/lit/ - Literature

Sounds like they only skimmed the communist manifesto and called it a day. Jordan Peterson tier interpretation

>>14105380
This interpretation is completely retarded. No surprise it's some hideous tranny.

Except the fact that the bourgeoisie aren't oppressed and wield disproportionately high political and social capital. What a retard.

>>14105380
Christ someone ban twitterposters, they are ruining this fucking board

>>14105389
>>14105394
>>14105412
>>14105413
holy shit cope

It’s about historical law and inevitability. Most Orthodox Marxists believe they’re making the rational choice to act in accordance with historical law rather than some sort of moral one.

>>14105417
trannysexualism has no revolutionary potential, now dilate

>arbitrary
YOU STUPID FUCK

>>14105389
>>14105394
>END BOURGEOISIE, DICTATURE OF YHE PROLETARIAT NOW
>wow what do you mean we're deomnizing the bourgeois, not at all.

>>14105463
commies sound no different to libertarian spergs

Kek. As Bohdan Chudoba put it, commies believe in the historical inevitabiliy, "but it would still be better if you joined the party, comrade."

The bourgeoisie are not living at the margins of society, in case it wasn't clear, and there's nothing strange about drawing the line between haves and have nots. Lumpenproles such as the one in OP's pic are the enemy too.

>>14105412
/thread

>>14105380
Yes. Communism must make way for real PoC discourses.

1 quote twitter
2 mention marxism
3 fake outrage

stay dumb /lit/

>>14105679
It still doesn't justify making them ennemies while believing in the superiority of the proles. Hell those distinctions are stupids today znd don't make much sense.

>>14105380
I entered marxism as an idealistic white guy who believed in equality for all races and was against identity politics, after being made aware of the actual state of the left, I realised all politics are identity politics and white nationalism was the only chance for a future worth living.

>>14105705
>NOOOOOOO DON'T SHOW ME REAL SOCIOLOGICAL SHIFTS, NOOO NOT THE REAL WORLD, PLEASE LET ME JUST QUIBBLE OVER 19TH CENTURY THEORY WITH MY INTERNET FRIENDS PLEASE!!!

Marxism is too stodgy and cryptofash, it's all about tranny capitalism now.

>>14105412
many white leftists just point to the bourgeoisie in order to detract attention for their own privilege, the real experience of queers is living in a heteronormative society and the real experience of PoC is living on a white supremacist society, regardless of what a dead old grey bearded white dude like Marx could have said. Too often, you use Marx to shut down the legitimate expressions of the oppressed. Marxists sound way too much like JBP 'classical liberals' at times- their common ground is white fragility refusing to see race and to come to terms with their race

>>14105766
*ahem* Shut the fuck up, nigger

>>14105755
orthodox marxists are delusional and openly disliked by most of the left, anyone with half a brain knows sexual politics are upstream from identity politics which are upstream from economics. They got it all backwards. The reason leftists are so triggered by incels is because they expose the true sexual political nature of leftism. Isn't the lgbtranny movement just that? being angry at reality and society for not conforming to your sexual fantasies claiming oppression and demanding action by an authoritarian government which can coerce people to engage in sex with you? I think the most patrician thing one can do is to forsake the politics of sexual victimhood and compulsory hedonism entirely and sublimate all those sadistic and masochistic impulses into a highly aestheticised Fascist movement.

>>14105739
The bourgeoisie don't have to remain enemies, they are free to join the workers and relinquish their private ownership of the means of production anytime. But since they won't, the workers have to get their freedom the hard way.

>>14105862
the white settler labour aristokkkracy don't have to remain enemies, they are free to join PoC and relinquish their whiteness and commit to full decolonization. But since they won't, the oppressed peoples and their allies have to get their freedom the hard way.

>>14105380
Marxists don't believe that the bourgeoise are inherently immoral and evil. They are simply inclined to act immoral from their environmental factors, such as having control over immense wealth and capital that can easily be exploited. It is in the same line of thinking of how proles are inclined to act immoral and steal because of their environmental situation of being poor and uneducated. This is why Marx wrote about abolishing class divisons as a bigger goal than just "eating the rich." OP pic is just another neoliberal strawman

>>14105389
>>14105394
>>14105412
>>14105413
>>14105463
>>14105645
>>14105679
>>14105705
>>14105766
>>14105820
>>14105862
>>14105898
>>14105938

See >>14105784

>>14105898
>relinquish their whiteness
See, this is the difference between Marx and retarded idpol bullshit, no matter whether the latter comes from the right or a self-proclaimed left.

