Marxistphilosophyand itsfollowers (the Frankfurt School and so on) engaged in solving systemic problems. Philosophyfollowed thepolicy, and was intended to promotesolution of humanexistentialproblems. But all thinkingremainedwithin the constraints of unnaturalness, while thingswere oftenaddressed by furtherdeparture fromtraditionalrules andnaturalmechanisms –market and democracy.The ideaof the lostunitywas irrational at times.These conceptshad partialeffect,butdid not capturethe essence – elevation ofman above natural principles.Deeper knowledge was prevented by structural separation,whichfor a timewas only representedin somelayers (classes).There was adistinction ofupper classesthat have alreadyadopted thedisjunctionfrom the lower onesthat stillexhibit certainaspectof belonging.This ledto the conceptof certain „proletarian solidarity“, which was instrumentalin structuralcombat, but importance of which was overestimated by thinkers.Marx’smainmistakewas inrelyingon a perfect man, irrational allegiances andmisunderstanding of features of natural mechanisms of market and democracy.Its activityhas led to completerejectionof capitalism; it was not understoodthat naturalmechanismsin then historicalversion of capitalism do not have conditionsto thrive and cannot actuallydevelop.Laterdevelopment ofdemocracy overcame Marx. On the contrary,rejectionof democracyand marketby communist regimecreatedanomicsociety in whichit was necessary toseverely restrictthe freedom to make it workat all.Belief indialectics andinability to understand the closenessanddeterminative nature ofnaturalprincipleswithin whichdialecticsdoes not applyhad tragicconsequences.Marx’sideas usually entirelyunnecessarilyreappear whendemocracydysfunctions andthere are no rulesthat wouldset parameters forthe market.Marx’s theoryis ratheruseless,one can onlylearn fromsome of the ideas. One of them is the theoryof alienation.
Hegelalreadynoticed(see71)some kind ofseparationof man fromhisvitalcharacteristics anddetachment, which in turnmeantexternalization, transfer of himselfto the outside world. Marxargued that in capitalism, one can notappropriate this externalisedthisaspect of himselfdeprivedof his personality.This “I” consisted ofthe senseof belonging to a groupandcertainnaturallife of man. This “I” was uprooted by capitalism (means to make a living belong to someone else, everything issomething elsethan what it seems to be,my activityis usedfor something elsethan I want…).Habermas(see71)saysthat man under the influence ofthe systemdeviates fromhis „living world“. Thefirstcriticises thevisibleenemy –capitalismasamodelsystembased on market economy.Capitalismhas itsdevelopment phases (see 74);inthe last one it is actually atotallyruling regime, because natural market mechanism favors thewelathy andthey are also eventually in control of the state apparatus.Such a systemis obviouslywrong anddiscontinuous, because state apparatusshouldbe dominated bydemocracy and superior to market.In fact,historicallywe can see thatcapitalism isthe worse, the moredistortedthe naturalmarket mechanisms anddemocracy are and the greater is itsdirectivity–that is, eitherin administration, or rule ofmonopolies andmobstersand state-related corporations.
Market mechanismmay or may notsupport artificialityand disjunction.Currently,this is the casebecause its character is Keynesianand itis based onwaste, destruction of environment, and excessiveresource depletion.At the same time it consumesman through pursuit ofsuccess andachievements and does not allowhimto developdifferentlyand performhis naturalobligations towardthe human race. Critique ofclassicsforsuch a scheme isin fact substantial, except for some weedandfallibleopinions.But evenordinaryclassical liberalism,in which small family businessescompete witheach other, mostly madenecessary utilitiesthat people would buy without bring forced; whenpeople had certainself-sufficiency, were not dependenton globalmarket,presents a completelydifferent picture of sustainable society based on themarket(of course,we musttakeinto accountthenlowermaterialstatus).
Butclassicsof socialisttheories did not think timelesslybut wantedliberationof man from working for thecapitalists. They wantedfree-choicework, butin an unnaturalsociety wherea person wouldwork either under the direction ofthe communistcamarilla, or will only dofree-choice work(and be rewardedaccording to his needs). The first example, of course, provides noliberation (opposite is true) and the other isunnatural, because man loseshis naturalskillsand graduallydeclines.
