Dear UK Embassy of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea The Scholars, Academics, Researchers, Workers, Volunteers and other Comrades that comprise the UK and world Membership of the BMA (UK) and the Sangha Kommune - convey their collective admiration, respect and support for the noble and progressive achievements of the People that comprise the world-shaking (1948) Revolution that generated the DPRK! The BMA (UK) and the Sangha Kommune support the noble People of the DPRK and admire the wise thought-formations of the Respect Comdrade Kim Jong Un! In everyway the DPRK has defended Revolutionary dialectics through 'Juche' (Self-sufficiency) and has constructed a just and able military to defend DPRK territory and population from US, ROK and Japanese aggression! Comradely Greetings! Proletarian Administration BMA (UK) & Sangha Kommune
0 Comments
The German Ideology - Part I: Feuerbach.Opposition of the Materialist and Idealist Outlook9/22/2021 [7. Summary of the Materialist Conception of History]
This conception of history depends on our ability to expound the real process of production, starting out from the material production of life itself, and to comprehend the form of intercourse connected with this and created by this mode of production (i.e. civil society in its various stages), as the basis of all history; and to show it in its action as State, to explain all the different theoretical products and forms of consciousness, religion, philosophy, ethics, etc. etc. and trace their origins and growth from that basis; by which means, of course, the whole thing can be depicted in its totality (and therefore, too, the reciprocal action of these various sides on one another). It has not, like the idealistic view of history, in every period to look for a category, but remains constantly on the real ground of history; it does not explain practice from the idea but explains the formation of ideas from material practice; and accordingly it comes to the conclusion that all forms and products of consciousness cannot be dissolved by mental criticism, by resolution into “self-consciousness” or transformation into “apparitions,” “spectres,” “fancies,” etc. but only by the practical overthrow of the actual social relations which gave rise to this idealistic humbug; that not criticism but revolution is the driving force of history, also of religion, of philosophy and all other types of theory. It shows that history does not end by being resolved into “self-consciousness as spirit of the spirit,” but that in it at each stage there is found a material result: a sum of productive forces, an historically created relation of individuals to nature and to one another, which is handed down to each generation from its predecessor; a mass of productive forces, capital funds and conditions, which, on the one hand, is indeed modified by the new generation, but also on the other prescribes for it its conditions of life and gives it a definite development, a special character. It shows that circumstances make men just as much as men make circumstances. This sum of productive forces, capital funds and social forms of intercourse, which every individual and generation finds in existence as something given, is the real basis of what the philosophers have conceived as “substance” and “essence of man,” and what they have deified and attacked; a real basis which is not in the least disturbed, in its effect and influence on the development of men, by the fact that these philosophers revolt against it as “self-consciousness” and the “Unique.” These conditions of life, which different generations find in existence, decide also whether or not the periodically recurring revolutionary convulsion will be strong enough to overthrow the basis of the entire existing system. And if these material elements of a complete revolution are not present (namely, on the one hand the existing productive forces, on the other the formation of a revolutionary mass, which revolts not only against separate conditions of society up till then, but against the very “production of life” till then, the “total activity” on which it was based), then, as far as practical development is concerned, it is absolutely immaterial whether the idea of this revolution has been expressed a hundred times already, as the history of communism proves. I fully recognise that the human species is communal and has evolved from an extended family base that became tribal. Indeed, human collectivity has been the strength underlying human (biological) evolution in general, and cultural development specifically. What, then, is the purpose, value and meaning for humanity (as a whole), for an individual pursuing a solitary path? What does it mean to be 'solitary'? Can a human being be truly isolatory? Is it possible to leave human society completely or even partially? What is it that is being left? From what is the individual removing him or herself from? To where are they relocating? What changes when an individual supposedly 'leaves' society? From