One cannot give away one's genetics, and a stupid race war between lumpenproles is never going to free anyone. Once the last enemy skin color is killed, who is going to return to slave away in the plantations, factories, and cubicles?

>>14105898
>by making posts and waiting for something to happen
luh dat struggle
i luh strugglin

>>14105993
freedom is above more than economics what pisses queer people and PoC off is having a fucking white guy go see i'm just as oppressed as you guys because I have to go to work every monday(even though I benefit for white privilege and get paid more for the same labour) and because I don't like to watch tv(ie. muh spectacle insists on representing people who are not me)

>>14106024
>every white person has a job and gets racist about my kwear pock ships in my Home Box Office programs
okay becky

>>14106024
>>14105766
t. white straight & cis

>>14105380
the left hasn't been marxist since the 1990s
>cultural marxism
is a meme only neonazi retards believe exists

>>14105862
>ahah bruh they just have to give up most of their wealth
You still haven't addressed my point. You irationally decide to put them in the bad category while you put the worker in the good category. Muh means of production isn't even an absolute todau. Look at people like youtubers, porns artists, or computer scientists. What are they? They are beholden to no bourgeois.

>>14106122
>>ahah bruh they just have to give up most of their wealth
Pathetic bougie fallacy. They defend the hierarchy because they have an inflated vision of how much they stand to lose. Bougie academics are living paycheck to paycheck like anyone else, they are deeply in debt like anyone else, but they still agitate against a proletarian revolution for their capitalist masters because they would rather feel slightly superior to the proles than free themselves from the capitalist yoke. Bougies are pathetic spineless slaves.

>>14106122
>youtubers, porns artists, or computer scientists.
few youtubers make money, porn artists have a short shelf life and like computer scientists bear the brunt of exploitation and alienation

>>14106024
>freedom is above more than economics
That's Marx's point. We don't want to be equal in heaven because a Declaration of Independence or Universal Declaration of Human Rights says we should be equal. We want to be equal on earth.
>get paid more for the same labour
It is to make you hate your fellow prole instead of the master, so you two don't join forces against your real, common enemy. That's the whole point.

It wasn't the proles that came up with the wage gap, as in *any* wage gap, you know. Or other forms of inequal treatment.
https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/chapter-2/inventing-black-and-white
If you have to feel pissed, why not be pissed at the bourgeoisie that creates and mantains this bullshit?
>representing people who are not me
If they start selling ingestible poison exclusively to the proles that don't happen to look like you, will you be the first in line to demand the recognition of your God-given right to senselessly consume poison? You don't need some capeshit character made up by the minister of propaganda to change its skin color to match yours, if anything what you need is to turn that shit off. Fuck poison and fuck its salespeople.

>>14106122
>What are they? They are beholden to no bourgeois.
Stuck in a cubicle, using equipment out of factory nobody has a democratic ownership thereof, and whether the search alogrithm allows viewers to even notice the presence of your cat video is entirely up to the bourgeioisie of the internet to determine, do something they don't approve of and you will get demonetized, your videos taken down and so on and so on.

>>14106212
the only difference between 'great art' and 'poison' is that 'great art' is glorified by its associations with dominant races, genders and sexualities

>>14105380
There's no "hypocrisy" it's just structurally incorrect. Nowhere did society solidify into two easily opposed camps in the fashion Marx thought and it's obviously less likely to happen today.

>>14105679
>and there's nothing strange about drawing the line between haves and have nots
That's not what Marx does. He claims the working class must take control of society. If you say "have nots" you could mean the long term unemployed which Marx doesn't want to include and by "haves" you would mean anyone retired today living on a fixed income.

>>14105380
The tweet is very wrong. Marxism doesn't moralize about good and bad. It merely points out that the great mass of humanity is part of the exploited proletariat while a comparatively small segment controls the means of production. This structural relationship is fundamentally unjust.

