|
| Ottmar Hörl and his Marx men (© Der Spiegel) |
In a TIME article, Marx's Revenge: How Class Struggle Is Shaping the World, I found Marx's statement: Accumulation of wealth on one pole is at the same time accumulation of misery, the agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole. Without describing the article's content, and given that we are still far from workers of the world uniting and even further from a dictatorship of the proletariat, we may still ask how those who govern us can ensure fairer economic opportunities.
The gap between the rich and the poor has been widening in recent years. In the
1970s, the wealthiest 10% of Americans earned 33% of the total income. By
2007, the percentage had increased to 49.7%, to nearly half. In Germany, where
in the 1960s nobody imagined such a development, the situation seems worse. In
2004, the wealthiest 10% earned 49% of total income, a figure that rose to
53% in 2008.
On April 24, I published a blog about our revolutionary hike from Günterstal to Freiburg's town hall. I mentioned Freiburg's Social Democrat MP Gernot Erler, who, on that occasion, traced the combination of the words "social" and "democracy" back to 1849. Ernst Elsenhans wrote them in the newspaper of Fort Rastatt, Der Festungs-Bote. It was No. 10, published near the end of the Baden Revolution on July 18, 1849, and was titled "Was ist und was will die soziale Demokratie?" (What is social democracy, and what is its aim?). I read the article and was stunned by one paragraph:
Die Demokratie an sich wird uns weder Arbeit noch Brod geben, sie wird unsere fälligen Zinsen nicht zahlen, sie wird uns nicht von Sorgen und Leiden befreien, denn sie stößt bei Lösung ihrer Aufgabe, das Volk zur Herrschaft zu bringen, stets auf das Mißverhältnis des Eigenthums, des Besitzes. Diese Ungleichheit, dieses Mißverhältnis sucht nun der Sozialismus durch Herstellung der Gleichheit herzustellen ... Die Vertheilung der Güter soll nach dem Verlangen der Sozialisten von der Arbeit abhängig gemacht und dadurch die möglichste Gleichheit unter den Menschen erzielt, es soll jedem fleißigen, ordentlichen und geschickten Mann Gelegenheit verschafft werden, so viel Besitz zu erwerben, als zu einem vernünftigen Genuß des Lebens nötig ist ... (Democracy alone will give us neither jobs nor bread, it will not pay the interest on our debts, it will not liberate us from sorrows and sufferings for when trying to bring the people to power it always stumbles against the disproportion of property, of possession. Socialism seeks to address this disproportion by creating equality ... According to socialists, the distribution of goods shall depend on work. Thereby, the best possible equality among people shall be achieved. Each hardworking, decent, industrious man shall have the opportunity to acquire sufficient property to assure him a reasonable enjoyment of life...)
For Ernst Elsenhans, socialism does not mean dispossession or leveling down, but rather that every person should earn their living through work. In addition,
remuneration shall be more than just sufficient to survive. The text is
burning hot for my country, where unemployment is low, but many a man or woman
needs two jobs to earn his/her living or to depend on, while working, additional
government money supplements. The victims are young people, single parents and
their children, and old people with insufficient old-age pensions. This is a
social scandal in a country like Germany.
Like Ottmar Hörl, I want to encourage you to rethink Marx, and would like to add: How deep a shade of red do you like for your miniature Marx man?
**
On April 24, I published a blog about our revolutionary hike from Günterstal to Freiburg's town hall. I mentioned Freiburg's Social Democrat MP Gernot Erler, who, on that occasion, traced the combination of the words "social" and "democracy" back to 1849. Ernst Elsenhans wrote them in the newspaper of Fort Rastatt, Der Festungs-Bote. It was No. 10, published near the end of the Baden Revolution on July 18, 1849, and was titled "Was ist und was will die soziale Demokratie?" (What is social democracy, and what is its aim?). I read the article and was stunned by one paragraph:
Die Demokratie an sich wird uns weder Arbeit noch Brod geben, sie wird unsere fälligen Zinsen nicht zahlen, sie wird uns nicht von Sorgen und Leiden befreien, denn sie stößt bei Lösung ihrer Aufgabe, das Volk zur Herrschaft zu bringen, stets auf das Mißverhältnis des Eigenthums, des Besitzes. Diese Ungleichheit, dieses Mißverhältnis sucht nun der Sozialismus durch Herstellung der Gleichheit herzustellen ... Die Vertheilung der Güter soll nach dem Verlangen der Sozialisten von der Arbeit abhängig gemacht und dadurch die möglichste Gleichheit unter den Menschen erzielt, es soll jedem fleißigen, ordentlichen und geschickten Mann Gelegenheit verschafft werden, so viel Besitz zu erwerben, als zu einem vernünftigen Genuß des Lebens nötig ist ... (Democracy alone will give us neither jobs nor bread, it will not pay the interest on our debts, it will not liberate us from sorrows and sufferings for when trying to bring the people to power it always stumbles against the disproportion of property, of possession. Socialism seeks to address this disproportion by creating equality ... According to socialists, the distribution of goods shall depend on work. Thereby, the best possible equality among people shall be achieved. Each hardworking, decent, industrious man shall have the opportunity to acquire sufficient property to assure him a reasonable enjoyment of life...)
|
| Der Festungs-Bote No 10 of July 8, 1849 |
Like Ottmar Hörl, I want to encourage you to rethink Marx, and would like to add: How deep a shade of red do you like for your miniature Marx man?
|
| Marx monument in Berlin (© Andreas Höfert†) |



No comments:
Post a Comment