• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

"Why Marxism is on the rise again"

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
I also agree that the OP's underlying premise, that marxism is on the rise, is absolutely silly. Faux media/GOP manipulative alarmism about marxism is certainly on the rise-such alarmism being a much more destructive force in modern USA than marxism ever will be again.
The article talks about Marxists who are saying Marxism is on the rise. I'm not sure where the "faux" media comes into play here. This article is not about Obama as a Marxist, it's about real Marxists.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
Only if you define piracy as capitalism. Somehow I think respect for other people's property is an inherent part of capitalism though.
I never once mentioned piracy, so why have you?

'Respect' has no place in capitalism.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
We turn third world the moment people use violence to protest our economic failure.
What does that even mean? Are you saying people shouldn't protest? Protesting is generally a first world concept, not a third world one.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
We turn third world the moment people use violence to protest our economic failure.
Violent protest is what happens when the gap between the rich and the poor becomes too big.

It's been happening for centuries.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81

Marx was a German. You are thinking of the creators of Leninism/Stalinism/Trotskyism. That happened like 50 years after Marx died.

Even Marx said "I am no Marxist!" when he heard how people were interpreting "dictatorship of the proletariant" to mean a literal bureaucracy of workers -instead of direct democracy.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,496
436
126
Marx was a German. You are thinking of the creators of Leninism/Stalinism/Trotskyism. That happened like 50 years after Marx died.

Even Marx said "I am no Marxist!" when he heard how people were interpreting "dictatorship of the proletariant" to mean a literal bureaucracy of workers -instead of direct democracy.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
Silly, this is like saying Ghandi was a serial killer because someone else made a violent movie after his death.



In other words you have no idea what you are talking about.

Marx is a Russian?....are you people home schooled? This must be it.
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,836
437
136

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
You all have seen the corruption from just the Congress, Senate, President and the immediate people he appoints. Do you really want to give them more power? I know Capitalism has is faults but the alternative should scare the crap out of you.
 
Nov 29, 2006
14,737
2,583
126
Capitalism is economic freedom. If people want an alternative to that, I'm against them.
You can keep your economic freedom. Ill take real freedom that doesnt require me to be a slave to money as if it is the only driving force in the world.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
You can keep your economic freedom. Ill take real freedom that doesnt require me to be a slave to money as if it is the only driving force in the world.
Good luck with that. Star Trek seems to think it will happen somewhere in the 22nd Century.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
571
126
I'll give you that restricting bazookas is probably a restriction on anarchy, but are you actually saying that you're against all economic restrictions that don't involve law and order? Things like minimum wage, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, public schools, workplace safety standards, food safety standards, medical standards, etc.? (This list is WAY longer)
I'm definitely against minimum wage, as all it does it price out of competition the lowest-skilled of the workforce: the people it purports to help the most. I'm against any attempt by the government to legislate prices, because it interferes with the purpose of prices: to signal value.

Entitlements I'd have less problem with if we didn't have to go in debt to afford them, and (especially with regard to health care) if we didn't have such an illegal immigrant problem. If you want to spend my tax dollars on other people's health care, fine, but can we at least do it within our means? This is the principal reason I'm against any tax hikes whatsoever.

I don't mind safety standards provided:

- the standards aren't written or influenced by industry lobbyists
- that they don't serve to put companies out of business or prevent new companies from entering the market, and thus
- serve to put people out of a job, and give consumers a more expensive, lower quality product.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
I'm definitely against minimum wage, as all it does it price out of competition the lowest-skilled of the workforce: the people it purports to help the most. I'm against any attempt by the government to legislate prices, because it interferes with the purpose of prices: to signal value.

Entitlements I'd have less problem with if we didn't have to go in debt to afford them, and (especially with regard to health care) if we didn't have such an illegal immigrant problem. If you want to spend my tax dollars on other people's health care, fine, but can we at least do it within our means? This is the principal reason I'm against any tax hikes whatsoever.

I don't mind safety standards provided:

- the standards aren't written or influenced by industry lobbyists
- that they don't serve to put companies out of business or prevent new companies from entering the market, and thus
- serve to put people out of a job, and give consumers a more expensive, lower quality product.
So essentially, you want the rich to stay rich, and the poor to remain in a poor state of affairs.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
6
0
You can keep your economic freedom. Ill take real freedom that doesnt require me to be a slave to money as if it is the only driving force in the world.
So you think other people should be forced to support you?

Seems like YOU are the one taking a dump on freedom.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
571
126
So essentially, you want the rich to stay rich, and the poor to remain in a poor state of affairs.
I could spend some time on a thoughtful reply, but I suppose it'd be a waste of time. So:

Yes, I'm an evil, evil rich person. I hoard my $42,000 a year at my house, in a secret safe which only rich people can afford. hahahaha. I love squishing the pathetic underlings under my feet. There's literally nothing I'd rather be doing every day than smashing the hopes, dreams, and lives of those who make less money than I do.

Excuse me. My shedule sez it's time for another baby-eating. Be back shortly.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
I know Capitalism has is faults but the alternative should scare the crap out of you.
The current path we are on SHOULD scare the crap out of everyone. (except the elites)

Am I totally scared of the USSR coming back with all its totalitarian suck?

