Harrekin
Well-Known Member
So you're arguing against the private ownership of goods?
That's fucking ridiculous, even China is moving away from that flavour of retardism.
Question for Teabaggers, Why Obama?
- Thread starter TheGreenMaester
- Start date
That's fucking ridiculous, even China is moving away from that flavour of retardism.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
he's not gonna answer because the answer is obvious.
Fuck Joe.
Joe is an asshole, otherwise he would never have come into possession of the WORKER'S property called Joe's Soap Company. Joe may have started the business, founded the company, created the formula, and made the first 500 thousand bars of soap with his own hands befor he kidnapped his first Lumpen Proletarian Worker and forced that poor fool into a life of drudgery making soap for Mean Ol Joe, but He Didn't Build That.
it's SOCIETY'S soap company and Joe has been stealing OUR "Means of Production" and "Natural Resources" to his own ends for too long.
so Joe goes up against the wall and is "Compensated" with a .30 caliber bullet with the rest of the mean ol bastards who werent willing to share their shit with the lefty marxists who dont know anything about marx.
Joe can rest easy in his trtench full of corpses though, since dippledink Abandonintellect will be tossed in on top with the rest of the "Useful Idiots" and "Fellow Travelers" after the revolution has not futher need for them and society is "de-radicalized" in preparation gfor 60 years of marxist socialist rule.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
You guys love talking about Marx.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
if you actually knew anything about marx you wouldnt have to hide behind vague statements and the psuedomarxist leftism of the Green Party and their Eco-Socialism platform.
if you actually KNEW anything about marx you would not act surprised when you qquote bertie russel in your signature
Protip: Bertie Russel was a HUGE MARXIST. He remained a HUGE MARXIST till the day he died and assholes like you started misquoting him.
Johnny Retro
Well-Known Member
For teh lulz
The Karl Marx depicted in Jonathan Sperber’s absorbing, meticulously researched biography will be unnervingly familiar to anyone who has had even the most fleeting acquaintance with radical politics. Here is a man never more passionate than when attacking his own side, saddled with perennial money problems and still reliant on his parents for cash, constantly plotting new, world-changing ventures yet having trouble with both deadlines and personal hygiene, living in rooms that some might call bohemian, others plain “slummy,” and who can be maddeningly inconsistent when not lapsing into elaborate flights of theory and unintelligible abstraction.
The Karl Marx depicted in Jonathan Sperber’s absorbing, meticulously researched biography will be unnervingly familiar to anyone who has had even the most fleeting acquaintance with radical politics. Here is a man never more passionate than when attacking his own side, saddled with perennial money problems and still reliant on his parents for cash, constantly plotting new, world-changing ventures yet having trouble with both deadlines and personal hygiene, living in rooms that some might call bohemian, others plain “slummy,” and who can be maddeningly inconsistent when not lapsing into elaborate flights of theory and unintelligible abstraction.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Therefore member of the illuminati?
I'm going to just assume you have never read his books, since at the very least, I think you have consistency.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Here, in sequence, Russel delivers anticapitalist and anti-state rhetoric.
So while this child decries him a Marxist, as if such categorization alone would be effective in rendering the whole of the man's works to be a catalog of falsehoods even if it were correct, it is incorrect.
Kynes excels at criticizing things he does not grasp.
As you can see, Russel, in his essay titled "Political Ideals", identifies with anarchist leanings.
http://www.angelfire.com/art/megathink/articles/political.html
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Here ya go AC, this is from international Socialism. You'll like this site.
http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=616
In 1871 both Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin, the most prominent representatives of the international socialist and anarchist movements respectively, welcomed the Paris Commune as a practical realisation of their visions of socialism.[SUP]3[/SUP] This fact would seem to confirm the claim made by Daniel Guérin in his classic history of anarchism that, beyond the sound and fury of sectarian wrangling, “anarchism is really a synonym for socialism”.[SUP]4[/SUP] If, additionally, we accept Noam Chomsky’s comment that “the consistent anarchist…will be a socialist, but a socialist of a particular sort”: a “libertarian socialist”,[SUP]5[/SUP] then perhaps we might be led to view anarchism as a variant of what Hal Draper called, from a classical Marxist perspective, the tradition of “socialism from below”.[SUP]6[/SUP]
Even your own people are calling you a Marxist, you should read his stuff, you'd be a fan. His own label for his theories was scientific socialism, sounds really smart.
