from different sectors argues that the main evil gets left now is the acquiescence of workers. Indeed, it seems that having enough purchasing power to consume, along with some entertainment and sports-entertainment, causes a lack of motivation and a mackerel in the work, preventing him to surface in any revolutionary spirit. Panem et Circus, in short.
But that explanation may small superficial. I think the current conformity with true, has its origin in a much more profound and difficult to face: the right core values \u200b\u200bare shared largely by the left. By "right values", entiéndaseme well I mean all those values \u200b\u200bthat have traditionally held the power to uppercase throughout history: tyranny, dogmatism, fanaticism, irrationality, injustice, selfishness, materialism ...
Humanity remained fairly stable, socially speaking, over the millennia in which there was an almost total consensus in accepting these values \u200b\u200bas a political base. The gap in this regard took place during the Enlightenment. The new values \u200b\u200bthat brought this line of thought (democracy, freedom, rationality ...) represented a moral and philosophical breakthrough that led to many revolutions since the late eighteenth century to the mid-nineteenth century. Judging modern capitalist states that gave rise to those bourgeois revolutions, it is clear that they certainly accounted for revolutionary advance in certain values, but not in others such as social justice and human solidarity. Arguably, the revolution created by the Enlightenment was lame in one leg.
born during the nineteenth century, another school of thought that just focused on the Enlightenment values \u200b\u200bthat inadvertently was left out: socialism.
Unfortunately, Marxist socialism (which became the mainstream in socialism) made the same mistake they had made years earlier illustrated, and conducted its analysis based on values \u200b\u200bof social justice and solidarity, forgetting or downplaying those that had prioritized the Enlightenment: democracy and freedom. That gap explains quite well the fact that ultimately could be as authoritarian Marxist interpretations and undemocratic as Leninism or Stalinism.
seems then that socialism was just as lame as the Enlightenment, albeit in the opposite leg.
But if we agree that the values \u200b\u200bof democracy and freedom are so desirable and necessary as social justice and human solidarity, we must conclude that the leftist current is ideal that he is able in its midst such approaches equally and in a balanced enough to preclude any type of deficit. And the truth is that this particular stream has always existed. I refer to libertarian socialism.
character
libertarian socialism is the counterpart of authoritative readings of Marxist socialism, and this is so precisely because it derives both socialism libertarian current that emerged during the Enlightenment.
And yet ... How is it possible that even the libertarian left today is able to seduce the mass of workers? The problem is, as I said, values. Society current is extremely individualistic, materialistic, selfish and consumerist. Which we have been so deeply ingrained as anti-human values \u200b\u200blike these, is the greatest triumph of the system and also its Achilles heel, because sooner or later ends our human condition rebelling against them. It is precisely at this point that the libertarian left should attack, and more in an economic crisis like the present, which are revealed most aberrant miseries we suffer socio-economic system. Thus, we must understand and make the public understand that the final collapse of capitalism (which is ultimately what we are attending) can only be overcome regardless by the end of selfishness and individualism, that is, coming together and organized under the banner of human solidarity.
But we will only reach that goal before today's society convince the great absurdity of materialism and consumerism. We need to see to the masses that happiness is not in the mall, but in different human interactions, and knowledge, culture, art or nature. It is essential to understand that the wealth of a society is measured not only in material terms but also in democratic terms, in social indicators (education or health, for example) or ecological levels. We are
a turning point in humanity, in which the old values-based mindset barbarians come to an end after a decline of several centuries. The transition will be more or less tolerable to the extent that the left knows different building schemes, relying on values \u200b\u200bequally different or even opposed. Keep in mind that the revolutionary left is, by definition, but requires a radical revolution of values \u200b\u200bor revolution is not complete. Both the nineteenth-century bourgeois revolutions and communist revolutions of the twentieth century suffered from a deficit or the other in that aspect, so when they failed to build a decent system for humanity. It is necessary that the XXI century revolution not make the same mistake again because failure could be fatal at this critical time for humanity.
But that explanation may small superficial. I think the current conformity with true, has its origin in a much more profound and difficult to face: the right core values \u200b\u200bare shared largely by the left. By "right values", entiéndaseme well I mean all those values \u200b\u200bthat have traditionally held the power to uppercase throughout history: tyranny, dogmatism, fanaticism, irrationality, injustice, selfishness, materialism ...
Humanity remained fairly stable, socially speaking, over the millennia in which there was an almost total consensus in accepting these values \u200b\u200bas a political base. The gap in this regard took place during the Enlightenment. The new values \u200b\u200bthat brought this line of thought (democracy, freedom, rationality ...) represented a moral and philosophical breakthrough that led to many revolutions since the late eighteenth century to the mid-nineteenth century. Judging modern capitalist states that gave rise to those bourgeois revolutions, it is clear that they certainly accounted for revolutionary advance in certain values, but not in others such as social justice and human solidarity. Arguably, the revolution created by the Enlightenment was lame in one leg.
born during the nineteenth century, another school of thought that just focused on the Enlightenment values \u200b\u200bthat inadvertently was left out: socialism.
Unfortunately, Marxist socialism (which became the mainstream in socialism) made the same mistake they had made years earlier illustrated, and conducted its analysis based on values \u200b\u200bof social justice and solidarity, forgetting or downplaying those that had prioritized the Enlightenment: democracy and freedom. That gap explains quite well the fact that ultimately could be as authoritarian Marxist interpretations and undemocratic as Leninism or Stalinism.
seems then that socialism was just as lame as the Enlightenment, albeit in the opposite leg.
But if we agree that the values \u200b\u200bof democracy and freedom are so desirable and necessary as social justice and human solidarity, we must conclude that the leftist current is ideal that he is able in its midst such approaches equally and in a balanced enough to preclude any type of deficit. And the truth is that this particular stream has always existed. I refer to libertarian socialism.
character
libertarian socialism is the counterpart of authoritative readings of Marxist socialism, and this is so precisely because it derives both socialism libertarian current that emerged during the Enlightenment.
And yet ... How is it possible that even the libertarian left today is able to seduce the mass of workers? The problem is, as I said, values. Society current is extremely individualistic, materialistic, selfish and consumerist. Which we have been so deeply ingrained as anti-human values \u200b\u200blike these, is the greatest triumph of the system and also its Achilles heel, because sooner or later ends our human condition rebelling against them. It is precisely at this point that the libertarian left should attack, and more in an economic crisis like the present, which are revealed most aberrant miseries we suffer socio-economic system. Thus, we must understand and make the public understand that the final collapse of capitalism (which is ultimately what we are attending) can only be overcome regardless by the end of selfishness and individualism, that is, coming together and organized under the banner of human solidarity.
But we will only reach that goal before today's society convince the great absurdity of materialism and consumerism. We need to see to the masses that happiness is not in the mall, but in different human interactions, and knowledge, culture, art or nature. It is essential to understand that the wealth of a society is measured not only in material terms but also in democratic terms, in social indicators (education or health, for example) or ecological levels. We are
a turning point in humanity, in which the old values-based mindset barbarians come to an end after a decline of several centuries. The transition will be more or less tolerable to the extent that the left knows different building schemes, relying on values \u200b\u200bequally different or even opposed. Keep in mind that the revolutionary left is, by definition, but requires a radical revolution of values \u200b\u200bor revolution is not complete. Both the nineteenth-century bourgeois revolutions and communist revolutions of the twentieth century suffered from a deficit or the other in that aspect, so when they failed to build a decent system for humanity. It is necessary that the XXI century revolution not make the same mistake again because failure could be fatal at this critical time for humanity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment