Marxism is classic and modern

Classical Marxism arose on the basis of Marx's observations of the early -capitalist society, which is still born in the grave sufferings of the proletariat from the bosom of the feudal society. It relies on the heritage of the society of the departing, decaying and from the last forces trying to continue its existence. The sunset of feudal society is accompanied by a series of social and political revolutions, during which the old system of relations (namely, land rent) becomes only a party, the particular system of relations. Capitalism of the era of "initial accumulation" and social anti -feudal coups - initial capitalism. Such capitalism still uses the human and intellectual resources of the old society and, in general, does not care about the fate of the proletariat - a ruined village and a small bourgeoisie throw out more and more disadvantaged to the labor market. The existence of unemployed, not engaged in social production, is the inevitable side of the life of capitalism, especially the original. Accordingly, the level of development of technology was then quite low, and training did not take any noticeable time. Essentially, a proletarian could be any person forced to endure his ability to work on the labor market and capable of performing monotonous labor operations. The proletarian as a class type, and the antagonistic, irreconcilable classes themselves are characteristic of the becoming industrial society, when the technique in its original forms and property on it (and, accordingly, property of its products) are a decisive factor in public life. Market relations undermine the relations of dominance-subordination and the patriarchal way of public life. Therefore, Marx decisive considered the political economy of the goods and the future of the company believed in a change in property of the means of production - equipment and raw materials. Labor was also a product.

Modern society has already taken on education and the training of a specialist for its own production. And this preparation is no longer so much a product as a service, and the product becomes not so much a thing as a formed form of service. Here, the decisive time becomes not spent, but the quality of the service provided. Thus, the very principle of dominance of market relations is subjected to a revision - the exchange is carried out primarily by the quality of the service and secondly - in terms of the cost of working time, on which the service depends quite a little, since the work is practically not in the forms of directly satisfying the needs, needs and whims of a person who accepts the service. Thus, through the dominance of the provision of services, capitalism began to rely on its own human and intellectual material, on its own anthropological factor and took full responsibility for society on all floors of public life, gave rise to or transformed in its own interests a layer of small bourgeoisie and intellectuals - the middle class, its genuine gravetor along with layers of the proletariat, which has become a working class and integrated In the middle class. The latter consists of independent agents of public life, capable of providing a service to all other members of society on the basis of highly qualified professional and intelligent labor. The main trend of changes in this area leads to more and more intensifying positions of managers who are truly managing the enterprise, or "capitalists", more and more in the forms of classes becoming managers. The tops of the workers and the "bottoms" of the capitalists are becoming more and more become middle -class members, and such a society can be called "heterogeneous." A heterogeneous society is a system of exchange of activity and, above all, services. The bureaucracy - an alternative to a to a heterogeneous society based on the "composition" of services - can integrate into such a society insofar as it depends on the main not on power relations, but on the intellectual component of their work. Essentially, a heterogeneous society is an alternative to a bureaucratized and therefore corrupt company.

Services are an integral act and do not depend on time in principle. However, this is not characteristic of an industrial society, but for a post -industrial society. In an industrial society, the transformation of value (the amount of labor embodied in the product) into the market value is still beginning, which undermined the principle of exchange at the cost and gave rise to a monopolistic price, which is always higher than the cost. The latter remains the role of an incentive to exchange labor within the framework of a separate enterprise. And this is a direct path to a post -industrial society in which the exchange of services dominates. Thus, the political economy of capitalism is blown up in its very basis - but it only seems. The entire system of commodity -money relations in the tendency, in principle, rotates around the value of the objective or endless working time. Another thing, working time is now not an abstraction, but the fruit of the service provided to the employee in the process of his education, training and leisure and the employee himself in his own work.

The industrial and then post -industrial society are built on denial and - at the same time - maintaining its own premise. Therefore, Marxov’s political economy is “removed”, but not the disappearing moment of later forms of commodity society. During crises or retrograde development of the capitalist society, its own prerequisites are actualized as systemic factors. Already an industrial society, which is influenced by commodity-high relations, is being built on an attempt to overcome the "rough" capitalism of the early stages of its development. However, these initial forms are preserved not only in the “removed” form, but also on the periphery of industrial civilization - in the so -called “third world”. Here, the political economy of early capitalist relations dominates. As the Roman Empire died under the burden of the barbar periphery, which for a long time supplied its slaves, so the Golden Billion system is cracking from the invasion of migrant workers, which the post -industrial economy cannot integrate, since they ensure the functioning of the prerequisites for the industriality - the industrial sector, since not all in the system in the system bourgeois society is amenable to modernization to the modern level. Traces of the system of relations described by Marx in Capital are clearly visible throughout the architectonics of the post -industrial society.

