I am needing help with the comprehension of marxism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Archedreamer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Archedreamer

Guest
Hi good aiders!

I need again your help. I am certainly a non so-wise man…

I am a person very interested at the social analysis… especifically I am interested at social psychology.

I am very very very interested specially at how culture takes part at the configuration of some attitudes. The way at where I try not to loose myself in my poetic imagination is studying also the economic strenght on the pople…

Those who I read specially to know about that are marxist… (you know, because they explain everything of the human decisions appeling to economy) I do that absolutely because I have their same escatology, but I have doubts about it anyway…:confused:

It is okay? I know respectabily about the God’s desire on our lifes because I read much the Bible…

But do you know where I would be able to be formed about the real relation between marxism and social christian philosophy? If I read marxist, I only read mythologycal explanations, if I read christians, I am not sure if they are not too polemics… I need to read someone who just says how the relation is…

Please, forgive how I writte english… it is a so beatifoul language…!

Thank you very much if you can help me and also If you cannnot, thank you just because you are how you are!🙂
 
Good evening!

Start with reading the writings of Pope John Paul II about Marxism. This will give you a good idea about how the modern Church looks at Marxism.

🙂
 
Warrenton said:
Good evening!

Start with reading the writings of Pope John Paul II about Marxism. This will give you a good idea about how the modern Church looks at Marxism.

🙂
Click to expand...
What I know about Marxism. There was Groucho, Chico, and Harpo. They were brothers and comics in the early days of sound motion pictures. Harpo never spoke but played the concert harp beautifully, Chico spoke with an Italian accent, Groucho was letcherous and later in the 1950s hosted a tv game show called “You Bet Your Life” 🤷
 
Catholic Encyclopedia, Communism:

newadvent.org/cathen/04179a.htm

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19031937_divini-redemptoris_en.html

Protestant and Catholic responses to Communism

encyclopedia.com/topic/Communism_in_the_Churches.aspx

In the chapter 17. Human rights: “letter” or “spirit”
Pope John Paul 2 discusses human freedom.
[17. Human rights: “letter” or “spirit”](17. Human rights: “letter” or “spirit”)

catholicnewsagency.com/news/benedict_xvi_cautions_against_dangers_of_marxist_liberation_theology/
 
LegoGE1947 said:
What I know about Marxism. There was Groucho, Chico, and Harpo. They were brothers and comics in the early days of sound motion pictures. Harpo never spoke but played the concert harp beautifully, Chico spoke with an Italian accent, Groucho was letcherous and later in the 1950s hosted a tv game show called “You Bet Your Life” 🤷
Click to expand...
After that, you learn about Lennon. He was also quite popular!👍
 
I can help you with Marxism. To start with, let me tell you that it is Atheistic at the outset. Communism and Socialism should not be readily identified with Marxism and vice versa. Although those 3 “isms” have negative connotations, communism and socialism are not necessarily atheistic, while Marxism’s first premise is to be founded on materialistic atheism, that is everything is matter and matter is all there is.

Though Marx’ materialism is not the same as our notion of materialism (which simply means love of material things), his philosophy ends up exalting economic conditions to be of supreme value, which for him is not simply the satisfaction of basic needs, but rather the satisfaction of man made commodities or simply wants.

For Marx, the there is no difference between humans and animals insofar as they are simply both animals. But at one point in the evolutionary progress arose animals which not only instinctively try to satisfy their needs, but also produce the means of production AND produce their own needs (wants) aside from their basic necessities. And for Marx, this fundamental difference, production (machines etc,) and produced needs (wants) should be satisfied and must be satisfied by all (communism) since the possession of these things is most essential since for Marx only the “here and now” is all there is. (By possession I simply mean the individual satisfaction of the good, Marx main point in abhorring private property is mainly about the privatization of the means of production which for Marx is against the very essence of why humans are humans - owning the production of the means of production and the their wants.)

I hope this helps. I hope it was clear enough.
 
