Modern Philosophy With Barış Bayram: Eliminating Marxism & Religious Violence Globally
To my analysis that you’ll now read in 5 minutes, it still matters to try to eliminate all forms of Marxism globally because of their “highly problematic effects on our long-term well-being”, and “implications against human rights”.
First of all, I want to clarify that Marxism misinterprets the world. Because economic factors and “class struggle” as determinants, in fact, are not linear/dominant/primary, and also not the main determinants. So, the Marxist doctrine tries to distort our understanding of critical issues as it misses the complex causal relationships between economic/political systems/decisions and our very divergent determinants especially in terms of biological, cognitive, behavioral and social sciences, and hence it prevents us to find out the drivers and origins of any problems of the status quo, and also how to transform them for positive social/political change. Second, the narrative of the conflict between two classes or two major powers/paradigms is false: There are very complex and multiple determinants and sides of any conflict and occurrence in relation to “our history”. As a result, Marxism is an extremely reductive, and unscientific story about social issues (just based on its straw man fallacies employing the concepts “base” and “superstructure”).
Plus, it aims to justify reducing our very freedoms and autonomy. In relation to that, many Marxist/communist governments have violated human rights. In such a sense, Marxism also implies a sort of majoritarian governance model against “individual-based human rights approaches”. This model too is not acceptable.
Then, how to design/develop economic/political systems that prioritize/improve long-term well-being of any citizen in individual-based ways primarily realizing human rights too? First, we need quality-designed tax-systems for the government’s science-based welfare investments/spendings. For now, the current Scandinavian ones, according to 2017 Social Progress Index, seem preferable and workable as economic systems. But of course they don’t have to be the most ethical ones (among realizable possibilities), and thus we must continue to try to examine, find out, discuss and develop further ones. For such designs of economic systems, “climate change and any environmental issues” too must be primarily considered. In addition, we, including business enterprises, (with further awareness, voluntarily) should think about reducing negative externalities, and increasing the positive ones. But also, we need systemic mechanisms that ensure that anyone can become a billionaire (much more rich than others) because of her merits and high quality (extraordinary) hard-work (through providing new chances and social mobility possibilities to them even in the later ages). To protect/facilitate such possibilities would be “more ethical” for everyone (else) through benefiting from such persons’s efforts and (possible) achievements/productions/actions/effects by motivating them using such systemic mechanisms.
Another problem stemming from the Marxist ideology is that it misleadingly creates a negative image that causes many persons to suppose that all cooperation directions and internationalist perspectives are Marxist, and consequently one has to be whether a Marxist (leftist in terms of economics) or a classical liberal (libertarian in economic sense). We need to understand that this is false and must spread such a new awareness in order to cooperate more effectively.
In today’s version, classical liberals are the new cynical narrow-self-interested persons. They typically defend “some” progressive values and “some” human rights, but also typically ignore “some” others, and even some “individuals” in relation to their own critical considerations. Thus, their views/decisions too are sometimes problematic (but indeed, “not too problematic” in comparison to the Marxists/leftists’s perspectives). But yet, as a consequence, (at least some) “classical liberal economic positions” cause/lead to “less-educated citizens in total, lower (than possible) levels of social progress, and more crime”, and thus, “considerable possibilities/effects against our long-term well-being”. So, I’m a liberal solely in political sense (i.e., I defend/promote/want “more civil society, more toleration, more individual liberties, more powerful citizens, more human rights and freedoms, and more personal autonomy”). And, my ultimate position about economic systems is a sort of “capitalist welfare state” including free trade, and a sort of free business in terms of globalization against protectionism. To complement this perspective, and to further solve our main economic problems (especially to end poverty), in my view, universal/unconditonal basic income too can be considered/examined more seriously (but of course, I don’t mean that it’s an absolute/perfect/sufficient response to our economic challenges). For further solutions, I think that we need more holistic approaches like “social progress”, and hence human rights considerations, high-quality education for all, public philosophy for ethics, gender quality policies, and some common workable global goals like the United Nations SDGs. Also, “individually giving funds to others in need or to those meriting much more especially in a sense of capability to upgrade our world if they’re funded sufficiently” could make a real difference. Plus, we should diversely donate to the reliable and effective organizations, scientists, philosophers and any authors having “divergent and high-quality capabilities” and “meaningful/valuable causes/goals”. We could mind sponsoring such persons/organizations’s projects too if we have enough wealth or income. This too can work as a kind of effective cooperation way against the problems of the status quo, e.g., against “the facilitators of Marxist efforts”. So, I want to express that, to flourish your (global) environment, please do consider to informationally and financially help/improve others, become a more engaged citizen, develop/improve “more-ethical social networks and organizations”, and vote for “pro-science and more-capable parties/candidates”. In short, try to act in Ethical-Possibility-Enhancement-oriented ways.
Finally, I would like to add that many versions of Marxism have violence-prescriptions too in its purpose of changing the existing systems and governments, so such versions are highly problematic, and must be considered even as a crime when endorsed by its supporters. By means of violence, “to try to realize such false/illegitimate ends like communism or Marxism-oriented goals” cannot be considered as “Free Speech” because it ideologically implies that people must/can use violence for “Marxist revolution” (e.i., this problematic action-prescription implies “direct and illegitimate violence, incitement, threat, and/or intimidation”).
More importantly, “to ignore its violence-prescriptions” has been facilitating/encouraging/effecting/catalyzing “many persons of other problematic ideologies” to generate violence-prescriptions and perform them, unfortunately. For countering/preventing them, we must more deliberately criticize/address such informational cascades, and their effects on other ideologies toward violence and many problematic behaviors.
Likewise, religion-inspired or religion-backed violence too must be eliminated. We have two main reasons for that: 1- Such practices/worldviews/perspectives/policies/laws in such countries effect others in nonlinear problematic ways. When people promote/practice these in their own countries, any terrorists (they are just “more extremist” than their own countries’s standards) become more-likely to attack persons in western countries too because such problematic religion-based violent perspectives effect their minds much more. 2- There are some persons who do not (at least) accept such problematic views in such countries. So, we have to save them from those countries: We must create new nonviolent ways and “political will” to stop/counter/prevent/reduce such violations of their very human rights. Otherwise, in any situation in the future, in any human rights violation against us, we cannot realistically await help/support from others. So, in both ways, we must act in EPE-oriented ways.
“To not eliminate Marxism and religious-violence globally” (our this inaction) has been also facilitating some other persons in the West (especially against these two) to generate problematic violent movements/ideologies like “alt-right and Nazi-like racism” especially if those persons are informationally/theoretically not capable enough. So, even to prevent and end such reactionary violent responses too, we should be committed to eliminating “Marxism and religious-violence” globally. But of course, even if there were not such violent responses, we would have a global responsibility to try to eliminate these two (thanks to our same resolute commitment and willingness to realize the very progressive values for our own long-term well-being).
I’m just saying that by building a more focused awareness and effective laws, and by legitimate international action-plans and governmental/diplomatic means, and also by civil-society and business responses, we can fix the status quo again and again for the advanced transformations on these issues too. How to eliminate “Marxism and religious-violence” (of course, solely) in nonviolent ways is up to you. My brief and main suggestion is, as a first step, “financial and informational cooperation and advancing the connectivity” especially between progressives globally to help each other and “to impact/influence any other individual and system” toward more-ethical possibilities in effective ways.
Author: Barış Bayram (22 July 2017) — Twitter: @BarisBayram2045
