A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage)
archives of old posts
The last 100 posts, according
The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours |
of past 30 days |
of 2002 |
of 2003 |
of 2004 |
of 2005 |
of 2006 |
of 2007 |
of 2008 |
of 2009 |
of 2010 |
of 2011 |
of 2012 |
of 2013 |
of 2014 |
of 2015 |
of 2016 |
of 2017 |
of 2018 |
of 2019 |
of 2020 |
Syndication Of A-Infos - including
RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
(en) Pakistan, Workers Solidarity Federation:The incompatibility and stupidity of Marx's ideas with science [machine translation]
Thu, 18 Nov 2021 08:03:29 +0200
Why can't Marx's ideas be called social and they are never social but they only
lead to state capitalism" (Pierre Remis) ---- Contents ---- Part one Marx, the
reactionary supporter of capitalism ---- Part two Commonwealth Manifesto ----
Part three Capital ---- Part IV Additional value teachings ---- Marx's capitalist
regression ---- Social democracy is based on the teachings of Marx and always
expresses only his correct ideas as scientific socialism. Now it has more meaning
with the scientific term. We can often see that the scientific instruction that
gives new knowledge will soon be replaced by a new explanation, inheritance or
Basically astronomy, mathematics, chemistry and some other so-called laws of
nature, only a few limited explanatory fields can be called science. But to refer
the study of human social life to science, as Marx did, especially when it is in
the conceptual form, would be nothing but a useless assumption.
The following remarks will prove that Marx's teachings are not only unscientific
but also erroneous. The only measure of knowing the truth is our logic. And that
we accept the truth of something when we can determine the cause and the cause of
its occurrence and what is happening.
From this point of view we see the industrial workers' movement as a worldview
based on the teachings of Bacon and Kropotkin, among other things, which seeks to
find cause and effect in real life wherever possible. Important to call it
scientific but still we do not have to reject this scientific name because in our
opinion there is no cause and effect inevitable progress in social life and since
both on the one hand intellectual commitment and individual ability and on the
other Affected but no effect without a cause.
Therefore, the demise of social democracy is not an accident but the failure of
individuals but the influence of Marx's ideology. It is, of course, true that in
a social democracy those at the highest levels do not feel the rights of the
people, nor do they feel real freedom and love in their moral qualities or in
their wealth of knowledge. They are politicians who are in an unprecedented cycle
of self-interest, putting the public interest above all else. These people are
just trying to seduce people. But not only the leaders but also the people
failed. It must be acknowledged that crimes of all ages were not committed
deliberately but by most proponents of social democracy in good faith. But that
all social democrats acted in a reactionary manner. This is because of the
principles of Marx's theory.
1. State sociology and state dictatorship
2. Wrong ways of parliamentary politics and centralism
3. Stupid strategies of bourgeois democracy and military organization
It would be wrong to assume that social democracy will gradually disappear. It
will last as long as capitalism lasts. There will always be people who, instead
of overcoming the current state of violence, economic robbery, will live with it
as much as possible. You just have to be more discriminating with the help you
render toward other people. The unity of such people is the party of social
democracy. Social democracy is not a cultural movement but a party movement. It
survives through the capitalist system and the capitalist system is its body and
soul. It dies with the death of capitalism. But according to a perspective called
the organization of projects which is based on society and it presents the right
ideas, social democracy must stop first. While the components of social democracy
continue to crumble as they undermine its strategies. All these groups except
those who Join us in the fascination of their plans. These groups need to be
warned and shown the right way.
The only way for the proletariat to unite on social grounds is to overcome Marx's
nonsense, recognizing him as an insignificant and foolishly provocative thing
that is freely politically secretive and you use it as your theology. Are taken
From the mid-eighteenth century to the mid-nineteenth century, all social
schools followed the basic principles laid down by Thomas Campino in the
All evils are born of two different things, poverty and wealth. Until Marx, all
social philosophers and intellectuals rejected bourgeois philosophy and theology.
