Quoting the book of Willard Cleon Skouzen "The Naked Communist"
I do not share some of his views, but I consider the book valuable as a characterization of typical communists who have today deeply penetrated Western institutions and are destroying Western values “from within”.
Karl Marx argued that "man's social existence determines his consciousness." Let's look at what kind of existence determined the consciousness of Marxism's chief ideologist.
“(Marx) lives in one of the worst, therefore one of the cheapest, neighborhoods in London. He occupies two rooms. The room looking out on the street is the parlor, and the bedroom is at the back. There is not one clean or decent piece of furniture in either room, but everything is broken, tattered and torn, with thick dust over everything and the greatest untidiness everywhere. In the middle of the parlor there is a large old-fashioned table covered with oilcloth. On it there are manuscripts, books and newspapers, as well as the children’s toys, odds and ends and his wife’s sewing basket, cups with broken rims, dirty spoons, knives and forks, lamps, an ink-pot, tumblers, some Dutch clay-pipes, tobacco ashes—all in a pile on the same table…. But all these things do not in the least embarrass Marx or his wife. You are received in the most friendly way and cordially offered pipes, tobacco and whatever else there may happen to be. Eventually a clever and interesting conversation arises which makes amends for all the domestic deficiencies.”
From Edmund Wilson's book "To the Finland Station", pp. 217-218
If you naively believe that "it was all those vile capitalists who didn't let him live normally," then well, that's the characterization the German communist Otto Rühle gives him:
“Regular work bored him; conventional occupation put him out of humor. Without a penny in his pocket, and with his shirt pawned, he surveyed the world with a lordly air…. Throughout his life he was hard up. He was ridiculously ineffectual in his endeavors to cope with the economic needs of his household and family; and his incapacity in monetary matters involved him in an endless series of struggles and catastrophes. He was always in debt; was incessantly being dunned by creditors…. Half his household goods were always at the pawnshop. His budget defied all attempts to set it in order. His bankruptcy was chronic. The thousands upon thousands which Engels handed over to him melted away in his fingers like snow.”
Ruhle, Otto, "Karl Marx", pp. 383-384
Let's be honest: Karl Marx never worked anywhere, meaning he wasn't involved in any creative activity. His only work was journalism, which today would be considered "leftist," which is precisely what it is.
Marx was a demagogue, parasitizing on his colleague, Engels, who, in turn, parasitized his own father, whom he hated and despised for "exploiting" workers, yet demanded money for his upkeep, part of which he regularly sent to Marx.
Shortly after Marx was expelled from France, Engels sent him all the ready cash in his possession and promised him more: “Please take it as a matter of course that it will be the greatest pleasure in the world to place at your disposal the fee I hope shortly to receive for my English literary venture. I can get along without any money just now, for my governor (father) will have to keep me in funds. We cannot allow the dogs to enjoy having involved you in pecuniary embarrassment by their infamous behavior.”
Watch closely: Engels's daddy was an efficient capitalist who squeezed "surplus value" out of workers, and in the evenings his son wrote tracts on how this class of workers should destroy people like his father.
Incidentally, in 1847, at a conference in Brussels, these two put forward their "Communist manifesto", later published in London as a brochure. Here is a summary of it:
abolition of private property in land and inheritance; introduction of a progressive income tax; confiscation of emigrants' and rebels' property; nationalisation of credit, communication, and transport; expansion and integration of industry and agriculture; enforcement of universal obligation of labour; provision of universal education; and elimination of child labour
If you, reader, are expecting to inherit your parents' apartment, want to use your own car, etc., then don't fool yourself - you definitely don't want communism.
"Enforcement of universal obligation of labour" in the context of Marx himself never being seen as engaged in creative labor is incredibly comical, but... as we know, this slacker didn't create his theory justifying his laziness for that reason, and any of his followers will demagogically outsmart the "capitalist's accomplice" with the words "he is engaged in creative thought" or something similar. In short, the peasant "must" plow the fields, and Marx and his ilk "must" in exchange supply him with the products of their "highly intellectual" labor in the form of the musings of a "bourgeois" lounging idly on a sofa or sitting on the cozy veranda of a city café (which Marx and Engels actually were) about how a peasant should live.
