Does Pat C understand dialectical materialism

Tuesday November 26, 2002 18:59

by DLR

Simply put: does Pat C actually understand how to apply the method of Marxism.

The philosophical outlook of Marxism is dialectical materialism. This asserts that all phenomenon (everthing) in the world is based on the material reality of nature. This reality is constantly changing, becoming new, passing away and superseding the old. Change can be gradual but can then change quite rapidly to form new realities.

Because politics stems from human thought and humans are just another part of nature poitics are also subject to change.

Marx and Engels developed dialectical materialism to a scientific world outlook. Lenin and Trotsky developed this science. They all applied this method to the world in which they operated. As the world changed the analysis changed, but always understanding the fundamental operations of society etc.

This can be said of all the areas which these 4 and many others aswell analysed. whether it was politics, economics, history, nature etc.

Pat c looks at these writings but does not understand the method used to reach this analysis. Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky would pour scorn on his fumblings in the arena of politics. His total lack of comprehension of dialectics is one example.

The national question is one example of this. The writings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky on the national question are a vitally important source for marxists today to understand this complex question. However to take the writings as an absolute, which does not change, is diametrically opposed to the very fundamentals of Marxism. Different periods in histroy require different tactics, organisation, demands etc. Tactics today may tomorrow be abstract or even incorrect. Without an understanding of how society changes, or even that it changes will lead you into the marsh. History has proven this to be the case. Countless tiny sects who in one period may have only made minor 'mistakes', in a different period, where they are unable to understand and analyise the changes, become profound blunders and disastrous mistakes. They in fact can turn into their opposite. Rather than being a force for progression and fighting on behalf of the working class, they can become an impediment to the working class movement, selling the labour movement out etc. This may not be intentional but nevertheless is the result.

As with this so to with all question in relation to theory. Republicanism has proven that a false method and understanding of reality can lead to completely different end than that intended. The National question today is quite different to the national question in the past. Falling to see this has lead many, including so called marxists into the wrong conclusions, and therefore the wrong slogans, tactics etc.

Pat does not understand marxism. He should not just read the words printed on the page, but try to understand why they are being said, what are the factors involved and how the particular conclusion was reached. This is no easy task. It can take quite fundamental overhauling of ones way of thinking. However this may be benefical, not just to Pat but to all. Like all science study and a keen mind are invaluable.

Contrary to what most would like to believe Marxism is not a dogma. It is a method of understanding the world