Marx, on the other hand, proceeds from Hegel's historical point of view, which
states that "everything in our social organization, including evil, all evil and
violence, is historically determined." Some are important in that they are
historically conditioned. "Because in the past and in the present, their
greatness had the power to sustain them. Now it is entirely self-evident that the
question that arises immediately is. Giving results? However, only a secular
answer to this question is possible. That is why Hegel's views on the concept of
God, his authority and the favor of God and the authority of the church are
supreme and all the powers of the state in general. And guided to the recognition
of their existence
This ideology is clearly regressive because it is the best excuse and
justification for capitalism. Hegel's theories accept what exists and justify it.
Its basic principle is "what is reasonable is real and what is real is reasonable."
Because real science must be unconditional. The bias in recognizing what already
exists rationally and in its context leads to the practical, scientific and
diversified economics of Hegel's theories.
In response to such confirmations, the Prussian government appointed Hegel, the
best philosopher, as Professor of Philosophy in 47-48, and in response, Hegel
continued this service until his death. The regression of Hegel's way of thinking
is especially evident when one thinks against the ideas of the present-day French
spirit of Rousseau and others like him. It says, "The realm of human knowledge
must change the real thing from its social condition. And that the product of the
violence of the blind powers of the past, whose past still seeks to be the future
beyond resolution. Marx should be condemned for being irrational. Marx has just
maintained Hegel's reactionary views. He had to come to the same conclusion.
Hegel puts forward only the spiritual purpose in humanity and space. Content
defined as original.
According to Marx, human life consists of biological factors in which some are
superior and some are influenced by others. According to Marx, the economy forms
the basis of society while the whole intellectual life is a superficial
structure. On the contrary, the study of nature and society teaches us that all
biological factors are systematic and equal. We are going to that action and
tranquility. Everyone is affected, but in different ways. And it is extremely
difficult to determine whether mental or material factors have a decisive effect.
There is a continuous interaction between the mental and material components.
Marx & # 39; s theory is based on Hegel & # 39; s theory that things and
situations change permanently in such a way that the opposite happens, and that
the continuation of the two gives rise to a new kind of fusion, from which I
return to the first state. Development begins with.
This theory is a strange form of thought which can be called imaginary. Science
and history prove that this theory is wrong.
Science teaches us that a small species can evolve into a larger species, but
that no species has ever evolved differently. A lion can never be a lion and a
good goat can never be a wolf. In the same way, the capitalist system will never
automatically change into an anti-social system. Every mode of production is
based on mathematics, geometry or in short general technology. First man had to
invent and make tools. These tools affected humans to a limited extent when they
came into being. It shows the interaction between the world and desire.
Marx Hegel's thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis theory is suitable for depriving
itself of its development and the power of will because it is regressive. The
communist manifesto and the capitalist reactionary ideology are presented.
The communist manifesto is the gospel of social democracy. He considers it a
symbol of all wisdom and is convinced of its revolutionary content. However, this
theory does not meet the critical scrutiny and only proves that all these social
democrats who swear allegiance to the communist manifesto cannot differentiate
between reactionary and revolutionary terms. It must first be noted that the
communist manifesto is not the real work of Marx Engel, but a replica of the work
of the French forester Victor Considerant in form and content. Marx Engel adopted
his views, expressing his views in a special way. But this is the most
comprehensive and clear summary of Marx's ideas.
The first part of the brochure divides capitalist society into bourgeoisie and
proletariat, and describes this division as the result of class struggle. It is a
remarkable fact that much of the first lesson is, in fact, nothing more than a
compliment to the alleged achievements of capitalism. It praises the replacement
of urban villages. It was also appreciated that a large part of the folly of the
rural population has been taken away by the capitalist system. This is wrong
because even today cities are totally dependent on villages. Once again, this is
wrong because the folly of being enslaved by the proletarian factories in the
cities, which is no less than the wages in rural agriculture, is no less than
that of an industrial or commercial bourgeois narrow-minded owner of rural crops.
The natural life of the villages is more important than the urban life.
Therefore, the current situation created by the capitalist system is commendable
Condemnation. Then literally it has been said that like the bourgeoisie, the
villages have been transformed from the city to the revelation and semi-savage
villagers who depend on civilization. The peasantry on the bourgeoisie, the east
on the west.
