Back in the USSR

“All I know is that I am not a Marxist”. Perhaps few people know that this is what Karl Marx (1818-1883) said when he was soupset with the various misinterpretations of his ideas. This was in the 19^th century when most of the world was still under feudalism and colonialism.

Subsequently, much after his death, during the 20^th century many countries declared themselves as communist, Marxist or socialist; some after revolution, some after coups and some after neither of the two.

Instead of studying and analysing the theories, intentions and the background behind what Karl said or meant, much of what we came across in history and education about Marxism was as defined by USSR and China, by the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Cold War, by Vietnam and North Korea and more recently in India the brash interviews of the Karat duo of the Communist Party of India. In fact in our school education, it was clubbed in History in the same year as fascism and dictatorship (something which becomes difficult for our innocent young (not so intelligent – in my case) minds to distinguish between). I will use his first name henceforth not out of lack of respect, but because the use of his last name Marx inadvertently gives rise to preconceived notions and emotions thereby closing our minds. As a wise man has said “If you already know what you are looking for, then that is all you will find”.

Karl was of the view that Communism will come about through the natural progress of society and the disintegration of the capitalist system, due to its internal flaws. Of course he did not completely rule out revolution and violence as a means to effect that change, but that is not the point of debate in this essay.

The two main so called Communist economies USSR and China did not progress in this manner at all. Russian Communism was brought about by the Bolsheviks led by Lenin against the autocratic leader Tsar Nicholas II. And when Stalin took over in 1953 and ran his dictatorship it was assumed to be just another level of Communism. The Chinese Maoist Communism was the effect of fighting by the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) under the leadership of Chairman Mao against the leadership of the warlord class. One of Mao’s famous sayings that “political power comes from the barrel of a gun” is perhaps ideologically opposite to what Karl believed that “ideas that rule any country must be the ideas of the working class”. Karl had believed that for Communism would eventually flow after the extremism of Capitalism, the latter was not present in both USSR and China.

An important tenet of Karl was his belief in False Consciousness. Because the way that people actually think is influenced by the society around them, people find it difficult to develop entirely new ideas. They can only think in the way that their language and concepts handed down to them allow. When people cannot see the way their beliefs are artificially constructed by society they are said to be in a state of False Consciousness.

Human nature is a not a fixed thing but alters with social and economic conditions. This means that society can be changed by altering the economic system (although I would personally prefer that we change Chairman Ben before he changes the society).

Karl believed art and culture were important parts of our society. Both art and culture are meant for people to enjoy. “Capitalist society tends to see everything in financial terms. Everything is given a financial value.” Karl believed that “nobody should have one exclusive sphere of activity.....to hunt in the morning (since there were no endangered species back then), fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner (not the cooking),...., without ever becoming a hunter, fisherman, shepherd or critic”.

Although the largest democracies emphasise and boast of their essential rights of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press (especially to broadcast breaking news) and equality under the law, Karl did not agree with any of these rights. He believed that as long as the base of society was still capitalist, the people were never free in the true sense. For example, although in the eyes of the law everybody is equal, those who are better off can afford better representation in court; although there may be freedom of press, but the rich control the flow of news. We appear to be free but our economic conditions and thereby our societies control our work, religion, politics and ideas. What do we control?

What nations started off on principles of Capitalism have quite some ago progressed (deteriorated) into Imperialism or as Lenin would have called it “financial oligarchy” (oligarchy is not to be confused with the word orgy, although in the current context they could mean the same).

Post-modern thinkers do not see the relevance of Karl’s theories as we now live in a post-modern world which bears no resemblance to the 19^th century. Karl predicted that large corporations would dominate world markets. Today with large conglomerates, world-wide banking corporations and large super-market chains it is only for time to tell the relevance of his theories. Are we really more satisfied than our parents and grand-parents, despite an increase in material possessions (I was going to say – despite having more money – but looking at the food inflation here and the money printing of the US FED I really don’t know what more money means). As long as 10% people hold 99% of the wealth Karl’ theories will have a chance to prove its relevance. The question is not ‘if’, but ‘when’. One thing is for sure that the capitalist economy cannot guarantee the prospective development of humanity because it does not take into account the cultural and human losses that result from its own expansion.

“Religion is the Opium of the people” was Karl’s more famous quotations. Opium is an addictive drug that dulls the senses. Would you say he is wrong after looking at the wars and terrorism and deaths of the last three decades fought in the name of religion? Here I do not justify either side at conflict, because both are taking advantage in the name of Religion and Nationalism (something which another great thinker Rabindranath Tagore was strongly against).

Even if Karl’s theories are adopted conflicts will always be part of society and society will always be unstable and changeable. Capitalism would try to fight back (some would say that it is the other way round). It may not be easy to create a state of equals, but inequalities even in Communism do not mean that Karl’s vision was entirely wrong. Karl might have said some instigative statements and proposed a lot of disputable theories, but that should not take away the merits in his approach and intention.

A wise man (second one) has said “In Capitalism man-exploits-man; in Communism it is just the opposite”. As the Latin saying goes - Mundus vult decipi – ergo decipitatur; meaning the world wants to be deceived, let it therefore be deceived. The purpose here is for us as thinking and educated individuals to select the good theories and the merits within the not-so-good theories to help us live a happy satisfied life and also a life where we can work for mankind. For like every journey has to come to an end, our modern civilization (Vedic Kali-yuga) will in the end meet our equivalence of the Vedic deluge, the destruction of the Atlantis or the Biblical Flood (that discussion will be left for another time). But as a wise man (third one) said “Fear not that thy life shall come to an end, but rather that it shall never have a beginning”.

Karl’s intentions can be summed up in a line from one of his letters “If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people”.

Notes:

All statements in Italics are attributed to Karl Marx, but I could not get him to personally verify this.

Efforts are being made to find the identity of the three wise men.