Marxism also distinguishes subsections of the proletariat, including the lumpenproletariat, the criminals, miscreants, and social flotsam that compose a part of the working class who have no revolutionary value.

There is nothing "arbitrary" about the distinction between the proletariat and the bourgeoise. Their distinction is fundamental to dialectical materialism and instantiated in the structure of the relations of production . The groups are defined by these relations. This is one of the first things you learn in a rudimentary education about marxism.

>>14106356
>Marxism doesn't moralize
>This structural relationship is fundamentally unjust.
well which is it lel

>>14105766
That's all fine and dandy until you do something like compare the life of any wealthy gay black man with the life of any poor straight white man and see that money is the single biggest influencer over quality of life.
Unless you're trolling/larping as a community college gender studies major, in which case 10/10 you nailed the whiny prose style perfectly.

>>14106380
You're talking about relations that probably already reached their peak and didn't even dominate most humans. Bringing billions of Chinese peasants into factories was the final big burst of proletarianization, from here on out workers are only less critical. Africa ain't going to repeat that.

>>14105753
>Brooklynite twitter masturbation
>The real world
Pick one you nonce

>>14106407
The point is that the structural relationship is wrong, not that any given group or individual is.

>>14106457
Marxism always has been about industrial society. Those who were outside of its scope and still living in an agrarian pre-capitalist order were considered irrelevant to the analysis.

>>14106484
>The point is that the structural relationship is wrong
This is moralizing

>>14106484
>Marxism always has been about industrial society. Those who were outside of its scope and still living in an agrarian pre-capitalist order were considered irrelevant to the analysis.
Ya and it's irrelevant in a post-industrial society, so basically it's relevant to no one anywhere.

>>14106492
Moralizes class division but never the classes themselves as one more moral than the other

>>14106201
>they have an inflated vision of how much they stand to lose
If it's not that important, why do you marxist insist they must absolutely lose it. Neck yourself.

>>14106204
>few youtubers make money
They still exist.

>porn artists have a short shelf life
They still exist and the doujin industry proves you wrong.

>computer scientists bear the brunt of exploitation and alienation
They are not binded by people owning mean of productions though. Nothing stop them from getting together and making software to sell.

>Stuck in a cubicle
Absolutely wrong. Home working is a thing for exemple, and artists and youtiber works wherever they please.

>using equipment out of factory nobody has a democratic ownership thereof

Most peopme have access to computer, hell most POOR people today own at least a phone and a tv.

>and whether the search alogrithm allows viewers to even notice the presence of your cat video is entirely up to the bourgeioisie of the internet
Even if youtube was run by communist it would be up to an algorithm to display content. Do you not know how search engine works?

>muh demonetization
If I made a video supporting the right of private property, of becoming rich or of restauring a class-based society, I'll get silenced too.

Marxism isn't a magical solution, it still has all the problem of capitalism and more.

>>14106449
>money is the single biggest influencer over quality of life

I'll rather be poorer right now and have no eczema. It would be an objective improvement. So you're wrong.

>>14106356
>This structural relationship is fundamentally unjust
Using words like unjust makes it a value judgement. A better word to use would be 'inequality' if you want to remain consistent with your first claim. The diagnosis by marx is descriptive but his prescription is normative. That is when the ideology begins.

>>14106561
Marx was insisting revolution was inevitable because the social relations structurally necessitated it at some point. The problem is it's unfalsifiable not that it's normative.

>>14105380
>OP's pic
So...I guess you could say that communism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

>>14106351
>He claims the working class must take control of society.
In order to abolish classes.
>long term unemployed which Marx doesn't want to include
Include in what?

>>14106526
He doesn't moralize anything. In The German Ideology he writes " The communists do not preach morality at all".

>>14106513
Imagine writing that you live in a "post-industrial" society while sitting in your basement surrounded by heaps upon heaps of factory-made plastic garbage.
Also, the anon who you were responding to is wrong, unless he has some extremely strange definition of "irrelevant to the analysis".

>>14106561
People who fell for the meme of the "descriptive vs normative" are advised to read less wikipedia articles about anglo pseudophilosophy and more Hegel.