Patty23 said:
I can help you with Marxism. To start with, let me tell you that it is Atheistic at the outset. Communism and Socialism should not be readily identified with Marxism and vice versa. Although those 3 “isms” have negative connotations, communism and socialism are not necessarily atheistic, while Marxism’s first premise is to be founded on materialistic atheism, that is everything is matter and matter is all there is.

Though Marx’ materialism is not the same as our notion of materialism (which simply means love of material things), his philosophy ends up exalting economic conditions to be of supreme value, which for him is not simply the satisfaction of basic needs, but rather the satisfaction of man made commodities or simply wants.

For Marx, the there is no difference between humans and animals insofar as they are simply both animals. But at one point in the evolutionary progress arose animals which not only instinctively try to satisfy their needs, but also produce the means of production AND produce their own needs (wants) aside from their basic necessities. And for Marx, this fundamental difference, production (machines etc,) and produced needs (wants) should be satisfied and must be satisfied by all (communism) since the possession of these things is most essential since for Marx only the “here and now” is all there is. (By possession I simply mean the individual satisfaction of the good, Marx main point in abhorring private property is mainly about the privatization of the means of production which for Marx is against the very essence of why humans are humans - owning the production of the means of production and the their wants.)

I hope this helps. I hope it was clear enough.
Click to expand...
So you might say that is what’s the “matter” with Marxism!:rolleyes:
 
Archedreamer said:
Hi good aiders!

I need again your help. I am certainly a non so-wise man…

I am a person very interested at the social analysis… especifically I am interested at social psychology.

I am very very very interested specially at how culture takes part at the configuration of some attitudes. The way at where I try not to loose myself in my poetic imagination is studying also the economic strenght on the pople…

Those who I read specially to know about that are marxist… (you know, because they explain everything of the human decisions appeling to economy) I do that absolutely because I have their same escatology, but I have doubts about it anyway…:confused:

It is okay? I know respectabily about the God’s desire on our lifes because I read much the Bible…

But do you know where I would be able to be formed about the real relation between marxism and social christian philosophy? If I read marxist, I only read mythologycal explanations, if I read christians, I am not sure if they are not too polemics… I need to read someone who just says how the relation is…

Please, forgive how I writte english… it is a so beatifoul language…!

Thank you very much if you can help me and also If you cannnot, thank you just because you are how you are!🙂
Click to expand...
Hello Dreamer and welcome to CAF.

What is your native language, may I ask?

There is a book out, called, Sense and Nonsense, by Maurice Merleau-Ponty, from Northwestern University Press (I believe). He was a French phenomenological philosopher who lived through Marx and was strongly influenced by him. You won’t read anything about Marx in the first third of the book, but, in the latter two-thirds, there is quite a bit of un-tainted insight into Marxism.

The book is written in English, but there may be translations in print.

God bless,
jd
 
One of the best books written on this topic is Frank Sheed’s Communism and Man.

The book is broadly organised into two main sections:
Part I - What is Communism? (Sets out the Marxist worldview.)
Part II - Refutation.

In typical Sheed fashion (and in keeping with the Catholic intellectual tradition), he states the Marxists viewpoint so fully and accurately that a Marxist would say “yes, that’s exactly what I think”. The Communist Party in the UK reportedly recommended that its new members read Part I (only) to get a good undestanding of what the Party stands for.

You can’t really refute Communism if your understanding isn’t accurate. Neither will you understand why communists are so fired by their beliefs and ideology. That’s why Sheed takes so much trouble to paint an accurate picture of Communism and the Marxist worldview.

Ourt of print. But highly recommended.
 
Bishop Sheen wrote an article about Karl Marx.

Marx was an atheist. Early in his life he editted an atheists’ magazine.

Marx was a miserable person. He hated everybody. He had terrible arguments with his mother although he lived off her money because he never held a job.

Finally, his mother was fed up with him and stopped supporting him. He got involved with Engels who was interested in his socialist ideas. Engels gave Marx living money.

