Marxism Is Pure Materialism

Marxism in fact denies any spiritual level, Karma, nonphysical entities and the likes. For a Marxist, a human is a piece of matter, the consciousness an illusion created by electrochemistry. As opposed to modern atheists who refuse to state this and its consequences clearly,

Friedrich Engels had no such qualms. To disprove Kant and other idealists, he claims

Die schlagendste Widerlegung dieser wie aller andern philosophischen Schrullen ist die Praxis, nämlich das Experiment und die Industrie. Wenn wir die Richtigkeit unsrer Auffassung eines Naturvorgangs beweisen können, indem wir ihn selbst machen, ihn aus seinen Bedingungen erzeugen, ihn obendrein unsern Zwecken dienstbar werden lassen, so ist es mit dem Kantschen unfaßbaren “Ding an sich” zu Ende.

My (shortened) translation:

The most striking contradiction of this [idealism/qualia] and all other philosophical foolishnesses is the praxis, namely experiment and industry. When we can show a process by reproducing it, it is the end of Kant’s “substance of a thing” [Ding an sich].

He goes on to criticize Feuerbach who was reluctant to drive materialism to its final conclusion, the total absence of a nonphysical plane of existence – or “hidden” layers a la Kant or Plato – or any religion.

Source: “Ludwig Feuerbach und der Ausgang der klassischen deutschen Philosophie”

Pure materialism was accordingly the ideology of the USSR. This had consequences:

  • Greed. When all you have is this life, you better down that Vodka now.
  • Not a whole lot of motivation besides fight for immediate survival.
  • Stalin stated when he starved 7 million Ukrainians to death in the Holodomor : “The Soviet Union has tractors, we don’t need farm workers.” – when your fellow humans are meaningless automata, well, why not kill them if it seems to be advantageous.

Accordingly it went downhill from there. Ironically this makes the socialist the ultimate compulsive hedonist consumer – he has no hope for a future after death – and his children, if he has any, are soulless automatons just like him and have no special meaning to him (if he actually believes in total materialism).

The socialist is the ideal impulse buyer. Maybe that explains why certain mega-rich types like Soros push socialism? You can sell anything that promises instant gratification to a futureless automaton- making socialist consumers the ideal complement to producers.

If you meet a socialist who claims to care for his fellow humans, ask him why.





15 thoughts on “Marxism Is Pure Materialism”

    1. Well *I* am but I’m special over here… so no – the Germans in general are shielded from the Obama critics in the USA. They don’t get exposure.


  1. While interesting, that’s not the best e.g., of what he has to tell us. Here’s some better material.

    And this interview with Rush Limbaugh.

    In order to counter Marxism, we have to know who they are and how they operate. Failing that, merely identifying isn’t going to do it, though it is an essential first step. And that’s why I think D’Souza is important, because he’s very aggressively showing us the danger we are in here in the States. I do hope you have someone there who can, by telling the truth, expose those who are destroying Germany in a way that will inspire people to have the focus to replace them with sane leaders.


    1. The right or Alt-right underground here exists in the form of several blogs with giant reach – most notably the indefatiguable – and has its tentacles in Pegida and AfD. And some fanatics like me *ARE* tracking the US right /alt-right movements all the time. And translate and publish in no time at all – for those who don’t track US and UK blogs.

      So we are very fast in mounting counterattacks. It happens more and more often that storms of comments force the system media and even the government to deny and backpedal. Like, they just had to publicly deny that they import Syrians with night flights from Ankara. Whether the denial is truthful is anyone’s guess: THEY LOST ALL CREDIBILITY.

      The reason for my post is like for most posts not an urgent new need for this analysis – but, I just stumbled across that remarkable quote and needed to fixate this for posteriority.


      1. And, more often than not, we read first at Breitbart London or at Infowars about something in Germany that the system media successfully shielded from us. Or in the Daily Mail. Especially personal details of attackers which are NEVER published by German media. Whether they’re Muslim; from which country. We *NEED* to read English language media for that. And we do.


      2. ” I just stumbled across that remarkable quote and needed to fixate this for posterity.” – Dirk


        I wanted to comment on it, but it’s difficult to grapple with what seem like multiple layers of self-contradiction, swimming in a fog of pseudo-intellectual drivel. Just one e.g., ” If we can prove the correctness of our conception of a natural process by making it ourselves…”

        What do they mean by “prove?” What are “correctness?” and “conception?” if not the products of a mind, which is what to a materialist? How does one “make” a copy of a “natural process,” whatever that is? Etc., etc.

        They are sloppy and shallow thinkers , stringing words and ideas together without giving us a clue how to interpret them. And today’s “new atheists” are no different. Take for e.g., Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s idiotic portrayal of Giordano Bruno. He was rightly criticized by scientists, as well as many honest atheists (those who aren’t out to convert the world). Here are a some selections: (It was so hard to choose which to include, so I’m listing about half of the best. They are all good reading, I think.) (1)**

        This one sums it all up nicely as a kind of “live by the stupid, die by the stupid’.

        Bruno was, if anything, more fanatical than the Church. His major works were on applied magic and witchcraft, in which he was a devout believer, who thought all should be converted. What more fitting a hero for the “new atheists?”
        **(1) – This one begins with the following quote that describes not only Bruno, but the rest of them, as well. – “The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us.” – Paul Valery, 1895


    2. Gavin McInness mentions d’Souza and his conviction here at 4:00.
      Exactly the treatment the DDR would dole out to regime critics.


  2. Funny you say that, Dirk. We in the US have the same problem. We need to read stuff outside of the reach of our ‘state’ controlled media, too. The folk who think that our ‘mainstream’ media is truthful and objective don’t realize that their precious NYT and et cetera are our version of Pravda. I did learn some Russian and loved Krokodile. I wonder if that’s still published.


    1. I never learned enough Russian to have that pleasure. My old joke was that I knew how to say all the important things, like:

      How do you say that in English?
      Give me a beer, please.
      How much does that cost?
      Where’s the bathroom?


    1. It isn’t so much the number of companies, corporate or otherwise, that matters to me. I remember the oligopoly, in TV, of ABC and NBC and CBS and PBC. Under the heed of the FCC and its ‘Fairness Doctrine’, it didn’t matter if there were 6 or 6000 stations. The incumbents toed the line or lost their broadcast licenses. IOW, BIG Government was requiring conformity, and was requiring it from the beginning.


  3. Excellent post, this to me is spot on. Once man banishes anything but the material, the only options are nihilism or some form of existentialism, subjectively finding a purpose to life. For whatever reason, many people, especially academics find this purpose in creating a utopia. If they can’t have paradise in the next life, they will attempt to create it in this one. This is my reading at least, communism is just another substitute for organised religion. In fact I would say it could well be considered one itself.


    1. It is a substitute for religion insofar as it is a “common cause” but it is devoid of any substance. What does a communist do after he has achieved victory in his country – and isn’t one of the comrades in the Politburo living off the fat of the land? Why, stand in line for a loaf of bread. It’s so completely foolish it makes you shake your head in despair.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s