Socialism doesnt work in the West, because without cultural haromy, all the prospect of welfare does is incentivize parasitism. There was a social experiment where they got a hundred people each to run two islands in Minecraft, one was capitalist, the other was communist. You know what the outcome was? They both worked fine, because the test players were all Scandinavian.
The New World Order - In 1940, Fabian socialist, H.G. Wells, who worked for the British Propaganda Bureau at Wellington House, published a book promoting a one world government, titled The New World Order, which the United Nations' charter drew heavily from: ''Countless people from Maharashtra to millionaires and from Pukka sahib to pretty ladies will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it.''
Karl Marx
(((Karl Marx'))) father, Heinrich Marx, a lawyer, whose name originally was Herschel Halevai Marx, was the son of a rabbi and Talmudic scholar, descended from the famous rabbi Eleazar Halevai of Metz, whose son Jehuda Metz was head of the Talmudic school of Padua. Marx's mother, Henrietta Pressburg, was a daughter of a rabbi likewise descended from famous scholars and sages.
Das Kapital is a series of essays glued together without any real form.
Marx wrote about finance and industry all his life, but he knew only two people connected with financial and industrial processes. One was his uncle in Holland, Leon Philips, a successful businessman who created what eventually became the vast Philips Electric Company. Uncle Philips' views on the whole capitalist process would have been well-informed and interesting had Marx struggled to explore them, but he only once consulted him on a technical matter of high finance, and though he visited Philips four times, these concerned purely personal matters of family loans.
In 1845, Marx paid a brief visit to London and attended a meeting of the German Workers' Education Society. These men were mostly skilled workers, watchmakers, printers, shoemakers. Their leader was a forester. They were self-educated, disciplined, solemn, well-mannered, very anti-Bohemian and anti-liberal, anxious to transform society but moderate without the practical steps to this end. They did not share Marx's apocalyptic visions, and above all, they did not speak in his academic jargon. He viewed them with contempt. Revolutionary cannon fodder. Marx always preferred to associate with middle-class intellectuals like himself, champagne socialists. When he and Engels created the Communist League and again when they formed the International, Marx made sure that working-class socialists were eliminated from the positions of influence and sat on committees merely as statutory proles. His motive was partly intellectual snobbery, partly that men with actual experience of factory conditions tended to be anti-violence and in favor of modest progressive improvements. They were knowledgeably skeptical about the apocalyptic revolution he claimed was not only necessary but inevitable.
In March 1846, he subjected William Veitling to a kind of trial before a meeting of the Communist League in Brussels. Veitling was the poor illegitimate son of a laundress who never knew his father's name, a tailor's apprentice who by sheer hard work and self-education had won himself a large following among German workers. The object of the trial was to insist on correctness of doctrine and to put down any uppity working-class type who lacked the philosophical training Marx thought was essential. Marx's attack on Veitling was extraordinarily aggressive. According to Marx, he was guilty of ''conducting an agitation without doctrine. This was all very well in barbarous Russia where you can build up successful unions with stupid young men and apostles, but in a civilized country like Germany, you must realize that nothing can be achieved without our doctrine.'' And further to this, he said, "If you attempt to influence the workers, especially the German workers, without a body of doctrine and clear scientific ideas, then you are merely playing an empty and unscrupulous game of propaganda, leading inevitably to the setting up on the one hand of an inspired apostle and, on the other, of open-mouthed donkeys listening to him." Veitling replied he had not become a socialist to learn about doctrines manufactured in a study. He spoke for actual working men and would not submit to the views of mere theoreticians who were remote from the suffering world of real labor. This, said an eyewitness, so enraged Marx that he struck his fist on the table so violently that the lamp shook. Jumping to his feet, he shouted, "Ignorance has never helped anybody yet." The meeting ended with Marx still striding up and down the room in violent rage.
Curiously enough, it does not have a central argument which acts as an organizing principle. Marx originally, in 1857, conceived the work as consisting of six volumes, but the methodical self-discipline needed to carry through such a plan proved beyond his power. In short, all the first part of Marx's scientific examination of working conditions under capitalism in the mid-1860s is based upon a single work, Friedrich Engels' Condition of the Working Class in England, published a number of years before. The truth is, even the most superficial inquiry into Marx's use of evidence forces one to treat with skepticism everything he wrote which lies on factual data. He simply cannot ever be trusted. The whole of the key chapter 8 of Kapital is a deliberate and systematic falsification to prove a thesis which an objective examination of the facts shows was untenable. His crimes against the truth fall under four heads.
Marx used out-of-date material because up-to-date material did not support his case. He selected certain industries where conditions were particularly bad as typical of capitalism. This cheat was particularly important to Marx because without it he could not really have had Chapter 8 at all. His thesis was that capitalism produces ever-worsening conditions. The more capital employed, the more badly the workers had to be treated to secure adequate returns. The evidence he quotes at length to justify it comes almost entirely from small, inefficient, undercapitalized firms in archaic industries, which in most cases were pre-capitalist. i.e. pottery, dressmaking, blacksmiths, baking, matchmakers, wallpaper and lace for instance. Using reports of the factory inspectorate, Marx quotes examples of bad conditions and ill-treatment of workers as though they were the inevitable norm of the system. In fact, these were the responsibility of what the inspectors themselves called the fraudulent mill owner, whom they were appointed to detect and prosecute and who was thus in the process of being eliminated anyway. Around this time, Parliament passed the Factory Acts.
