Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the
founders of Marxism, both wanted to end the death penalty and legalize abortion.
Sadly, many people were influenced by their ideas. We will present these
articles to educate the public on one of the early pioneers of legalizing
abortion. Most Marxists are Pro Choice and also Anti-Death Penalty
campaigners.
 |
|
No to Marxism
|
INTERNET SOURCE: http://www.personal.psu.edu/glm7/m287.htm
The Relationship Between Communism and Abortion With an Examination of Marxism's
Influence in the U.S. Today
Historic Proponents for Legalized Abortion
Legalized abortion has it roots in Marxism, socialism, and
egalitarianism. Lenin and his communist Bolsheviks were the first ones to
widely and openly legalize and advocate abortion as a woman’s right. Communism
viewed abortion as a vital part of implementing Marx’s and Engel’s Communist
Manifesto and their desire for the “Abolition of the family!” and liberation of women who
were oppressed by capitalism, marriage, and the family. Modern day Marxists
are proud of their pro-abortion heritage and are still leading proponents of
abortion as seen by the short article Marxism and Abortion. This article offers us the following
insights on how Marxists view abortion – “A Marxist believes that personality
and human value are imparted by the external and economic environment, not by
any inherent spiritual value, or even by biological processes . . . . The
fetus, according to a Marxist, becomes a person when he is judged as such by
‘someone of higher wisdom.’ The humanity of the fetus depends upon how the
mother perceives the ‘social relationship’ that exists between them. If the
mother desires to keep the baby, then she ‘fantasizes’ it into becoming a human
being. But, if she does not want the pregnancy, ‘it is something else
entirely.’ Her opinion of the fetus thereby denies it of personhood . . . .
‘Biological processes,’ says Albury, ‘do not carry automatic moral values as
the Right to Life suggests . . . . Human economic, social and political
relationships create moral values.’ . . .
According to Albury, ‘Material conditions of life change, and so do
moral values.’ This means that, to a Marxist, the unborn baby may be a human
being for a time, but may then become depersonified and rendered 'pre-human,'
all because his or her mother began to think differently about him or her. She
adds: ‘Certainly, many women experience mixed feelings; the fantasy baby may
even appear for a while. Women can tell it goodbye forever.’” The article
concludes with this comment by Dr. John Whitehall: “The inhumanity of communism
resides in this arbitrary assessment of human life, which is based on the
Marxist valuation of certain social relationships. On this basis, millions have
been told 'goodbye'--from the purges of Russia , to the genocide in Cambodia ,
to the killings in the Philippines , and now to the unborn baby.” I can only
agree with Dr. Whitehall’s comment and add that it is amazing that anyone,
especially libertarians, would cling to anything associated with Marx’s thoroughly
discredited theories. We have already had too many innocent lives
needlessly sacrificed for the addle-brained utopian scheme of a classless
worker’s paradise; we don’t need to add any more.
 |
|
“It would be very difficult, if not altogether
impossible, to establish any principle upon which the justice or expedience of
capital punishment could be founded in a society glorying in its civilization.”
|
Marxism and Abortion
By Editorial Staff
Published November 1988
A recent article in The Tribune, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Australia, expounded upon the Marxist view of abortion, adding new understanding to the international debate over the rights of the unborn.
“Human Life and Fetal Images,” an essay by Rebecca Albury, appeared in the Australian publication on August 10 of this year. Albury made the following statements about the teachings of Karl Marx and their relationship to the unborn:
Published November 1988
A recent article in The Tribune, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Australia, expounded upon the Marxist view of abortion, adding new understanding to the international debate over the rights of the unborn.
“Human Life and Fetal Images,” an essay by Rebecca Albury, appeared in the Australian publication on August 10 of this year. Albury made the following statements about the teachings of Karl Marx and their relationship to the unborn:
- A Marxist believes that personality and human value are imparted by the external and economic environment, not by any inherent spiritual value, or even by biological processes.
- The fetus, according to a Marxist, becomes a person when he is judged as such by “someone of higher wisdom.” The humanity of the fetus depends upon how the mother perceives the “social relationship” that exists between them. If the mother desires to keep the baby, then she “fantasizes” it into becoming a human being. But, if she does not want the pregnancy, “it is something else entirely.” Her opinion of the fetus thereby denies it of personhood.
- “Biological processes,” says Albury, “do not carry automatic moral values as the Right to Life suggests … Human economic, social, and political relationships create moral values.”
- According to Albury, “Material conditions of life change, and so do moral values.” This means that, to a Marxist, the unborn baby may be a human being for a time, but may then become depersonified and rendered ‘pre-human,’ all because his or her mother began to think differently about him or her. She adds: “Certainly, many women experience mixed feelings; the fantasy baby may even appear for a while. Women can tell it goodbye forever.”
 |
|
“No soldiers, no gendarmes or police, no
nobles, kings, regents, prefects, or judges, no prisons, no lawsuits - and
everything takes its orderly course. All quarrels and disputes are settled by
the whole of the community affected, by the gens or the tribe, or by the gentes
among themselves; only as an extreme and exceptional measure is blood revenge
threatened-and our capital punishment is nothing but blood revenge in a
civilized form, with all the advantages and drawbacks of civilization. Although
there were many more matters to be settled in common than today - the household
is maintained by a number of families in common, and is communistic, the land
belongs to the tribe, only the small gardens are allotted provisionally to the
households - yet there is no need for even a trace of our complicated
administrative apparatus with all its ramifications. The decisions are taken by
those concerned, and in most cases everything has been already settled by the
custom of centuries. There cannot be any poor or needy - the communal household
and the gens know their responsibilities towards the old, the sick, and those
disabled in war. All are equal and free - the women included. There is no place
yet for slaves, nor, as a rule, for the subjugation of other tribes.”
[PHOTO SOURCE: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/2900919.Friedrich_Engels]
|
OTHER
LINKS:
