DOGMATIC MARXISTS

To Anmdrew.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Broome P wrote:
Mind you, I don't hear much about dogmatic capitalists - does anyone
suppose there is such a thing?

DOGMATIC MARXISTS.
A dogma is a belief, that cannot be shaken by arguments based on logic or
common sense. The fact that all the answers to my posting only referred to
the mentioned term, without trying to discuss my arguments seems to prove
my point. They are unwilling to even consider that Marx or Engels could
have made mistakes or that democratic capitalism might have some positive
side; in other words they are true believers in the Marxist dogma.

As to DOGMATIC CAPITALISTS there are many of them around. They are
convinced that the market can solve every problem and must never be
interfered with and that there is nothing wrong with money deciding
elections. 

UNDOGMATIC CAPITALISTS, like myself, admit hat Socialism has many excellent
features and that the undue influence of wealth on decision-making must be
curbed. On the other hand we cannot fail to see, that most attempts to
create a successful Marxist Society have failed, while there are many
democratic and capitalist countries with a reasonably happy population. The
decisive advantage of democratic systems is the possibility to evolve, to
adapt to changing circumstances and to throw out any government, that fails
to deliver on their promises.
It is true that introducing basic changes has become more difficult lately
and that eternal vigilance is necessary to maintain any progress achieved.
But let us not forget that once an insane criminal like PolPot seizes power
in a Marxist country an external military intervention is necessary to
remove him.

UNDOGMATIC MARXISTS are trying to convince us, that they promote a
DEMOCRATIC version of Marxism, but so far none of them was willing to give
us details on how achieve such an ideal society. Hopefully some of them
will now come forward.

Greetings       Paul Riesz
        




>
>This reminds me of Parenti's argument concerning the "moderate extremist."
>We hear in the mass media the terms "rightwing extremist" and the "radical
>left," but never about the "radical center" (although the term radical
>only fits well with the left, in my biased view).
>
>I understand that when a person is dedicated to principle she may be
>characterized either in a positive light by being a person with
>"conviction" or in a negative light as a "dogmatist."
>
>I suppose that if a dogmatist will accept nothing less than the abolition
>of an exploitative-oppressive economic system then the person who is
>willing to cling to some part of that system has conviction?
>
>The real question is, why should advocating the elimination of capitalism
>be a dogmatic position? Isn't the purpose of such characterizations to
>cordon off from debate the possibility of building a different societal
>system?
>
>Of course, skipping the answer and rejecting the question does make life
>difficult for those advocating a reformist version of the status quo (not
>that there isn't merit in reform).
>
>Andy Austin
>
>