Originally published in revista 22.
Have been fulfilled, on May 5, 192 years since the birth of Marx. Marxism not only left us, but in recent decades, and especially after the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, headed by so-called, one of the most interesting phenomena we could find was a greater interest for Marxism.
Marxism was born in Western and Central Europe, but has grown to be re-presented with an essentially Russian doctrine. In one way or another, the entire continent had to take note of the forecast and promises full of hopes from the Communist Manifesto, published in 1848, but having as object the what does not yet exist, it must be properly settled on socialist Manifesto.
Marx and Engels, then their followers launched an appeal, promising (very vaguely) the establishment of a company that did not exist anywhere, but what was the date as a very secure future reality. They used the existing terminology and took over and processed an arsenal developed by national Socialists that they regarded with contempt "overthrow" or belonging to an infantile stage of true socialism (communism) excogitat.
Rule out the idea of class struggle
From the beginning, when you're trying to get close to the history of Marxism, did impressive national confusion, nejustificati, ambiguity and confusion: "socialism" and "communism", "exploitation" and "class struggle", "bourgeoisie" and "proletariat" are not inventions of the two intemeietori, but rather of their opponents.
One of the most striking errors was to present their valid solutions as universal, although the world and even in the West, there were very important States filed living from the rural economy and even in slavery.
Danubian Principalities was the case, some State units under Turkish suzerainty, but they pastrasera a certain autonomy. This was not the case of Serbia, Bulgaria, Albania, Bosnia, Montenegro-Greece's situation being very special. Both they and their pastrasera moldo-Wallachians and yet an elite social, economic and cultural purposes which, paradoxically, for thinking will put marxista in the forefront of all movements of autonomy, emancipation and liberation. In short, the whole process of domestication and integration in the world movement started here from top to bottom, not from the "popular masses" (pleonastic is expressed as marxistii) but from an elite an inexorably unique constraint of nothing but them. The huge rural population Fund produced revolution, but only razmerite or disorder during wars or exceptional moments already inflicted by others.
If the Greeks is more significant and more striking, as they considered the Romanian Principalities (in some measure and Transylvania under the Habsburg empire) some privileged areas, menajate gate, which he provided with grain and raw materials. The Greeks dominated especially in the last part of this administration, and their Principalities and settled here the starting point of the revolution initiated by the Eteria, with promise for local ca, in case of victory, they will succumb to the Dominion of tarisoare.
While in the West the revolution is part of the proletariat and bourgeoisie-equation (i.e. owners of means of production or bankers) or latifundiari, imbogatiti or speculanti seniors recently upon us, Vanguard posed no negustorimea or small and medium acting on an almost feudal, but very low country elite, composed of latifundiari (political) up to date with what's happening in Europe, people of high culture. Between them they have lacked high ecleziasti with the rank of Bishop and priests, but more small fighting for faith (Zach in bulgareste).
The huge force of the Ottoman Empire could not be covarsita or neutralizata only through a much wider movement, of all ethnicities subject to them, but also of the peoples of the proletarial (unknown marxisti), category in which subordinates were not only Greeks but also Armenians, Italians and Jews of the Habsburg empire.
The revolutionary movements at least reformist effects, which have been kept in chains since the beginning of the 19th century and with various results were turned on mostly by elite, in any case workers (Marx, in his view, be considered a botched "class") and even fewer workers-a word for effect, stuck up today as an anachronism in the motto (slogan) left parties.
The most significant phenomenon is that the revolution started in Bucharest's most reactionara country in Europe, Russia, civilized and was illustrated by "decembristi". Greek revolution has brought to light a personality like Lord Byron, a Polish insurrection of personalities, from Chopin to Adam Mickiewicz, and plenty of princesses who have invaded Paris, despite the ideas that made them marxistii about psychology class.
