u/commie_wannabe

Hello everyone.

Does the term "dialectical materialism" not assume what it ought to prove? For Hegelians, this term is perfectly reasonable, although reduces Hegel to a crude version of himself, but for the Marxists is it not problematic? Hegelians understand reality to be the unfolding of a Concept, so they should have no problem in asserting that matter does in fact unfold dialectically - but the Marxists can't do this (as far as I can see) because then they would be establishing an identity between thought and reality.

Can someone please explain - I may very well be wrong in my understanding, and any corrections would be most welcome. Thanks in advance!

Hi everyone. I was just thinking about that absolute nonsense of "thesis->anti-thesis->synthesis" which is claimed to be the Hegelian method. Just where does this rubbish come from, and why is it still around? If anyone could please enlighten me.

Thanks in advance.

Greetings comrades.

Is there any English translation of the first edition of Das Kapital Vol. 1? Marx says that he essentially had to present his work differently because it still had remnants of Hegelianism - the problem is that this resulted in a downgrade of the book's content, and resulted in, for example, an erroneous conception of value. The development of the category of value is the main reason why I am looking for the first edition.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Hey everyone - I was making some notes, so I wanted to know if I had the gist of things. Please, feel free to critique and add on to this - it will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Upon overthrowing the capitalist class, the proletariat becomes the ruling class - that is, the will of society becomes identical with that of the proletariat. At this point, they have the bourgeois state in their hands - that is, the destiny of the bourgeois state is entirely in the hands of the proletariat. It is therefore precisely at this moment that the smashing of the state begins. This constitutes, mainly, destroying value-relations - consequently, no labour-vouchers as these have the potential, and will certainly be used by the counter revolutionaries, to maintain value and thereby engender a market, ultimately giving rise to capitalist relations. The answer to the question of how to fight off the counter revolution is not to seize the state and turn it on the bourgeoisie - rather, it is to destroy the very thing that engenders the bourgeoisie in the first place, namely, value. We therefore destroy the bourgeoisie by making sure that there is nothing they can take back, since value relations would be undergoing destruction and are precisely the relations that enable private property and, therefore, the appearance of the capitalist class. The destruction of private property is nothing more than the destruction of the relations that give rise to them. The revolution is not a new way of state management - it is the end of state management in general.