>>14106599
"Unfalsifiability" is not a problem. Even dumb anglos have abandoned that criterion for science.

>>14106550
>Society gave me eczema
Also
>I'll rather be poorer right now
No you wouldn't you fucking liar.

>>14106697
>He doesn't moralize anything.
What does he write so passionately then for?

>>14106705
>society gives me money
>no you wouldn't
I see you never suffered beyond mild inconvenience.

>>14106697
>In order to abolish classes.
Which they can't do.
>Include in what?
Any revolutionary movement. If you're telling people without work to fuck off you won't be popular.

>Imagine writing that you live in a "post-industrial" society while sitting in your basement surrounded by heaps upon heaps of factory-made plastic garbage.
Yes you can get the income to get all that without entering into industrial relations which aren't the dominate form and won't be in the future.

>"Unfalsifiability" is not a problem. Even dumb anglos have abandoned that criterion for science.
It's pretty useful.

>>14105380
Why is Marxism still a thing in 2019? It should be obvious to everyone in our post-ideological age that Marxism is literally just Christian theology in secular clothing. Marx doesn't acknowledge the Christian roots of his thought at all. It has no place in modern thought especially after communism was permanently discredited in the 20th century. "I'm a Marxist but not a communist!" you say, well that's wrong too. You can't separate Marxist historical analysis from communism because dialectical materialism is Marx's way of immanentizing the Christian eschaton, to show that history is a constant progression upwards towards the kingdom of God on Earth, also known as communism. And when Marx's theory was shown to be bullshit because the living standards of the working class were rising rather than falling, Marxist cultists defended it by saying "That's not what Marx meant!" or some other nonsense. Though on second thought, it seems that Marxism is a necessary secular-spiritual progression of Christian thought - would postmodern philosophy even exist without Marx?

>>14106771
Eczema is a mild inconvenience.
>muh dry itchy skin waaa waaa

>>14106766
Why are you asking? Are Einstein's field equations imbued with morality because he was passionate about the subject?

>>14106823
>Which they can't do.
Sure they can. Capitalism has replaced millions of individual, independent productive units with one world-wide production network, the ownership of which is concentrated in few hands. So while abolition of classes was impossible earlier, now it's just a matter of forcibly removing the proprietary barriers around this network.

>Any revolutionary movement.
Marx "didn't want to include" the unemployed in the revolutionary movement? Where are you getting this Marx? On Jordan Peterson's blog?

>Yes you can get the income to get all that without entering into industrial relations
You are already entering into "industrial relations" by relying on all those products of industry in your life and work. If you want to prove that we live in post-industrial society then how about you try live without products of industry for a month.

>It's pretty useful.
Useful for pretending to have an argument in a discussion on an anime internet forum.

>>14105389
Not even that. It's a very very superficial "if you squint this thing sort of looks like this other thing but JUST MY OPINION GUYS" bullshit, barely even saying anything.

>>14106963
>Are Einstein's field equations imbued with morality because he was passionate about the subject?
Title of your next academic paper.

>>14105389
the communist manifesto sucks off the bourgeoisie for like the first 5 pages

>>14106697
>"Unfalsifiability" is not a problem. Even dumb anglos have abandoned that criterion for science
Since when? I must have missed that memo.

t. STEM PhD

>>14107484
Since Kuhn, Lakatos, and Feyerabend, so 1970s basically. You probably haven't missed a memo. Most scientists are not familiar with the developments in philosophy of science because that's not their discipline.

>>14105766
>white dude like Marx

>not understanding materialism
yikes

>>14106833
>Marx doesn't acknowledge the Christian roots of his thought at all
He considered his bastardization of Epicureanism to be a higher form of materialism.

Brain dead Marxists creating non arguments so they can keep jerking off to their revolution fantasy kink

>>14106963
It looks like Jordan b Peterson has became a scape goat for an actual argument now. Stop being stupid and use your words.

>>14105380
this is shitpost/bait, but
> The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that it is essential to educate the educator himself. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society.
>The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-changing can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.
theses feuerbach iii

>>14106697
>People who fell for the meme of the "descriptive vs normative" are advised to read less wikipedia articles about anglo pseudophilosophy and more Hegel.

