Theos-Talk Archives (October 2001 Message tt00460)

Dallas:

< As far as I was able to ascertain, the system of practical economics 
devised by Marx, etc... was geared purely to the physical existence of man 
(economics of trade) and had nothing of a spiritual base nor any spiritual 
and ethico-moral base. >

Intention is humans conquest of his own essence of a free creator. Human 
soul or self are not considered, but again, it is consistent with 
abandoning of a difference individual/Universe; isolation of some 'special 
parts' is alienation. One have not to agree with him, but deep ontological 
base (and even parallels with eastern thoughts) cannot be denied.

Life in socialism, at least in Yugoslavia was not close to the slavery, 
but, point is elsewhere: difference between Marx's ideas and later practise 
are not smaller than differences between Christ's ideas and Roman Church.

< So why need student of theosophy consider that? >

If you comment my claim that he is 'well worth reading' - simply he is one 
of the most important and influential philosophers, as such he is necessary 
for those who want rounded knowledge of phylosophy and worth reading for 
everyone. There were so many simplifications in media that it is impossible 
to know him without study of very complex original texts, especially early 
works. Surprise is guaranteed. Marx is much harder, more complex and deeper 
thinker than Nietzsche, for example, who is also worth reading without doubt.

---------------------------------

Kazimir Majorinc, Zagreb, Croatia
http://public.srce.hr/~kmajor
M e r c y o f C h a o s