Marx's family quarrels were almost the first thing his future wife, Jennifer von Westphalen, noticed about him. At Bonn University, the police arrested him for possessing a pistol, and he was very nearly sent down. The university archives show he engaged in student warfare, fought a duel, and got a gash on his left eye. His rouse within the family darkened his father's last years and led eventually to a total breach with his mother. One of his wife's earliest surviving letters reads: ''Please do not write with so much rancour and irritation'', and it is clear that many of his incessant rows arose from the violent expressions he was prone to use in writing, and still more in speech, the latter often aggravated by alcohol. Marx drank daily, and often heavily, sometimes engaging in serious drinking bouts. According to his wife, the rows were perpetual. In Paris, his editorial meetings in the Rue de Moulin had to be held behind closed windows, so that people outside could not hear the endless shouting. These rows were not aimless, however. Marx quarreled with everyone with whom he associated, from Bruno Bauer onwards, unless he succeeded in dominating them completely. As a result, there were many descriptions, mainly hostile, of the furious Marx in action. One associate of Marx's, a man by the name of Karl Heinzen, said that he had a habit of saying: "I will annihilate you."
Marx was so abusive during his row with August von Willeck in 1850 that the latter challenged him to a duel. Marx, though a former duelist, said he would not engage in the frolics of Prussian officers, but he made no attempt to stop his young assistant, Konrad Schramm, from taking his place. Though Schramm had never used a pistol in his life and Willeck was an excellent shot, Schramm was wounded badly. How Marx actually saw the morality of his actions, whether distorting truth or encouraging violence, it is impossible to say. In one sense he was a strongly moral person. He was filled with a burning desire to create a better world. Yet he ridiculed morality in the German ideology. He argued that it was unscientific and could be an obstacle to revolution. He seems to have thought it would be dispensed with the result of a quasi-metaphysical change in human behavior that the advent of communism would bring about. Like many self-centered individuals, he tended to think that moral laws did not apply to himself, or rather to identify his interests with morality as such. Certainly he came to see the interests of the proletariat and the fulfillment of his views as coextensive. In his testimony about Marx's political aims and behaviour, it is notable how often the word dictator crops up. Anikov called him the personification of a democratic dictator. An unusually intelligent Prussian police agent who reported on him in London noted, "The dominating trait of his character is an unlimited ambition and love for power. He is an absolute ruler of his party. He does everything on his own and gives orders on his own responsibility and will endure no contradiction." Von Teschau, who once managed to get Marx drunk and to pour forth his soul, gives a brilliant pen portrait of him: "He was a man of outstanding personality with a rare intellectual superiority, and if his heart had matched his intellect and he had possessed as much love as hate, I would have gone through fire for him. But he is lacking in nobility of soul. I am convinced that a most dangerous personal ambition has eaten away all the good in him. The acquisition of personal power is the aim of all his endeavors.'' And Michael Bakunin's final judgment on Marx struck the same note: "Marx does not believe in God, but he believes much in himself and makes everyone serve himself. His heart is not full of love but of bitterness, and he has very little sympathy for the human race." Marx's habitual anger, his dictatorial habits, and his bitterness reflected no doubt his justified consciousness of great powers and his intense frustration at his inability to exercise them more effectively. As a young man he led a bohemian, often idle and dissolute life. In early middle age, he still found it difficult to work sensibly and systematically, often sitting up all night talking, then lying half asleep on the sofa for most of the day. In late middle age, he kept more regular hours, but he never became self-disciplined about work. Yet he resented the smallest criticism. It was one of the characteristics he shared with Rousseau that he tended to quarrel with friends and benefactors, especially if they gave him good advice. His angry egoism had physical as well as psychological roots.
Lifestyle - He led a peculiarly unhealthy life, took very little exercise, ate highly spiced foods and often in large quantities, smoked heavily, drank a lot, and as a result had constant trouble with his liver. He took one or two baths every year and hardly washed his hands at all. This, plus his unsuitable diet, may explain the veritable plague of boils from which he suffered for a quarter of a century. They increased his natural irritability and seemed to be at their worst while he was writing Capital. He wrote to Engles: ''Whatever happens, I hope the bourgeoisie as long as they exist will have cause to remember my carbuncles.'' The boils varied in numbers and intensity, but at one time or another they appeared on all parts of his body.
