Democrats and this Philosophy...What's the Difference?

[Bush92]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

 

[Contumacious]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

The difference between LIFE and DEATH

 

[occupied]

Did you actually watch this?

 

[Bush92]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

 

[Votto]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

 

[occupied]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

 

[Bush92]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

Communism was supposed to create a "classless society" instead it created a new class...the communist party member in Moscow. Just like Democrats want to be a new " political party ruling class" operating out of Washington DC.

 

[Bush92]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

 

[occupied]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

 

[Bush92]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

Marx could not see that capitalism could change and government and capitalism could exist in a limited mixed economy and that the government could provide a social safety net during bad times like FDR's mostly temporary New Deal.

 

[occupied]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

Plenty of free material on Marx. Posting links to paywall protected content to start a topic is kind of dumb. Some forums even make it an infraction.

 

[Bush92]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

Plenty of free material on Marx. Posting links to paywall protected content to start a topic is kind of dumb. Some forums even make it an infraction.

Here...now shut up about a paywall
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

 

[12icer]

The dimocrats that infiltrated the Democrat part count on the stupidity of the public to further their communist agenda, I don't know why they think Russia would want a Trump when they could have had a comrade shitbitch? The shitbitch voters are the indoctrinees of many years of rewriting, and revising historical facts and hiding the actual historical FACTS that define Marxisim. They also remove the history of The truth about the governments of Stalin, Lenin, Mao, ETC>>>>>. The idea being to indoctrinate stupid shallow weak minded people with a picture of everyone sharing everything, and being equal in every way with no reason to fight ETC >>> with a picture of themselves dancing in a field of barley and eating a peach. HAHAHA. how about living in a concrete building barely scraping out a living with everyone watching you to see if you spit on the sidewalk to tell on you, and the leaders living like kings, killing and/or punishing anyone who questions their power, and using the military to exterminate any person or persons who defy them. That is the history of socialisim in EVERY CASE and the start of real full blown Communisim. Why don't you liberals jump ship and go to a communist country and try it? We will let you go, just leave what Capitalisim has given you here when you leave. HAHA.

 

[occupied]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

Marx could not see that capitalism could change and government and capitalism could exist in a limited mixed economy and that the government could provide a social safety net during bad times like FDR's mostly temporary New Deal.

That is a certainty, practically no one on the left takes Marx as the gospel, more like one of many philosophers that formed the bedrock that underlies All modern economic theory. Most leftists today favor the Democratic socialist model rather than anything that is recognizably Marxist like abolishing private property. He may be considered one of the fathers of socialist thought but he was never the last word.

 

[Bush92]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

Marx could not see that capitalism could change and government and capitalism could exist in a limited mixed economy and that the government could provide a social safety net during bad times like FDR's mostly temporary New Deal.

That is a certainty, practically no one on the left takes Marx as the gospel, more like one of many philosophers that formed the bedrock that underlies All modern economic theory. Most leftists today favor the Democratic socialist model rather than anything that is recognizably Marxist like abolishing private property. He may be considered one of the fathers of socialist thought but he was never the last word.

But he wanted one party control over society, culture, and economy. Just like modern PC, social justice, socialist, Bernie Sanders Democrat Party.

 

[occupied]

Did you actually watch this?

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

Plenty of free material on Marx. Posting links to paywall protected content to start a topic is kind of dumb. Some forums even make it an infraction.

Here...now shut up about a paywall
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

I have read many of the writings of Marx, his articles on the American civil war are some of the best contemporary accounts. I've read lots of other things too and only idiots think any philosopher had the whole truth of the world and existence. I have my own theories influenced by a host of men-of-letters as they used to called. Marx is mixed in there as well as a lot of people you probably admire like Lincoln.

 

[Bush92]

Yep.

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

Plenty of free material on Marx. Posting links to paywall protected content to start a topic is kind of dumb. Some forums even make it an infraction.

Here...now shut up about a paywall
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

I have read many of the writings of Marx, his articles on the American civil war are some of the best contemporary accounts. I've read lots of other things too and only idiots think any philosopher had the whole truth of the world and existence. I have my own theories influenced by a host of men-of-letters as they used to called. Marx is mixed in there as well as a lot of people you probably admire like Lincoln.

