Traveling to distant shores and Moslems (the same which I am writing after a long silence, busy, and that told me other lines - lines that sooner or later you will read) I happened to take a road train sitting in front of a young Marxist philosopher and prepared to direct deserved holiday. And to have pleasant conversations with him.
This young man, former director of stimulating my readings, it is, I'll tell you, unassailable by criticism that the instinctive allergic to the term "Marxist" may have begun to sharpen the mind to just read the word. He has an uncommon knowledge of all Philosophy, in Marx it is not fleeting or high school reading slogans squatters (1). You know the story, my friend and also, given the ages, from adherence to that philosophy has not (at least not yet) made prebends, benches, ottomans or any folding, not the open space with arguments ad personam is Marxist in heart and mind, and mind is well fed. And it does not maintain the governicchio in office, or professes boundless esteem for one of the figurines existing policies. E 'Marxist period.
So my friend argued that the definition of man as an animal that Marx gave to the work that creates its own conditions of existence is the best possible, on the millennial market philosophy. The check even on those which identify the essential characteristic of man in possession of language, for example, or the concept of God, man is distinguished for il lavoro. I successivi punti essenziali della filosofia marxista li conosciamo, se li abbiamo studiati al Liceo o almeno orecchiati altrove, magari sulle pagine dell‘Unità. Li accenno un po’ da Bignami (esponendomi a critiche di sciatteria, ma tant’è - ogni correzione poi è gradita, nell‘impresa collettiva del sapere). Chi possiede i mezzi di produzione esercita un dominio sull’altrui persona; questo è appunto ciò che è avvenuto ed avviene nella Storia, che è fondamentalmente storia di lotte di classe e che (“è tempo di cambiare il mondo!”) può, deve essere presa in mano per arrivare ad una società senza classi, in cui ciascuno può esprimere appieno la propria humanity without having to dispose of.
As in all stories there are the bad guys, and have the tools to fight those who oppose them. The bad guys are those who keep to themselves instruments of production. The basic Marxist insights, which should stimulate us to struggle towards the perfect society, were hampered, and still are, a series of mental spanner in the works, delays ideological, that the poor know very use to their advantage as all philosophies that justify the status quo, or how the concept of God, opiate and comforting, or the temptations of consumer society (if still there), or finally basking in it (for those who already there is) - and so on.
But how, when and where will this company classless? There have been great experiments in this direction, and are not failed miserably? And what others consider themselves still on the way? I can remember, in joint statements (in addition to some newspaper, that is) there are a small Caribbean island paradise by the views, the source also easy (and sometimes ugly and illegal) no solace to the loins otherwise dismal market tourists who grizzled. And then the middle countries that so many restaurants and street vendors bestows on us. And even those are in doubt.
But my friend did not bat an eyelid. The island's long-stay Grigiobarbato hours has been stifled in its potential to be a powerful tool that has dramatically distorted the results: blockade. Okay, I'll pass. It can not be distributed to all the misery, poverty-induced alas. But the Celestial Empire was, by so long a lacquered in red? He tells me that there, there, things are working. I know, for example, who is the Prime Minister of China? Threw out an embarrassed "Hu Jintao" (in fact I remember the joke about Bush and "Condy, who's China's Prime Minister?" "Who" - etc.). "No" - he says triumphantly friend (also without specifying who he is, but I think the same: "Ah, touché). "You see, while this is already a sign of overcoming the cult of personality, which was much criticized." Down-summarize his speech following-there is a great collective effort. In high places and low. The worker simply a mule toiling away night and day even though he knows that he, personally, will not come to see the new and definitive society, but why others enjoy - has class consciousness that makes him transcend individuality. And who is up for its part is now at the helm but he is ready to give up the power, in the future. The grand experiment of humanity is still in progress, which derives more capitalistic. Yes, There are capitalist methods, but it's like Lenin's NEP, are strategic, not failure: for now would not make sense now to abolish classes and give everyone in equal measure what little there is, however, expects that the barns will be filled and then you'll see that the classes disappear.
It is aware of all the people: so much so that if you talk to one of the many Chinese who, silent, punctuating the student population of the German university where he lives, he tells you he knows only a philosopher, Karl, and flaunted great national pride, a deep awareness of the grandiose project of which it is party. Deboluccio argument, this, I think - even my great-grandfather might have exchanged, if you really, at the instigation of the interlocutor, the speech had raised a little more business newspaper, admiring words about four Duce, so what? Necessary sign of inner conviction or result of indoctrination? Easy answer. (My friend, however, also honest enough to tell me his views on China are not shared by all those who call themselves today in Italy, "communists").
Interesting point of view, the Marxist, on the whole. First is fidelity to a line of thought in a world where people are at most loyal to a team of football, then I admire him. Troubles me a little '. First using it as a lens to read myself and my role in society. I'm not part of the production chain. I always thought that philosophy that I take care of it (junk logical-formal) is sterile, and now, remember, in the words of my friend, what Marx says of ideology, the ideas that are created by economic conditions and sometimes used to anesthetize the criticism of the inequalities that reminds me most of my cultural interests (interests, precisely!) could also be a matter of ideological domination on my mind: young, energetic brain that could address (along with the body ch 'it controls) to more noble causes, but which crumples on matters of piddling masked by deep questions, so long as the belly, at the expense of others, is full. The same could be said of my anxieties about God el'aldilà (the latter expression, in particular, a personal egoism). Are in some way the postmodern version of the Truffle, I.