a philosophical position it would seem that 'leaving society' might be a 'tautology' - more of a convention than a practical reality, and yet something tangible does appear to 'change'. Firstly, there is an inner change in orientation usually coupled with a concerted change in behavioural patterns. Indeed, 'leaving society' seems to be primarily a decision about abandoning one set of behaviours whilst embracing another. What is abandoned is the ordinary or expected patterns usually associated with the conventions of everyday life. Although there are grades of disengagement from everyday life - the more stringent examples include the rejecting of commercial labour (that is labour for profit), but not usually labour in principle. Personal (amorous) relations are purged from the expectations of the mind and body - as are any associations and interactions with family members and family structures. These are remarkable realignment of outward behaviour, but their purpose is to create an external (sensory) environment that generates the conditions for a profound change to occur in the functionality of the inner psychological and biological processes of the body. An outer physical transformation is required because without this impetus it is doubtful that will power alone could furnish the requisite strength of purpose required to permanently 'change' the frequency through which the mind and body operates. This being the case, is living in isolation in reality simply another definition of collective existence, albeit existing 'outside' of the convention that usually defines what many believe communal living actually is? If course, as the individual living in isolation still inhabits exactly the same physical world after supposedly 'leaving' it - and given that no one disappears or that anything changes to any great extent - it must be the case that 'leaving society' is really a redefinition of the physical phenomena of the world and of the manner in which these processes interact. Nothing changes except how the physical world is interpreted. However, although this may appear to be a superficial definition, throughout human history, it is clear that great historical and dialectical forces have been unleashed and harnessed that have brought down (and established) dynasties, empires, religious movements and social orders, all premises on markers of outer differences and distinctive modes of inner thought. Gods have come and gone, spirits have emerged and been exorcised and many different types of nature worship have come and gone. Yet the ability for a man and woman to live peacefully in the metaphorical (and actual) hills has often provided the inner (and outer) stimulus for great spiritual, artistic and engineering achievements to be conceived in the mind, built through the control of the body and put to use for the benefit of humanity. In this model, the direction of travel is easy to discern - from isolatory inspiration to purposeful application to collective human society in general. How did this happen? What is the pattern that grants this kind of inspiration? It seems that by consciously ‘withdrawing’ an individual is entering a ‘different’ type of collectivity – one that is not necessarily common or obvious to the rest of humanity. There appears to be a ‘gathering’ of inner and outer energy – a combination of psychological creativity and physical strength and healthy robustness! This intensification of the over-all energy available to the participating individual is ‘focused’, ‘directed’ and ‘intensified’ through the act (and experience) of ‘isolation’. It is as the ‘herd’ is seen better from a distance and understood to a greater degree. As an individual is part of the herd – it is the same as stating that the ‘herd is looking at itself in a particular manner’ - and none of this at this juncture has to have anything to do with ‘religion’ as such or even specifically. Taking a step back allows for the human mind to adopt a wider scale of observation and thereby ‘select’ a more effective mode of interactive behaviour that is designed to alleviate the greatest amount of collective suffering with the least (or most ‘efficient’) amount of individual effort. Although perhaps associated with the monkish disciplines – even those undergoing specialist education in the secular world still have to ‘withdraw’ from regular society to attend a school and become a ‘student’. A certain ‘isolation’ from mainstream reality is acquired to define what is a ‘different’ approach to understanding and interpreting reality! It could be that by adopting the meditative style of the monastic – a style of being considered the most ‘efficient’ for self-isolating – the secular student could achieve a much more profound appreciation of their subject matter! The forces of historical materialism, for instance, together with the waves of dialectical transformation could be easily perceived as unfolding through the inner and outer world! Surely, this is the Revolutionary power of isolating for self-education.
