Latest news with #Marxian
The Wire
8 hours ago
- Entertainment
- The Wire
When Marx Returned to Kolkata
Marxian dialectics require two contradictory social or economic phenomena that influence each other. This leads to their development and negation, but that is not the end. The negation creates a new situation that develops and needs negation again. And so it goes on through time. It is quite satisfying, therefore, in a dialectical way, to witness Karl Marx land in contemporary Kolkata in Swapnasandhani's latest play, Marx in Kolkata. Persistent rumours about his death have compelled the founding father of communism to make a comeback. Kolkata is a coincidence, but that his reputation is also at stake in the capital of the Indian state that was ruled by a democratically elected communist party for 34 years is telling. It is a little sad to see a man of Marx's stature trying to prove that he is alive. Self-justification, however, can also be the opportunity of self-searching, and in Kolkata – formerly Calcutta – Marx launches himself into deep introspection as he walks into that perfect example of the new world order: a food court. Here at this site of mass consumption (in more than one sense), where workers are treated as modern-day slaves, Marx begins to talk about himself and his life. Jayant Kripalani as Marx and Srijit Mukherji as Mephistopheles in ''Marx in Kolkata'. Photo: Sandip Kumar Marx in Kolkata is inspired by American historian Howard Zinn's 1999 play, Marx in Soho, which had Marx landing in Soho in contemporary New York instead of the locality in London. Swapnasandhani's play is directed and adapted by Koushik Sen, who keeps it primarily in English, but also uses Bengali and Hindi. Marx speaks especially of his life at his home in Soho, a London neighbourhood, where the German materialist philosopher had eventually taken refuge after being forced to leave his homeland for his radical journalism. In his Soho home, Marx wrote much of Das Kapital in the 1850s. Marx recounts how he wrote, despite everything, in the small Dean Street house in London, surrounded by garbage and squalor outside and crushed by poverty. He was intensely wary of what would happen to his legacy: he was not a Marxist, he asserts, unlike those who would use his ideas for power and profit. Marx and his wife Jenny von Westphalen, a theatre critic and an extraordinary person, saw the death of three of their children in their Soho home. Jenny kept making frequent trips to the pawn shop. Yet their home, with the three daughters who had survived, was full of laughter and joy because love and the hope for a better world held it together, as did Jenny's hard work. Class struggle may be the first contradiction in the Marxian scheme of things, but his writings were possible because of Jenny's labours at home. The admission makes the play a feminist critique of Marx's works. Sen makes two significant departures from the original in his adaptation. In Zinn's play, Marx is the only character. In Sen's adaptation Marx, played by Jayant Kripalani, gets a supporting cast: Jenny, Marx's and Jenny's remarkable precocious daughter Eleanor, a brutal manager and groups of actors, at the food court or at a meeting. Jayant Kripalani as Marx and Srijit Mukherji as Mephistopheles in ''Marx in Kolkata'. Photo: Sandip Kumar The second departure is spectacular. To the ironic echoes of the opening lines of The Communist Manifesto that Marx had written with Friedrich Engels before Das Kapital: 'A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of communism', what could have been a trap door opens at the end of the first half of the play, and through the door rises Mephistopheles himself, replete with a wanton creature wriggling at his feet. Two of god's greatest adversaries are meeting in Kolkata. History and myth confront each other. But which is which? Mephisto, represented in literature and art memorably through the ages, is played in Marx in Kolkata by Srijit Mukherji, the film director, and looks more real than ever. He rules the world with money and power. His tools are death and destruction. Mephisto is late capitalism and neo-Fascism, grotesque and lurid, funny and seductive, and looks very, very familiar. With Marx, Mephisto is up to his old trick. He tries to get Marx to sign a contact to sell his soul. What follows is interesting. Dialectics have infinite possibilities. Marx in Kolkata, which has held two shows so far in the city to an enthusiastic response, raises the very relevant question about Marx's absence, or presence, now. Kripalani, as Marx, carries the weight of the play robustly on his shoulders. The veteran actor brings to life an icon, with humour and sensitivity. His portrayal has Marx looking at a world that has displaced him with a vulnerability that is moving. It is quite evident, though, that Marx is still full of life. I am dead and I am not, Marx reminds. That's dialectics for you. Mukherji, who was a stage actor before he became a well-known film director, is the perfect counterpoint as Mephisto to Kripalani. Mukherji's Mephisto is flamboyant, flashy, amusing, trippy, younger and blood-thirsty. Mephisto is now Mammon on steroids, and Mukherji, as this sweet-talking shape-shifting monster, holds the attention of both Marx and the audience steadily. Ditipriya Sarkar as Jenny and Shaili Bhattacharjee as Eleanor are competent. Mrinmoy Chakraborty is well cast as a nasty, screaming manager. Marx in Kolkata is a romp asking a serious question. It is good to see such a burst of energy on the Kolkata stage. The play moves at a good pace, is spectacular and uses lots of movement and more than one language, which may help it to connect with younger audiences. The music, sound and sets add to the liveliness. Special mention must be made of the use of G.D. Birla Sabhaghar, including the use of the revolving stage and the entrance from below. One wonders, though, if it was necessary for Mephisto to travel across space and time and meet Marx, that too in Kolkata. 'But who other than Marx?' asks Mukherji in an off-stage interview. Capitalism and its cronies would like to finish Marx off for ever. What if, however, instead of entering the grand design of Mephistophelian myth and overarching themes, Marx had walked out from the food court into a Kolkata street and looked around? How about finding out some facts about the city? What would he have to say about the ratio of his own statues to the number of cafés in Kolkata now? What is the number of seats that the communist party named after him, which had ruled Bengal, won in the last Lok Sabha elections? What is the percentage increase in the number of temples constructed under large trees in streets in the last five years? If religion is the opium of the masses, what about the classes? A spectre is haunting Bengal, and it is not of communism. Maybe Marx could have taken a closer look? God lies in the detail, goes the idiom. The devil lies in the detail, is its other version. Chandrima S. Bhattacharya lives in Kolkata.