What is (and how to know it) and what ought to be (and how one should live) is a common distinction that has been around since the Greeks. Your post reeks of someone that has never read anything apart from wikipedia articles.

>>14106963
>Why are you asking? Are Einstein's field equations imbued with morality because he was passionate about the subject?

They have different ends, dummy. One is a social and political program about how things should be, the other is a scientific program for understanding the world.

It's amazing to me how easy it is btfo commies with a tiny bit of philosophical knowledge. It's like you idiots don't read anything apart from communist literature.

>>14106833
>what is marx's engagement with feuerbach and hegel
jesus. and pomo might exist but it would be different. most of the western world would be different in certain respects without the influence of marx
>>14108868
i agree with you re your first point: Cf. hume's guillotime lmao

>>14108875

>>14106890
It depends entirely on the severity of the eczema. At its worst it cover you body with unhealable wounds.

>>14105413
seriously. get the fuck out

>>14105389
Because it's literally Jordan Peterson's interpretation, and it's literally about the Communist manifesto. It's from the Zizek-Peterson debate "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism"
It's a shit debate with shit talking points. It's full of gems though.
>be Jordan Peterson
>Marxism is wrong because its focus on materialism is inherently wrong when talking about social issues
>Lemme tell you why capitalism is the answer to social and environmental issues from a materialistic point of view
>I'll have you know that when people are getting richer through the free market, they'll care more about the environment
>capitalism = saving the environment, checkmate commies
>Marxism doesn't have any answers, it's too vague!
>capitalism, you see, there's like, a hierarchy, it's nature, it just works!
>so I have this vague idea about regulating capitalism that's totally the answer

>be zizek
>be a communist but not really
>so the thing about bio-engineering is...
>what was the subject? Right
>so there's this joke I heard...
>sniff
>unintelligible.mp3
>>r e g u l a t e d c a p i t a l i s m

I just wish people knew what arbitrary meant

lmao

It's great fun seeing Marxists being attacked by the frenzied morons they roused. Have fun reaping that whirlwind.

>>14105394
>No surprise it's some hideous tranny.
But trannies and tranny supporters are almost all communists and communist sympathizers...

>>14106482
>Communism working
>The real world
Pick one

>>14109649
No, trannies and tranny supporters claim to be Marxist but will unironically attack other leftists for "being too class reductionist". They like to think of themselves as lefties but all they're interested in is their autistic identity struggles instead of the one that actually matters - the class struggle.

>>14109660
Ironically Marx's dumb class struggle idea has worked far better for the leftists who applied it to social issues than it ever did economically.

>>14109667
What the fuck are you talking about LMAO
His class struggle idea formed the basis of revolutions and changed the course of history.

>>14109660
white heterosexual marxists are cucks who had they any balls would have become reactionary white nationalists a long time ago, effectively they carry water for the trannies and multinational capital while working to silence any real countercultural opposition to the system.

>>14109679
>white marxists should become the opposite of what they value

>>14109677
And every single nation that attempted to implement his economic ideas failed horribly and reverted back to state capitalism. Marx's ideas being appealing to hordes of dumb proles because it appeals directly to their envy of more productive and successful individuals doesn't mean they're actually good. In practice they've failed every time.

On the other hand cultural marxism that groups people into categories and plays them against each other based on which groups have "institutional power" has been very successful and has complete cultural hegemony. Turns out "Marxists" really aren't that interested in losing their private property but ooffer them a slacktivist way to be on the "right side of history" by making everything about smaller groups of "oppressed" identities railing against the prevailing cis white male culture and they'll line up in droves.

>>14109681
what do you value? its obvious the queers and the peeohcees and the academic appartchicks don't care about the crassness and degradation of capitalist culture, they actively enjoy it as long as it panders to them, they don't want equality, they want revenge, they will never see you as a comrade, but as an enemy that must be humilliated. They relish victimhood far too much to actually bring about utopia. The radical right on the other hand will welcome you as a comrade in the struggle to further true life affirming values.

