Jurriaan can't see the dog even if it bites him in the ass (was Re: [Marxism] Is this an accuratequote of Heidegger?

["Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <andromeda246@xxxxxxxxx>

> Individualism is I think a rather vague concept which might refer to such
> things as expressing individuality, going your own way, self-reliance,
> independent initiative, anti-social behaviour, lack of team work etc. Thus
> individualism could be a creed against social tyranny, but also a denial of
> social cooperation.

I agree fully.

> In Marxist philosophy, the dialectic of cooperation and competition has
> rarely been thought through clearly.

I have to disagree, with a caveat. While the marxist views on individualism
have in general addressed the denial of social cooperation, it has indeed
been insuficient in terms of the positive aspects.

This is particulary true in the development of alienated personal property,
and the capacity for small accumulation that capitalism has spread beyond
the ruling class.

Failure of the Soviet excercise in collectivism, in fact, demonstrate that
this matter has indeed been given not only thought, but praxis. That we
still haven't reached a conclusion speaks of the dialectics of history, an
not of a lack of exploration, observation and practice.

> The reason is probably that Stalinist Marxism-Leninism saw individuality,
> if uncontrolled, as a threat to or deviation from the party line. The
> underlying idea was, that we must all work together and sacrifice
> ourselves to improve the conditions of material life, and then the
> communist paradise will follow.

That is the short course. Of course, not only of Stalinist ML, but all other
forms of ML, including Trotskyism.

And of anarcho-syndicalism and other non-marxist class-based socialist
tendencies.

> But that is not the case, and what you still have in the CIS republics
> these days, is a profound moral malaise manifesting itself in cynicism,
> nihilism and corruption.

And this is meant as criticism of collectivism?

Of course, something did go wrong in the Soviet Union, and one must approach
the question critically. But what happens today in the former Soviet Union
is a glaring, eloquent, and undeniable example of the complete superiority
of the Soviet system, however flawed, when compared to (neo) liberal
capitalism.

While that the Soviet Union failed speaks to the flaws of that system, it by
no means speaks of the positive aspects of capitalist society. The former
Soviets states, in fact, speak of the worse of capitalist indivualism.

When you confuse the two, you help not to clarify the matter, but further
cloud it.

sks




_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism