Marxism 22

This a 2011 fb post and few comments

A religious minded, fb friend asked me about when was the golden period of socialism?

Let us look at the course of history as it had been dont look for any golden period. Golden period is a myth created by the ruling classes. hitherto history has been the history of class-conflicts. The cliched concept of all the ruling classes has been"The past has been glorious and future is bright", just bear with the miseries of the present, he he hee. The societies looking for the golden period in the past are stagnant societies. The Hindutva forces under the tutelage of RSS want to take us to the highest glory of the past, without telling us, when was that golden past. History evolves the laws of its own dynamics and its engine does not have back gear. Knowledge is continuously evolving process, each generation consolidates and builds upon the achievements of previous generations, and hence every next genertion, in general is smarter. In Hindu mythological world the progress is so regressive that it begins with the "climax" -- Satyuga and rolls down to the lowest stage -- the Kaliyuga in which even the Shudra will assert rights and scholarship. That is followed by Treta symbolised by an "ideal", Lord Rama, without going into comprehensive details of this period, when a Shudra, Sambuk was meditating in the forest , it seemed the clamity had fallen on the system he represented, and instead of sending his trusted leftinents --Hanum , laxman, ..... -- went himself to kill him. In the next best phase, an ideal teacher destroys the talent by cutting the thumb of a tribal boy trying to learn archery, but tribals learnt the art of shooting arrows without the use of thumb. And historical golden period is Gupta period during which the Varnashram system got consolidated and Manusmriti, one of the most reactionary scriptures perpetuated its inhuman commandments. In Islam, Mohammad, an intelligent poor Arab with potentialities of great mass mobilization declared hiself to be the last prophet in the sequence of many preceding and found misery-stricken people simple enough to be3lieve him and hence the golden period. He combined the religious and political authorities in a single person Imam/emir whose most barbaric culmination was the fascist Khomeini. It was such a golden period that followers and kinsmen waged a bloody battle for the seat of power. therefore let us care for the struggles of today for justice and basic human rights against corporate-led plunder of the earth in connivance with their political agents across the countries. Religion by definition is retrogressive as it looks to past for inspiration an does not allow question and radical doubt.

SH@ what is difference between "sruggle" and 

Upendraprasad Singh THESE TWO ARE DIFFERENT WORDS HAVING DIFFERENT MEANINGS

The conflict is the contradictions of the interests -- class interest in the present context and struggle is to comprehend the contradiction and fight it out to eventually end it. This conflict is not matter of economic bargain but a social relation of domination and subjugation. As domination occurs at various levels -- economic; cultural; political; juridical......... hence the struggle takes place at various levels and is ongoing process. We are contributing to it our bit (positively/negatively) through our each word and action. revolutions and uprisings are its most visible manifestations.

Upendraprasad Singh You are very correct that the beginning sentences of the Manifesto contain "class struggle". The overt-covert struggle is regarding irreconcilable conflict of class-interest. The notion of Class and Class conflict had been invented by liberals for whom it was a problem to be solved, Marx and Engels contribution is specification of conflict that is irreconcilable as the antagonists don't represent as individuals but some total of social relations in which they stand -- the Relations of Production. I use the class-conflict and Class-struggle interchangeably, now on I shal be careful.

(Bahir's comment on Marxism and revolutionary nature of Islam is probably deleted.)

Mr. Abdul Baseer, if you are really interested in any meaningful deliberations, please read and discern the post and subsequent comments and refrain from putting your words & fantasies in other's mouth. We are authentic atheist and materialist for whom truth has to be proved in practice, anything that can not be proved is not truth. Let me ask you one simple question, what do you know about socialism, from what source? or for that matter what do you know about capitalism from what source? I am asking this question because many people without knowing ABC of a concept come out with judgmental statements, fatwas and I agree with Anton Chekhov, that Art for Art sake is crime. We don't live in fantasies that is the area of excellence of ecclesiastical scholars and theologians who obfuscate the reality by philosophically abstracted concepts, dogmas and myths. Giving you a lecture on historical materialism would be out of place and waste of time (Don't take it as my vanity). History of capitalism, that began with the promise of heaven, is over 500 years old, would you tell me when was/is its golden period unless its attributes are unprecedented crime of expropriation of peasantry; unprecedented colonial plunder and extermination of majority of native populations of Americas and Australia; Plunder/occupation of African communities and re-institution of Slavery, the most vulgar, barbaric, inhuman form of exploitation of human beings by "inhuman beings"; the unprecedented bloodshed for imperialist division of the world. The history of socialist experiments, that began with the shaking the world in 10 days, is not even a century old, there are setbacks, stalemates but no going back, it's a continuous process. The Socialism is the inevitable alternative of Capitalism, that has to, according to the laws of dialectics has to go. Historically, anything that exists is destined to perish, that is true of capitalism. Long live Revolution.