This clearly justifies the imperialist politics of the capitalist states. The two
great wars of the twentieth century and the subsequent Cold Wars by 2020 make us
realize that the so-called civilization of the present age can be overtaken by
What Marx has said is contrary to reality. Capitalism has pushed humanity back to
a terrible extent. If it continues to exist, it will be a threat to the last
surviving nature of the people, mutual aid and free solidarity. These features,
which are essential for sociology, were much better in ancient man. All of Marx's
ideas are very reactionary.
The second part of the communiqu is relatively better. But not because it
describes the structure of communism for which there is no word in the whole
manifesto. But also bourgeois and capitalist rhetoric against communism for good
reason and nothing more. On the contrary, it has no purpose or meaning.
First of all, it is said that the next aim of the communists is to unite the
proletariat (as if it were not a party before it), to end bourgeois domination
and to seize political power through the proletariat. But later the communist
revolution was called the fundamental breakdown of the traditional property
system. But instead of explaining the meaning of this, it is suddenly stated that
the stage of the workers' revolution is to take the proletariat to the party at
the government level is a fight against democracy.
First, democracy means bourgeois means, and second, there is always the
opportunity to learn from the history of previous revolutions, and the
experiences of Germany's social democratic government convince us that
post-revolutionary democracy always backfires. Leading sentences contain
contradictions and self-denial, but there is no communion as Marx sees it. This
is not a partnership at all.
While the makers of goods today rely on private capitalists for the means of
production, so will Marx's state. The power that will rule over the life and
death of the people. The proletariat will not remain proletarian because they do
not own the means of production. The Commonwealth assumes that the state will
gradually dissolve automatically. This assumption is against all the experiences
of nature and society. One type will never go against itself. That is why the
state, using means like pressure and exploitation, can never become a society of
free people. A state never commits suicide but it will become a factor of
increasing power and pressure. Thousands of proofs can be given of how each form
of government fights with all its might to maintain its survival and avoid
collapse. Noski Wazm and Bushlism also denigrated all official, political and
legal offices in the same way as the other. There are government forms. The most
influential figures in the party and trade alliances are the state powers. He is
a dictator in the Samai state. But now, in the form of capitalism, they form
their own party, which acts against the interests of the proletariat, or
constantly suppresses its power. They themselves admit it. Therefore, they will
not work to eradicate it in the social state economy because with the death of
the state, all their facilities and government positions will be lost. Finally,
it offers some strategies for the implementation of the Partnership Charter, but
they are all regressive, including Will not work for because with the death of
the state all their facilities and government positions will be lost. Finally, it
offers some strategies for the implementation of the Partnership Charter, but
they are all regressive, including Will not work for because with the death of
the state all their facilities and government positions will be lost. Finally, it
offers some strategies for the implementation of the Partnership Charter, but
they are all regressive, including
1. This can be done by depriving the owners of their property in the property
business to cover government expenses. The starving proletariat has no such
thing. According to Marx, they should be given a basic pension to cover large
government expenditures on land cultivation.
2. Big development tax. The money and tax system should be maintained and it is
capitalist and not socialist.
3. Abolition of hereditary law in favor of the state so that everything is for
the Mamluk state and not for the people.
4. Confiscation of the property of all refugees and rebels and depriving anyone
who does not agree with the measures of the state dictators of their property in
favor of the state.
5. The concentration of credit in the national bank in the hands of the state
through special monopolies. No bank is required in the social system but only in
the capitalist system. But even there, monopoly is the biggest evil. Monopoly is
the antithesis of the general economy and also of the social system.
6. Concentration of means of transport. Workers and the people have become quite
aware of the anti-people effects of this system in the railways and post offices
and their awareness is increasing day by day.
7. Making work necessary for everyone through the formation of industrial and
agricultural forces. Military of all economic life.
This will be the case in the socialist system according to the communist
manifesto. Elected leaders, officials and the government are free from productive
work. Large numbers of people work under the command of arms and force, as is
happening today in prisons, barracks and monasteries. These reactionary ideas are
not real or new. Three centuries before Jesus, the administration of Latvia used
to carry out agricultural activities on the ruined properties of ancient Rome
through slave groups.
In the same way, the return to prehistoric terrible conditions would be
theoretical Marx, and just as Rome was destroyed at that time, so it would be the
enslavement and decline of humanity.