>>14109681
you insist on ignoring reality for fantasy. ordinary white people see an assault on every aspect of their culture and their very existence by global capitalism and its leftist attack dogs. the destruction of everything they have ever found meaningful. Even marxism depends on christianity and the western literate tradition for coherence, the same things leftists have been hard at work attacking for the last few decades

>>14105380
trannies have ruined leftist solidarity in less than a decade better than fascists ever could. I fucking hate them

>>14109622
They fucking deserve it desu. By including mentally ills hedonists in their movement we have effectively ruined Marxism. Now working class people are put off by socialism whenever they see these freaks.

>>14109699
That's not true. I'm a poc but I fucking trannies and other poc for being too stuck in idpol. They were just played a number by you know who

>>14109715
the answer to the attack on culture by capitalism isn't blind racial hatred and ethnonationalism.

>>14109699
pic related is you

>>14106535
>artists and youtiber works wherever they please.
As the websites that would allow their work to even receive any acknowledgment are able to take down their work and blacklist them whenever they please. We're dealing with levels of alienation so elevated you don't even get to have a contract and a salary, whether you are going to get anything out of your labour at all is entirely contingent on the whims of Google or whoever.
>Nothing stop them from getting together and making software to sell.
>Most peopme have access to computer, hell most POOR people today own at least a phone and a tv.
Then why do you think all these temporarily embarassed millionaires aren't living like Bill Gates yet?
>if youtube was run by communist it would be up to an algorithm to display content.
Which is why the means of production have to be democratically owned, not operate like the same exact company except it's "run" by a capitalist claiming to be a communist.
>Do you not know how search engine works?
Do you? YouTube/Google's shit is not open source.
>If I made a video supporting the right of private property, of becoming rich or of restauring a class-based society, I'll get silenced too.
Comedy will continue to exist under communism.
>it still has all the problem of capitalism
It doesn't have unemployment.

>>14109787
based kid having ambition

In my country, the traditional leftists have very little patience with identity politics of various kinds. Sure, they acknowledge that racials issues exist and should be handled, but the emphasize that your social class is the primary indicator we should be concerned with. All identity politics seem to do is muddy the waters and cause in fighting on the left, which I am sure is to the great amusement of the right wing establishment and power holders.

>>14109791
>democratically owned
>It doesn't have unemployment
Yikes!

>>14109825
It's the gulf between the educated metropolitan leftwingers and the working class man who has traditionally been left wing.

>>14109609
Your Zizek is on point.

Yes, most marxists these days are either racist, sexist, abelist, etc. Look at Chapo Trap House for instance. People complain about "muh inner city liberal elite" or other conspiracies, but the reality is that we intersectional progressives are a higher evolved group than all of the left wing. We are more aware, empathic, and educated than the marxists of the past. We are its commanders, activists, and thought leaders now. We are the central group of the left. The rest of you are just riding our tailcoats, and there is nothing you can do about it but bitch (like all the marxists and communists in this thread). No one cares about your class analysis when there are more pressing problems like violence against trans folk, violence against black women, and the fact that everyone on the right is basically a nazi of some sort. You call us the divide and conquerers of the left, when really it is YOU that is making us fight among ourselves by continually bitching about social justice and identity politics. My suggestion? Shut up and follow.

>>14109862
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlmNqwEhGIk

>>14108821
There was no counter-argument to be made there because the anon I was responding to hadn't substantiated his claim. If he had done that, I would've responded with an actual argument.

>>14108868
>What is (and how to know it) and what ought to be (and how one should live) is a common distinction that has been around since the Greeks.
And Hegel is the philosopher that took such simple oppositions that "have been around since the Greeks" and showed how they evolve through their contradiction.

>They have different ends, dummy. One is a social and political program about how things should be, the other is a scientific program for understanding the world.
Marxism is a scientific program for understanding the world.

>It's amazing to me how easy it is btfo commies with a tiny bit of philosophical knowledge. It's like you idiots don't read anything apart from communist literature.
It's amazing to me how the "Dunning-Kruger" cliche proves itself correct with every overconfident dunce on the internet.

>>14109925
>Marxism is a scientific program for understanding the world.
"Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it."

>>14109925
>Marxism is a scientific program for understanding the world.
Marxism is at best a pseudoscientific program that mixes christian morality with cherry-picked anthropology, hegelian teleological dogma and materialist notions on the human condition that have been disproven by now (to be fair here, neither Marx nor Engels could have known about the last part since nobody knew anything about genetics and neurology back then).
Bascially peak 19th century scienticism, where people think you can analyze human society and the course of history the same you can analyze physics.

