The Student Room Group

Why does Marxism refuse to die?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by McTosh
We had Democracy centuries before Marx was born, and he wasn't western European.



I didn't say Marxists invented the concept of democracy.

Marx was german and did most of his work in the UK.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
d when western european states did decend into authoratarianism marxists always apposed it.


Ya and one great example of Marxist opposition to authoritarianism was the Nazi collaborator, Stalin supporter and sympathiser, KGB stooge and Marxist icon Jean Paul Sartre. He's one of the greatest minds of the Marxist movement and I cannot think of a better example of how detached your statement is from history and reality than him.

When Nazi Germany took over France and started slaughtering Jews, he wrote for their newspapers, attended their parties, had sex with their women, justified their hatred for the Jews and hated on the Jews along their side to further his career. When the Nazis were defeated and communism rose in power in Russia and whilst Stalin was openly slaughtering millons of people and sending them to the gulags, Sartre was singing his praise in Russia and across Europe, attending his parties, practicing self censorship so as to support Stalin and sleeping with his secret service agents. Not only that but he went so far as justifying Stalin's death camps and censoring any and all news that put Stalin in a bad light in the newspapers over which he had control..... only to admit that he was lying after the fall of Stalin...his lies having contributed to the empowerment of authoritarianism and the deaths of millions of people.

"In the first days of the revolt you must kill!" Jean Paul Sartre's justification for Stalins concentration camps.

Marxists always apposed authoritarianism? no....marxists have been an integral part to the spread of authoritarianism and the deaths of many millions of people.
(edited 5 years ago)
i was told that bismarck invented the welfare state in order to compete with marxism.
Original post by Pinkisk
Ya and one great example of Marxist opposition to authoritarianism was the Nazi collaborator, Stalin supporter and sympathiser, KGB stooge and Marxist icon Jean Paul Sartre. He's one of the greatest minds of the Marxist movement and I cannot think of a better example of how detached your statement is from history and reality than him.



Ok I will give you that. The allying of stalinism and nazism was real. It wasn't the only thing Marxists were doing however. Communists always made up a bulk of anti-fascist resistance. They were not a monolithic block.
Original post by Anti-Vaxx
Jewish-zionist domination of international banking and military security. In a nutshell.

Anti-semetic conspiracy theory.
Original post by Davij038
Because his ideas are actually where society is going under the present neoliberal agenda* as he understood it:

Tthe erosion of borders, traditional family units, religion: no more bigotry- we will all be materialistic individuals pursuing our own interests with an apparently benevolent government paying the bill as almost everything is done by automation now.

Basically liberal utopia. You can pump yourself full of now legal drugs and the state will pay to get you detoxed. You can abandon your kids and the state will look after them. You can do whatever you please so long as it does not directly harm anyone else (aside from abortion obviously which you can get whenever you want) :, As others have noted its strikingly Similar to Ian Banks’s ‘’Culture’ faction.


Oof.
Because idiots exist.
Original post by Pinkisk
Anti-semetic conspiracy theory.

So Jews aren’t over represented in international finance and the military industrial complex? Lol
The late, great Jonathan Bowden gave a fantastic speech on the modern incarnation of Marxism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE_60V4a3yM
Lefites like its ideals and accept the death toll. Marxism is as bad as fascism and would be treated the same if USSR caused a war
Original post by Miss Maddie
Lefites like its ideals and accept the death toll. Marxism is as bad as fascism and would be treated the same if USSR caused a war

How is fascism as bad as Marxism?
Original post by Davij038
So Jews aren’t over represented in international finance and the military industrial complex? Lol

There are many Jews in the pornography industry too...does that mean Judaism promotes pornography?...I mean, that's what your implying isn't it? that there's Jewish conspiracy against the world...Freakin ideas like this are what lead to genocide.
Original post by Pinkisk
There are many Jews in the pornography industry too...does that mean Judaism promotes pornography?...I mean, that's what your implying isn't it? that there's Jewish conspiracy against the world...Freakin ideas like this are what lead to genocide.


This is a huge leap. And Jews can promote pornography for profit and isolate themselves from its influence. To my knowledge there is nothing in the torah that suggests the sale of pornography is prohibited business.
Original post by Arran90
Marxism is not a popular political ideology in Britain but why does it refuse to die? What exactly is so attractive about it that keeps its flame burning?

Marxism as a means to understand and explain how human societies come to exist and are organised has a lot to attract it. Marxism as a political project, i.e. as a porgamme of change towards 'how things should be' as opposed to 'why things are the way they are' has been less successful. We're at the high water-mark of capitalism right now but we should be a little humble about that, plenty of self-confident and thriving civilisations in the past have become mere history.
Because people really want all workers in a country to be paid the exact same, regardless of their work function and performance, and share all of their resource properties and have none of them be privitalised? I dunno man, people are really desperate to attain the legal right to use my Bugatti however they want, even if they never worked a damn day to earn the licence to do so like I did.
Original post by LongMarch
This is a huge leap. And Jews can promote pornography for profit and isolate themselves from its influence. To my knowledge there is nothing in the torah that suggests the sale of pornography is prohibited business.


