conceived by > individuals, including individual proletarians, in bourgeois society. > The "self-interest" of the proletariat as a class *fur sich* consists of > its *abolition as a class ============================================== But it is only when individual workers identify their own economic self-interest with the interest of all who work for wages and salaries that they combine for collective action in the workplace and in politics - that which presents them with the possibility of transcending their status as workers, ie. the abolition of the working class. This newly awakened social consciousness is conceived of as the "highest expression" of morality in contradistinction to bourgeois morality which exalts the individual, but it follows rather than precedes the development of class consciousness arising out of the realm of production. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ c b wrote: > Marx is also an amoralist for the following reason: morality concerns > judging action that impacts the interests of _other_ people not the > self-interests of the actor. Hard to see how someone could affect their own self interest without impacting others. ie?? martin ^^^^^ CB: No doubt. In general, in these times, an individual worker can seek to fulfill her own self-intetest by helping to make socialism while impacting others' self-interests positively, no ? So, no moral dilemma in following Marx's suggestions. Marxism is selfish and moral at the same time. The original win-win approach. By the way, there's nothing immoral about impacting the rich's overinflated, ballooned even, wealth by deflating it. Rich individuals can satisfy their self-interests with much less wealth than they have now.. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Matthias Wasser > Individual self-interest doesn't get you there, though. As far as any one individual is concerned, your material-reward-to-effort ratio is going to be a lot higher trying to get into the ruling class than overthrowing them. You can push out the boundaries of the self to include the community, of course, but that encroaches on the territory of - gasp! - morality. ^^^^^^^ CB: So far, yes. So far it hasn't gotten us there, but the struggle continues; victory is certain. ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Shane Mage : But the "self-interest" of the proletariat, as Marx conceives it, has nothing to do with "interest" (economic advantage) as conceived by individuals, including individual proletarians, in bourgeois society. The "self-interest" of the proletariat as a class *fur sich* consists of its *abolition as a class*. This is an entirely moral, not amoral, motive because it grounds communism in a concrete teleology--the planetary historical mission of human consciousness as the embodiment of what Hegel called "objective spirit." ^^^^^ CB: Yes, I think as it has turned out historically, the failure to achieve socialist reovolutions, especially in the Western, big power nations, means that there is an ironic convergence of Marxism with the Christian trope of pie-in-the-sky-in-the-bye-and-bye or ,individual Marxists and workers sacrificing their immediate and short-term self-interests for the cause of the interests of others to be fulfilled in the longer run in the planetary mission. The Party bookstore in Highland Park 10 -15 years ago was "Longview Bookstore". However, Marx seemed to seek to help make revolution in his lifetime, not to say that he opposed it in the long run. And each generation of Marxists "should" look for a way to make revolution within their lifetime, even if as with Sisyphus, the revolutionary rock has rolled some ways back down the hill again. Note that Marx -and Engels, Lenin , Angela Davis, et al, (most LBOers ) - not being in the working class were thoroughly morally motivated, I.e. they could have met their own individual self-interests much easier or at all, in the case of Marx and Lenin, by working for the rich rather than the poor. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