And again, to go from single to many, the idea of \u200b\u200bwork, and that of the struggle as the key to the story are a stroke of genius, and very far-reaching theoretical. Embrace the thought of Marx even up to this point makes for a formidable critic (and self-critical) available. So far I admire and am tempted to join, or to use the concepts in question, at least in evidence.
-pierced after the failure of large-brood experiments Communists should not instill in young Marxists prepared (or connoisseurs of history) a bit 'of pessimism? Ie: you can come to think that Marx was so right, but at the same time the forces that impede the achievement of the goal (capitalist temptation, low self-interest, deliberate opposition) are overwhelming. In short, a diagnosis can not be completely right, even if flawless, unfortunately, is incurable? No, says my friend (and here it darkens a bit '), the category of pessimism is "ahistorical". Even the failure. We're going
greeted cordially, each in his own way, happy to have alleviated the hours of travel with the company.
However not all in my head, I continue to mull over. We have also by failure and pessimism, if they are anti-historical (whatever that means). Suppose that somewhere you get to the barns will be filled. That the ruling class (of the Middle Kingdom, or any other thinker has taken the lion of Trier in his deity and light) could escape from the temptations of power for power, in short, that everything runs smoothly in terms of ideological and economic. All are convinced and claim the effort. But how will they abolish the classes? Maybe it will equalize wages, yes. But the skills to maintain operating a nuclear power plant, to teach mathematics and to sow rye are interchangeable. You can not redistribute. Can not be spread over the population, each one in turn to the reactor Monday, then Tuesday to the village school campaign to inculcate the tables brats and Wednesday to sow seeds - and again. While nuclear power plants, two to three fields of rye and invariably will continue to serve cold, unaware of social transformations. And then some will continue to lead a terrible life dog, others a life so well and others will look great. If there is high agreement of social justice, welfare in all its meanings, all right, meaning the state, agree - but where is the lack of classes, except the salary?
And then, I'm fine with God and can be used ideologically disturbing company, such as opiates, that the pessimism, the evocation of the human limits are partly the result of a forgery which would frustrate the bud 's Action midwife of change, but, meine Damen und Herren , will deny that human beings may, at any time, should die without knowing how and when - and who will be afraid terrible? And that will have to sleep a certain number of hours a night? And that will be hungry and thirsty? And it will do, apologize sit verbis , poo and pee? And what will it take some time and some effort to learn something, whether it's two for three, the Capital or the service manual of the nuclear power? All things necessary for everyone, but in different sizes depending on the individual - and these different measures will guide the various activities, which will pull in different directions. Nor should we forget the randomness of sexual attraction - where we're pretty disappointed not to want to speak of being in love! And jealousy and envy and competition, that some drives are pulled below. Not exaggerating, Dante, to say that love moves the sun and other stars, even if they had a concept too sparse and crystalline, not yet tainted by Freud. Here, as is done? It introduces a rotation of embraces, perhaps with a few forays into homosexual ones, to be sure that everyone is fully satisfied?
How to abolish the limits, the factors of selfishness, unhappiness or individual differences arising from the fact that man is not pure angel's head? Maybe with games Prometheus? But we must avoid genetic manipulation, if only for a matter of continuity: if economically equalize the population of new uniforms beings obtained in the laboratory, that the said worker, now underground, poor fellow, do not have toiled for a chubby granddaughter, but the result , unimaginable to him, some new mixing of their DNA, most grateful to the tube and syringe to the memory of the workaholic grandfather.
So how else to deal with the structural outline of a human being? With primary education? With a cultural revolution? O with a decree is revoked and enemies of the people heart, digestive tract and genitals with their reactionary whim, and then shoot them in the streets with their carriers?
Conclusion. I admire the zeal Marxist, or communist, if well argued. Really. It provides a great critical acumen, which may well act as a solvent for many deadly temptations to intellectual laziness. Who is against, who does not take for granted, those who fight the obvious is my friend. But Marxism, when you forget the complexity and limitations of man, falls into a sin first philosophical and practical then worse than that of pure inert teoreticità that his acute and admirable father stigmatized: the oversimplification. What could be worse than inaction. And who is the cousin of the deformation (because it is easy to slip into the Machiavellian defense of atrocities in the name of the People's Republic are being made, when you are convinced that this is on the way to the perfect society - given that not all of our media disinformation States, of course). The deformation, which is to say her sister was ugly and bad inertia, and we are again, or worse.
Purpose. I do not want to be among those who cultivate only their garden. And even those who want to be a fever if you take them away while they are there to scratch the pumpkin wondering whether it is substance or accident. I agree that history is the history of struggle, and are almost willing to say that it is class. And I prefer to believe, especially as the statistical registry tells me (or I realized, which is the same) ahead of me still having a bit of history to see standoci up inside the ears, which can be corrected, if not really drive, to be all better. But do not ask me to believe in a classless society as the goal. With good peace my friend's heart and mind of a Marxist.
final self-doubt. And you think to settle in your heart, so Marxism? With some semi-serious line? And volumes and volumes of pages pro, and other more noble attempt against? No, I have no illusions, not at all, we're just in the blogosphere, I am neither true antidote to those not like them, I know. But who said that the truth should be argued at length with deep frown on rolls and rolls acts to cram libraries? David slew Goliath it. Valete.
(1) Yeah, "squatter"! Remember? Old word, then repainted with a forgotten ennobling "No global" people called it.