Epoch Times
10-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
What Is ‘Fair' Taxation of Corporate Enterprises?
Commentary Whenever tax policy comes to public attention, the issue of fairness arises. That is just as true in regard to the taxation of corporate enterprises – the subject of this article – as it is for personal taxes. With President Trump taking steps to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status, we are confronted with the question of when it is 'fair' to bestow or withdraw such an exemption. There is also the related fairness question of whether granting a non-profit enterprise tax-exempt status gives it an unfair advantage vis-à-vis for-profit enterprises. And, of course, there is the perennial question of what is a 'fair' tax rate for those for-profit businesses. Let us examine these three questions separately before looking at a possible solution. Is It 'Fair' to Grant or Deny Tax-Exempt Status to an Enterprise Classified as 'Not for Profit'? The Trump administration's clash with Harvard and other universities about their tax-exempt status will seem fair to some and unfair to others. Section 501(c)3 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code stipulates that tax exemption may be granted to corporations 'organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes ... no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda ... and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.' We have seen examples in the past of how the tax code can be weaponized for partisan purposes. During the Obama years, we had the notorious case of the IRS withholding or delaying the granting of tax-exempt status to not-for-profit organizations that were deemed too conservative. Today, Team Trump is threatening to withdraw the tax exemption from universities that are deemed too woke. There are those on the left who would like to revoke the tax-exempt status of, say, churches whose pastors openly support Donald Trump from the pulpit. And there are those on the right who would be quite happy to see the revocation of the tax-exempt status of churches where the sermons preach that progressive candidates are God's true messengers. Is It Fair to Grant Privileged Tax Treatment to Nonprofits While Continuing to Tax For-Profits? In practice, according to many analysts, such as the Related Stories 3/24/2025 5/4/2025 The fundamental problem here is widespread ignorance of how important profits are for a society's well-being. I groan every time I hear a college student answer the question, 'What are you going to do after graduation?' with the piously delivered refrain, 'I'm going to find a non-profit to work for.' Such young adults have had professors who have inoculated them with the poisonous Marxian dogma that profits are somehow unnecessary, illegitimate, and morally tainted. They truly believe that they are being virtuous by not participating in a for-profit enterprise. Nothing could be further from the truth. A quick review of the ABCs of profit: 1) Profits are not a transfer of wealth from one party to another, but are mutual. The first rule of voluntary exchange is that both sides profit; otherwise, the exchange would not take place. 2) Thus, the larger the profit earned by the producer, the greater the value received by the consumer. 3) Profits are new wealth; entrepreneurial vision has found a way to combine inputs with a total market value of A and turned that value into more than A, thereby increasing the total wealth of society. The person who despises profits despises wealth creation and human prosperity. It is hard to think of a more misanthropic case of economic ignorance than the ignorant dogma that profits are immoral. What Is a Fair Rate of Taxation of For-Profit Businesses? As I have written before (see The Only Truly Fair Solution The anti-wealth left will hate this, but there is a single simple solution to all three of the contentious questions about tax fairness examined herein. It is the solution mentioned in the previous paragraph: to make the tax rate zero—not just on what are today classified as for-profit firms, but on the so-called not-for-profits, too. Then Harvard et al. wouldn't have to worry about a president withdrawing their tax exemption, because they never would be subject to taxes on their income in the first place. There would be no need for squabbling about whether Enterprise A should be classified as not-for-profit, since there would be no advantage to it. [Note: There is one other wrinkle, and that is that, currently, donations to not-for-profits are tax deductible. But such contributions comprise only about 12 percent of not-for-profit income, and the government has no business tilting the table in favor of certain enterprises. It is the same unfairness as government subsidies. In both cases, government alters the cost structure so as to confer a benefit on favored constituents. It's time for that corrupt practice to end. As the old economic truism states, 'Corporations don't pay taxes; only people do.' Let's set free thousands of accountants and lawyers to do other work instead of playing the complicated game of seeing who can extract the most favors from government. If you argue that the government needs more revenue, then have the courage and honesty to call for individual tax rates high enough to fund your grandiose government spending plans, and see if the American people agree that taxes should be that high. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