Besides, Karl Marx was a very egocentric and arrogant person, which, again, is evidenced by the communists
“I was eager to hear the words of wisdom that would, I supposed, fall from the lips of so celebrated a man. I was greatly disappointed. What Marx said was unquestionably weighty, logical and clear. But never have I seen any one whose manner was more insufferably arrogant. He would not give me a moment’s consideration to any opinion that differed from his own. He treated with open contempt everyone who contradicted him…. Those whose feelings he had wounded by his offensive manner were inclined to vote in favor of everything which ran counter to his wishes… far from winning new adherents, he repelled many who might have been inclined to support him.”
Ruhle, Otto, Karl Marx, pp. 157-158
Now look at socialist protesters of modern days! Don't you find their behavior pattern familiar?
😃
Well! Let's look at Marx's family
In 1852 his little daughter, Francisca, died. Two years later marked the passing of his young son, Edgar, and two years after that a baby died at birth.
A few paragraphs from a letter written by Mrs. Marx indicates the amazing loyalty of this woman who saw her half-fed children dying around her while their father spent days and nights in the British Museum library.
“Let me describe only one day of this life, as it actually was…. Since wet-nurses are exceedingly expensive here, I made up my mind, despite terrible pains in the breasts and the back, to nurse the baby myself. But the poor little angel drank in so much sorrow with the milk that he was continually fretting, in violent pain day and night. Since he has been in the world, he has not slept a single night through, at most two or three hours. Of late, there have been violent spasms, so that the child is continually betwixt life and death. When thus afflicted, he sucked so vigorously that my nipple became sore, and bled; often the blood streamed into his little mouth. One day I was sitting like this when our landlady suddenly appeared…. Since we could not pay this sum (of five pounds) instantly, two brokers came into the house, and took possession of all my belongings—bedding, clothes, everything, even the baby’s cradle and the little girls’ toys, so that the children wept bitterly. They threatened to take everything away in two hours. (Fortunately they did not.) If this had happened I should have had to lie on the floor with my freezing children beside me...
“Next day we had to leave. It was cold and rainy. My husband tried to find lodging, but as soon as he said he had four children no one would take us. At length a friend helped us. We paid what was owed, and I quickly sold all my beds and bedding in order to settle accounts with the chemist, the baker, and the milkman.”
Ruhle, Otto, Karl Marx, pp. 202-204
Thus the years passed. Literally hundreds of letters were exchanged between Engels and Marx and nearly all of them refer in one place or another to money. Engels’ letters characteristically contain this phrase: “Enclosed is a post office order for five pounds”, while Marx’s epistles are shot through with exasperated passages such as: “My mother has positively assured me that she will protest any bill drawn on her.” “For ten days we have been without a soul in the house.” “You will agree that I am dipped up to my ears in petty-bourgeois pickle.”
At one point in this bitter existence there seemed to be a sudden ray of hope. During a particularly desperate period when Engels could give no relief, Marx made a trip to Holland where a prosperous uncle generously handed him one hundred and sixty pounds. This was enough to put Marx on his financial feet, pay off his debts and give him a new start. But with money in his pocket, Marx decided to take a tour of Germany. He visited his mother in Treves, preceded to Berlin, undertook a number of drinking excursions with his old friends, had himself photographed and generally played the role of a gentleman of leisure. Two months later he returned home. Frau Marx welcomed her tourist husband thinking that now bills could be paid, clothing and furniture could be purchased and better rooms rented. She was horrified to learn that practically nothing remained of the hundred and sixty pounds
I guess this just confirms everything said above🤔
In support of the words that Marx was a very authoritarian leader who did not tolerate any objections:
"What Marx was contemplating was a party purge. The first to feel the force of the new campaign was the German labor leader, Herr von Schweitzer. All students of Marx and Engels seem to agree that both of them were completely without mercy when it came to dealing with a comrade who was marked for party liquidation. The broadside of propaganda which they launched against Schweitzer alleged that he was working for Bismarck, the Iron Man of Germany. Although this was pure fabrication, nothing would have been more devastating to Schweitzer’s reputation. Even today some historians use Marx’s charges as a basis for the claim that Schweitzer was a traitor to the cause of labor.
