Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The the trendy died hair lefty hipsters don’t talk about Marx, I agree it’s correct. They are basically programmed with a script laid out by postmodern radical academics who had an agenda of social change. They do not realise this and most of them are not even aware of these thinkers. Just know - Marxism was rebranded because it was no longer sexy after people found out what was happening in the Soviet Union. It is not paranoid because the precise things that these people said are being reflected in these groups I described.

    You are obsessed with Marxism. Marxism is about a critique of capitalism, not about SJW/ safe sapces/ PC culture.

    Again the strange obsession that the right have with Marxism, which even the left don't is really bizarre.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    There are so many ways people are discriminated against that should be an outrage to the liberal left (to the true right, to discriminate is just your natural right), what about jobs that only require drivers? Discrimination against non-drivers, or strip joints that only want women? Chinese restaurants that hire only Chinese? Not enough men in play schools or as nurses? First class sections of airplanes that only allow people with lots of money? Fighter pilots have to have 20/20 vision. What about someone born with bad eye sight?
    Again - you are mixing your examples. You are confusing discriminating against people on the basis of the skills they may have (acceptable and desirable) and discriminating against people based on their characteristics (undesirable)

    In other words - you are looking for an argument.

    Are you really telling me that black people should not be permitted to do certain jobs for example?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You are obsessed with Marxism. Marxism is about a critique of capitalism, not about SJW/ safe sapces/ PC culture.

    Again the strange obsession that the right have with Marxism, which even the left don't is really bizarre.
    The left put a tree in the road and if someone points to the tree or says it should be removed they then say that they are obsessed with the tree. The most prominent academics between 1950 and 1980 were Marxists who espoused a post-Marxist view. ( I posted an interview with Herbert Marcuse to prove this). These people had a tremendous influence on society and education. I am not obsessed with Marxism, I am just relaying the reality of these academics. The same way I am not obsessed with the tree, I just want to move it off the road so I can drive past.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Again - you are mixing your examples. You are confusing discriminating against people on the basis of the skills they may have (acceptable and desirable) and discriminating against people based on their characteristics (undesirable)

    In other words - you are looking for an argument.

    Are you really telling me that black people should not be permitted to do certain jobs for example?
    Many of those examples I provided were characteristic not skills.

    If I have a job to do, then I should be able to hire what I want. If I only want to hire Eskimo painters, cleaners, builders, trade reconciliation specialists and directors then it should be my natural right to do so.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airplanebee2)
    The left put a tree in the road and if someone points to the tree or says it should be removed they then say that they are obsessed with the tree. The most prominent academics between 1950 and 1980 were Marxists who espoused a post-Marxist view. ( I posted an interview with Herbert Marcuse to prove this). These people had a tremendous influence on society and education. I am not obsessed with Marxism, I am just relaying the reality of these academics. The same way I am not obsessed with the tree, I just want to move it off the road so I can drive past.
    No, the left don't do that.

    The vast majority of left wing people are left wing due to their opinions on issues such as public services, employment rights, housing, education, nationalisation etc.

    Yet you seem to focus on a tiny amount of edgy students as if they represented the entire left. It's totally, totally bizarre. No one cares about Marxism in a social context, except those on the right who seem to be utterly obsessed with this non-existent idea of 'cultural Marxism.'

    Academics only really refer to Marx in the context of critiquing capitalism.
    • Offline

      20
      (Original post by Bornblue)
      Again the strange obsession that the right have with Marxism, which even the left don't is really bizarre.
      Blairites aren't left-wing, mate.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      6
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Bornblue)
      No, the left don't do that.

      The vast majority of left wing people are left wing due to their opinions on issues such as public services, employment rights, housing, education, nationalisation etc.

      Yet you seem to focus on a tiny amount of edgy students as if they represented the entire left. It's totally, totally bizarre. No one cares about Marxism in a social context, except those on the right who seem to be utterly obsessed with this non-existent idea of 'cultural Marxism.'

      Academics only really refer to Marx in the context of critiquing capitalism.
      (Original post by Bornblue)
      Some on the right seem far more obsessed with Marx than the left do these days. It's really bizarre.

      I think 'Marxism' is just a generic term they use for anything they don't like, rather than it having anything to do whatsoever with Marx.
      No there is a factual and objective thread where Marxism morphed into the ideas of Antonio Gramsci, Adorno, Horkheimer, Derrida, Foucault, Herbert Marcuse etc. and there is a synthesis of these postmodern thinkers which can be summed up as: The west has an oppressive and authoritarian ideology which results in a negative cultural hegemony resulting in inequalities and alienation. The solution is to bring about a consortium of grievances so large as to actually challenge the superstructure.
      (Original post by Bornblue)
      No, the left don't do that.

      The vast majority of left wing people are left wing due to their opinions on issues such as public services, employment rights, housing, education, nationalisation etc.

      Yet you seem to focus on a tiny amount of edgy students as if they represented the entire left. It's totally, totally bizarre. No one cares about Marxism in a social context, except those on the right who seem to be utterly obsessed with this non-existent idea of 'cultural Marxism.'

