American Marxism

[Immanuel Can]

...your position is that marxism is a detriment to human welfare.

The data shows that Marxism isn't just "a detriment to human welfare," Gary. A "detriment to human welfare" might be anything from brain cancer to toenail fungus.

By orders of magnitude, Marxism is the most homicidal ideology ever to exist. In fact, second place isn't even close. And there isn't a single place in the entire world, in the last 150 years or so that Marxism has existed, that has not been made miserable, poor and devoid of human rights by the fools and criminals who exploited it.

So yeah, I'd say that's a "detriment." But I'd say that's too little to say.

[Gary Childress]

Probably the biggest "spoiled brats" are CEOs and other uber-wealthy who think they are entitled to thousands of times the compensation of ordinary workers in order to do their job, don't you think?

Envy is envy, Gary.

That's what our rich, spoiled, bratty Western "social justice" types don't understand.

I think you're confusing the whole issue, IC. I don't think anyone envies the uber-rich as much as they oppose some of their policies and practices. When you speak out against the "great reset" do you do so out of "envy?" Do you feel like you should fall to your knees and thank God instead of speaking out against the "great reset"? I mean, I've seen you speak out against it. Is that because of "envy"?

[Gary Childress]

...your position is that marxism is a detriment to human welfare.

The data shows that Marxism isn't just "a detriment to human welfare," Gary. A "detriment to human welfare" might be anything from brain cancer to toenail fungus.

By orders of magnitude, Marxism is the most homicidal ideology ever to exist. In fact, second place isn't even close. And there isn't a single place in the entire world, in the last 150 years or so that Marxism has existed, that has not been made miserable, poor and devoid of human rights by the fools and criminals who exploited it.

So yeah, I'd say that's a "detriment." But I'd say that's too little to say.

I don't know, IC. Marxists claim that Marxism is no more detrimental than democracy is. That it has never been put into practice. I mean, the DPRK claims to be a "democracy" should we assume therefore that democracy is detrimental because N. Korea chose to call itself a "democracy" for propaganda purposes?

[Immanuel Can]

I don't think anyone envies the uber-rich as much as they oppose some of their policies and practices.

Oh, they certainly do.

Why else call them "the rich" instead of just "the influential"? It's their having of the money that people hate...the power, well, they care less about that.

Look at Pelosi and Biden...they're both stinking rich and getting richer. But the Left sees them as "ours," so they aren't criticized in the media. And the same goes for the bunch with their noses in the troughs who meet at Davos.

When you speak out against the "great reset" do you do so out of "envy?"

No, of course not.

Personally, I don't envy the wealthy. I'm not particularly rich myself (except, of course, by the standards of the Developing World). I'm grateful for what I have, which is more than I deserve, however much or little it is. Likewise, I'm happy to see others do well. And as a Christian, my values are not material. If I envied the wealthy, I would be showing I'm secretly believing that their acquisitions are important. I don't believe they are.

What I know, as a Christian, is that (to quote the great philosopher Spiderman) "with great power comes great responsibility." So wealthy or poor, we answer for ourselves with regard to what God has permitted us. The rich have more to answer for than I do, because they have more power.

No, my issue with the Davos group is different. It has nothing to do with their wealth, which I do not envy. It has to do with their illegitimate determination to interfere with the autonomy of all the people in the world, and to impose their foolish and destructive personal ideology on everyone, regardless of personal conscience and free will. I don't like liars, autocrats, megalomaniacs, propagandists and control freaks, all of which they clearly are. They have absolutely no right to be herding people around like they intend to, and they are aiming to take us all in disastrous directions.

They're really "making plans for Nigel," and they seem to think somebody gave them the right and the wisdom to do it. But I think they're a top-level disaster waiting to happen, as their glee over COVID and their opportunism with regard to it have clearly exposed. These are bad people, full of arrogance and up to no good. But they will answer for that, of course.

Why would I envy them?

[Immanuel Can]

Marxists claim that Marxism is no more detrimental than democracy is.

It's killed far more people.

In any case, that claim is the opposite of the next claim you cite. How would we say Marxism is "not detrimental" if "it's never been put into practice"? How can something that never existed be known beforehand to be "no more detrimental than democracy"?

That it has never been put into practice.

Well, one of two things is obvious, and you can pick your explanation.

One is that the Marxist apologists who say this are merely lying -- the truth is that Marxism has been being tried for 150 years, and has failed so badly that it has become the world's most homicidal creed. That's one possibility.

The other is that Marxism is so incoherent and unrealistic that in 150 years, no group of people, no matter how large and smart, and no matter how sincerely they tried -- even all the people in China, Russia, Cambodia, Cuba, etc. considered together -- have been able to make the wretched thing work, even once. That's the other possibility.

Which version of things would you prefer?