The flaw of theabovetheoriesof alienation isfirst of allreductiononly to certainphenomena thatseem to beat any given timesociallysignificant, andmisconceptionsabout human nature. This thenleads to the ideathat alienationcan be overcome by liberation(release) of man from therules andfrom the system(capitalism) and through his returnto the natural(environmental) world.Becausewriters andapologistsof these theoriesare inunder the impression of ideasabout a perfectman, they believe that sucha liberated person willnot onlybe happy, but also good.In fact,man isimperfect,can not existwithout order(see previoussection)andliberation (release) from the orderleadsto chaosand discontinuity.Thisliberationis often maximized,morphsintodisjunction from thetraditional order, which ensured function of familiesand communities,and in generalall vitalnaturalrules,and thusdisrupt thenatural life.Then, paradoxically, itiscaptivated bythe market systembecause it is the only one with clear rules and is capable of providing regulationsto people. Alternatively it has to be substituted bytotalitarianism.The whole problemis solvedonly via these two reducedsubjects that change turnsand returnand people only dedicate themselvesto them.The most important thing is that people in bothsubjectsbegin to freethemselves from all theburdensof life and begin to createtheories that arefoolishin termsoffunction of society and responsibilityfor the future. Nevertheless they will pursue them doggedly, and push the substitutes in boththemes;becausethey are part ofa pleasantand irresponsiblelife anddo not recognizethatthey are thecause of the crisis, because they would haveto change their lives.Struggle forliberationfrom the burdenof the generalorderends with the liberation(release) from naturalness(by stating this I am not rejectingstruggle forregime change). Liberation (release) andalienationboth include the conceptof separation (disjunction),because they both comefrom the same source, and often cannot bedistinguished from each other. To position these two terms against each other was mostly done mostlyteleologicdriven by politicalagenda.
Examples ofliberationcreatingalienationmaybe the storyof family breakdown: Liberation(release) of women and men frominterdependencewithin a family led to liberation from materialdependence through independent economic activity; liberation (release) from the division of laborwithin the family,liberation (release) from the traditional order; all this stronglysupportsalienation:inabilityto start a family, divorce, poor education of children, and targetedinfertility.Thesedeleteriouseffects did not ocurrby themselves,but their existencehas emergedwith the idea ofliberation (release) of manfrom everything, what ispossible.Liberation(release) from the interests ofsociety and thetraditional ordercausesestrangementof people:not connectedby sharedgoals the only goals that remain theindividualonesthat are rather mutually competitive in nature.Arbitrariness(free willwithoutrestraints by thesystem), which is in the backgroundof Marxistideas ofa classless societyand on which the society should be based, isthe basis of „free-choice labor without coercion„. If everrealized, it eventually leadsto loss ofhuman abilities andresponsibility.Surelymyopponentswillarguethat there are casesthat donot supportthis causalrelationship, but as far as know they willargueeitherminoritycases ortheories ofthe „perfectman“,which, however,can not be proved.
Objective of liberation– freedom andequalityof manis only meaningfulin social relations that promote natural mechanismsof market anddemocracy.These are mainlyall formsof freedomand equality thatserve the interests ofa democraticsociety, and thusthe participation ofindividualson power.Furthermore, it is freedomof creativity andequality of opportunity.Another kind ofequality canbesupportive or have partialmeaning,butdoes not havea generalvalue.This certainly includesmaterialcircumstances of existentialenvironment; the emergence settledmiddle classformed by the majority of population,which ismateriallyindependent,freein theirdecisions;and its members equal tothegreatestextent possibleunderlaw.Thesemembers of middle classwill have theirinterestsidenticalwith the interests ofsociety, becauseonly this society will safeguardthemtheir wealth, status and reserves created through work.At the same timeitwill not beindividuals, but families, small businesses or cooperations that will thenform communityof acquainted people; and individualswillonlyrepresent them.Freedom isalsothe possibility toget a joband choose corporate environmentand peoplewith whomI want tocollaborate,orwork aloneas part of anetwork ordirectlyto the market.In nocase, freedom will reach to society consisting of poorpeoplewithoutreserves, managed by tycoonsor communistofficials,despite the factthat thecompany reportedother types ofso-calledliberation (liberation from family andresponsibility),whichwill bemanipulated by the ruling group,because itcosts nothingand they would wantto cover upthelack of freedom.True and realfreedomstarts withindependent sourcesof income, assets and anchoringat home.The onlypurpose of liberationis to fightfortimeless society, other byproduct ideas are misleading, because theyare identicalwith disjunctionand lead toalienation.
I believe thatanchoringas statedbelow is, among other things, also the possibility ofovercomingMarx’sconceptof alienation;through return ofacquiringthe necessities of lifewithout intermediariesand through properappreciationof things. Sense of belonging isachieved via cooperationon building a home andinterdependence within the community. However, the sense of competition with the homes of other people must also be present otherwise occurrence of realsolidarity is unlikely to develop.