      Academics only really refer to Marx in the context of critiquing capitalism.
      So what are race, gender, sexuality and religion equality. 100 years ago they did not exist and the only equality that was conceived was in Marxism for the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Is it a coincidence that they are now the centre of our political message and that the ideas were peddled by Marxist academics 50 years ago?

      The ideas that were considered radical left 50 years ago are now just normal so you don’t see them.

      Sadie Khan recently said we should get rid of Mister and Misses on London Underground not to offend transfers. Imagine if someone said that pre-1960, do you think they would be able to hold public office? What about gay Christian marriage pre 1960? What about making verbal ****ging off a prisonable criminal offence (for non protected groups ****ging off protected group.) pre 1960 they would have said it’s an injustice. What about the idea that white history is evil, evil white slave owners and terrible Southern American Christians. Try that one pre 1960. These people are are calling normal and only concerned with employment, housing, education etc. They are imbued with radical ideas and take them as so normal that they simply reject as nonsense may challenge to it - to them challenging these ideas is like saying the moon is made of cheese.
      Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
      • Offline

        20
        (Original post by Airplanebee2)
        The ideas that were considered radical left 50 years ago are now just normal so you don’t see them.
        That happened with Nazism too, in a gradual process that started with Darwin's theory of evolution.

        It is just a natural evolution of society's hivemind.

        Nothing is more dangerous to the left that political correctness. It is all too easy to link being anti-banker to being anti-semitic; and to sideline the real leftist issues (capitalism in general) by appeasing the population with addressing non-issues ("diversity").
        • Community Assistant
        Online

        15
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Airplanebee2)
        No there is a factual and objective thread where Marxism morphed into the ideas of Antonio Gramsci, Adorno, Horkheimer, Derrida, Foucault, Herbert Marcuse etc. and there is a synthesis of these postmodern thinkers which can be summed up as: The west has an oppressive and authoritarian ideology which results in a negative cultural hegemony resulting in inequalities and alienation. The solution is to bring about a consortium of grievances so large as to actually challenge the superstructure.

        So what are race, gender, sexuality and religion equality. 100 years ago they did not exist and the only equality that was conceived was in Marxism for the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Is it a coincidence that they are now the centre of our political message and that the ideas were peddled by Marxist academics 50 years ago?

        The ideas that were considered radical left 50 years ago are now just normal so you don’t see them.

        Sadie Khan recently said we should get rid of Mister and Misses on London Underground not to offend transfers. Imagine if someone said that pre-1960, do you think they would be able to hold public office? What about gay Christian marriage pre 1960? What about making verbal ****ging off a prisonable criminal offence (for non protected groups ****ging off protected group.) pre 1960 they would have said it’s an injustice. What about the idea that white history is evil, evil white slave owners and terrible Southern American Christians. Try that one pre 1960. These people are are calling normal and only concerned with employment, housing, education etc. They are imbued with radical ideas and take them as so normal that they simply reject as nonsense may challenge to it - to them challenging these ideas is like saying the moon is made of cheese.
        No one cares about any of that, except people such as yourself. No one cares about the superstructure, they want better public services.

        People want more money to public services, the NHS, better employment rights and environmental protections. This obsession with the non-existent cultural Marxism comes from the right.

        I'll say it again. Marxism is an economic analysis. It has nothing to do with any of what you've just written.
        • Community Assistant
        Online

        15
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by FriendlyPenguin)
        That happened with Nazism too, in a gradual process that started with Darwin's theory of evolution.

        It is just a natural evolution of society's hivemind.

        Nothing is more dangerous to the left that political correctness. It is all too easy to link being anti-banker to being anti-semitic; and to sideline the real leftist issues (capitalism in general) by appeasing the population with addressing non-issues ("diversity".
        The left is about challenging and changing the economic system. Centrists are about diversity.

        The only thing more annoying than political correctness is the right wing hyperbole and obsession with 'PC culture'. A lot of what those on the right describe as 'PC culture' is more accurately described as 'don't be an ******* culture'.
        Offline

        20
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Airplanebee2)
        No there is a factual and objective thread where Marxism morphed into the ideas of Antonio Gramsci, Adorno, Horkheimer, Derrida, Foucault, Herbert Marcuse etc. and there is a synthesis of these postmodern thinkers which can be summed up as: The west has an oppressive and authoritarian ideology which results in a negative cultural hegemony resulting in inequalities and alienation. The solution is to bring about a consortium of grievances so large as to actually challenge the superstructure.

        So what are race, gender, sexuality and religion equality. 100 years ago they did not exist and the only equality that was conceived was in Marxism for the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Is it a coincidence that they are now the centre of our political message and that the ideas were peddled by Marxist academics 50 years ago?

        The ideas that were considered radical left 50 years ago are now just normal so you don’t see them.