Another party pillar to fall under the purge was Mikhail Bakunin, the first Russian to become interested in revolutionary activities. He escaped from a Russian prison and had taken up residence in Geneva. Bakunin became so enthusiastic in advocating Marx’s principles that certain elements of the labor movement began gravitating toward his leadership. This was fatal. Marx immediately set out to destroy him. The technique was the same as that used against Schweitzer except that Marx and Engels charged Bakunin with being an agent of the Russian Czar. This had a ruinous effect for awhile. Then they spread a charge which later proved to be completely false—that Bakunin had embezzled 25,000 francs. Finally, to administer the coup de grace, Marx succeeded in getting the International to oust Bakunin from the Association. By this act Marx secretly felt he had destroyed the last man who might seriously threaten his leadership. What Marx did not know was the fact that in spite of this abuse, Bakunin would remain loyal to Marx’s precepts, even translate Marx’s books into Russian and thereby plant seeds which would ultimately bring the first nation in the modern world under a Communist dictatorship...
Bakunin could call Marx the “supreme economic and socialist genius of our day” and then give the following evaluation of Marx, the man: “Marx is egotistical to the pitch of insanity...
“Marx loved his own person much more than he loved his friends and apostles, and no friendship could hold water against the slightest wound to his vanity... Marx will never forgive a slight to his person. You must worship him, make an idol of him, if he is to love you in return; you must at least fear him if he is to tolerate you. He likes to surround himself with pygmies, with lackeys and flatterers. All the same, there are some remarkable men among his intimates. In general, however, one may say that in the circle of Marx’s intimates there is very little brotherly frankness, but a great deal of machination and diplomacy. There is a sort of tacit struggle and a compromise between the self-loves of the various persons concerned; and where vanity is at work there is no longer place for brotherly feeling. Every one is on his guard, is afraid of being sacrificed, of being annihilated. Marx’s circle is a sort of mutual admiration society. Marx is the chief distributor of honours, but is also the invariably perfidious and malicious, the never frank and open, inciter to the persecution of those whom he suspects, or who had the misfortune of failing to show all the veneration he expects. As soon as he has ordered a persecution there is no limit to the baseness and infamy of the method.”
The acid of boiling intolerance which Marx frequently poured down on the heads of his followers may be partially explained by his own complete certainty that the theories he had concocted were infallible gems of cosmic truth."
And a little about the end of his life:
The closing years for Karl Marx were sterile, lonely ones. In abject defeat he turned to the bosom of his family. Always there would be Jenny to give comfort and consolation. But the Marx children bore the scars of their upbringing. When Marx interfered with the courtship of his daughter, Eleanor, she entered a free-love union with Edward Aveling and, following a most wretched existence with him, committed suicide. Another daughter, Laura, married a renegade doctor and later died with him in a suicide pact.
By 1878 Marx had abandoned practically every aspect of his work. His rock-ribbed self confidence had been shattered. Labor leaders ignored him, reformers ridiculed him. His words carried little weight, either at home or abroad.
Thus, his morale was at the breaking point when the toll of time struck down his only kindred spirit outside of Engels—Frau Marx. This gentle, aristocratic and long-suffering companion died of cancer December 2, 1881. Thirteen months later, Marx’s favorite daughter, Jenny, also suddenly died. Thereafter, Engels noted that Marx, the man, was as well as dead. He survived his daughter, Jenny, by only two brief months. On March 14, 1883, at 2:45 in the afternoon, he died while sitting alone in his chair.
Three days later six or seven persons followed the casket of Karl Marx to Highgate cemetery in London and there his one abiding friend, Friedrich Engels, read a funeral oration.
While concocting his parasitic theory, Marx outlived his six children, three of whom died in poverty from exhaustion while he was busy traveling abroad. Tell yourself honestly, what good could this man have come up with? And is his "theory" worthy of the attention that the immature minds of children in Western universities are forcing his works to receive today?
On the pages of this blog, I will continue to periodically return to this book, as well as to the "imperishable work" of the figure under discussion, which I intend to study using the same principle by which I intend to carefully study Mein Kampf. Especially since I am categorically convinced that this literature has much in common and along with Islamism represents the foundation of green-red alliance of present day🤔
