Of course, you can do this. But the point of this thread (which you once again miss) is not to define the word “Marxism” in your own way.
The point of this thread is to figure out what Marx said and whether theories that were put into practice (and failed for some reason) were truly Marx’s theories (and not merely other people’s interpretations of his theories.)
But you are (just like Fixed Cross and even phoneutria) consumed by hatred and are thus utterly incapable of having a rational discussion.
Being the best philosopher in the world. (Beside being the leader of the capitalists.)
i’m not consumed by hatred
i swear a lot
but I’m super chill throughout this whole thread
sticking to the subject, staying on point
furthering the conversation
avoiding personal attacks and strawmen
why do you gotta bunch me up with the uncivil?
can we rest that bullshit and continue to talk about marxism
we can bypass this whole ideology debate
with the fact that it is obvious that people disagree
regardless of whether it is an ideology or not
the sense of ownership|private property is very strong in society
and since there is no consensus
there can be no rule revoking that right
not until there is a very large shift
literally an evolutionary shift
we’d have to cease to be what we are now
less monkey-like and more bee-like
create a brave new world
where everyone performs their role like a well oiled machine
and clones are born with their destiny set for them and they need not aspire to anything other than do their work
a beeeautiful society in which the individual has been “swept out of the way, and made impossible”
like marx wrote
fixed, in case you don’t notice, those last bits were sarcasm
No no, you don’t get to have it “your own way” everytime.
PK started the thread. He is responsible for it. Silhouette wants to argue “in his own words”. That’s his argument, and you’re welcome to join it. Nobody disagreed. However, those of us who know Marxism (better than you and Sil apparently), repeatedly gave more context. It’s not just “Marxism in his own words”. It’s about real-life. It’s about history. It’s about Communism and Lenin and Mao and Socialism, etc. Reality is the point. You are not giving context, nor is Sil. Because once you do, your “Marxism” evaporates.
As-if the proponents and points against “haven’t read Marx”. As-if I didn’t go to college, a liberal-lefty University??? Did I not go? Did I not read Marx, decades ago?
Sil embarrassed himself, as he provided quotes which basically were the exact-same thing I said at the start.
So you’ve been on the losing-side of the argument from the start.
If you want to present “Marx in his own words”, then go ahead, be my guest. Nobody is stopping you. Nobody is stopping Sil. But you don’t, and you won’t, because you can’t.
Marxism is a historical failure. And it is so, because we have demonstrated it as such (Fixed, Myself, Phone, etc).
that is what a tax is
–a rule revoking your right to what’s yours, some %. or on your property.
and then everyone else spends it, their representatives do, on their platform
on things like schoolshospitalspolice
and investing in basic research that is far from a market application
because investors won’t
and museums
and sometimes welfare, because 25,000 people starve to death per day
fucking social justice warriors
and sometimes wasting it in abuse
because what do you expect
should public or private own means of production?
there is not a country that is not a mixture
and any that wasn’t would collapse egregiously
why are people making caricatures out of themselves?
why are people argumentum ad passiones-ing against caricatures
the answer is clearly #3
look at data to see what balance you like, and where.
economic data, opening of new businesses, competition,
health data, etc.
compare your country to others with a different balance
and notice when you suck at something, and why
it’s not against your nature, …you’re also tribal
no evolutionary shift, from one caricature to another
(The same goes for Fixed but we can ignore him for now.)
The definition of the word “Marxism” is found in Marx’s books. It’s found nowhere else. And though you are free to define words any way you like, that’s not what this thread is about. This thread is entirely about what Marx wrote in his books. That’s the subject of this thread. What happened in practice is only relevant to the extent that it helps clarify what Marxism is and what it isn’t.
And if you want to criticize Marx, you need to do two things 1) read and understand him, and 2) test his theories. It’s not enough to live in a communist state (nope, that doesn’t earn you any special points) nor to be otherwise familiar with various historical developments (nope, that doesn’t earn you any special points either.) You actually need both (as stated by Silhouette pages ago.)