        Sadie Khan recently said we should get rid of Mister and Misses on London Underground not to offend transfers. Imagine if someone said that pre-1960, do you think they would be able to hold public office? What about gay Christian marriage pre 1960? What about making verbal ****ging off a prisonable criminal offence (for non protected groups ****ging off protected group.) pre 1960 they would have said it’s an injustice. What about the idea that white history is evil, evil white slave owners and terrible Southern American Christians. Try that one pre 1960. These people are are calling normal and only concerned with employment, housing, education etc. They are imbued with radical ideas and take them as so normal that they simply reject as nonsense may challenge to it - to them challenging these ideas is like saying the moon is made of cheese.
        The economy is more right wing now than it ever has been in living memory. Atlee was elected on the basis of large scale nationalisations and that consensus was held until the 80's, even Thatcher thought privatising the railways was a step too far. Now Corbyn only wants energy and transport back in public hands and that makes him a communist.

        Slavery is a stain on our history. Yes plenty of other cultures were at it as well throughout time but it doesn't make it ok.

        I don't see what's radical about behaving without bias with regards to race, sex or religion? Maybe you can help me out on that one?
        Offline

        20
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Bornblue)
        No one cares about any of that, except people such as yourself. No one cares about the superstructure, they want better public services.

        People want more money to public services, the NHS, better employment rights and environmental protections. This obsession with the non-existent cultural Marxism comes from the right.

        I'll say it again. Marxism is an economic analysis. It has nothing to do with any of what you've just written.
        Exactly, people care about the here and now.

        Is my housing be affordable?

        Can I get a GP appointment?

        etc...

        I've never encountered anyone in real life who gives a **** about any of the other stuff he's rambling on about.
        Offline

        9
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by JamesN88)
        Exactly, people care about the here and now.

        Is my housing be affordable?

        Can I get a GP appointment?

        etc...

        I've never encountered anyone in real life who gives a **** about any of the other stuff he's rambling on about.
        Yet most people realise public spending has to be paid for either by taxes or borrowing (which accrues interest and will cause trouble for the country in the future).

        It requires a view to be taken on politics, not simply a shopping list of what you would like.
        Offline

        20
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Hatter_2)
        Yet most people realise public spending has to be paid for either by taxes or borrowing (which accrues interest and will cause trouble for the country in the future).

        It requires a view to be taken on politics, not simply a shopping list of what you would like.
        Borrowing to grow the economy is a legitimate approach and has worked before. It's only since the 2008 crash that the narrative of all borrowing being bad has taken hold.
        Offline

        9
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by JamesN88)
        Borrowing to grow the economy is a legitimate approach and has worked before. It's only since the 2008 crash that the narrative of all borrowing being bad has taken hold.
        I agree, however we have had a budget deficit for a decade, and it's still at £50bn a year, and in a period of growth. This is reckless and unsustainable.

        By all means invest in the economy, training for the skills we need etc. But we have to find cutbacks in public spending from somewhere.
        Offline

        20
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Hatter_2)
        I agree, however we have had a budget deficit for a decade, and it's still at £50bn a year, and in a period of growth. This is reckless and unsustainable.

        By all means invest in the economy, training for the skills we need etc. But we have to find cutbacks in public spending from somewhere.
        Housing is where it's really needed. The govt can borrow cheaply to build and the assets will pay for themselves. It's purely a political choice not to do it.

        Everywhere outside the South East is crying out for infrastructure investment as well, which again pays for itself over time.
        Offline

        9
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by JamesN88)
        Housing is where it's really needed. The govt can borrow cheaply to build and the assets will pay for themselves. It's purely a political choice not to do it.

        Everywhere outside the South East is crying out for infrastructure investment as well, which again pays for itself over time.
        I completely agree. By moving the focus away from the South East and London, it will be easier to find the space to build homes. We need to help developers clean up unused brownfield sites rather than using up the green belt.

        Right to Buy is madness until we have the investment in new council homes and train a larger workforce out of the (still too large) unemployed.

        And the demand can be managed by having a more sensible immigration policy post-Brexit, where we don't have 300k net per year and not everybody who comes to work here has the right to permanently settle.
        Offline

        20
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Airplanebee2)
        Well you managed to insult a group (exactly what I’m sure you wouldn’t do to protected groups like blacks, Muslims, gays and women - right?) but people who challenge postmodern social theory are fair game, but you haven’t managed to actually argue philosophically. “You’re a bunch of nutters” is not a philosophical rebuttal. Try harder.
        I don't need to try harder. You are a conspiracy theory nutjob. Plenty of others have already shown that.
        Offline

        18
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Airplanebee2)
        Many of those examples I provided were characteristic not skills.

        If I have a job to do, then I should be able to hire what I want. If I only want to hire Eskimo painters, cleaners, builders, trade reconciliation specialists and directors then it should be my natural right to do so.
        And that is where you are foul of the law. What does it matter who you hire in terms of ethnicity if all applicants can paint to a high standard?

        I think you are trying to justify racism.
        Offline

        15
        ReputationRep:
        >Soviet union
        > liberal

        Pick one
       
       
       
      Reply
      Submit reply
      TSR Support Team

      We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

      Updated: November 4, 2017
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
      Useful resources

      Groups associated with this forum:

      View associated groups
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.