In the first part of the Das Kapital I dealt with the theoretical maze that Mr Kwarteng spun in his essay. In this piece I am going to pick up from where I left. There are some people who think that anything that is in print is a fact. For example, Marxists believe that if you don’t read all their holy word you will fall short of the glory of Marxism. And for that matter Philip Kobina Baidoo Jnr who has not read all Das Kapital has fallen short of the glory of Marxian heaven. If you are proving a point, which cannot be tested scientifically, for example, love, beauty, justice, etc. I can, as the hallmark of a gentleman, hear you out, or read it in print. If you are pontificating a theory that has left countless cadavers in its wake am I obliged to hear you out when I have got brains to determine good from evil? It is unequivocal no.

Mr Kwarteng made so much noise about the fact that theories evolve. Of course, I accept the fact that a theory evolves, but a theory that evolves at the cost of so many lives needs to check its basic assumptions – it must be faulty. Much of the miseries of the 20th century can be laid squarely at the door steps of Marxism and all it’s watered down forms. India’s wrenching poverty was due to socialism. The world was denied China’s productive potential from 1949 till the death of Mao, because of the silly and unmitigated stupidity of Marxist ideology. I must make it here loud and clear, whether Isaac Newton dabbled in alchemy or not his blind spots in his thinking did not render a whole generation of Chinese in poverty, or put millions of Russians in the Gulag.

Mr Kwarteng quoted one Stuart Jeffries copiously in capital letters, and I could feel his desperation. So I went to read the full article, however, I saw something different. He said China’s cheap labour is what sustains Western capitalism. The fact is these people are so myopic in their assessment and ignorant about the fact that it is a symbiotic relationship. Where will be the economy of China without the Western Market? This is the beauty of capitalism that Adam Smith spoke eloquently about in ‘The Wealth Of Nations’ on the principles of division of labour. If the people of Britain can buy underwear at a cheaper price from China, why should they produce it at exorbitant price in Manchester? Does it make sense to any thinking mind? I mean people who can use their brains. The expensive labour of Manchester can produce something worthwhile like high-tech fibre glass roofing and not underwear. I think his darling Jeffries should go back to his Oxford College to relearn his economic theories again.

He said the sale of Das Kapital has soared ever since 2008 without giving his readers any statistic in such a renowned British news paper. Now, if a police department puts out its crime figures for murder for the previous year to be 4, and the current year records 7 you can conclude that there has been 75% rise in murder cases. That statistics can be interpreted as a soaring rate of murder. So, if 10 of Das Kapital was sold in 2007, and 2008 records 20 that is 100% rise in sales and can equally be interpreted as soaring sales. If some goons who cannot understand that the collapse of Western economies was caused by politicians indiscriminate movement of pawns on the global economic chess board, and will rush to buy Das Kapital to look for answers that is their cup of tea? Who cares anyway?

Jefferies said, ‘Surely there is no straight line from The Communist Manifesto to the gulags.’ And I say he is dead wrong; there is mesmerising straight line and if they do not lead to the gulags it meanders all the way. If you need to see how that will be repeated see their twisted faces with consuming anger when they go on their demonstrations. They do not allow any dissent. And Marx himself was a typical model of this intolerance. During his time, he got Mikhail Bakunin, whom I do not endorse his anarchist ideology, to be expelled from communist international when he expressed objections to his idea of dictatorship of the proletariat. What did Stalin do to Trotsky, Mao to Xiaoping and Castro to Matos and his own uncle Nkrumah did to his lieutenants. They claim that Marxist communism is scientific as outlined in his Das Kapital. The only empirical scientific evidence I can assign to it is that everywhere it is tried people lose their lives en masse.