>>14109968
how the fuck can you disprove historical materialism?

>>14109882
Marxism Leninism isn't a humanitarian movement to help the weak. Its main concern is eliminating the capitalist class. Anything is diverting from its course

>>14109882
>most Marxists are racist, ableist
Fucking based im a marxist now

>>14109882
Either bait or a tranny. Either way dilate you disgusting freak

>>14109935
So "descriptive/normative" is not the only absolute contradiction of abstract ideas that you fell for. "Theory/practice" is another one. From the same document:
>Man must prove the truth, i.e., the reality and power, the this-sidedness [Diesseitigkeit] of his thinking, in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question.
>All social life is essentially practical. All mysteries which lead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice.
The point of "Philosopher have hitherto..." is not opting for practice in favour of theory, but for transcending the opposition between the two.

>>14109968
Marxism affirms that morality and religion are alienated social products that cease to be such external objects once private property is overcome. It also rejects idealism and vulgar materialism.

>>14110197
That must be why the USSR organized all the world peace conferences at a point when the capitalist class directly ruled most of the world and was indirectly influencing the remaining part through trade and competition.

>>14109882
>there are more pressing problems like violence against trans folk, violence against black women, and the fact that everyone on the right is basically a nazi of some sort
Epic

>>14109609
Peterson is mostly right tho.

>>14105380
Test

Marxists have been conceding to progressives for fucking ever now and are essentially a none entity. It literally just takes one fucking black person to say BLACK LIVES MATTER! At something and marxoids will instantly cuck, and fall to the wayside and sometimes literally let the monkeys take the podium. Pretty pathetic bunch really.

>>14110216
>Marxists have been conceding to progressives
You're just describing progressives. If you "concede to progressives" you're not a Marxist, but a "progressive".

>>14110209
Except he keeps contradicting himself and generally has pretty shit arguments against Marxism. He’s the embodiment of “b-but they didn’t think of human nature.” Seriously, listen to the debate, it’s on YouTube, search “zizek Peterson Marxism”

>>14110170
>how the fuck can you disprove historical materialism?
I didn't try to deny historical materialism. Marx has actually several good insights and ideas including the basic concept that the material conditions are the dominant forces of history.
The problem with Marx is the whole teleological bullshit about some dialectical development towards a classless, stateless society for which there is neither proof nor any indication and is mostly based on Marx own wishful thinking and cherry-picked anthropology.
Material history doesn't seem to develope the way communists want it to be. Look what the recent technology enables us to do: WMDs, 1984-tier mass-surveillance, drones, police-bots, environmental destruction which makes global eco-collapse and descend into barbarism more likely by each passing day, etc.... all thanks to technological progress which marxists view as the driving force towards the golden communist future

>>14110203
>Marxism affirms that morality and religion are alienated social products that cease to be such external objects once private property is overcome.
>Peak vulgar materialism, which also rejects the fact that many of our basic instinct-driven emotions, that are "reactionary" by communists standards, are hardwired into our brain and can't just be "educated away" in the matter of a single generation.

>>14110431
>Peak vulgar materialism, which also rejects the fact that many of our basic instinct-driven emotions, that are "reactionary" by communists standards, are hardwired into our brain and can't just be "educated away" in the matter of a single generation.
How did you manage to contradict yourself that much in a single short sentence? Even if the part about the rejection were true, then it would be the absolute opposite of vulgar materialism, because it's precisely vulgar materialism that attributes too much to biological impulses.

>>14105898
>aristokkkracy
Opinion dropped, GB2R

>>14110203

>"Theory/practice" is another one
Practice isn't an ends, you stupid faggot, it's an activity. To say, "the point is to change [the world]" is to entail two different states: (A) an original unchanged state of the world, and (B) a later changed world state. The "point is to" reach (B), i.e. (B) is an ends or goal. The quote thread you are responding to is pointing out the ends are different between your example of Einstein (understanding the natural world) and the example of Marx (sociopolitical change, of which understanding the world is only a sub-goal to the (B) state). You're either being deliberately deceptive (typical of commies), or a complete dumbass on this issue.

