Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Karl Marx's erupting skin


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Karl Marx's erupting skin Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 9:05:37 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
quote:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071030/sc_nm/marx_boils_dc_1;_ylt=AsppqN8gzJVVJPKBRMOMSs0E1vAI

 Marx's erupting skin may have influenced writings 

Karl Marx, who complained of excruciating boils, actually suffered from a chronic skin disease with known psychological effects that may well have influenced his writings, a British expert said on Tuesday.

Sam Shuster, professor of dermatology at the University of East Anglia, believes the revolutionary thinker had hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) in which the apocrine sweat glands -- found mainly in the armpits and groin -- become blocked and inflamed.

"In addition to reducing his ability to work, which contributed to his depressing poverty, hidradenitis greatly reduced his self-esteem," said Shuster, who published his findings in the British Journal of Dermatology.

"This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing."

While HS is linked to boil-like lumps, the painful condition also causes more widespread infection, swelling, skin thickening and scarring.

It could also explain a number of Marx's other complaints, not previously linked, such as joint pain and a painful eye condition which often stopped him working.

Shuster based his diagnosis on an analysis of Marx's extensive correspondence, in which he wrote to friends about his health and described his skin lesions as "curs" and "swine."

"The bourgeoisie will remember my carbuncles until their dying day," Marx told Friedrich Engels in a letter from 1867.

Marx, who died in 1883, was one of the most influential philosophers of the 19th century and his radical writings formed the basis of modern communism.



 Karl Marx was "self-loathing"? That explains a lot...

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 9:41:18 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
It is all probably irrelevent to his writings. His writing developed with some logic and no matter what rightwingers think of him, he made an important contribution to western philosophy. But what the hell, rightwingers misinterpret him in the same way they misinterpret Adam Smith.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 11:29:07 AM   
luckydog1


Posts: 2736
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline
How could his mindset possibly have no impact on his views?   That just makes no sense at all. 

I don't think anyone says he didn't have an impact.  He was one of the most important people of history.  It was just mostly a negative impact.   It all boils down to -the best kind of society that can be organised is a benign dictatorship for the people.  Eventually in this perfectly organized society the need for the gov will fade away-   There is no logic in it, people have passions and are not perfectable.  Plato demolished this idea thousands of years ago.  Of course a just tyrant is the best system for governing.  A wise king, a golden slavery.  But it doesn't work.  for a variety of reasons, chiefly the succession of power and the corruption of the bueracracy.  There are people in the system.  If we were ants Marxism would work.  Marxism can not tolerate dissent.  Capitalism makes money off of dissent.  Marxism is interesting thoereticall musing (which ironically is a decadent use of resources), that is a nightmare when attempted to be applied, usually leading to mass slaughter.


(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 11:33:00 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

How could his mindset possibly have no impact on his views?   That just makes no sense at all. 

I don't think anyone says he didn't have an impact.  He was one of the most important people of history.  It was just mostly a negative impact.   It all boils down to -the best kind of society that can be organised is a benign dictatorship for the people.  Eventually in this perfectly organized society the need for the gov will fade away-   There is no logic in it, people have passions and are not perfectable.  Plato demolished this idea thousands of years ago.  Of course a just tyrant is the best system for governing.  A wise king, a golden slavery.  But it doesn't work.  for a variety of reasons, chiefly the succession of power and the corruption of the bueracracy.  There are people in the system.  If we were ants Marxism would work.  Marxism can not tolerate dissent.  Capitalism makes money off of dissent.  Marxism is interesting thoereticall musing (which ironically is a decadent use of resources), that is a nightmare when attempted to be applied, usually leading to mass slaughter.




I bet you have never read Marx because you would understand the important contribution he made to political and philosophical thinking, no doubt you are like those zealous muslims who burn books because someone told you that its bad for you.

Rereading you comments about Marx, you certainly haven't read him or know very much about his thinking or if you did, you bearly understood a word he wrote.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 10/30/2007 11:35:08 AM >


_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to luckydog1)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 11:45:44 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
Hey Lucky, a quote from Marx. Democracy is the road to socialism. You should now go and read one of his manifestos, much of what he and his followers proposed in the latter stages of the 19th century is alive and well in Europe. Universal health and education, the right to a home (now made law in France), decent working conditions, sexual emanicpation and sexual equality. Democracy with his prediction has brought these about. Just because some dictators use his writings like Christians, Jews and Muslims use their holy books, does not mean he got everything wrong. There has always been more Marxism in western European political thinking than in the USSR. Hell, there is even some social care in the US which is directly responsible to Marx. Sociology is down to Marx and all the professions that have sprung from that.

For such a dower man he wrote and had published a collection of very fine love poems. He was not at all how you would paint him.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 10/30/2007 11:46:45 AM >


_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 11:57:45 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline
I believe , emphasise believe, that Marx was a towering intellect but as Luckydog hints at he was probably a hopeless idealist. Thought he saw the road to perfectability in the human condition.

Mild Social Democracy was NOT what Marx predicted as being inevitable.
He expected  the Dictatorship of the Proletariat
What actually happened was the horrors of Stalin.