Given that you’re utterly incapable of understanding what other people are saying (something that anyone can witness here in this thread), the probability that you understood Marx is very low.
we’re not discussing anything other than marxism in this thread
so I am not discussing anything about what I think is right
i’ve been talking about what i think is not right
because that is my opinion of marxism
off topic stuff:
I can say that I am not completely anti-tax and anti-regulation
I don’t want to be taken for a radical, I am not
what I’m against is double taxation
if we already pay tax on everything that we buy
we should not be taxed on income
plus there’s yearly property tax on vehicles and estate
and on that subject
most services that you mentioned are afforded by the states
state taxes are a rather dignified spending
it’s like a membership fee to a club, i am cool with that
cuz you pay a fee and you get services
with federal taxed you pay a fee and you get zip
education is just over 6% of the discretionary federal spending
for the whole fucking country
science takes a whooping 3.5%
military spending is nearly 54%
and most of these soldiers are not securing the borders
they’re fighting wars on the other side of the planet
and these are percentages from the discretionary budget
which is just 30% of the gdp
if you compute in the mandatory spending
those percentages nearly disappear in the charts
taxes in murica are not about servicing the people
if you want to stop this absurd scheme of funneling public money out to corps
in exchange for political power and influence
you do that by defunding the federal government
and by taking their power away
but none of this is a conversation for this thread
i won’t reply here because I don’t want a derailing
if you want to start a thread on what capitalism really is or whatever
i did not take anything off topic
your criticism of marxism did
it applies broadly
there is a spectrum; marxist on one end, capitalist on the other
caricatures are hurling accusations from both ends
and they are landing on sensible people’s heads, somewhere not at the extremes
sensible people, like… just me, and karpel
so i say
“settle down, caricatures”
is usa high on standard of life metrics? i don’t know.
I am Canadian, eh
Like you would ever be capable of reading what people who disagree with you say. Start on Page One. I’m not doing your homework for you, same goes for Sil.
It is not a stretch to take this as: “no tax, unless us monkeys transform to bees”.
So, my point was, every tax is a “rule revoking ownership to property”
—by degrees
i am somewhat guilty of making caricatures.
And just what do you think you are doing, Mr. Smee?
when what I’m actually talking about is the idea that a business owner should lose his business to the employers
or that a house owner should lose his house to a tenant
as evidenced by … literally what we’ve been talking about
if you just read the words
instead of reading the words “as”
The post mostly consists of assertions.
(And assertions aren’t demonstrations.)
[tab]It’s one assertion:
After another assertion:
After another:
After yet another:
And it goes on and on, like so:
[/tab]
The following is the only argument in the entire post:
The problem with it is that it misses the point. I’m not aware of a single person posting in this thread who actually thinks that risk taking shouldn’t be rewarded. The question is: by how much? You never tackled this question. (Other people did, such as phoneutria, but you yourself never did.)
[tab]And of course, at the end of your post, there’s the most important assertion:
The government NWO, not elected but appointed by mysterious factions, controls all freedom (limits speech and free thought, right to peacefully assemble, right to defend yourself, etc) while under 24/7 surveillance and you are brainwashed to report your friends and families to the state for any infractions, 24/7 curfews under martial law, controls movement of people, movement of goods, goods manufactured, how much food you can eat in a day, how much electricity you can use, how much water you can use, how often you can seek medical care and the type of care, allocation of living space (size, number of rooms, number of windows, number of doors, bathrooms, color of walls), how you move, when you move, where you move, where you work, what you are paid (you don’t get to negotiate or seek employment elsewhere), they will score your participation in everything the government wants you to do such as how you follow social correctness and governments laws (already being done in China), if you can marry, if you can reproduce, if you can enjoy any entertainment. Everybody works for the government, but only a few or one unelected official decides the fate of all of mankind, violence and fear control the masses. Radical communism is 100 times worse than 1984.