Although the Buddha’s assessment of physical reality seems very ‘modern’ in its use of logic and reason, is his notion of enlightenment relevant to a modern world that is dominated by science? What relevance does a Buddhist viewpoint have in a world that no longer accepts religious dogma in a blind and one-sided manner? Even if the Buddhist philosophy is placed to one-side and Buddhist enlightenment is reduced to perceiving the empty essence of the thinking mind, so what? How does this ability assist humanity in a world of measuring matter, observing processes and continuously striving to understand more about material existence? How does the Buddha’s idea of leaving the world help a person living in the modern world understand that world better? Of course, the honest answer is that it does not. Seeing into the empty fabric of the mind does not build houses, feed people or cure diseases. As an ability, it does not generate an income and cannot pay the bills. Leaving the world does not offer any contribution to making the world a better place. For the Buddha, an individual removes themselves from the most obvious causes of physical and psychological suffering. This suffering he associates with the conventional life of a lay-person participating in marriage, child-rearing and working for a living. This includes the activities of commerce, politics and warfare, etc. Interestingly, the Buddha advocates a moving further into abject poverty as all work is abandoned as a manifestation of desire. Once a regular income is denied, then it becomes a matter of sustaining the life of the individual through the indifferent eating of waste-food acquired by the monastic through the act of begging. Even so, as begging does not guarantee a daily meal, a semi-state of starvation becomes the norm. What is the point of this lifestyle? The Buddha states that all of humanity’s suffering stems from the traits of greed, hatred and delusion continuously operating in the mind, which manifest without end through a corresponding set of physical behaviours in the outside world. Cutting-off and uproot these three traits in the mind and the corresponding behavioural patterns will cease to function in the outside world. When the root of humanity’s suffering is permanently uprooted in the mind and purged from the body, then there exist no more suffering-inducing conditions to plague the individual. However, as life in a capitalist society relies entirely upon ‘greed’ and ‘selfishness’, the Buddhist path is obviously ‘anti-capitalist’ and renders the individual impotent and unable to effectively participate in a greed-orientated society. Of course, things are different within a Socialist society, as a ‘selfless’ individual who profoundly cares for the ‘welfare’ of others is exactly this type of ‘altruistic’ society requires for each of its citizens. An enlightenment achieved within a capitalist society proves to the experiencer that all greed is thoroughly incorrect and counter-productive toward the achieving of human happiness. In other words, a genuine Buddhistic experience grants the insight that the world of predatory capitalism is immoral, backward and the source of all human suffering! Capitalism is clearly perceived as existing entirely due to an unquestioning of human ignorance! Once the mind is cleared of its capitalist corruption, then the individual acquires the ability to comprehend not only the higher teachings of the Buddha but also the dialectical meaning contained within the work of Marx, Engels and Lenin! This would suggest that the Buddhist ideology, if pursued within its proper Asian context, leads the practitioner to an innate understanding and comprehension of the ideology of Scientific Socialism as formulated by Marx and Engels, and developed by thousands of other Revolutionary leaders ever since! Of course, bourgeois Buddhism – or that teaching which is mixed with the Judeo-Christian tradition to exclusively serve the socio-economic system of predatory capitalism – is nothing but a ‘bogus’ Buddhism used by privileged ‘White’ people as a leisure activity and simple play-thing. As this is the most common Buddhism functioning in the West, Buddhism in this guise has no relevance for freeing humanity or in the appreciation of Communist ideology. This is the fake Buddhism of ‘feeling good’ and of temporarily ‘escaping’ from the woes of everyday life for short periods of time. No one practicing this ogre of misrepresentation can ever clear their minds of greed, hatred and delusion, as all this ‘playing’ does is strengthen the functioning of greed, hatred and delusion! This shadow of Buddhism ‘strengthens’ capitalism and gives it’s a greater stability in the minds of the practitioners. This is why bourgeois Buddhism is nothing other than a collaboration with capitalism and the exploitation of the working-class! Anyone can read the Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist teachings, and apply the teachings themselves as part of their study of Marxist-Leninist ideology. Indeed, meditating and calming the mind allows for a preparation of the intellect so that it can more readily ‘absorb’ the profound lessons inherent within the teachings of Scientific Socialism and the work of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara and Thomas Sankara, etc. Ethnic Buddhist communities in China, Laos and Vietnam use this method to integrate their communities into the Socialist System! It is exactly the same method used by the three or four Buddhist Republics that were part of the Soviet Union! Although Buddhism is certainly not required for the successful learning of Marxist-Leninism, nevertheless, if it already exists it can be useful as a method of working-class empowerment!
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles PhD - Political Commissar and BMA (UK) Historian & Researcher. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|