-
A Marxian Critique Of Capitalism: A Contemporary Approach
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
-
-
1.2STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Although we cannot but subscribe to the
Marxist condemnation of exploitation of man by man, nevertheless, we
cannot go along with his commitment to Machiavellianism. For we do not
believe that any means employed to bring about a good end is morally
justified. We hold on the contrary that the end does not and cannot
justify the means.
Consequently, it is an evil in itself to employ a
bad means to bring about a good end. We can therefore not go along with
Marxism in encouraging class conflicts, class antagonism and violent
revolutions. Nor do we subscribe to the Heraclitan-Hegelian-Marxist
dogma that social change and progress can only come about through
violent conflicts and bloody revolutions. Nobody wins a war these days;
in the long run both sides are the losers. Worst of all, it is generally
the poor and the innocent who are sacrificed as victims to the “gods of
revolutionâ€. This itself is evil, and an evil means should not be used
to bring about a good end.
Moreover, although Marx’s intention was to
safeguard the welfare of the people, but by calling for a violent
revolution, the welfare of the people which he was trying to safeguard
will no longer be safe. This is because the violence that goes along
with a revolution is a threat to security of lives and property.
Furthermore,
Marx seems not to be concerned with the method but with the ends of the
struggle. This is prone to error because goals achieved by proper means
are always more lasting and are of permanent duration than those
achieved by improper means. Therefore, for a lasting peace and
stability, it is not the end that matters but what matters is the method
by which these ends are actually achieved.
To push it further,
Marxian theory of state is not so sound as prima facie it may appear.
His emphasis on armed revolution is rather too much and cannot be
justified especially today when nations are thinking more in terms of
peaceful co-operation rather than war. Who can deny that violence brings
with it hatred and destruction of lives (especially the innocent ones)
and property and counter-revolutionary forces will breed more
destruction and instability in the society. Settlement of disputes by
violent revolution is bound to retard political and social progress. It
is therefore beyond all reasonable doubts that the changes brought about
by an armed and violent revolution is less durable than the changes
brought about by peaceful means and method on the one hand, and
persuation on the other hand. As I put it, “persistent, unflinching and
patient persuation can break even the strongest resistanceâ€.
Going
further, Marx’s method of over-throwing one economic system and its
replacement with another is dangerous to the extent that it has never
paved way for enduring stability. Instability which this revolution will
bring with it, shall always remain alive in the minds of the
capitalists who in turn are bound to over-throw the workers regime at
the first available opportunity. This will be never-ending struggle
which is unwanted both for nation’s economic progress, cultural
advancement and political stability. This is not to say that an
oppressive economic system should not be confronted and replaced but the
confrontation should not be that drastic to the extent that stability
would be elusive.
Also, Marx believes that the only way to bring
about a change is through bloody revolution. But he forgets that there
are peaceful methods also for bringing about changes. Gandhiji brought
change in Indian political and social life without any bloody or violent
revolution in the Marxian sense of the term but by non-violent means
and method.
Arguing further, Marx has not realized that on the
collapse of state many other factors and classes might emerge. It should
be noted that break-down of capitalism might result not in communism
but in anarchy from which there might emerge some dictatorship unrelated
in principle to communism.
Finally, it should be noted that the baby
should not be thrown away alongside with the bath water. But Marx fell
prey into this problem. While pressing for the elimination of capitalism
and the inauguration of communism through socialism, Marx inevitably
threw away hardwork which leads to invention and innovation, which in
turn encourages faster economic and societal development and progress.
It is a known fact that capitalism which leads to faster economic growth
and societal development is as a result of hardwork. Therefore, while
pressing for the elimination of the capitalist system, Marx was
inevitably eliminating progress and development from the society.
Having presented the statement of problem, I shall now proceed to the purpose of study.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
-
ABSRACT - [ Total Page(s): 1 ]This project is intended to expose the nature as capitalism as well as its merits and demerits. An exposure of the Marxian critique of the capitalist system and how marx pressed for the replacement of the system with the inauguration of communism through socialism shall then be explicated. It should be noted that according to marx, the only was to attain this goal is through a mass revolt bloody revolution. Hence a critical evaluation of the Marxian critique of the capitalist system as well as h ... Continue reading---