In a similar way in the field of the ideology of the adepts of capitalism, the desire to overcome the ideology of Marxism is clearly noticeable - they all remain within the framework of the ideology of the capitalist society, and only the manifestation of bourgeois views through them gives the basis for the question of their authenticity. The fact is that the bourgeois relations, apparently, are a general historical achievement and more unsettled from social life. They subjugate previously prevailing land relations and themselves become a special case of just outstanding post -industrial relations, the characteristic features of which are the knowledge economy, information technology, a heterogeneous society and the exchange of services in turning money into credit funds. The post -industrial society is characterized by a new stage of human individualization. Already early capitalism is characterized as a society of isolated individuals, however, the forms of class identity are preserved, which allowed some Marxists to talk about "masses" as the basis of historical development. Later, the forms of corporate identity, the association of an individual employee with the corporation as the basis of his work in his social significance arise and develop. In general, individualization was presented as a kind of suffering state, but this is due to the fact that it is carried out to the end and the preservation of non -free, forced forms of integration into a social whole seems to be social "atomism". It was such capitalism that was the object of observation of Marx and expressed in the concept of alienation. Early capitalist individualism and alienation are preserved under socialism in the sense that individualization has not been completed and the preservation of community is not a matter of free choice of a person. Post -industrialism inevitably leads to the final individual of a person and his free choice of his fate as a personal revolution in a person’s whole life. Unlike the classical Marxism, an individual person is not “a combination of all social relations”, but their source and basis - these are the original prerequisites for the modern Marxism. Under these conditions, a single ideology becomes impossible and ultimately harmful, since the variety of fate and skills of people will level, which negatively affects the exchange of services. Another thing is metaeology, a classic example of which is Marxism. Bourgeois ideologies arise and develop quite “according to Marx” (however, Marxism itself is an ideology originated in the bowels of a bourgeois society in the early stages of its transformation into an independent formation), are generated by the observation and sympathy of the poverty and oppression of the proletariat. Therefore, the highest example of the new, which is replacing the capitalism of the Communist Society, is the idea that the earthly goods are “flooded” and everything will be without money or other equivalent. Essentially, spiritual needs are reduced (more precisely, reduced), moreover, Marxism itself, while he himself needed development in the direction of improving social relations based on ideological freedom, only the threshold of which is Marxism. To turn classical Marxism, a reflection of poverty and lawlessness, into a universal means - this is not dogmatism ... and overcoming the poverty of material is not the ultimate goal - this is the lesson of classical Marxism to the modern Marxism.

The history of socialism is also an attempt to overcome capitalism with which all bourgeois, essentially urban in the way of emergence and functioning of the relationship were identified. For socialism, the inevitability was a constant intense confrontation of bourgeois relations and, in particular, capitalist manifestations. All attempts to cast socialism on their own grounds were undermined by the natural desire of people for freedom, which required the constant tension of the punitive apparatus and ideological services. It is impossible to imagine otherwise in a society based on compulsory redistribution and alienation from ownership of both material and intellectual. It can exist until the material and human resources of a denied society are exhausted.

The modern bourgeois society is largely built on the accounting of the lessons of socialism, taking into account the danger of preserving poverty, leading to revolutionary shocks and changing the regime of property and state power. Poverty in modern society in the West is generally overcome, and this is a significant influence of competition with a socialist camp. Rich layers chose to share an income, and not lose everything. The promise of the "society of mass welfare" has become a large reality. However, this was carried out due to the export of poverty to the countries of the "third world". As for the zones of this world and for the zones of the industrial society within the post -industrial society, Marxism is relevant even in its classical form. The zone of post -industrial society is the zone of action of the modern Marxism.

The post -industrial society with its dominance of information technologies leads from inhibition of commodity exchange to oppression in sign form - the symbolic domination is more significant - the iconic consumption of material goods, inaccessible to other sections of the population, the formation of the discourse of power as not only domination, but also symbolic rule over people. This is expressed as a kind of “surplus dominating” over people of the ruling elite and is carried out whether they themselves want the rule themselves or do not want to. Such is the reverse side of the information society - each act of communication implies the preservation of power over information resources, and the power itself largely becomes the function of the distribution of information. Without the media, there is no modern government. Accordingly, this is also reflected in the ideology of various segments of the population, since and how much they serve various social groups. From the political economy of the goods to the "political economy" of the sign - this is the main path of modern civilization. On the basis of sign systems, ideologies of various social groups are formed. Marx also wrote about the reverse influence of ideologies on economic life. In modern society, it (with the help of power) is becoming more and more significant. Accordingly, more and more layers of society are integrated into a capitalist society. The "silent majority" is quite integrated into the center of modern civilization, and its ideology is clearly visible in blockbusters and series.

The post -industrial society increasingly puts on ideology as a way of functioning of modern society. Modern Marxism should expose all these ideologies as ways to stabilize the capitalist society insofar as it distorts the natural social basis of any society, elementary social relations. Marxism, in essence, is a system of views on society from the point of view of transistoric human relations in society - whether it is pre -industrial systems, industrial or post -industrial systems. The latter rely on urban, bourgeois relations in overcoming capitalism, historically private and overcome as a dominant system with the preservation of their creature. Post -industrial society - overcoming imperialism as the dominant system of society. However, the main ideological systems lag behind this process - a critical theory is necessary, and modern Marxism should become a leader in a rethinking of the role of capitalism and its future.

The decisive side of modern Marxism is the transition from the analysis of the society of consumption and production of goods and relations - to the production and self -production of a spiritually rich, comprehensively developed person and the dominance of spiritual over the property and material, the dominance of the communicator over communication, the predominance of universal and transistoric over private and temporary. This means the formation within the framework of society and beyond its scope of his own life philosophy, the personal ideology of each person. Historically, the worldview passes the forms of mythological, religious, scientific and - this era is just beginning - the actual philosophical worldview. The formation of the worldview of each person on the basis of the uniqueness of his place in the world, history and society should not be based on the uncritical acceptance of existing doctrines, but on critical theory, one of the most striking examples of which Marxism is us. At the same time, overcoming classical Marxism as the ideology of the proletariat and the idol of the intelligentsia and its transformation into a critical theory is also carried out. Personal philosophy, ideology - the continuation of Lenin’s work at a new stage, the introduction of self -awareness is no longer into the masses, but to their maximum component, in every person. In essence, this is not only a “personal” coup, but also a personal coup, often, although in a cut form, experienced by a person at various stages of her life. It is necessary to overcome the fear of individuals in modern society and the flight to the community. Modern Marxism is the completion of the path from the dominance of classes and social groups to the dominance of personalities over the natural and social circumstances of their life, overcoming them into transistoric and hypersocial. At the same time, classical Marxism becomes historically, socially and intellectually - a special case of modern Marxism.