Most influential writings to me are John Locke,and the Constitution of the United States of America. Concept of "natural rights" and Constituion are the Genisis story of modern self governance by the people and the role of a limited central national government.

 

[occupied]

I can detect no difference between what is put forth in video...and Democratic Party.
Karl Marx: Theory of Class Consciousness and False Consciousness - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

Marx could not see that capitalism could change and government and capitalism could exist in a limited mixed economy and that the government could provide a social safety net during bad times like FDR's mostly temporary New Deal.

That is a certainty, practically no one on the left takes Marx as the gospel, more like one of many philosophers that formed the bedrock that underlies All modern economic theory. Most leftists today favor the Democratic socialist model rather than anything that is recognizably Marxist like abolishing private property. He may be considered one of the fathers of socialist thought but he was never the last word.

But he wanted one party control over society, culture, and economy. Just like modern PC, social justice, socialist, Bernie Sanders Democrat Party.

Marx did not want that, you talking more about Stalinism, no one wants that. The things you say are just the same have somehow not resulted in Gulags, state run media or broad nationalization in any western democracy, the slippery slope theory is based on something that has never happened. What you think of as authoritarian socialism has only ever followed fascist states, dictatorships or monarchies.

 

[Bush92]

Marxism is not against wealth and control, rather, it is just against the wealth and control outside of those running the government.

Marx sought to limit the power and influence of private citizens to help nix people like Trump. What Marx wanted was a continuation of Hillary and her daughter and her daughters son and so on. Marx wanted a dictator or monarchy to rule indefinitely with no one to challenge their power.

Now if they limited the wealth of private citizens and, at the same time, limited government, I might go for it, but that will never happen.

What Marx would have wanted for the present day is like talking about who Lincoln would have endorsed. His theories were grounded in how the early industrial revolution conducted itself towards labor, horribly, and a working class with zero political power. Things are different today somewhat but all politicians in any society speak of class struggle and populist empowerment because nearly all of us accept the concept of class and no one really likes to think they might serfs in a plutocracy.

Marx could not see that capitalism could change and government and capitalism could exist in a limited mixed economy and that the government could provide a social safety net during bad times like FDR's mostly temporary New Deal.

That is a certainty, practically no one on the left takes Marx as the gospel, more like one of many philosophers that formed the bedrock that underlies All modern economic theory. Most leftists today favor the Democratic socialist model rather than anything that is recognizably Marxist like abolishing private property. He may be considered one of the fathers of socialist thought but he was never the last word.

But he wanted one party control over society, culture, and economy. Just like modern PC, social justice, socialist, Bernie Sanders Democrat Party.

Marx did not want that, you talking more about Stalinism, no one wants that. The things you say are just the same have somehow not resulted in Gulags, state run media or broad nationalization in any western democracy, the slippery slope theory is based on something that has never happened. What you think of as authoritarian socialism has only ever followed fascist states, dictatorships or monarchies.

Of course he did. He said democracy had to be eliminated until a communist state could be created because people would be upset at efforts to create the new communist man...and thus vote them out. Somehow, in his warped view, he thought it would lead to an anarchist utopia.

 

[occupied]

Well why didn't you say that much of the lecture is behind a pay wall?

Irony of capitalism my man. Buy the book.

Plenty of free material on Marx. Posting links to paywall protected content to start a topic is kind of dumb. Some forums even make it an infraction.

Here...now shut up about a paywall
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

I have read many of the writings of Marx, his articles on the American civil war are some of the best contemporary accounts. I've read lots of other things too and only idiots think any philosopher had the whole truth of the world and existence. I have my own theories influenced by a host of men-of-letters as they used to called. Marx is mixed in there as well as a lot of people you probably admire like Lincoln.

Most influential writings to me are John Locke,and the Constitution of the United States of America. Concept of "natural rights" and Constituion are the Genisis story of modern self governance by the people and the role of a limited central national government.

Read everything not just the stuff you agree with. I don't agree with how Marx predicted industrial society would evolve because it never really happened. Our distinct social classes found a third way that allowed the rich to be rich yet not accumulate all the wealth or hold all the power. That coexistence is slipping.