Doubtful this could ever happen to a advanced society nowadays,

The USA was NEVER at risk of becoming a Russian bolshevik state outside of the silly Red Dawn movie or paranoid books the right wing enjoys getting worked up over. Get real.

Now, could we have a bit more of a less dogmatic neo-liberal system that takes care of it's own people and at least gives those a level playing field who wish to work hard? Regardless of sex, race, class etc?

What Marx proposed was no less controversial then what the founding fathers wanted. With a little bit of a antitrust law to the people twist to keep the self destructive capitalist exploitation in check.

That is a horrible summary of the works of Marx, but whatever, I am a Bakunin/Zizek/Chomsky sort of lefty anyhow.

Marx is so outdated now, hard to find much relevance in such old books besides the whole "he was right! how do these capitalist bastards STILL get away with this?" little kick. It gets old though, pointing out problems is the easy part, the contemporary left needs to find answers relevant to the 21st century.

Still doesn't hurt to go back a bit, there is a lot lost in history through disinformation put out by the establishment for over 100 years. Some more useful then others.

For example I am no fan of Lenin or Trotsky, but they did write some interesting works on how they put together one of these centralized economies from scratch, what civ gamer wouldn't be interested? They literally got to micro a whole society with almost no automation or computers to distribute resources. Amazing how they pulled it off.

The other rhetoric they spew was war stuff, blah blah smash the kulaks/capitalists etc. I think Lenin/Trotsky sucked but they kept 11 capitalist armies out of the cccp right after WW1. Dunno if them being in charge was any better for the people though. Stalin was waiting to make his power grab.
 
Last edited:

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
I don't mind safety standards provided:

- the standards aren't written or influenced by industry lobbyists
- that they don't serve to put companies out of business or prevent new companies from entering the market, and thus
- serve to put people out of a job, and give consumers a more expensive, lower quality product.
Which is exactly why you shouldn't have made your ridiculous statement. Prior to the safety standards of today it's not like there was anarchy, so you ARE in favour of at least some restrictions on economic freedom, and not just, as you put it, "Only to the extent that I'm against anarchy."
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
571
126
Well, wouldn't you agree that at the basis of capitalism is the claim that people may buy and sell what they please without interference?

In other words, wouldn't you say that a very easy summation of the defense of capitalism is, "leave it the F alone"?
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
The USA was NEVER at risk of becoming a Russian bolshevik state outside of the silly Red Dawn movie or paranoid books the right wing enjoys getting worked up over. Get real.
It's not like Russia ever invaded any countries or backed any other Communist nations doing the same.

Now, could we have a bit more of a less dogmatic neo-liberal system that takes care of it's own people and at least gives those a level playing field who wish to work hard? Regardless of sex, race, class etc?
We have that now. Everyone is guaranteed a 12th Grade Education and damn near guaranteed a degree with grants, financial aid and student loans. You have a lot of control over your career path and the $$$ you will make. So I am not buying into a lot of the "We weren't given a fair shot" excuse. Even then, all you have to do is show how little you make and you are all but guaranteed Foodstamps, Wic, Section 8 Housing, Welfare.

I have met a LOT of people on various forms of Government help. A lazier bunch you will not find.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
571
126
Which is exactly why you shouldn't have made your ridiculous statement. Prior to the safety standards of today it's not like there was anarchy, so you ARE in favour of at least some restrictions on economic freedom, and not just, as you put it, "Only to the extent that I'm against anarchy."
I said I don't mind them, not that I'm in favor of them. I suppose that's a weak defense. I suppose then I'll have to revise what I said.

If pressed I'd say I'm ultimately against entitlements. I'd say they create more problems than they solve.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,050
6
81
It's not like Russia ever invaded any countries or backed any other Communist nations doing the same.



We have that now. Everyone is guaranteed a 12th Grade Education and damn near guaranteed a degree with grants, financial aid and student loans. You have a lot of control over your career path and the $$$ you will make. So I am not buying into a lot of the "We weren't given a fair shot" excuse. Even then, all you have to do is show how little you make and you are all but guaranteed Foodstamps, Wic, Section 8 Housing, Welfare.

I have met a LOT of people on various forms of Government help. A lazier bunch you will not find.
Russia was imperialist beck then, I would agree.

Now on your "The workers are lazy! Money = morality" phoney divide and conquer strawman.

Wait..I thought that the section 8 housing was all a plot by liberals to hold the underclass/minorities down? Why would you recommend workers to go into the maw of the government beast?

Once again your views are based in poorly thought out contradictions laced with sensationalist conspiracy trafficing, -you all dont even know what you think.

You have your whole life been fed history by the establishment, they write what they must for their own self-interests. This is how the world works, but it is not the whole picture. Matter of fact, the whole of history shows funny contradictions like say... Marx and Adam Smith pretty much said the SAME thing.

This is why what in the US is known as "libertarianism" (free market anarchism -corporate class warfare propaganda) is known as NEO-liberalism. It's not Adam Smith, or Marx, its a new fad since the 1950s mostly brought by anti-bolshevik extremism by former soviet citizen Ayn Rand here in the USA.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY