9k:RD/ chains (Marxism) (Q384)
Main entry
- chains (Marxism) -> this is an unexpectedly complex signifier that seems simple to everybody and then turns out to have many layers and many complexities and be terribly easy to misinterpret while there is actually a completely different thing it was supposed to mean.
overall, it's a very bad metaphor if it was meant to communicate anything. I think this one word "chains" has brought a surprisingly great portion of all the misinterpretations of Marxism in existence. - losing chains / you have nothing to lose but your chains (generic) / Q3,84-CM
- a class with radical chains (generic) / Q3,84-RC
"Suffering in general"
- universal suffering / a sphere which has a universal character by its universal suffering and claims no particular right because no particular wrong, but wrong generally, is perpetuated against it (Marx 1844, Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right) / a class with radical chains ->
oh boy. I am almost positive some people in Western Marxism have interpreted this totally wrong. you have to understand that the concept of "suffering" here means something oddly specific and isn't just any suffering at all, and the reason the statement is interesting is that it's saying that a highly specific form of suffering still applies to everybody.
let's see... hang on... okay I've got a B-side analogy. is your cat a member of the proletariat??? if you were a Western-Marxist talking about 'worker compression' or 'how Jungian psychoanalysis and repression define the proletariat' you'd be pretty much implying that. Marx isn't implying that. - universal suffering -> note: Marx quite literally means the physical bond of capital and what capital and the people connected to it are doing as an object. I just rediscovered that today and suddenly felt like "wow, I've been stupid" because I talk about 'chunk competition' all the time but I rarely stop and distinguish how it changes things for it to be refined over the centuries into capital per se. yes, there's a small difference and it makes all the difference.
- worker compression (Western-Marxism) / (9k) -> the motif of claiming that all human beings experiencing suffering or empathy and all workers experiencing working-class suffering are the exact same thing and there are no differences whatsoever between them, such that there is an implication that every single human being is currently a worker.
- A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right (Marx 1843) [1] / (9k) -> in this text "chains" refers to either being under the power of ruling classes as actively ruled France, or great numbers of people starving while the ruling class survives as happened at other times in France (including a small amount of it today). yes, this becomes a touchy subject when you start talking about the Soviet Union and pointing out that there was an apparent phenomenon of universal suffering among the peasants and small owners compared with the bureaucrats, and perhaps implying that with the bureaucrats being a structure passed down from the old feudal order the population would be better served by a worldwide population of small owners smashing the Soviet government and absorbing the small producers into the First World. that is not what Marx endorsed, because his important insight was that all the ruling classes would have to be replaced by the thing below them, and in the 'book of revelation' pattern one of the existing ruling classes takes over the world. as soon as he says that particular sentence, the possibilities have been narrowed down to proletarian republic in one country or Trotskyism.
the part about kings says that the emergence of the proletariat means that every meaningful ruling class territory within a former kingdom flattens to the point you have a country region full of proletarians and nothing else who will all have to form the structure of that country. that part negates blue countries (once again) but says nothing about the interesting question. - A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right -> so... Marx had not solved the problem of what a proletarian civilization looks like in that year. this text by Marx is actually crimson, as crazy as that is.
"Wage slavery"
- wage slavery / slave class of workers (Marx) / (9k)
Related
Ideologies, topics, or genres
- / meta-Marxism
- / Trotskyism
- / Communist party aesthetics
- / Communist manifesto (1848)
- / Western Marxism
- / Western-Marxist distortions
Wavebuilder combinations
- : forms result [Item]
- --
- non-slaves, don your chains (MDem 4.3 scrap)