/lit/ - Literature

>>15853663
>No true Scotsman, or appeal to purity, is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample.[1][2] Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule – "no true Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group.[3]

You changed the definition of 'Marxism' in order to exclude the contemporary Marxist writers and practitioners who incorporate identity politics into their beliefs- yet this includes a number of prominent communist politicians around the world.

Pic related is the leader of the communist party in my country, who ran as vice-President of Fernando Haddad, who belong to the PT party, whose had a president, Luis Inácio Lula da Silva, who is greatly admired by Antonio Negri, who said Lula was ''the greatest political man of Latin America in the second half of the 20th century'' - greater than FIdel, therefore, according to the words of Negri.