http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=616
In 1871 both Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin, the most prominent representatives of the international socialist and anarchist movements respectively, welcomed the Paris Commune as a practical realisation of their visions of socialism.[SUP]3[/SUP] This fact would seem to confirm the claim made by Daniel Guérin in his classic history of anarchism that, beyond the sound and fury of sectarian wrangling, “anarchism is really a synonym for socialism”.[SUP]4[/SUP] If, additionally, we accept Noam Chomsky’s comment that “the consistent anarchist…will be a socialist, but a socialist of a particular sort”: a “libertarian socialist”,[SUP]5[/SUP] then perhaps we might be led to view anarchism as a variant of what Hal Draper called, from a classical Marxist perspective, the tradition of “socialism from below”.[SUP]6[/SUP]
Even your own people are calling you a Marxist, you should read his stuff, you'd be a fan. His own label for his theories was scientific socialism, sounds really smart.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I have read Marx. I know about the similarities. Similar is not identical. To give something a label that does not fit, simply in order to reject, is the definition of facile.
Now stop telling me about Marx, I fucking know about Marx. I am not the one around here pushing Marx. Some of Marx, not all of Marx, I don't agree with his revolution or his antisemitism. For that matter, I actually agree with some of Locke and Smith. That does not mean I agree with the idea of God having sanctioned the right to own the earth.
So yes, I agree with Marx's diagnosis of capitalism, no I do not share in his revolution or in his view of end state communism. You boys are trying so hard to keep this focused on Marx, and that's cool, but if you're not just trolling me, than look at it from my perspective, I'm getting sick of pointing this out.
Yet another debate derailed by idiot republicans who lack the ability to grasp an abstract concept, unable to understand what anarchism and libertarian socialism are, insisting therefore that they are just some footnote by Marx that didn't make it into the manifesto. To compound this, you call yourself a libertarian and think anarchocapitalism is not an oxymoron.
Seriously, we can have a debate for hours over the finer points of marxism until I either give in and get sick of repeating the same thing, or we can skip Marx altogether. Either way, you'll refuse to understand anarchism by choice through dishonesty and I'll point out your dishonesty but you won't even know that your mind is closed by choice.
I know more about capitalism than you do also.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
you are an odd dude AC
Whenever you espoused particular Marxist nuggets and got called out on it you denied any relationship in your ideology. Now that you've had it pointed out using your hero's words you act like you've known it all along and are a Karl Marx expert.
Then you call me dishonest.
Whenever you espoused particular Marxist nuggets and got called out on it you denied any relationship in your ideology. Now that you've had it pointed out using your hero's words you act like you've known it all along and are a Karl Marx expert.
Then you call me dishonest.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
OK, I can see where you're coming from. I don't agree with all of Marx and I'm tired of talking about him. I'm not the one who brought him up. I'm closer to Proudhon than either Marx or Bakunin, but I never bring up Proudhon, because outside of his ideas which I agree with, I find him to have been a repugnant character.
I'm making certain to highlight who it is that brings up Marx and who it is that makes such a huge effort to keep discussion focused on Marx and honestly, it is because he fucking loves Marx.
Even Richard Nixon had a few good ideas. I mean he did at least desire that inflation be a solved problem. Does that mean I would have shilled his innocence during watergate?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
if you believe he knows anything at all about marx, then i got a bridge for sale....
he doesnt recognize marx's definition of socialism, marx's plan for socialism as an interstitial stage on the path to utopian commmunism, doesnt believe that lenin and trotsky were true believers in marxism because stalin threw them out of the bolshevik party, thus they couldnt have been "real communists", as if stalin were the final aarbiter of who could wear the mantle of marxism.