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 12:09:27 PM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

I believe , emphasise believe, that Marx was a towering intellect but as Luckydog hints at he was probably a hopeless idealist. Thought he saw the road to perfectability in the human condition.

Mild Social Democracy was NOT what Marx predicted as being inevitable.
He expected  the Dictatorship of the Proletariat
What actually happened was the horrors of Stalin.


Actually he wasn't an idealist, you have obviously not read him. Like all philosophers he never finished his work because only with death did he stop thinking. If you look at Europe today through the eyes of an exploited worker or a laissez faire capitalist of the 19th century, what we have today in Europe is not mild social democracy but it would appear a full blooded revolution has taken place. Whether it can be sustained with so many people thinking that capitalism gave them what they have through its inbuilt altruism (not) is to doubtful.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 5:01:42 PM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline
I admit I have not read Marx, thats why I said " I believe"
but
He absolutely did believe that society was perfectable and I'll get a quote to prove it if I have to. lol
I think you had consumed some Vino when you posted the above because its a tad confusing.

He said that working class consciousness had only to be raised then they would see how they were being exploited, "Workers Unite you have nothing to lose but your chains"
"Religion is the opiate of the masses" or should that be alcohol, football or sex
and then all would be well.

What has actually happened is that sociologists  diversity experts, road traffic fukkeruppers and other assorted thinkers are now living the good life at the working classes expense.

Whats that saying.. " the more things change the more they stay the same"

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 10/30/2007 5:03:57 PM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 7:56:19 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Meat, I've never read Karl Marx and I WOULD burn his books.
He was a fuckin' Moron!
He must have had an ego the size of a House to think that "HE" knew better than everyone else on the planet!
And look what happened with Stalin.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Karl Marx's erupting skin - 10/30/2007 9:32:40 PM   
lucern


Posts: 54
Joined: 11/13/2004
Status: offline
Interesting post, OP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

How could his mindset possibly have no impact on his views?   That just makes no sense at all.


This should be acknowledged as truthful.  It's easy to go too far, though, like this from the OP: "This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing."

Has anyone else read Marx's early writing on labor alienation?  This is roughly the alienation of Marx's work.  It has nothing to do with social isolation of individuals.  Nothing.  I suspect the author saw that this idea is used in his work and assumed what it meant.  It really doesn't.  That work is about the condition of labor relations as observed in the middle of the industrial revolution - where once people generally got to enjoy the fruits of their labor, factory work changes this.  People constantly work at something that they won't keep or benefit from directly.  Alienation in this context refers to an alienation of the worker's personal experience of labor and the products of it.  Now, read what this blurb says again (and always be skeptical of the second-hand reporting of science).  If that's what the original writer meant, Marx's boils, lesions and other maladies of the flesh have nothing to do with alienation in his writing.  Most of Marx's social isolation and poverty in his life actually came from the reception of his ideas.

Which brings us to debate raised in this thread, about Marx's impact. 

Luckydog - ask yourself what 'Marxism' entails.  Is it governmental or intellectual?  You'll find that there are Marxisms rather than a Marxism, and they're always philosophical or at least intellectual in nature.  Why?  Because aside from the Communist Manifesto, which was a (successful) attempt with Engels to write for a popular audience, the bulk of his writing had to do with social description and analysis.  Whether writers believed his writings or were critical, the debates about society he sparked are the lasting impact of Marx himself.

For those who are dismissing a writer they haven't read...well...you know the risk involved in that: you're going off of second hand information at best.  Marx is a 19th century colossus, writing at the cusp of the industrial revolution...essentially trying to work out a lot of new and complex problems all at once.  He also wrote an early and still viable critique of capitalism, though his attitude towards things he doesn't like is polemic.

As an anthropologist in training, I can tell you that Marx remains important intellectually.  Am I a Marxist, or do I even use Marx?  Nope.  Two words: historical determinism: you can't expect history to follow some pre-defined course.  There are indefensible claims and frankly archaic understandings throughout the work.  Gee, almost as if much of it had been written over 150 years ago.  Then again, why do I know anything about Marx if I don't even use him?  You have to understand Marx to understand social science literature because he's often there.  People debate him.  If you don't understand Marx, you won't understand them.  If you don't understand them, you won't understand the people using their work.  Nor will you understand entire branches or subdisciplines of some fields, who, because of their focus on the physical and social together, found Marx eminently useful. 

And finally, it's worth extracting Marx from things he didn't actually do.  Don't equate Marx with communism in practice - what he and Engels wrote was never enacted or, I'd argue, seriously attempted (not that I'd recommend it, mind you).  Nothing in the Manifesto or his other writings indicates that an enormous statist empire should emerge with a totalitarian ruler and tiny permanent elite.  That's actually specifically what Marx was worried about.  If you work to understand how ideas actually get used for practical reasons you'll have gone a long way to understanding humanity.

(in reply to luckydog1)
Profile   Post #: 10
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Karl Marx's erupting skin Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.281