section 1 {Marx in our time}

Given that some would believe that Nostradamus predicted the WTC attack, and the election of George W Bush with "village idiot will be king", it is certainly easy to agree that Marx predicted the Asian economic meltdown and a host of other historical events. While we have our reservation about such claims, it is nevertheless useful to review his relevance to our times.

The starting point of Marxism is philosophy, specifically Hegel's theory of the dynamics of ideas: a thesis is opposed by an antithesis, until a new idea containing both emerges, the synthesis, which then starts a new round of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Marx replaced ``idea" by ``social force" resulting in a theory of class struggle: the ruling class with an ideology based on economic interest is opposed by the oppressed class, until a new ruling ideology emerges to preside over a different kind of society. Because his theory has its roots in philosophy and logic, Marx considered it scientific and indeed inevitable, hence the name ``scientific socialism", in contrast to the earlier utopian socialism for improving the condition of society. The supposedly scientifically based conviction that history is on their side has always been an inspirational motif for his followers.

As theories go, Marxism is neither good philosophy, nor good economics, nor good political science, nor even the best kind of sociology, but it is far better in providing an analysis of the shortcomings of capitalism: in striving to maximize profit, capitalists constantly invest in better technology and higher productivity, until production exceeds the limits imposed by the resources and needs of society, and has to be cut back resulting in widespread unemployment, which further reduces consumption and causes even more unemployment... Hence, capitalism suffers periodic recessions and depressions. Further, competition between capitalist nations for markets and resources, in order to support their expanding production, leads to conflict, including wars, and economic bankruptcies for the weaker competitors.

The world wars and great depression of the earlier half of the 20th century, and the sudden collapse of the Asian economic miracle near the end of the millennium, show that the analysis still has its potency, and the search for the capitalism antithesis did get somewhere. However, in the ``synthesis" aspect Marx has come up empty. His prediction of a new classless society of unselfish individuals, who will collectively control capital without the profit motive of the capitalists, has been shown to be as utopian as the earlier ideas, indeed much more harmful in its consequences. By breeding an inflexible world view together with a ``scientific" disregard for spiritual values, and hence a ruthless willingness to use all unscrupulous means to achieve heaven on earth, Marxism has produced some of the most destructive political movements of this century, both following it and in opposition to it.

Yet, regardless of its lack of success as a practical political system, Marxism remains one of the most important undercurrents of modern thinking. Like Einstein's relativity, which too has few direct uses but forms an integral part of modern physics and scientific awareness, Marx's way of looking at history and society permeates, like it or not, through the way we see things. Today we automatically link economics with politics, and think of individuals in terms of their class consciousness. Constantly and nervously, the ruling class looks over its shoulder to see if some ideas of the lower class need to be ``synthesized" and neutralized before it starts to cause big trouble. Whereas living off one's capital and not having to work used to be the mark of the gentleman, today that would be embarrassing, and even the richest people would make an effort at something and try to be some kind of worker rather than a mere capitalist.

In short, we are all Marxists.