Ecclesiastes 7:4

I didn't know the title came from the Old Testament/Torah/Bible...but it does.

Ecclesiastes 7:4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of the fools is in the house of mirth. So there it is, the title of our book. I'm assuming this means Lilly isn't wise? since shes in the house of mirth? or maybe shes escaping it and finding wisdom?

I also didn't know what 'Mirth' meant, so i looked it up. Mirth-amusement, usually expressed in laughter. I'm not too sure what all this means. i guess we'll find out.

Code?

Is Marx speaking in code? There are a bunch of italicized words throughout this section of his texts. Words like: Proprietors, Greed, Commodity, Product of Labor, Means of Life, Producing Activity, Species-existence of Man etc...

Ok well all these words are nice but frankly this section was a bit too heavy for me. I couldn't follow Marx's whole argument. I realize that he's explaining a complex theory, but i did get lost.

What i did like was all the discussion over how the products of labor are the resume of that labor. That was an interesting product.

i also liked the quote 'what is life but activity' it just seemed wise.

so even that i didn't fully understand this section i do think it demonstrated Marx's wisdom, giving credibility to the texts.

Crusoe = Value

On page 236-237 Marx talks about Robinson Crusoe. The paragraph is long so i won't type it out, but pretty much Crusoe is the embodiment of Marx's value theories. All the economic talk and symbolic reasoning was weighing me down, but that slight interlude about Robinson Crusoe really showed me how simple value theories are (in theory). It also showed me that Marx really knows what hes talking about. Anybody can ramble on in complex language, but it takes a master of a subject to simplify something complex down to laymens terms, and thats what he did.

pg 107: "Man can be distinguished from the animal by consciousness, religion, or anything else you please. He begins to distinguish himself from the animal the moment he begins to produce his means of subsistence, a step required by his physical organization. By producing food, man indirectly produces his material life itself."

Wow, maybe this just hit me and it is no big deal to everyone else, but the fact that man is distinguished from animals because he produces his own means of 'surviving at a minimum' just seems so simple that it must be true. It makes a lot of sense. We are different because we build ways for ourselves to exist, not just flying from flower to flower sucking nectar or hunting down an animal every-time we get hungry. I would argue that religion and consciousness fall in to this same category. They don't help us exist at a physical level, but at a spiritual and emotional level they definitely do.

My Marx group is supposed to identify deviations from the 'communist stereotype' My only stereo type of communists comes a little from modern china, but more from post cold war sentiments of Russia. Films set during the cold war, films made during the cold war, and stories my parents tell are really the only views of Communism that i have, so they are extremely skewed.

The opening line of this reading section was one of the first things that went against my stereotype. 169: The communists, therefore, on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions and the ultimate general results of the proletariat movement.

I always saw (as my group discussed) the people of communism (not the leaders but the actual citizens) as being oppressesd and force-fed propaganda that promoted the communist way of life. I never really envisioned the people of the nation (proletariat) pushing for and marching for communism. Shows how naive i am huh?

Karl Marx's Manifesto is such a widely known book and this is the first time i read it. This may be a sign of the times, but i found the book almost humorous because of all the jokes i've heard and seen involving the 'proletariat rising up'

for example:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=L-RsuI_cOSI

Or how many times in class in high school we would joke about having a proletariat uprising over a test or some project.

Its very interesting now to see the actual text that bred such thought. I can imagine being an oppressed lower class worker, reading this, lending it to my friends, and becoming extremely unified and emblazoned against the bourgeois. I really enjoy reading the sections made to fire up the proletariat like on page 167 "the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class. The other classes decay and finally disappear in the face of modern industry; the proletariat is its special and essential product."

Gandhi and Plato Would Have Been Friends.

Gandhi's essay on page 80 (i think) proves this point. His perfect village looks a lot like Plato's republic. All the villages are self sustaining, Education is compulsory, compulsory service for village guards, etc.. I'm sure Gandhi received a classical education when he trained as a lawyer, so i'm sure he has read The Republic. I just found it interesting the overlaps and similarities in wisdom from 2 very different cultures.

While reading Gandhi's 'Fifteen Instructions to Volunteers' I noticed a lot of similarities between Gandhi's codes and many of the Boys Scout's ideals.

almost every ideal Gandhi lists is part of a Boy Scout pledge or ideal or something along those lines.

some examples:
'Do a good turn daily' would go along with Gandhi saying no harsh or cruel language and showing courtesy to those who are rude to volunteers

almost every point G. lists can fit in the scout oath or law though:
Oath:
On my honor i will do my best to do my duty to God and my country. To obey the scout law, to help other people at all times, to keep myself Physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.

law:
a scout is: trustworthy loyal helpful friendly courteous kind obedient cheerful thrifty brave clean and reverent.


The very interesting thing is that Gandhi was alive when Scouting started in England and the British still had their control over India, yet both groups claim to love and value the same things. Scouting was supposed to raise up perfect citizens for England and Gandhi was teaching India's citizens life's true virtues... Its funny that they overlap in 2 cultures in a confrontation.

Gandhi & Christianity?

Throughout the essays we just read from Gandhi I saw many biblical quotes or allusions. Now i don't think this means that on all accounts Gandhi borrowed his ideas from the Bible, but what i do see is that there is a sort of base human wisdom (if that even makes sense) Each culture or religion probes life and all its possible meanings and styles, and many come up with similar or identical answers, which i think proves the fact that some of these moral ideals have real Truth to them.

The first one i noticed was on page 77. "whosoever wants to save his life will lose it and whosoever loses his life for the Lord's sake will find it." That is one of Jesus' famous quotes.

The next one was on page 74. "I can no longer hide my light under a bushel" very similar to the biblical "no one lights a lamp and then places it under a bowl"

Gandhi even mentions St. Francis of Assisi's supposed ability to preach and commune with the animals and nature on page 95, and then on page 96 states that he knows he "must love my enemy" (another popular biblical theme).

I'm not sure if Gandhi was just being wise and saying things that seemed to come from the Bible or if he pulled these from the New Testament because he saw wisdom in them, but either way i believe it shows that across cultures and religion, there is some sort of basic morality and wisdom.

Gandhi's lightsaber

Ok so yea, the title is cheesy, but isn't that what an all sided sword would look like?

"Passive resistance is an all sided sword, it can be used anyhow; it blesses him who uses it and him against whom it is used. Without drawing a drop of blood it produces far reaching results." (50).

I really like this idea. First, that of passivity as a weapon. Of course, it has to be used correctly, passivity should not be confused with apathy. Still, the idea of peaceful confrontation as a weapon and means of social or political (or both) change is always a cool idea and coming from the horses mouth, so to speak, is even cooler. I've known Gandhi promoted passive resistance, but hearing his wording and seeing his arguments makes it all the more real.

I also think the idea of the passive resistance aiding that who it is used against is very interesting. Its not often that means of social change 'bless' those being who don't want the change. Some how, in Gandhi's logic, it is possible. I would like to see how he supports this.