Marx and money - Still more central to his anger and frustration, and lying perhaps at the very roots of his hatred for the capitalist system, was his grotesque incompetence in handling money. As a young man it drove him into the hands of moneylenders at high rates of interest, and a passionate hatred of usury was the real emotional dynamic of his home-world philosophy. These troubles began at university and lasted his entire life. They rose from an essentially childish attitude. Marx borrowed money heedlessly, spent it, then was invariably astounded and angered when the heavily discounted bills plus interest became due. Money dominated his family correspondence. The last letter from his father written in February of 1838, when he was already dying, reiterates his complaint that Marx was indifferent to his family, except for the purpose of getting their help and complains: "You are now in the fourth month of your law course and you have already spent 280 thalers. I have not earned so much throughout the entire winter." Three months later he was dead. Marx did not trouble to attend his funeral. Instead, he started putting pressure on his mother. He had already adopted a pattern of living off loans from friends and gouging periodic sums from the family. He argued that the family was quite rich and had a duty to support him in his important work. Apart from his intermittent journalism, the purpose of which was political rather than to earn money, Marx never seriously attempted to get a real job, though he once in London applied for a post as a railway clerk, being turned down on the grounds that his handwriting was too poor. Marx's unwillingness to pursue a career seems to have been the main reason why his family was unsympathetic to his pleas for handouts. His mother not only refused to pay his debts, believing he would then simply contract more, but eventually cut him off completely. Thereafter, their relations were minimal. In one last letter to him, she would write: "I wish you would accumulate capital instead of just writing about it." All the same, one way or another, Marx got considerable sums of money by inheritance. His father's death brought him 6,000 gold francs, some of which he spent on arming Belgian workmen. His mother's death in 1856 brought him less than he expected, but this was because he had anticipated the legacy by borrowing from his uncle Phillips. He also received a substantial sum from the estate of Wilhelm Wulf in 1864. Other sums came in through his wife and her family. She also brought with her a part of her wedding portion, a silver dinner service with the coat of arms of her Scottish Argyll ancestors. Between them they received enough money, sensibly invested, to provide a competence, and at no point did their actual income fall below £200 a year, three times the average wage of a skilled workman. But neither Marx himself nor his wife had any interest in money except to spend it. Legacies and loans alike went in dribs and drabs, and they were never a penny better off permanently. Indeed, they were always in debt, and often seriously, and the silver dinner service regularly went to the pawnbrokers along with much else. But of course the principal victims of Marxism providence and unwillingness to work were his own household, his wife above all. Jennifer Marks is one of the tragic, pitiful figures of socialist history. She had the clear Scottish colouring, pale skin, green eyes and auburn hair of her paternal grandmother, descended from the second Earl of Argyll. She was a beauty and Marks loved her, and she loved him passionately at first. It took many years of bitterness for her love to die, however. How could an egoist like Marks inspire such affection? He was proud of his wife's noble Scottish descent and her position as the daughter of a Baron and senior official in the Prussian government. On printed invitations to a ball which she issued in London in the 1860s, they refer to her as "Née von Westphalen", or Westfalen Marx leaned heavily on his wife all throughout their marriage, and after her death in 1881, he faded rapidly himself, doing no work, taking the cure at various European spas or travelling to Algiers, Monte Carlo and Switzerland in search of sun or pure air. In December of 1882, he exulted at his growing influence in Russia. "Nowhere is my success more delightful," he said. Destructive to the end, he boasted that "it gives me the satisfaction that I damage a power which, next to England, is the true bulwark of the old European society." Three months later, he died in his dressing gown, sitting next to a fire. One of his daughters, Jennifer, had died a few weeks before. The lives of the other two daughters were also tragic. Eleanor, heartbroken by her husband's conduct, took an overdose of opium in 1898, possibly in a suicide pact from which he wriggled out. Thirteen years later, his daughter Laura and her husband also agreed to a suicide pact, and both carried it through.
Helen de Muth, known in the family as Lention joined the von Westphalen family at the age of eight as a nursery maid. She got her keep but was paid nothing. In 1845 the Baroness, who felt sorrow and anxiety for her married daughter, gave Lentjen, then 22, to Jennifer Marx to ease her lot. She remained in the Marx family until her death in 1890. Eleanor called her the most tender of beings to others while throughout her life a stoic to herself. And as would be expected, Lynchon had a child by Karl. This child was born at the Soho Address on 2018 Street on the 23rd of June 1851. It was a son registered as Henry Frederick de Muth. Marx refused to acknowledge his responsibility then or ever and flatly denied the rumors that he was the father. This woman then was the only member of the working class that Marx ever knew at all. His one real contact with the proletariat. She helped raise his daughters, washed his britches and darned his clothes, and never received a farthing for this. Their illegitimate son, Frederick, was brought up as a working-class lad and in 1888, when he was just 36, he got his coveted certificate as a qualified engineer and fitter. He spent virtually all of his life in Kings Cross and Hackney and was a regular member of the Engineers Union. But Karl Marx never knew him. They met only once, presumably when Frederick was coming up the outside steps from the kitchen, and he had no idea then that the revolutionary philosopher, his father, was the man pouring tea in the kitchen.
By: Vertigo Politix
Raped by: Otto Heckel
No comments:
Post a Comment