he doesnt know SHIT about marx's theories, or marx's contemporaries like Mussolini, who developed his own brand of marxist socialist society by elimiunating the violent revolution and instead taking a more measured approach through democracy and gradual expansion of the state until full socialism is achieved, before eventually evolving into utopian communism. (fascism/democratic socialism)
he doesnt recognize marxism's industrial vanguard as re-envisioned by mao and pol pot as an agrarian vanguard, doesnt see the commonality between the urban "intellectual vanguard" of the occupy dinks, and doesnt recognize the international socialist and communist organizations as marxist either,
he only accepts marxism in the context of his secret made up-language where every word may SOUND familiar, and the syntax may SEEM like english but the meaning of every phrase is entirely different.
and no, you cannot get a translation from his secret language, since the phrase "can i get that in english" in his secret language means "i concede every point, you win"
he is not dishonest, any more than a retard is intellectually lazy.
he has no concept of how honesty works or how to process any information which contradicts his crazy notions. thats why everything goes through the filter of his secret made-up laanguage, where anarchy = utopia, wealth = crime and property = theft.
thats how everything from factories and forests to seeds and shovels become the Means of Production and thus are State property, despite his insistence that there will be no State, yet everyone is compelled (totally without compulsion) to adhere to the rules which are not rules in his glorious Utopian Worker's Paradise which is totally not communist, and totally not based on marx...
he reminds me of somebody.
but without the intelligence, eidetic memory, logical consistency, or knowledge of the subjects on which he endlessly prattles.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
This is how the right always fails. This is the soviet system. This is how Kynes connects the dots to make everything on the left the same thing. This assumption is as far as he needs to investigate anything.
This is why Kynes is calling an anarchist "commy".
You'll never understand liberty so long as colonialism is your culture.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
everywhere you go people start talking about marx. is this a coincidence?
I think not.
you exude marxist craziness, quote marxists, post pictures of marx,, repost marxist propaganda, use marxist rhetoric, and even have Bertie russel in your signature, and then yuou act all shocked if anyone makes the marxist connection cuz youre TOTALLY NOT A MARXIST!
you just sound like one, act like one, lie like one, gibber like one, get butthurt like one, repeat trite slogans like one, hide behind the appeal to authority like one, use special pleadings like one, and expect everyone to agree with you like one.
if you roll around in dogshit, smearing it everywhere, caking it onto your body like some derranged spa treatment, and then go to a party yo cant realistically expect that NOBODY should mention the fact that youre wearing a body-suit made of fresh dog turds.
your marxism is only slightly less obvious to everyone (except apparently, yourself).
kelly4
Well-Known Member
If the stimulus worked, but not enough, why don't we do another one?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
well neither you, nor noam chomsky hve explained how shit would work, or how shit would be shared without some administration of resources, so there either WILL be a State, or your silly little daydream will fail, resulting in a State which you have nothing to do with.
your smug pretense of secret knowledge does not impress me, since i read das kapital and the communist manifesto, and thus am quite aware of how the "Means of Production" will be administered, even if you refuse to admit the truth.
farmer's farms will become the "People's Collective Farms" which will be worked by city dwellers who know nothing of agriculture, and run by incompetent boobs who know nothing of farming, but have connections in "The Party", and the farmers will be sent off to work in factories also run by political appointees.
everything will be the property of the "Glorious People's Revolutionary Collective" but the end result will be a privileged few running everything and living in luxury while the masses live in hovels.
unlike yourself, history doesnt lie.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
and you speak of intellectual laziness
Read a fucking book before you opine, especially that thing with Orwell, it just makes this too easy for me.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
funny, im not the first to call you a marxist, nor am i the only one. every thread you appear in devolves into an argument about marxism, just like this one, even if i dont feel the need to post.
YOU bring the stink of marxism with you, then bitch about how everybody else is making up stories that you smell bad. if it were just me, then you could maybe make the case, but when everybody shouts "Marxism doesnt work" as soon as you walk in the room, maybe you should take the fucking hint.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I have actually reported you repeatedly, for harassment, for months for derailing every thread in which I post. You have been following me, really harassing me, trying your best to paint me a Marxist, it is just you. Please stop it. I have explained repeatedly to you.
Cannabineer joined the discussion once, Ginwilly did this time, Nonthiest posts commie symbolism in memes to troll me, but you bring it up, everytime.
Cannabineer joined the discussion once, Ginwilly did this time, Nonthiest posts commie symbolism in memes to troll me, but you bring it up, everytime.
Similar threads