But I would say it's the former: it's not that Marxism hasn't been tried. It's been tried, and tried hard, and tried by different countries over a long period. But it never works and never will, because it fails to have realistic anthropological, theological or sociological views behind it. It's just a mad dream, not a workable kind of politics.

[Gary Childress]

I don't think anyone envies the uber-rich as much as they oppose some of their policies and practices.

Oh, they certainly do.

Why else call them "the rich" instead of just "the influential"? It's their having of the money that people hate...the power, well, they care less about that.

Look at Pelosi and Biden...they're both stinking rich and getting richer. But the Left sees them as "ours," so they aren't criticized in the media. And the same goes for the bunch with their noses in the troughs who meet at Davos.

When you speak out against the "great reset" do you do so out of "envy?"

No, of course not.

Personally, I don't envy the wealthy. I'm not particularly rich myself (except, of course, by the standards of the Developing World). I'm grateful for what I have, which is more than I deserve, however much or little it is. Likewise, I'm happy to see others do well. And as a Christian, my values are not material. If I envied the wealthy, I would be showing I'm secretly believing that their acquisitions are important. I don't believe they are.

What I know, as a Christian, is that (to quote the great philosopher Spiderman) "with great power comes great responsibility." So wealthy or poor, we answer for ourselves with regard to what God has permitted us. The rich have more to answer for than I do, because they have more power.

No, my issue with the Davos group is different. It has nothing to do with their wealth, which I do not envy. It has to do with their illegitimate determination to interfere with the autonomy of all the people in the world, and to impose their foolish and destructive personal ideology on everyone, regardless of personal conscience and free will. I don't like liars, autocrats, megalomaniacs, propagandists and control freaks, all of which they clearly are. They have absolutely no right to be herding people around like they intend to, and they are aiming to take us all in disastrous directions.

They're really "making plans for Nigel," and they seem to think somebody gave them the right and the wisdom to do it. But I think they're a top-level disaster waiting to happen, as their glee over COVID and their opportunism with regard to it have clearly exposed. These are bad people, full of arrogance and up to no good. But they will answer for that, of course.

Why would I envy them?

From the reading I have done on the topic, reading the sources themselves, I don't think any serious thinkers on the left envy anyone either. It's a shame you haven't read them. You might like Noam Chomsky if you actually understood him.

[henry quirk]

OK. So, in the end, your argument hinges on marxism being awful and free enterprise being a godsend. Just wanted to point that out to you. Otherwise, it would make no sense to want something if it were to the detriment of human welfare. But your position is that marxism is a detriment to human welfare.

I refer you to Aesop's The House Dog & the Wolf.

[Immanuel Can]

I don't think any serious thinkers on the left envy anyone either. It's a shame you haven't read them. You might like Noam Chomsky if you actually understood him.

I know Chomsky. I shall say that much. You would be much surprised by what I "understand."

However, the entire Left is driven by envy. It's all they've really got, actually. Without ressentiment, they cannot get general feelings of alienation, and without alienation, no "revolution."

Why do you think Marx hated religion so much? He was convinced it prevented the envy, the ressentiment and the anger necessary to power his desired revolution. He said it was the masses' "opium," by which he meant a soporific, a sleeping drug, that would keep the masses from the critical rage they needed to build.

[Gary Childress]

I don't think any serious thinkers on the left envy anyone either. It's a shame you haven't read them. You might like Noam Chomsky if you actually understood him.

I know Chomsky. I shall say that much. You would be much surprised by what I "understand."

However, the entire Left is driven by envy. It's all they've really got, actually. Without ressentiment, they cannot get general feelings of alienation, and without alienation, no "revolution."

Why do you think Marx hated religion so much? He was convinced it prevented the envy, the ressentiment and the anger necessary to power his desired revolution. He said it was the masses' "opium," by which he meant a soporific, a sleeping drug, that would keep the masses from the critical rage they needed to build.

Do you think Chomsky is driven by "envy" in his writings? And if so what makes you think that?

[Immanuel Can]

Do you think Chomsky is driven by "envy" in his writings? And if so what makes you think that?

No, envy may be the prime driver of Marxism, but it's not its only driver. Chomsky may have some envy, for all I know, but his primary driver, it seems to me, not that. Rather, it is pride, celebrity, admiration. He loves to talk and talk, and to have people think he's a kind of prophet. And he just can't resist the camera.

I've never admired his political astuteness. His academic contributions to the field of linguistics, yes. His personal wisdom, definitely not.

[henry quirk]

Rather, it is pride, celebrity, admiration. He loves to talk and talk, and to have people think he's a kind of prophet. And he just can't resist the camera.

8B6E3BFC-EA44-4A79-B82D-7E289C781825.jpeg (46.62 KiB) Viewed 996 times

0AE5FD9F-1BCE-4CBD-B5C5-F4EA46BA3EF9.png (208.16 KiB) Viewed 996 times

[Gary Childress]

Do you think Chomsky is driven by "envy" in his writings? And if so what makes you think that?