There is no word in the whole communist charter for abandoning the wage system.
Marx Engel never discusses compensation for human labor. It is understandable
once again that in the case of a review of the question, there will be two
opinions, none of which would seem appropriate.
Either the compensation should be based on the work done. This will not be
possible because the state will never pay the producers their full wages as they
will have to use a large part of this wage to maintain it. Or to provide food,
clothing, and other necessities to all members of society, which is communal.
However, the state-state necessary in the latter case is mere nonsense because
the coercive means of the economy, such as the threat of starvation, the
communist state will not be able to impose its will on the disparate minorities,
and if they do not I will be exploitative. If these facts were not made clear,
Marx should have remained silent about it and left the rest in the path of all
progress. Thus we see that Marx created a false communist system instead of the
original communist system.
While communism denies the existence of all the basic components of bourgeois
society and its productive form and conditions. The national economy defines and
justifies them and seeks to promote them on a regular basis from this point of view.
This is the intellectual activity of the national economists. If Marx's ideas are
a huge stumbling block in the development of sociology that would bring him down
to the dictatorship and violence of the state dictatorship which is the opposite
of culture, it would be a further setback to the capitalist occupation of the
national economy. And those who have integrated communism into the national
economy by emphasizing communism.
Thus, based on its logic and speculation, it formed the basis of the concept of
social freedom in specific commercial terms. It can be said that it is often true
that the enemy should be found and killed in his camp. Marx did the same, but he
got stuck in the national economy. Previous thoughtless answers given in this
field have limited its teachings for reform from the point of view of national
economy. Rather, other scholars had done so long before Marx, so he did nothing.
Marx did not extend the work of existing sociologists, but he was a great
economist and he remained so.
The present communism had rejected the bourgeois national economy before Marx.
This work was mainly done by Fourier and Prodhan. At the same time, there was a
need for further development of the existing communist ideology, but Marx
completely failed to do so. Bakunin was the only person who completed the work,
which is why Marx strongly opposed it. "Capital" I failed to state the
precondition for the emergence of Marx's concept of money. He simply counted on
that idea. In this way, it should not have come to the conclusion that the
monopoly of government institutions and individuals is a prerequisite for the
creation of capital. According to Marx, the capitalist party has the potential to
be exploited and enslaved because the means of production belong to it. But this
thinking is close-knit because communist ideas were very common at that time.
Marx Engel tried to mislead the state capitalist coin. "Partnership Manifesto".
Because social democracy has accepted these ideas. The workers have forgotten the
origin and the transition of the capitalist economy to a communist economy is
proving extremely difficult. ? Because social democracy has accepted these ideas.
The workers have forgotten the origin and the transition of the capitalist
economy to a communist economy is proving extremely difficult. ? Because social
democracy has accepted these ideas. The workers have forgotten the origin and the
transition of the capitalist economy to a communist economy is proving extremely
Part III: Capital
Capital is generally considered to be the holy book of social democracy and this
is not against logic as it is a thick thing which is difficult to understand and
can be explained in all possible directions. It is also very hard and
unscientific. Marx calls it a critique of the political economy, with which he
adopts the British method, which he uses for the term "national economy" in Germany.
There is a big trick in this word. This economy is not as if one is presenting it
as a benefit to all in just one word but it is useful for a small benefited
minority or political group. The national economy must be seen as an attempt to
justify exploitative capitalism.
The average lifespan of a fully grown tree can range from 6 650 to 00 1,100,
depending on the type and height of the tree. The average cost of extracting an
oak tree is 9 950, 11 1100 for a pine tree and 6 650 for extracting an olive
tree. Although it takes almost equal work to cut down all these trees first, then
only a few people have to do a few more hours of pruning and pruning them. The
cost of the human labor involved in the tree is more than a handful of a dozen
dollars. But in fact capitalist speculation plays a relatively large role, as
Marx assumes that the price of a thing is affected not only by the relation of
production but also by the relation of exchange. Furthermore, brain work can
never be born. Especially the intellectual work involved in everything. The
capitalist does not do anything according to the work done for its growth but
according to it
However, Marx's claim that work determines the price of all things is a
flattering concession to the capitalist system, which he primarily considers to
be a collective happiness, because if social work is the measure of the value of
all things, then this price is justified and It should be the same for all
members of society. Thus Marx's theory is appropriate to the capitalist concept
and apologizes for the exploitation. The worst thing Marx conveyed was the theory
of the value of state social society. Marx's statements on communism are
completely useless and inappropriate.
