: : I'm not really sure what "supra class" morality means, but I'm guessing it means morality that goes beyond class considerations. If so, then "supra class morality" is yet more convoluted gobbeldygook in support of an ideology which rationalizes oppression of someone -- in this case, the demonic bourgeoisie, or for that matter, anyone who does not agree with Marxism. I sincerely hope that there are brands of socialism and/or communism which transcend this rigid ideological fanaticism.: There are the utopian socialists:
:
: Socialists of this kind...consider themselves far superior to to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the conditions of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class... Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social gospel.(1)
:
:
: Recognize anyone you know?
No, but it sure makes for a good caricature of people. However, since you're obviously implying it's moi, allow me to respond to each charge as presented.
:Socialists of this kind...consider themselves far superior to to all class antagonisms.
That's a hell of an assumption. Let's see if M&E can do better than tell other people what they think:
:They want to improve the conditions of every member of society, even that of the most favored.
Why would the most favored need their conditions improved? If anything, their material position will worsen by necessity as the wealth is spread around. If this ultimately ends up humbling the erstwhile rulers, then I suppose that's an improvement for them, so why begrudge it?
:Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class...
As you are fond of saying, the ruling class does not generally give away its power and privilege voluntarily; hence, this would be a losing strategy and therefore a utopian/socialist would appeal to the rest of society to mobilize together to force a more just and equitable society; in a democracy, this is possible.
:Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary action;
Where is the evidence for this rather ridiculous assertion? Radical political action is how radical reform is achieved.
:they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means,
Aha! In other words, if one doesn't favor slitting the throats of the ruling class, one has therefore abandoned all political action. No wonder the post-Russian Revolution was such a bloody, authoritarian mess.
:and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure,
I don't know how well-off M&E were in their lifetimes, but small improvements, while trivial to the comfortable, are welcomed by those whose lives are improved; there is nothing to stop people from demanding more.
:and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social gospel.
That's an ambiguous finale. Let's anyone fill in the blanks.
: : I will support a system which strives to protect everyone's freedom, extend justice to everyone, and base equality for all under the law. To me, that's a moral system -- none of this "supra class" nonsense, please.
: No 'supra-class nonsense' for you---you want to protect the freedom of this dude, this dude, and this dude.
: _______________
I have a strong suspicion of any ideology which relies on convoluted, seemingly intentionally arcane, rhetoric. As for telling me which dudes' freedoms I want to protect, don't tell me what I think. However, I will fight to protect the liberty of even the wealthiest; this does not conflict with wealth redistribution or a radical restructuring of society -- it only means that I'll blow up any guillotines which the revenge driven seek to erect.
As for being a utopian: guilty as charged. I believe in striving for the best of all possible worlds, even if perfection may never be achieved. Why strive for less (or as you might put it, why think small?).
: Note:
: 1. Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto, International 1948, p. 40.
:
Those two sure had a lot to say.