Late in his life Marx wrote junk about communism to keep Engels’ money coming. Since Marx hated everybody he proposed a political system that would oppress man.

Everything is owned by the state. Since there are no personal rights withoug property rights, communism was sure to be a dictatorship in which a few men were in control of everybody else.
And so it has come to pass in every communist society, as Marx knew it would.

That’s all you need to know about marxism. :eek: :banghead::bigyikes::amen::tiphat:
 
JDaniel said:
Hello Dreamer and welcome to CAF.

What is your native language, may I ask?

There is a book out, called, Sense and Nonsense, by Maurice Merleau-Ponty, from Northwestern University Press (I believe). He was a French phenomenological philosopher who lived through Marx and was strongly influenced by him. You won’t read anything about Marx in the first third of the book, but, in the latter two-thirds, there is quite a bit of un-tainted insight into Marxism.

The book is written in English, but there may be translations in print.

God bless,
jd
Click to expand...
Thank you everyone so much because you are interested in me!

My mother language is spanish. I understad english, not all, but I don’t need to read so much the dictionary if i read a text! =P but to achieve an american book in Argentina, it 's difficult…

That about I am most interested is about if I should accept historic materialism in that about that ideology says about the relationship between material condition and life. As and interested in the ethnopsychology (I am a disciple of Herder) I always receive critics from marxists… I only can think with poetic (never economic or technic) categories and marxist show me how wrong I can to be sometimes. I would never become a materialist (I think never forever, because my lutheran roots are very strong tough I have returned to the Catholic Church, and they are always how to claming… let us go! hahaha).

Can I think this?: Oh… it is true that an industrial man will desire to have this way of life… Oh… it is true that a proletarian will think this… Oh this is true that a middle-class man would believe this… It would be okay? I never never will rennunce to my religious beliefs, strong even how strong scream reductionist philosophies…

thank you very much! excuse my english!
 
I want to say… if I don’t do from this a philosophy, nor much less a theology, how Marx has done… it 's okay to understand marxism as a economic psychology of economic attitudes? I don’t know is even if i didn’t do from this a philosphy marxism has or has not politic keys in his theories…

I have read Juan José Sebreli (it is a marxist sociologist from Argentina). He has explanations of phenomenons as Romanticism or Wellfare state that have served me very much to understand kirchnerism (it is the political current that is on the governament of Argentina). Marxist only use their categories to attak conservative political systems… but marxism is also useful to see how Marx has been irrational if I think that he acted as a lawyer how he was (a middle class man, who can be consterned by the poor men, but who won’t do anything for them, because he is a lawyer, not a cooker… he did ideals born dialectically from matter… but I don’t know if it is rational-)
 
I have read Marvin Harris (a famous materialist, but not marxist, anthropologist) and he says that marxism is not to explain vital attitudes trough economic status … marxism is something like to explain life trough the distribution of technic possibilities for domain the environment…

So that I am interested in is not marxism. I wanna to search explanations of psychology in economic issues… like the examples I left at the previous post. I am not mainly interested in politics but some thing have politics… like not to lose the social position.

Can I think this?: Oh… it is true that an industrial man would not do this. Oh… it is true that a proletarian would think this… Oh this is true that a middle-class man would believe this… It would be okay? I never never will rennunce to my religious beliefs, strong even how strong scream reductionist philosophies…

Said with facts: Could I think: The Illiad can be understood (partially) as the dreamed canon of the Mycanean noblemen (here is economy) toward their serfs… could I think that? It is just an example. Other could be could: Cuvier (an evolutionist) did her theory based on the ideals of Restauration (all the Nature is perfect for this time…)… etc.

Maybe some thing of the Church can be explained talking about the economic issues that leaded some attitudes… Not all the Church of all times and obviously only the Human Church… Could we explain the Borgia popes behavior arguing their membership to financery Medici? (indulgences are credits… etc).

Should I do that I project? Marxism has been so confronted with Catholicism that I don’t know what to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top