Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Two kinds of morality

  1. #1
    Council Member kowalskil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Lee, New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    49

    Default Two kinds of morality

    TWO KINDS OF MORALITIES, MARXIST VERSUS THEOLOGICAL


    I am reading interesting comments about communist morality, in a book devoted to Judaism, published in 1975. The authors are two rabbis, D. Prager and J. Telushkin. A Christian theologian would probably make similar observations.

    Marxists and theologians, they write, "are both motivated by the desire to perfect the world and establish a utopia on earth. ... Both promote all-encompassing worldviews. But they diametrically oppose one another in almost every other way." The authors remind us that communists rejected "all morality derived from nonhuman [i.e. God] and nonclass concepts," as stated in 1920 by Lenin. ... "Marxist morality sanctions any act so long as that act was committed in the interest of [economic and political] class struggle." Nothing that Stalin, and Mao did was immoral, according to such ideology.

    Theologians, on the other hand, hold "that morality transcends economic, national, and individual interests." God's commandments are objective rather than subjective. Evil human acts are condemned, no matter what economic or political gains are derived from them. That is the essential difference. Greed in human nature, they emphasize, "may have helped create capitalism, but capitalism did not create greed in human nature."

    Theologians also deplore social injustice. But they reject brutal proletarian revolutions because "the roots of evil and injustice lie not in economics or society but in man himself." This has to do with the concept of freedom. "For Marxism, which conceives of the world in materialist terms, bondage is defined solely as servitude to external sources such as slave owners, capitalist bosses, or other forms of material inequality. Freedom is liberation from such servitude." People, as stated in the Communist Manifesto, written by Marx and Engels, must get rid of economic chains binding them. Then they will automatically cease to be evil.

    Theologians, on the other hand, see two kinds of liberation, from external and from internal bonds. "Once liberation from external servitude takes place, one must then liberate oneself from internal domination, the domination of one's life by passions, needs, irrationality and wants." The conflict between theologians and Marxists "is not economic, it is moral." Proletarian dictatorship was practiced in several countries; the results show that "when Marxist revolutionaries attain power they are at least as crual as their predecessors."

    Philosophical differences about morality, among different kinds of theologians, are minimal, as far as I know. But attempts to impose morality are not very successful. Why is it so? What can be done to improve the situation, to bring our reality a little closer to "utopia" dreams?

    Ludwik
    Ludwik Kowalski, author of a free ON-LINE book entitled “Diary of a Former Communist: Thoughts, Feelings, Reality.”

    http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/intro.html

    It is a testimony based on a diary kept between 1946 and 2004 (in the USSR, Poland, France and the USA).

    The more people know about proletarian dictatorship the less likely will we experience is.

  2. #2
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Weren't Marx and Engels Jews? Isn't the Jewish Kibbutz based upon Communism?

  3. #3
    Council Member Abu Suleyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Montgomery, AL
    Posts
    131

    Default Reinhold Niebuhr

    For an interesting take on a similar issue, you should see Reinhold Niebuhr's Children of Darkness, Children of Light discussion. Riebuhr was a reformed Marxist, but a committed lefty for his entire life. He is the father of what we now call, "Christian Realism" and to the extent that a group reflects that foreign policy, or ethical, stance today it is -- ironically -- the Religious Right.
    Last edited by Abu Suleyman; 07-09-2013 at 03:24 PM. Reason: I forgot HTML Doesn't work.
    Audentes adiuvat fortuna
    "Abu Suleyman"

Similar Threads

  1. The Army: A Profession of Arms
    By Chuck Grenchus, CAPE in forum Miscellaneous Goings On
    Replies: 160
    Last Post: 07-08-2014, 04:00 PM
  2. communist morality
    By kowalskil in forum Doctrine & TTPs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-25-2012, 08:35 PM
  3. Mechanization hurts COIN forces
    By Granite_State in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 142
    Last Post: 11-22-2010, 09:40 PM
  4. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-29-2007, 02:14 PM
  5. Battlefield Ethics
    By Dr Jack in forum Social Sciences, Moral, and Religious
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 05-15-2007, 12:44 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •