The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas.
I’ll assume the typical leftist political context of it’s use implying an ‘aspirational’ view of my fellow humans they would often fall short of due to material concerns.
But? Nah who would ever claim certainty in this type of casual anonymous interlingual forum?
I’ll assume the typical leftist political context of it’s use implying an ‘aspirational’ view of my fellow humans they would often fall short of due to material concerns.
That’s not the typical leftist political context? In a leftist political context idealism posits that ideas are the driving force of history, as if thought creates reality rather than reflecting it. This flips the actual relationship: material conditions shape consciousness, not the other way around. When we start from abstractions instead of concrete social practice, we end up justifying the status quo or chasing illusions. Real change comes from engaging with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.
Just to be clear, by idealism we mean the conception that thought is prior to matter, ie supernatural explanations for material phenomena. We do not mean having ideals. An example of idealism is ascribing a morality to the state to begin with. There is no such thing as a supernatural “good or evil,” and that’s why Marxists reject such frames of argument.
Ok tell me about the country with the moral founding.
Ireland?
Ireland is a bourgeois democracy, otherwise known as a bourgeois dictatorship.
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:The_German_ideology#Ruling_class_and_ruling_ideas
The world’s tax haven now but I’ll go with ya for a cool thousand years.
This silly, idealist question isn’t the gotcha you think it is.
Actually it’s pretty foundational anarchist doctrine.
Christianity is anarchist doctrine?
Idealism?
I guess?
But I was referring to the innate immorality of the state.
But I won’t deny a certain amount of idealism is required to be an anarchist.
Are you sure you understand what idealism means in this context?
I’ll assume the typical leftist political context of it’s use implying an ‘aspirational’ view of my fellow humans they would often fall short of due to material concerns.
But? Nah who would ever claim certainty in this type of casual anonymous interlingual forum?
That’s not the typical leftist political context? In a leftist political context idealism posits that ideas are the driving force of history, as if thought creates reality rather than reflecting it. This flips the actual relationship: material conditions shape consciousness, not the other way around. When we start from abstractions instead of concrete social practice, we end up justifying the status quo or chasing illusions. Real change comes from engaging with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.
Interesting. I understand why I’ve never heard of idealism as a political ideology. Doesn’t seem very, viable.
I was just bastardizing the dismissive use of idealist used in US discourse.
Just to be clear, by idealism we mean the conception that thought is prior to matter, ie supernatural explanations for material phenomena. We do not mean having ideals. An example of idealism is ascribing a morality to the state to begin with. There is no such thing as a supernatural “good or evil,” and that’s why Marxists reject such frames of argument.
You’re bolstering my case, given anarchism’s track record. Communism is founded on historical materialism, not on morality or idealism.
But you don’t have to subscribe to communism to get value out of letting go of moralism.
Cool nobody asked.
just because you lack any inquisitiveness on your part, don’t assume the same for everyone else