Action Etaireía (protected at first by the Czar of all the Russias) was active on the iconic type and Alexandru Ipsilanti, family fanariota, but with roots in the Danubian Principalities, and Prince Gh. Cantacauzino, Russian general, in Moldova. Finally, when the Greeks achieved independence a part of Greek territory, the first President of the new State was former Chancellor of Capodistria, the Tsar Empire.
Danubian Principalities in progress "up down" is a constant phenomenon, thereby contradicting the thesis of Marx, preserved in spite of evident till the last moments of propaganda. The idea that nobility is a priori conservative class and the bourgeoisie was more revolutionary, but the proletariat, giving birth, and put only streangul throat, it's a neadevar so shrill that it would compromise any sociologist or historiographer of minimum professional honesty what would sustain it.
Our situation and to several European countries does not constitute an exception, but only one that flatly refute Marx's assumptions about class struggle, as well as about the existence of the classes which he strictly and rigidly delineated see, rather like caste.
Rule out the idea of class
In his capacity as an ideologue, Marx ignores the reality and consider in generalities and preconceptions. As a follower of Hegel, he nesocotea particularul, which is the defining characteristic of homo, humanus from the deepest Antiquity.
Of course, the real science is General. The idea of this, formulated since Plato, Marx led to disregard of the main characteristics of the phenomenon of charge, committing an error ab initio with consequences for him and for his entire posterity. Because if people there are traits common to indenegabile, just as there are differences. This makes into a family not to look like brothers to each other, not only through somatic or facial features, but that fire, temperament, skills, ideals towards culture and intellectual. In a bourgeois family, considered the overall classification-enthusiasts, there may be a member that meet the definition of defamatory to Marx, namely hraparet, profiteering, speculator, dishonest, and another who is content with his condition, which reap reasonable image gave him the fate and lives in a otiu without pretensions. Another is a fussy and a fancy, an adventurer, a free-lance journalist with the taste of risk, willing to live life "pericolosamente" as Mussolini thought it would be better to make all Italians (when, in fact, they were most inclined toward moderation, though not to the mess).
One of the girls in the family above mentioned physical and ment, will launch into life movement in order to overcome the condition, another one will please to be a factor of domestic happiness, anyway, the last giving up all the Beatitudes and becomes delusional nun.
The variability of this observable by anyone in the way most frequently in all environments more developed a society starts to human freedom and demonstrated against instincts, I mean the animalitatii of it. Marx and his followers, but also previous Socialists, fought until over human sociability disfigurement (which between certain limits is something real), but spurned devianti's which can be and look forward to more, but there are those inventive, geniuses, charismatic characters, determining human society, which is nothing but a pack of wolves or a colony of termites.
More curious is the fact that contradictory and one "utopian Socialists" were declared pacifisti and claimed that once the class struggle will disappear due to the fierce private or private ownership, will install an eternal peace, no antagonistic conflicts. But history has always proven the opposite. Masses in suppression of freedom were left in wars and m. in an inner conflictualism that starts, if not with Adam and Eve, surely with Cain and Abel, the conflict between hunters and predation, aventurismul agitatilor agrarianismul expansionisti and sedentary. Since the deepest Antiquity, was seen as possibly fratricidal wars battles are the most cruel and immoral.
Rule out the conditions required for the installation of socialism
The author of these lines is not a scientist, a specialist in issues that we propose here the discussion of situations that they evoke, but a writer of imagination and, in second grade, a writer and an amateur artistic world. Marxism and socialism, with the prospect of communism, were felt by him not only as a disaster but as an intrusion because of our country's labour infrangerii in World War II. In any way totalitarian project not a direction of development and progress that would have called for continued.
In all Eastern European States, made gift from the Russians through peace treaties from 1946, rounded with the Geneva Agreement, installed an unprecedented policy of these countries in the past, be it very dramatically. They had to adapt, with the hope of an improvement after Stalin's death and the dezghetul that followed. Despite predictions of Marx's socialism was installed and in an excerpt from Louis J. Elteto, Mongolia, and in german, and agrariana in China, and overwhelming Albania, miserable but also in Czechoslovakia ultraindustrializata. What followed has been recorded in many variants.
