/lit/ - Literature

>>18544971
>So it seems to come down to the idea that humans will be good when capitalism is cast off.
Again, I don't think humans are "good" or "bad" in this essentialized way, although it seems human beings have the capability of being both at different times, in different circumstances, and at different stages of their lives. I think this is really a question over values.

>I meant it in terms of social and political significance, from the Marxist perspective, where good is egalitarian and fair/just according to their own ideals.
I don't think Marxism preaches egalitarianism. I think that's more of an anarchist notion.

>In other words, by your description Marxism takes the liberty to assume humans will not seek to dominate each other politically after the end of capitalism, which means that it supports the (A) premise in my previous post.
I don't think that's knowable, but I think socialism can be defined in a Marxist sense as the political domination of society by the working class. There may even be other classes, there may even be capitalists ("merchants" in other words) but they may not hold the reigns of political power like they do in capitalist societies. Marx called for a dictatorship of the proletariat. But he felt that capitalist societies were a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

>It merely camouflages this assumption by stating that political movements and war are only caused by capitalist mechanisms, and therefore they are not "natural" with respect to how humans organize and act in a general sense.
I think Marxists view every thing as containing contradictions. History is full of them, societies are full of them, political movements, religions, nations, classes. Every thing has an opposite and they clash. Slave societies contained contradictions that eventually exploded and gave way to feudal societies which gave way to capitalist societies and will, presumably, give way to socialist societies and then presumably on to communism (maybe), and within these societies there are contradictions and struggles until they reach a point where there's an open antagonism that develops into revolution. So in a sense, revolutions are quite natural.