marxism: if it were the 'real' deal

[Immanuel Can]

Where, dear, pro, did I ask for anyone's idea of utopia or worker's paradise?

All I'm askin' for: a picture of a working Marxist community, society, nation if the citizens, workers, etc. got it right.

Ain't no one stepped up yet: which is peculiar in a place with so many willin' to defend marxist theory.

Yes, it's remarkable. So many people sold out to destroying the status quo, with no intelligible idea of what's going to follow.

[promethean75]

"Well, in Marx's analysis, the "bourgeousie" was the mercantile middle class, not the elite rich of the aristocracy."

No dude. If you research the etymology of the term you'll see that Marx uses it to define specifically that class of people who own property in the form of some means of production for the purposes of generating capital. It is that singular feature of the class that distinguishes it from the proletarian class, who exchange their labor, as a commodity, for a wage.

So with the Marxist use of the classification, it matters not how dispersed the modern middle classes are - that they are no longer the broke ass industrial workers of the 19th century that Marx observed, being now much more fluent financially in the 21rst century.

The point is, they're still wage workers. The point is, it is not in the best interests of the working classes to continue existing under this economic arrangement. The point is, there is literally no need whatsoever in the chain of production and distribution, for the parasite capitalist class to exist.

Don't do it bro. I've done this argument a hunerd times. The capitalist is absolutely useless and unnecessary from the perspective of the workers... who can do everything he/she does.

[promethean75]

"So many people sold out to destroying the status quo, with no intelligible idea of what's going to follow."

But this was never done. Not once in history. It's a red herring. No theorist of an economic model had a crystal ball to capture an image of what such a society run along that model's terms, would look like. Of the four major modern economic transitions from feudalism to mercantilism to capitalism to socialism... none of the conditions could possibly be foreseen by the theorists who entertained those modeled predictions.

Rather by observing a society and its tensions, one can predict with some degree of reason that X might follow from conditions Y. This is what Marx did. He saw it once with the Paris commune, and made the reasonable prediction that it could very well happen again. And by god if it didn't, several times over throughout history, since. Duddint matter if the proposed model failed to materialize. What matters is the fact that there HAS TO BE some substance to the theory if every time we turn around, some mass of working people are staging a revolt.

You think they're doing that shit for fun?

Capitalism contains inherent contradictions and inner conflicts built into the system. If it didn't, we'd all be singing kumbaya by the fire.

[Immanuel Can]

"So many people sold out to destroying the status quo, with no intelligible idea of what's going to follow."

But this was never done. Not once in history.

Ummm...The Russian Revolution? The Cultural Revolution? The Cuban Revolution?" Need I go on?

And today, Antifa and BLM are sacking cities with no clue of how anything's going to rise from the ashes. Not only has it been done many times in history, it's all Marxism has EVER done. They destroy, but what they promise to follow never comes. What the people get is not at all what was promised.

No theorist of an economic model had a crystal ball to capture an image of what such a society run along that model's terms, would look like.

Sure they have. Ordinarily, people don't overthrow the existing order until they've got some compelling idea of where they're going. And even if that idea turns out to be flawed, without such an idea, people don't usually agree to mobilize at all.

Even the Neo-Marxists are trying to present things like "ending racism" or "ending poverty" or "equity" as if they were visions of the good. They're not, of course; and they lack any description of the mechanics involved. But Marx had a definite idea: he called it "the Triumph of the Proletariat." Now, his idea was wrong, of course, and is now historically proved so; but at least he had the sense to put something in place, and not to ask people just to burn stuff down with no idea of how to fix anything.

Duddint matter if the proposed model failed to materialize.

Well, his idea killed more human beings than any idea in history -- by orders of magnitude. His disciples killed over 100 million in the last century.

So I'm going to say it "mattered" that Marx's utopia "failed to materialize," as it de-materialized a whole lot of innocent people.

[henry quirk]

Where, dear, pro, did I ask for anyone's idea of utopia or worker's paradise?

All I'm askin' for: a picture of a working Marxist community, society, nation if the citizens, workers, etc. got it right.

Ain't no one stepped up yet: which is peculiar in a place with so many willin' to defend marxist theory.

Yes, it's remarkable. So many people sold out to destroying the status quo, with no intelligible idea of what's going to follow.

