Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Have you ever read a complete text by Marx?
Have you ever studied Marx in university context, where you unpacked his terms inside their historical context?
Here is why I ask.
I notice that Conservatives make constant references to Marx, but I never get the sense that they've studied his work in depth. I get the sense that they've been exposed to Marx mostly by interested 3rd parties (Talk Radio, partisan literature, the echo chamber) who provide only cherry picked quotes.
I have a friend who has been referring to Marx for years. I finally found out he had never read anything by Marx and it scared me.
When I tried to investigate why he would do such a thing, I discovered something horrific.
First, I should mention, I understand that Conservatives have created a universe which circulates talking points to their members. [This is what all political parties do] These talking points, which contain references to Marx, are pumped through a vast media network and repeated endlessly until they are experienced as "facts". I get this, and I realize that these talking points are designed for lemmings who can't think for themselves. Both parties have this regrettable element.
The horrific part is that so many people do not experience any cognitive dissonance when they use a reference that they've never fully investigated.
Here is my question, again. Why do Conservatives use terms that they've never studied? Is there anything about their personalities that would explain this? Does the movement attract a certain type of person? Is it a quasi-religious thing whereby they trust "higher powers" for their information? Or is this just a malignant strain of Machiavellianism, e.g., say anything to "fight the other side".
Please help me understand.
[Please don't say "liberals do it too". We already know this. The question is not "why do commie liberals act stupidly or unethically?" rather: "why do good conservative americans act stupidly or unethically?"]
History, all types, and Literature were what I excelled @ in High School. I used to read my history book just for fun in study hall.
That said, I see no need to read Marx's literature fully. I've skimmed over it before, but it's easy to pick out the main points, the crux, all that really matters, and pwn it. Random curiosity always fuels my Google searches for historical figures, events, etc.
I study objectively, what I need to to be properly informed, and versed, but reading up on Marx's childhood, or his mannerisms is really unnecessary.
I also wouldn't generalize on the scope you are sir. I could just as well ask: "Why is this Briton's teeth so bad? Why is he so concerned with us, our politics, when his own nation is going to hell in a hand basket?"
See how easy that was?
If you were as well read as you claim... You would not be a young, urban, Latino, gay 'Republican.'
The far right reactionaries reveal their foolishness.
They don't read! They don't read!! They don't read!!!
As if there was ever any question that they are indeed illiterate about definitions and their historical context.
Nobody cares what you think. Only what the facts are.That's the whole reason I am, we use facts, and yall use talking points from Obama's ass. I go against the grain, cuz I see policies that you likely support, are destroying my communities, and this whole area.
Oh do you think so? I don't think you use any facts at all. If you do... Please, elaborate on what you just said.
The facts are not on your side.
Nobody cares what you think. Only what the facts are.Oh do you think so? I don't think you use any facts at all. If you do... Please, elaborate on what you just said.
The facts are not on your side.
But your reactionary brethren and sistren just demonstrated they don't read, which means they don't know the "facts." Son, you all are nothing but talking points.
The far right reactionaries reveal their foolishness.
They don't read! They don't read!! They don't read!!!
As if there was ever any question that they are indeed illiterate about definitions and their historical context.
List of countries where Marxism has worked as advertised:
End of list
Capitalism has not failed. people are not roiting in the streets due to capitalism,The modern industrial revolution, integral to capitalism, has resulted in scores of millions of death, caused by the ism's, right and center and left. Don't think an intelligent person believes unregulated capitalism to be any more wonderful than a communist state. Both capitalism and socialism, properly managed, have created decent societies: Denmark, Sweden, and Canada are examples of the latter and the USA and other countries examples of the former.
A society good to all mandates an educated understanding of definitions, theories, and the historical construct in which they are used. Anyone who starts arguing about "elites" is a person who intends to take far more than his or her share.
hmm. I think you are confusing war and growing pains with murder. Stalin, Mao, Pot, Hitler, murdered that many people, and most kept thier people living in fear.
Socilism does not compare to capitalism. Capitalism is not a political ideal, though it tends to function best under democracy.
Socilism is a combo of politics and economy. Where in the end, the government has most if not all sway, leading to cronism (china), or dictatorship (Vensualia)
Then do explain the plight of America & other capitalist nations, where a dictator can murder, torturer & rape children (America), Please point out the Leader that's doing that to Americans, we can either man up and get him ourselves or call the cops.or starve the masses (India) for the benefit of the few. dont know enough about India to comment, except that many of them come here for the greater opportunities. Judging from our homeless, poor, Every single last country has those. and being the biggest debtor nation in the world, And yet we find the charity to loan. shouldn't we be fearing failed Capitalism instead of socialism??