Experience of socialism is incomunicabila
The collapse of communism in the SOVIET UNION, Romanian-born playwright Eugène Ionesco commented on happy event, but he sneaked a crucial observation: "Communism was a pungasie!". Because, indeed, he was not just a doctrine and a wrong ideology, as can be (and have been) more, but a gigantic fraud on the scale, an attempt to address morality, not only to address the logic and reason.
The author of these lines is not a qualified specialist in the problem and proposed a discussion here, but a writer of imaginative literature, which has discouraged to say the word, and on the contrary. Because the issue of communism was for him the first living experience that only subsequently or after a while he tried to explain and refute the arguments on and i put them on hand all unusual and unfortunate to experience life. It is a situation in which there are those who even in our country have borne the brunt of the Communist at an age when they could judge.
The moment the girl, they left very few in number and make negative judgements upon what Marxism can hardly be out of reach of most young people. From the very beginning I will say that the experience of living in a totalitarian regime, especially the social democratic incomunicabila is, because none of the tiraniile of the past did not have means of compulsion and mystification of the two comparable socialisme.
Apart from this, the countries of the Russian lands, but also those who voluntarily relinquished challenges the regime (Albania, Cuba, China, North Korea) have a past history of convulsive, but have lived in totalitarian regimes, which makes the totalitarian experience truly unique and so hard calificabila. BA some of them have lived even in liberal democratic regimes (Czechoslovakia, Romania, Poland, part of the former german Reich). It was impossible that tens of millions of people not to keep the memory of those times and reflexes of some citizens who have known even with intermittent freedom, not what happened in the middle ages with the bondsman or slaves in Antiquity the most civilized.
And yet, to me limited to our country, which had for a hundred years one of the most liberal political regimes in the world, after the release in 1989, the world was not turned towards the past, but recently it toward nonliberale formulas: nationalism, authoritarianism and egalitarianism and anachronistic taranism. It is also the result of the fact that the immense majority of new actanti have rural origins are the pride of this cause.
The role of the political element
This pride but has no justification. For that, I have said it many times, rural table was never a provocative of democracy. To us through artful, sacrificandu-reform is always an economic factor, gave "the serfdom was abolished" after 1920 a small poor seniors living in primitive conditions and developed a civilization of its own, and while some in the tangent with the façade. Peasant State but there was never anywhere.
Romania has been under this aspect a negation of Marx's assumptions, but especially to his paneconomiste claims. What mattered to us in all the crucial moments was not economic, but political, namely in action well inspired an elite. It has approved some of the proven success of political actions always from top to bottom, and for the people, but not run by the latter.
Rule out another aspect of paneconomismului, this time in the form of centralized planning claims, is the fact that communism existed a market economy clandestinely. There were brilliant speculanti with the name "bisnitari" (incorrect deformation of his retail fashion), millions of people who received supplemented incomes on horses through "criminalised" attention, "" gifts, "little understanding" especially in the service sector, neglected by dogmatic thinking marxista. And, from the economic point of view, our country has been for four decades the model most clearly by the failure of Marxism. The Communist regime, as I said as soon as I could, I mean after the release of the December 1989 was one absurd, contradictory, inconsistent. For this reason, he leaves a margin of neutrality period as some oases, where stiffness is more relax. And take advantage of it all, even the police special armed forces policy of "workers" in security and militia.
* * *
The fruit of these sad experiences was for me a publishing of which I selected documents with some historical value: history, politics, literature in 1997, freedom Pro in 1999 and all for freedom, in 2003, therefore, about a decade after issue. These essays, scattered in various publications, without the desired coherence of me, yet the idea of a guideline which i remained faithful and which today, unfortunately, in a too small extent, won the world issued by communism.
All by myself above were facts of life, lived by me, not logical deductions on the basis of documents or books to lead to understanding. This is precisely the reverse process in which we assist those elderly with consternation, today.