Ownership alone will not suffice for this unless there are such powers.
Capitalism does not guarantee too many claims on property. If there is only one
such powerful and strong organization in the society. A state that can exploit
the means of production through ownership.
It was the only extremist organization in Mai to make slavery possible in the
past, slavery in the Middle Ages, and wages in the present. These are all
different forms of exploitation, the first of which is capitalism. But Marx is
not worried about any of them. Exploitation for this only begins with the
production process. Earlier, he praised the misconception that workers were free
to sell their wares. This misunderstanding explains why Marx and his supporters
had such misconceptions about freedom. We know that the worker is not free. He is
not equal to the business manager, but he has been enslaved by the whip of hunger
since his birth. He has to sell his things. There is clearly a fundamental flaw
in Marx's theory.
The basic tenet of capital is value theory. Marx also claims that human labor
determines the value of all things. Marx initially ignored the fact, such as
obtaining prior permission from the capitalist before starting the work of making
and producing things, and the initial construction work of the previous
generations involved. The value of a piece of land that is unused and on which no
human work has been done does not become insignificant. On the contrary, land
without any construction work is often much more expensive than its equivalent,
as local conditions and capitalist speculation play a decisive role. Items often
cost more than their actual value. Caviar (large fish egg pickle) would be much
more expensive than herring fish pickle if the human value involved would
determine its value. From the grinding work of the original gemstone to achieve
the production of artificial gemstone Requires a lot of friction but still the
real stone is more expensive than the artificial stone. Today, one can observe on
a daily basis how low the value of a thing is in the capitalist economy in
proportion to the work involved in that thing.
All the concepts of price that we know today are capitalist terms. Air, sunlight,
ground moisture, confinement and many other factors of production because they
cannot be monopolized and now they are capitalist insignificant and yet they are
most valued in the society. The same is true in a communist society where there
is production and all things of life because every economic stockpile is
eliminated and free production alone is guaranteed for everyone. The elimination
of the concept of ownership of the means of production also eliminates the
individual concept of price.
If you want to prove the injustice of capitalist exploitation, you do not need to
misuse the Marxist ideology of value. The simple fact that if a product is sold
at a much higher price than its actual price, it is clearly enough to estimate
the potential for exploitation and fraud that the proletariat faces.
Other innovations of Marx's theory now follow his erroneous theory of value.
Part IV: Teachings of Extra Value
With this theory we come to the most important aspect of Marx's theory. At the
same time, Marx was convinced that he had discovered the secret of capitalist
exploitation. At the same time, bourgeois national economists have long (from a
capitalist point of view, of course) proved that the principle of surplus value
justifies surplus value because it offers compensation for advertising work and
the elimination of capital risk. Have denied In this theory, once again, only
industry started. He saw that a laborer had to work for a daily wage, which is
still not wrong for the capitalist Marx. However, if the business manager has
made the daily wage of the worker, he does not dismiss him after 5 or 6 hours but
takes his work for 10 to 12 hours.
This difference is the extra cost that the business manager takes and at the same
time is exploited. According to Marx's theory, exploitation increases with
increasing daily working hours. We can only call such thinking ridiculously
unwise because we know that workers are exploited from the first hour to the last
hour during working hours. According to Marx, a reduction in working hours will
reduce exploitation. We know that despite the constant decline in the daily work
of the workers, capitalist profits have not diminished, but vice versa. The
profits of business managers and their shareholders and the amount of their
shareholders increased steadily. All the teachings of extra money have been
proved wrong. In his lesson, Marx concludes from the erroneous idea of surplus
value that if the first and foremost task of the working force is to determine
the appropriate daily working hours. By participating in parliament, the
proletariat is represented by the state The maximum number of working hours
should be followed. A gradual reduction in working hours would minimize the
surplus cost and eliminate capitalism. Only fortunately, without waiting for the
legal standard regarding Marx's proposed working hours, he took it into his own
hands that Marx himself had to admit in "Capital" that the workers / laborers in
England The rules about were broken. Only the workers themselves could improve
them through their direct action. I had to admit to myself that the laws
concerning workers in the UK had gone bad. Only the workers themselves could
improve them through their direct action. I had to admit to myself that the laws
concerning workers in the UK had gone bad. Only the workers themselves could
improve them through their direct action.