Original post by Davij038
Ha ha, yes actually! But not for the Jews of course*, in much the same way Jews champion immigration in their host countries but not in Israel. If you’re interested in looking it up, there some videos stil on YouTube where Eric Striker and Mike Enoch talk in depth about this (if Jewish owned YouTube hasn’t removed them yet)



* (Israel requires you to get an agreement with internet providers in a strong attempt to limit pornograhy amongst its population) this among other measures that would be frowned upon by ‘liberal’ jewish Commentators in the west may contribute to Israel being the only first world country to have a growing population.


Ok, this is proper anti-semetic and racist and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. In Judaism we are required to dress decent. Its considered sinful for women to shake a strange man's hand. Its considered sinful for a strange man to be alone with a woman...how can a religion that promotes such strict standards of morality promote pornography for anyone? The Talmud deals with sex and marriage in many chapters. Sex outside marriage is considered sinful. Sex is considered a harmonious, holy, intimate and private matter between a husband and a wife. It is considered sinful to do it in public. Jewish law considers Pornography very sinful. Everything surrounding sex in Judaism must, by Jewish Law, be done with dignity and modesty...
Original post by Pinkisk
Ok, this is proper anti-semetic and racist and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. In Judaism we are required to dress decent. Its considered sinful for women to shake a strange man's hand. Its considered sinful for a strange man to be alone with a woman...how can a religion that promotes such strict standards of morality promote pornography for anyone? The Talmud deals with sex and marriage in many chapters. Sex outside marriage is considered sinful. Sex is considered a harmonious, holy, intimate and private matter between a husband and a wife. It is considered sinful to do it in public. Jewish law considers Pornography very sinful. Everything surrounding sex in Judaism must, by Jewish Law, be done with dignity and modesty...


Since when did jews ever care about the fate of the goyim? and subverting the truth to protect the faith is hardly unprecedented
https://www.ou.org/torah/parsha/rabbi-sacks-on-parsha/permitted-tell-lie/
Original post by Pinkisk
Ok, this is proper anti-semetic and racist and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. In Judaism we are required to dress decent. Its considered sinful for women to shake a strange man's hand. Its considered sinful for a strange man to be alone with a woman...how can a religion that promotes such strict standards of morality promote pornography for anyone? The Talmud deals with sex and marriage in many chapters. Sex outside marriage is considered sinful. Sex is considered a harmonious, holy, intimate and private matter between a husband and a wife. It is considered sinful to do it in public. Jewish law considers Pornography very sinful. Everything surrounding sex in Judaism must, by Jewish Law, be done with dignity and modesty...

For Jews, not for Goyim.

In the same way that under Islam, lying is forbidden except in the use of Taqiya where it is permitted if you are reviving non Muslims for the benefit of Islam
Original post by Davij038
For Jews, not for Goyim.

In the same way that under Islam, lying is forbidden except in the use of Taqiya where it is permitted if you are reviving non Muslims for the benefit of Islam


in sync man.
Original post by Axiomasher
Marxism as a means to understand and explain how human societies come to exist and are organised has a lot to attract it. Marxism as a political project, i.e. as a porgamme of change towards 'how things should be' as opposed to 'why things are the way they are' has been less successful. We're at the high water-mark of capitalism right now but we should be a little humble about that, plenty of self-confident and thriving civilisations in the past have become mere history.

Marx was an immensely important economist and philosopher whose ideas have been adopted by capitalists so as to better preserve capitalism itself; his crisis theory describes the tendency of capitalism to lurch from crisis to crisis as the capital owners attempt to keep a greater share of the profits, thus depriving workers of the necessary means to consume the goods in the very first place and causing a crisis in demand. This was a central contradiction at the heart of capitalism, and you don't need to be a Marxist to recognise that this was immensely important in the development of Keynesian economics as an attempt to smooth out such lurches in the business cycle. In the post-2008 crash, where the failure to step in would have destroyed the economy.

This thread has talked a lot about the Soviet Union. It is insulting to say that Marxists cannot also condemn such barbarism. Take Rosa Luxembourg, for instance. Or literally any anarcho-communist. To call someone a 'Marxist', like calling someone a 'Capitalist' or a 'Keynesian' entails a huge amount of variability within it; those who would call themselves Marxists form a broad, chaotic and internally divided group. This is for a good reason - Marxism is bloody complicated. Professors dedicate their whole lives to understanding it, with all of its complicated Hegelian links. Now, to address the point about the Soviet Union more directly. Ideologies all have had bloody consequences. Christianity led to the Crusades, a horrific series of events. But to dismiss Christianity as a whole because of its barbaric consequences would be absurd, because there are certain elements we can take from it without necessarily believing in the whole thing. The same is true of Marxism; some of his ideas are extremely useful. Others are not, and can be used to justify the most evil and hideous forms of authoritarianism. But the fact that some of his ideas are bad does not justify totally dismissing him as an economic and philosophical thinker. To do so would be the most crude and dogmatic form of stupidity.

Some have stated that we can learn nothing useful from Marxism. I have vastly oversimplified crisis theory above. But where his ideas really shine are on his critique of capitalism. He exposed it as a wasteful, alienating system that degrades and dehumanises the individual through utterly monotonous work. This is not to say that he thought it was all bad; he described it as 'dynamic'. But dynamic as in a lifeless robot. I'm going to link a Yanis Varoufakis article because I have become bored.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/apr/20/yanis-varoufakis-marx-crisis-communist-manifesto

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you