Don’t think I am over dramatising Jeffries statement, which without a deep thought appears to be a benign one. This is a statement made by Slavoj Zizek a Slovenian neo-Marxist philosopher who lectures at New York University: Better the worst Stalinist terror than the most liberal capitalist democracy. This is a typical sample of the statements that some of these neo-Marxist philosophers spew around. Think about it, am I obliged to read or listen to such goons when they spew and write such garbage and hate. Am I not right when I say they are evil and they do not tolerate dissent? Tell me, why should I take into account anything that these people write? I will rather drink poison than to read their stupidity and be like them. I am a human being not an erudite ape. I value the independence of my thoughts, and as a result I don’t read foolish ideas.

Stuart Jefferies did not stop there he said that, ‘a survey in East Germany found 52% believed the free market economy was ‘unsuitable’ and 43% said they wanted socialism back. And Mr Kwarteng thinks that I will be surprised by that. What do you expect from a drug addict; they binged themselves on this Marxist poisonous drug they further want the fatal dose that will finally finish them off. The East Germans are behaving exactly like a drug junky who is being weaned off drug. The pain can be sometimes very unbearable and will like to go back for the very drug that will rip their hearts and kill them like a dog. Mr Kwarteng reads this rubbish, and he is impressed by it. He then decides to quote it to Philip Kobina Baidoo Jnr. Does Mr Kwarteng think I am going to say that is wonderful? No! It is the mother of all stupidity.

In Mr Kwarteng’s piece under contention, a few lines after the capitalisation of Stuart Jeffries nonsense he said, ‘what are many in advanced capitalist countries (and around the world) seeing in Karl Marx that Mr. Baidoo Jr. fails to see?’ When I read that my heart went out for him. It was not in admiration; I pitied him for exhibiting such crass ignorance. Of course, it goes to reinforce my belief that he is got the capacity to read enormous materials, but lacks the intelligence to understand what he crams into his head. For me, Marxism from the communist manifesto to the Das Kapital is nothing, but pure evil in print. And I will dump them with the likes of The Malleus Maleficarum. Whenever anybody reads his work and believes all the nonsense whole heartedly the evil spirit comes to live.

What I see that the so called people in advanced capitalist countries don’t see is that they cheat, lie, falsify evidence, evasion of the truth and playing fast and loose with it like his Noam Chomsky. I am not going to clatter this piece; I am just going to give one sterling example that makes me suspicious of anything the left or the Marxists offer as evidence in their defence. Malcolm Muggeridge was a British journalist who graduated from Selwyn College, Cambridge. He is credited with putting Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu, who went by the nom de guerre Madam Teresa of Calcutta, on the world map. I chose him as my example, because he was a communist sympathiser before he penned the atrocities of Stalinist Russia in Ukraine. There are more of such critics of the Soviet evil empire, but none come authentic as Malcolm Muggeridge. During the Ukrainian farming he was standing in as a correspondent for William Henry Chamberlin, also once a believer in communism, who later became a bitter critic. Muggeridge filed a report for the Mancherster Guardian, the same paper Stuart Jeffries writes for, cataloguing the atrocities of the farming in Ukraine and its human cost. He was accused of deliberately lying, and was ostracized. Strangely, the Soviets themselves later admitted 5 million deaths of the Ukrainian farming. However, when Walter Duranty came to report in America that the soviet farming was not taking place they applauded him, because that is what those evil leftist who were bent on promoting Marxism in the United States wanted to hear. Walter Duranty was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his fictitious report. This is why I don’t put any credence to the so called prizes and award that he claims the sources he offer have received. What Duranty published in the New York Times was complete fiction, a figment of his imagination. It was respectable for his New York editors, but they were absolute lies. I will ask again, why should I trust anything that these people write, when they can look the other way to further the aims of their evil ideology in the face of such human tragedy? Lying about Marxism aid and abet murder. They love the death cult of Marxism. Think about it. Mr Kwarteng can write about all the nonsense his imagination can offer him. Those without brains will applaud him. I have got one, and I know how to use it. Thank you again for your patience.


Philip Kobina Baidoo Jnr
London
baidoo_philip@yahoo.co.uk