It's like they can't be bothered, or are too a'fear'd, to just paint a picture.

They're like Star War geeks who'll argue about fast the Millennium Falcon can make the Kessel Run, but clam up when you ask 'em how the Falcon could get off the ground in the first place: they love their fantasy and hate to be reminded it is just a fantasy.

LARPers.

[FlashDangerpants]

The simple fact is that your description of free thinkers has always been rigidly conformist.

citation, please.

It seemed quicker to just get a new example than to rummage your post history for that one. Here you go...

What say have you got in who other persons sell their property to?

The opening asks for a picture of a working Libertarian community, not one just startin' out. The minarchy I'm describin' is seasoned, been thru it's start up period. Only folks livin' it are folks, well, like me.

That was you just assuming all the free folk in your imaginary town all think and do exactly as you think and do.

[Immanuel Can]

LARPers.

I get it now. Yes.

[henry quirk]

That was you just assuming all the free folk in your imaginary town all think and do exactly as you think and do.

Not exactly, no; similar, yes.

[FlashDangerpants]

That was you just assuming all the free folk in your imaginary town all think and do exactly as you think and do.

Not exactly, no; similar, yes.

So ... not exactly conformists, but similar to conformists in that they all make exactly the same choice in some hypothetical situation that you would... and that in any other hypothetical situation that amounted to anything, they would then make the same choice as you again. But perhaps they all have favourite colours.

[promethean75]

"Well, his idea killed more human beings than any idea in history -- by orders of magnitude. His disciples killed over 100 million in the last century."

Lol! Well that's a little better, I reckon. At least he's not claiming two billion, eh Rosa?

[Immanuel Can]

"Well, his idea killed more human beings than any idea in history -- by orders of magnitude. His disciples killed over 100 million in the last century."
Lol!

You shouldn't laugh. That's according to the Encyclopedia of War. You're laughing at stacks of corpses.

[Sculptor]

"Well, his idea killed more human beings than any idea in history -- by orders of magnitude. His disciples killed over 100 million in the last century."

Lol! Well that's a little better, I reckon. At least he's not claiming two billion, eh Rosa?

Figures ranging from 10 million to 250 million means that the idea is bullshit.
A statement completely without merit.

[henry quirk]

That was you just assuming all the free folk in your imaginary town all think and do exactly as you think and do.

Not exactly, no; similar, yes.

So ... not exactly conformists, but similar to conformists in that they all make exactly the same choice in some hypothetical situation that you would... and that in any other hypothetical situation that amounted to anything, they would then make the same choice as you again. But perhaps they all have favourite colours.

Yeah, not exactly.

I'll expand on what I mean in the other thread this evening.

[promethean75]

All revolutions are experimental in nature. One has a set of objectives derived from a theory, and then one attempts to establish those objectives in practice. But because future circumstances can't be known in advance, unpredicted factors and variables may present themselves and produce greater challenges. Russian civil war after the Bolshevik revolution was one such factor that beset any progress. One can't know whether or not, that had that circumstance been absent, the soviets may have become stabilized and highly productive toward moving the revolution forward. The Chinese revolution; critics fail to mention that despite the disaster that it inevitably turned into, both life expectancy and literacy rates drastically increased for the Chinese peasantry. It's easier to retain some confirmation bias than it is to actually do the leg-work and investigate the matter. I understand this totally. I've seen the same tired old criticism nonsense for over a decade now at every forum I've stepped foot in. It really is a subject that is partial to the right company; members of the working classes who are interested in workable alternatives to the capitalist system. Anybody else is as irrelevant as they are usually woefully wrong about everything they think they know about Marxism.

And I'd hesitate to include antifa and BLM among the ranks of legitimate marxists. They have to first know we're talking about Karl Marx and not Groucho Marx. Like that's one of the first things a revolutionary should know, I think.

That rabble belongs to YOU and YOUR beloved capitalist system. Monstrous reprobates YOUR society has created. Straight outta Compton.

[promethean75]

"You're laughing at stacks of corpses."

There were two kinds of causalities involved. One kind resulted from accidental circumstances and mismanagement due to incredibly difficult conditions to contend with, e.g., starvation. The other kind actively resisted the terms and demands of the victorious party... and got blasted as a result. But such is the dirty nature of war, comrades. Niggas ain't handing out gift baskets.