We industrial workers know that fraud is not the only form of exploitation but
the proletariat is exploited through trade, movement, property, interest and the
taxes imposed by the state. Marx also ignores the fact that the surplus value
must first be obtained through exports, which pushes the state towards imperialism.
Thus the exploitation of the proletariat cannot be interpreted according to the
principle of surplus value. This is just as wrong as theories.
Marx's theory of error
At the same time, Marx emphasizes that the capitalist system must be abandoned on
the basis of the established economic laws of its products. However, such
consolation is conducive to keeping the worker engaged in the class effort. It
leads to destiny, so it is a crime. The theory of error is further broken down
This means that capitalist development worsens the condition of the worker and
with it the industrial protected army which is the army of the unemployed which
will increase. According to Marx's theory, in 50 to 60 years of industrial
development, industry should become secure, but in reality it has not increased,
but its number fluctuates by a certain percentage.
Marx ignored the fact that the capitalist system, when there is a danger that the
army of the unemployed will grow so large that it will be called a war, uses it
as a means. This means reducing the industrial security force. But even then, if
somehow poverty is right, which has been proven wrong, then this is not the case.
These scenes never lead to a social system but go further than that.
A proletariat that is so poor will probably break the capitalist system but will
never complete its social construction. So it is better that the ideology of the
poor is just an imaginary desolation.
The second part of the theory of breakdown or defect is concentration. According
to this theory, Marx claims that capital is concentrated in a few hands and that
the middle class is gradually disappearing. The capitalists are eating it and
eventually the capitalist class will destroy it as much as possible. With this
concentration, Marx also adopted the central tendencies for the social state.
These tendencies are just as wrong as the whole theory. As a logical consequence
of his erroneous ideas, Marx believes that the destruction of the whole middle
class is necessary. If he acknowledges that the middle class is better and freer
in the capitalist economy than the working class. Finally, he supports the
fallacy that World War II is a necessary step in the concentration of capital.
The results of Marx's theory are terrible and completely wrong. In fact, the
opposite is true. The capitalist and middle class are constantly on the rise,
exploiting the exploiters. The number is not decreasing but increasing. The
Russians have made Tscherkeseff the world, especially for England
It is presented in a wonderful way. This is the country for which Marx derived
all his science. According to this, in 1815 the income of only 39569 people in
England was more than 3000 marks whereas in 1907 this number was 568092 which is
14.3 times more while the population had only doubled during that period.
In 1907 the small capitalists were 16.8 times more than in 1815 and the big
capitalists 11.3 times more. All countries had similar developments as the number
of millionaires in Prussia increased from 5306 to 9431 from 1895 to 1911. From
1914 to 1924, the number of millionaires in the United States increased from
4,000 to 20,000. With these facts, the theory of concentration of wealth was
refuted and Marx's theory of fragmentation itself came into conflict.
The unscientific nature of Marx's theories became clear in the context of his
concentric theories because Marx did not include agriculture in all his
researches / studies. In doing so, Marx disregarded the basic theory of
economics, and therefore all his assumptions would be of no value. Industrial
capital is only a secondary scenario while agricultural production is the basic
form of all production. First people need food and that is possible only from
agricultural production. Only then can they make textiles, machine making and
other things and finally all the means of production like house, machines, raw
materials. It all started in agriculture. Marx made many things easy for himself.
It shifted from agriculture to the so-called capitalist trend. In agriculture,
however, it is more clear than industry that this alleged trend is a story. The
development of agriculture shows us that major projects in agriculture are in
decline While small projects are moving towards development and this is the case
with all countries. For example, a professional census / survey in 1907 shows
that the number of small pieces (less than 2 hectares) increased by about 142,000
from 1893. Small farms (2.5 hectares) decreased by 1000. All when only the
original middle class peasants (20/5 hectares) grew to a full 67,000. In
contrast, large area farms (100/20 hectares) decreased by 20,000 and large real
estate areas (100 hectares more) decreased by 1500 or 6% in large German owned
lands. Twelve years of real progress, a development that strikes a chord with
Marx's ideas. Other countries, such as Hungary, have seen similar developments.