Capitalism has not failed. people are not roiting in the streets due to capitalism,hmm. I think you are confusing war and growing pains with murder. Stalin, Mao, Pot, Hitler, murdered that many people, and most kept thier people living in fear.
Socilism does not compare to capitalism. Capitalism is not a political ideal, though it tends to function best under democracy.
Socilism is a combo of politics and economy. Where in the end, the government has most if not all sway, leading to cronism (china), or dictatorship (Vensualia)
Then do explain the plight of America & other capitalist nations, where a dictator can murder, torturer & rape children (America), Please point out the Leader that's doing that to Americans, we can either man up and get him ourselves or call the cops.or starve the masses (India) for the benefit of the few. dont know enough about India to comment, except that many of them come here for the greater opportunities. Judging from our homeless, poor, Every single last country has those. and being the biggest debtor nation in the world, And yet we find the charity to loan. shouldn't we be fearing failed Capitalism instead of socialism??
They are rioting over a loss of socialism in the EU though.
Yes, body, you are a sophistetette.
Both side has caused the deaths of scores of millions. Unregulated capitalism is no more desirable than communism because both permit the Rule of over the Rule of Law, behind which both hide. Yes, imperialism and colonialism were used by the capitalists to amass fortunes in the third world.
You are the perfect example of one who doesn't read much or if you do read extensively, you read too narrowly.
We are witnessing the social and economic evisceration of the working class, said Rich Lowery (National Review Online). In recent decades, the gap between Americans who complete college and those who dont has become a chasm ---- economically and socially. Generally speaking, the third of Americans with college degrees ---- the so called elites ---- enjoy rising incomes and low unemployment, and theyve embraced traditional values and stable families. But among those without a high school degree, the picture is grim: Unemployment has surpassed 15%, and todays blue-collar workers often earn less than their fathers did.
Worse, this economic pressure makes it harder to marry, and family stability in middle America is crumbling. Even among the moderately educated ---- those with a high school diploma or even some college ---- out of wedlock births have exploded from 13% in 1982. to 44% today. In effect, the creation of a stable family ---- an institution absolutely critical to childrens prospects ---- is increasingly tied to a college education. There is a crisis in the middle, and the brain dead populism of blaming the elites wont save the struggling working classes.
Rich Lowery is editor of National Review. A reprise in The Week, 16 Dec 2010, of an article. mobile.theweek.com/article/search?ext=html&url..
Yes, body, you are a sophistetette.
Both side has caused the deaths of scores of millions. Unregulated capitalism is no more desirable than communism because both permit the Rule of over the Rule of Law, behind which both hide. Yes, imperialism and colonialism were used by the capitalists to amass fortunes in the third world.
You are the perfect example of one who doesn't read much or if you do read extensively, you read too narrowly.
We are witnessing the social and economic evisceration of the working class, said Rich Lowery (National Review Online). In recent decades, the gap between Americans who complete college and those who dont has become a chasm ---- economically and socially. Generally speaking, the third of Americans with college degrees ---- the so called elites ---- enjoy rising incomes and low unemployment, and theyve embraced traditional values and stable families. But among those without a high school degree, the picture is grim: Unemployment has surpassed 15%, and todays blue-collar workers often earn less than their fathers did.
Worse, this economic pressure makes it harder to marry, and family stability in middle America is crumbling. Even among the moderately educated ---- those with a high school diploma or even some college ---- out of wedlock births have exploded from 13% in 1982. to 44% today. In effect, the creation of a stable family ---- an institution absolutely critical to childrens prospects ---- is increasingly tied to a college education. There is a crisis in the middle, and the brain dead populism of blaming the elites wont save the struggling working classes.
Rich Lowery is editor of National Review. A reprise in The Week, 16 Dec 2010, of an article. mobile.theweek.com/article/search?ext=html&url..
As it appears your position is anti-capitalism or at least not very fond, can it be concluded that you support socialism in all aspects of life in the US?
Poor Jake. It's not faaaaair that people are criticizing Marx. Don't they know how awesome he is?daveman continues to reveal his foolishness.
No, I've read none of them, so I will make no claims based on them. My education has been technical.Let's ask a question. Have you read any in the great works of Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, or modernist traditions? If so, what? Will you name them? And when you are done, will you swear that they make you a man who understands our modern problems?
Jake, what have Marxists accomplished?The far right reactionaries reveal their foolishness.
They don't read! They don't read!! They don't read!!!
As if there was ever any question that they are indeed illiterate about definitions and their historical context.
