Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gmku
So the failing with pure Marxism is the assumption that the individual producers will feel "devoted to the cause," so to speak. I think it's hard for people to feel motivated for long based on altruism or ideology.
.
|
Not just Marxism, ALL fascist (I use the term most literally in the sense of authoritarianism blended with patriotic nationalism) economic systems have this same flaw. The Catholic and Byzantine Church succeeded in controlling the Eurasian economy for some centuries, however inevitably folks just stopped buying into the idea, and hence forth the Crusades (more financially motivated by jealousy of the Byzantine Empire and the Arabs than religious fanaticism) and then the subsequent and more impacting Reformation (which was also more financially motivated by Dutch corporate interests than religious fanaticism)...
What happened in all these instances of rebellion was that while people often remained religiously Catholic or Christian, it was socioeconomic policies that they militantly rejected...
History seems conclusive on this fact, that human beings will only buy into any philosophical system if they receive economic incentives, and when these dry up and even reverse to disincentives, folks often reject and rebel.
This is why inherently all economic movements seem to fail, but of course they do not, they just fail as attempts at monolythic systems, but individual nuances that are successful tend to get integrated into whatever is the current system, as pan-humanistic culture tends to be readily able to adopt new strategies for success..