Agriculture is taking the form of small businesses in all countries. 5 hectares)
decreased by 1000. All when only the original middle class peasants (20/5
hectares) grew to a full 67,000. In contrast, large area farms (100/20 hectares)
decreased by 20,000 and large real estate areas (100 hectares more) decreased by
1500 or 6% in large German owned lands. Twelve years of real progress, a
development that strikes a chord with Marx's ideas. Other countries, such as
Hungary, have seen similar developments. Agriculture is taking the form of small
businesses in all countries.
How wisely small business was used in China in 1920 where land was distributed
almost equally among all families of adults where agricultural work in the fields
was excessive so wise horticulture was promoted which led to a Hector provided
food for 10 people. In this way, economic development paves the way for a future
shared culture, art and organization of horticulture, reflected in our
state-of-the-art electric mechanic technology, and the desired goal is
independent and autonomous rural and industrial people instead. That they are
Marx's industrial and agricultural armies.
The last part of the theory of subversion is delicate. Marx's prediction of
capitalist production that it would become more and more severe ten years after
its precarious situation was not fulfilled, but the capitalists understood how to
reduce the precarious situation by forming groups and trusts. can go. But it is
not a situation that begins to weaken the capitalist system and extends to its
entire production system, possibly impossible. But this misery gives rise to
events that restore the relationship between capitalists and production that
arises from a lack of planning. In Latin, if it came to an end, it would not be
the form described by Marx. But the capitalist system has gone bankrupt due to
shortage of capital and raw materials and high debt.
The sudden decline in the living standards of the present age and the elimination
of the possibility of a large number of people becoming impoverished without any
resistance is a major factor in changing the social conditions. Therefore,
according to Baconin's teachings, it will now depend on the revolutionary
determination and energy and ability of the proletariat whether collectivism
becomes a reality or not.
The negation of Marxism
Even Fourier and Proudhan had written the exact capitalist analysis many years
before Marx. These correct theories would be in the knowledge of Marx and filled
all his correct analyzes with dictatorial errors. Throughout his research, Marx
overlooked the fact that at all times an intense process was distinguishing
between potential wealth and the poor. Therefore, the guarantee of the capitalist
system of our time is its activity which carries out the present state process.
Marx did not recognize the difference between society and the state and that is
why Marx is regressive in the light of sociology because he does not strengthen
the society as compared to the state but on the contrary he weakens the society
in the face of the absolute dictatorship of the state. Gives.
But sociology means social power. The only hope for human freedom from the
domination of the state and capitalism is in the form of a growing intelligence,
maturity of sense of justice, a growing sensitivity to humanity and a growing
minority group that is largely a state and capitalist system. Can deprive them of
their thoughts and actions. These new people can help create a new social
organization that can somehow forcefully separate it from capitalism. The
communist system will not be the result of a natural accumulation, as Marx
claimed, but those who want to be social and constructive in this regard can
bring the communist system and with it the union justifies the need for
organizers to create new societies. I have to make my own places. Overcoming
state supremacy through a united proletariat and bringing the proletariat to a
uniform economic front and overcoming the innovations of Marx's ideology.
Proponents of Marx argue that socialism can only gain its significance in 1870
when Prussian Germany conquered France, where the centrality of the empire would
seem to be the victorious and superior form of organization in its toughest
At the end of World War I, Prussian military power collapsed and this scenario
turned out to be wrong and it should have ended Marx's erroneous social ideology.
Workers should return to Baconin's first international ideology and social
liberalism, as opposed to Marx. But that did not happen, and hundreds of years
passed aimlessly, in which Marx's erroneous ideas were repeatedly expelled and
digested. Antarctics like us should return to Baconin's social liberalism instead
of Marx and finally trash the erroneous ideas of Mars.
Our job in the 21st century is to accelerate as much as possible.
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-Infos Information Center