Marxism Unmasked from Delusion to Destruction.pdf 7471KB

2nd lecture
Class Conflict and
Revolutionary Socialism
N4ARX ASSUMED that "interests" were independent of human ideas and
thoughts. He uid that socialism was the ideal system for the proletariat.
He uid diss interests determme the thinking of individuals and that this
situation causes irreconcilable conflicts between the various classes. Marx
then returned to the point at which he had started—namely, that socialism
IS the ideal state.
The fundaincntal concept of the Communist Manifesto (1848) was that
of"class" and "class conflict." But Marx didn't say what a "class" was. Marx
died in 1KH3. 35 years after the publication of the Communist Manifesto. In
those 35 NTars he published many volumes, but in not one of them did he
My what he meant by the term "class." After Marx's death, Friedrich Engels
published the unfinished manuscript of the third volume of Marx's Das
Kapiul. Hngels said this manuscript, on which Marx had stopped work,
many \*ears before he died, had been found in Marx's desk after his death.
In one three-page chapter in that volume, Marx tells us what a "class" was
not. But NTHi may search through all his writings to learn what a "class" was
without ever finding out. In fact, "classes" don't exist in nature. It is our
thinking
—
out arranging in categories—that constructs classes in our
minds. The question is not whether social classes exist in the sense of Karl
Marx; the question is whether we can use the concept of social classes in
the way in which Karl Marx meant it. We can't.
Marx did not see that the problem of the "interest" of an individual, or
of a class, cannot be solved simply by referring to the fact that there is such