Would you care to explain how defense of Marxism and criticism of capitalism is a mainstream Republican position, or have you given up that ridiculous charade?The far right reactionaries reveal their foolishness.
They don't read! They don't read!! They don't read!!!
As if there was ever any question that they are indeed illiterate about definitions and their historical context.
List of countries where Marxism has worked as advertised:
End of list
Non sequitur, sonny, because no one here has suggested that Marxism has worked as advertised. Give us a list where unregulated capitalism has not devastated the working classes, forcing them ever further into poverty. End of list.
Common sense. Will you honestly tell me that Republicans are the champions of gay and minority affairs?
Republicans, like Democrats, are the champions of advancing the power and dominance of the party to which they belong.
Conservatives are the champions of all individual rights whether they be Democrats or Republicans. If you view Gays and Minorities as individuals, then Conservatives are thier champions. If you view Gays and Minorities as voting blocks, then Liberals are their champions.
Liberals veiw every group and every issue only in terms of us vs. them. Liberals identify groups in terms of wealth, race, gendre, religion, geography, education and you name it in order to pit one group against another. In this way, every person is both de-humanized and catagorized. Injustice is attacked, but justice is never sought.
For Liberals, there are no individuals, only demographics. Within the society, all demographics are either better or worse, richer or poorer, dominant or oppressed. Nobody is responsible for himself. Only groups can be granted rights and only members of groups can enjoy those rights.
So if you think that by segmenting and disecting society into component groups and then pitting one group against another we can establish justice, then you will be quite comfortable self-identifying as a Liberal.
If you feel that according all individuals equal rights and equal oppotunity and then allowing each individual to function as a free agent within the society, then you will be quite comfortable self-identifying as a Conservative.
If you see a person and then find it only interesting in passing that he is Gay, you are probably a Conservative. If you see a Gay and understand prima facia that he is oppressed, you are probably a Liberal.
By establishing rights for all individuals, the need for propping up or tearing down certain groups is diminished. By propping up or tearing down certain groups, the integrity and value of the individual is diminished. If the rights of all people to marry the person they love is guarenteed, the need for a law to "allow" gay civil unions is suddenly moot.
Group rights are by definition discriminatory. If one group is empowered, unnamed groups are disenfranchised.
I disagree. The modern Con movement has been more about dismantling programs that were meant to create an equalizing effect on opportunity - Not an equal end-result, but an equality of opportunity for all. They do this all in the name of "Freedom," but unfortunately the end result of laissez-faire economics is the establishment of a caste system and ultimately class revolution. You get so caught up in principle that you ignore ultimate results.
Oh, like I can't criticize crack smokers because I've never smoked crack? Well I don't have to because I've seen how it destroys people.
I don't need a degree in Communism to see how it's never worked in any place it's tried and destroyed millions of lives.
I know people who actually lived in actual repressive countries (Like Iran, China, Vietnam) so I don't need you spoiled, pointy headed intellectuals trying to lecture me.
Besides, you have a bigger problem: Islam is taking over your country. Enjoy your Sharia Law faggot.
Poor Jake. It's not faaaaair that people are criticizing Marx. Don't they know how awesome he is?daveman continues to reveal his foolishness.
No, I've read none of them, so I will make no claims based on them. My education has been technical.Let's ask a question. Have you read any in the great works of Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, or modernist traditions? If so, what? Will you name them? And when you are done, will you swear that they make you a man who understands our modern problems?
Is this where you claim I'm uneducated and therefore have no business giving my opinions? Are you aware that education and intelligence are not synonymous? Most leftists confuse the two.
Jake, what have Marxists accomplished?The far right reactionaries reveal their foolishness.
They don't read! They don't read!! They don't read!!!
As if there was ever any question that they are indeed illiterate about definitions and their historical context.
Poor Jake. It's not faaaaair that people are criticizing Marx. Don't they know how awesome he is?daveman continues to reveal his foolishness.
No, I've read none of them, so I will make no claims based on them. My education has been technical.Let's ask a question. Have you read any in the great works of Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian, or modernist traditions? If so, what? Will you name them? And when you are done, will you swear that they make you a man who understands our modern problems?
Is this where you claim I'm uneducated and therefore have no business giving my opinions? Are you aware that education and intelligence are not synonymous? Most leftists confuse the two.
You have every right to give uneducated opinions as long as we all know that they are uneducated and ignorant. You are not conservative (that is often by your posting) and you would not know a leftist if one walked up and shook your head.
Thank for outing yourself clearly here.
So says the leftist badly pretending to be a Republican.