No, envy may be the prime driver of Marxism, but it's not its only driver. Chomsky may have some envy, for all I know, but his primary driver, it seems to me, not that. Rather, it is pride, celebrity, admiration. He loves to talk and talk, and to have people think he's a kind of prophet. And he just can't resist the camera.

I've never admired his political astuteness. His academic contributions to the field of linguistics, yes. His personal wisdom, definitely not.

Do you think Marx envied the rich? He would have had much opportunity to become one of them had he chosen such a life. Do you think the poor just need to accept their lot in life or do you think they are often justified for whatever envy or indignancy they may have?

[Immanuel Can]

Do you think Marx envied the rich?

Have you read his biography? It's clear he had contempt for everybody but himself, and thought of himself as a very great man. Not only that, but he thought he had a right to trash the world in his towering rage. He really was a brat.

Have you read any of his poetry? You get a pretty clear view of the inside of that mind.

"… Worlds I would destroy forever,
Since I can create no world;

... The world which bulks between me and the Abyss
I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses.

...Embracing me, the world will dumbly pass away,
And then sink down to utter nothingness,
Perished, with no existence — that would be really living!"

What a lovely man!

Well, he was right, after a fashion. He proved to be a great disaster.

Do you think the poor just need to accept their lot in life

Not a bit!

I think it's on you and me, the privileged, to show charity and mercy. But it's only on you and me to do what we can with what we're given; it's not our role to dictate to others how they must behave, far less to play God and reashape the world in the image of our desires or our version of "fairness."

Every man answers to God. There are no exceptions. And it will come as no surprise to you, Gary, that you and I are not Him.

[Gary Childress]

Do you think Marx envied the rich?

Have you read his biography? It's clear he had contempt for everybody but himself, and thought of himself as a very great man. Not only that, but he thought he had a right to trash the world in his towering rage. He really was a brat.

Have you read any of his poetry? You get a pretty clear view of the inside of that mind.

"… Worlds I would destroy forever,
Since I can create no world;

... The world which bulks between me and the Abyss
I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses.

...Embracing me, the world will dumbly pass away,
And then sink down to utter nothingness,
Perished, with no existence — that would be really living!"

What a lovely man!

Well, he was right, after a fashion. He proved to be a great disaster.

Do you think the poor just need to accept their lot in life

Not a bit!

I think it's on you and me, the privileged, to show charity and mercy. But it's only on you and me to do what we can with what we're given; it's not our role to dictate to others how they must behave, far less to play God and reashape the world in the image of our desires or our version of "fairness."

Every man answers to God. There are no exceptions. And it will come as no surprise to you, Gary, that you and I are not Him.

If there's a God in this world, then God can knock himself out punishing the unbelievers and "ungrateful". Frankly, I don't see what there is for anyone to be grateful for in this world. I've tried for years to find happiness and am convinced it doesn't exist in this world. I've tried embracing God but it hasn't solved anything either. I'm just as lonely and miserable now as I was before giving religion a try. to be honest, I think God created one screwed up world. He gave us a sex drive, then told us we're sinners to appease it. Is that some kind of sick joke? WTF???

[Immanuel Can]

Frankly, I don't see what there is for anyone to be grateful for in this world.

Well, let's see...

You posted a picture of yourself on a court, playing tennis. You look like you've got all your limbs. You have eye glasses. Without insult, you look like you eat. You have shoes. You have clothes...even some just for sport. You are enjoying recreation, and are holding a tennis racquet in your hands that probably could be parlayed into a couple of corrugated roofs to shelter families in Colombia or enough medicine to cure a half dozen Africans of river blindness...

So what was your question, again?

I've tried for years to find happiness and am convinced it doesn't exist in this world.

Was there somebody who promised you you'd be happy in this world?

Well, I'm sure you know that happiness is not a thing one can "find". It's a byproduct. It comes when one is finding one's life significant and meaningful in some way, or when one feels loved and secure. When one is not finding happiness, it's invariably because something else is out-of-sorts in one's life. Being unhappy is then a symptom, but not a description of the root condition.

So, Gary, the real question is, what is missing from your life?

I've tried embracing God but it hasn't solved anything either. I'm just as lonely and miserable now as I was before giving religion a try.

I don't recommend "religion" to anyone, for precisely that reason. Religion is man's attempt to engineer some sort of "deal" with God, on his own terms. That never works. At best, it anaesthetizes one to the lack of a real relationship with God. At worst, it makes one merely a zealot.

What one needs is an actual relationship with God -- something much more than "religion."

I think God created one screwed up world.

He didn't. We did.

He gave us a sex drive, then told us we're sinners to appease it.

He invented marriage. It we who messed that up, too. And loneliness is the consequence.