>The point of "Philosopher have hitherto..." is not opting for practice in favour of theory, but for transcending the opposition between the two.
Notice in your argument here you don't even explicitly go into the sublation of the alleged contradictions you are talking about. You say something about a "transcendence of the oppositions," but you neither being explicit about what this new unified entity is, nor are the quotes you've presented illuminating to this issue (probably because you know you've backed yourself into a corner regarding the topic of evaluation here, and are trying to be rhetorically slippery like the majority of your posts in this thread).

>>14105412
So when the dictatorship of the proletariat happens we should fight them as well right?

>>14110676
>Practice isn't an ends
Yes it is.
>To say, "the point is to change [the world]" is to entail two different states: (A) an original unchanged state of the world, and (B) a later changed world state. The "point is to" reach (B), i.e. (B) is an ends or goal.
There's no "original unchanged state of the world". There's no place to shoehorn your stupid fucking abstract opposition of means and ends here.
>You're either being deliberately deceptive (typical of commies)
You're being a retard who's submerged in false abstractions. That I don't indulge them is not "being deceptive".

>you neither being explicit about what this new unified entity is
"Revolutionary practice ... a PRACTICAL-CRITICAL activity".
>ALL MYSTERIES WHICH LEAD THEORY TO MYSTICISM FIND THEIR RATIONAL SOLUTION IN HUMAN PRACTICE AND IN THE COMPREHENSION OF THIS PRACTICE.
The quotes were perfectly clear on this. You just won't accept that something won't fit neatly into your stupid little oppositions of theory–practice, means–ends, normative–descriptive, good–evil, authoritarian–democratic, or whatever else you use as a substitute of genuine understanding. So you conclude that whatever doesn't fit them must not make sense, and anyone who doesn't accept them at face value must be being deceptive.

>>14110801
>Yes it is.
No, you dense fool. Are you even following the conversation here? I'm talking about YOU making the mistake of conflating between ends and practices (you shifted from examples given about ends to talk of practice). I'm not talking whether it is an end in the predicate sense (practice can be an end), I'm talking about the identity sense (are they one and the same or do they have the same qualities, which is what is at issue). They aren't the same thing (and if you do admit they are, then you've just undermined your own argument by introducing values again). A practice is a process or activity. It may or may not be done for ends either extrinsic or intrinsic; but more importantly, it's carried out by someone (or a group), making it an action. This is the critical difference between activities and ends. Ends are desired states or objects that sometimes drive actions. They aren't the same thing. I hate quoting fallacies at people, because it reeks of reddit, but you shifting my argument about ends to talk about practice is the very definition of a strawman. You've batted something down that has nothing to do with what I'm saying.

>There's no "original unchanged state of the world".

It's entailed by the fact that there is a possible state (B) of a changed world. Nitpick in any way you like about the language, but Marx is ontologically committed to some preceding actual world state that differs from the end goal (B).

>There's no place to shoehorn ...

You're projecting. The only person shoehorning stuff here is you with your constant claims about "abstractions" and "oppositions". Nothing in this thread of yours is supported by the way. You don't indulge posts, because you are a dummy and can't think.

>Revolutionary practice ... So you conclude that whatever ...
The term "revolutionary" carries both ontological committment to change, and evaluative aspects (political). So this undermines your argument again w.r.t. both with the world state issue and the evaluative stuff. RE: deceptive, yes you are, because the original issue at hand had absolutely nothing to do with these oppositions, it's you that introduced them (without argument). The issue at hand is the fact that you are avoiding the value issues involved in several of your claims above. To get out of these claims you've merely asserted that there is a contradiction (with no support) and also asserted the sublation process (with no explanation).

You are legit the dumbest communist I've spoke to on here. You literally can't think outside of your tiny brain toolkit. I'm going to sleep now. If I wake up tomorrow and I see another post where you've replied to me with no argument and more retarded shit about "oppositions", I'm not going to reply. Should be self-evident to anyone else that you are a retard if you reply in that manner.

>>14105412

And?

It moved past Marxism around the time of al-Khaldun

>>14109677
>His class struggle idea formed the basis of revolutions and changed the course of history.
and lost, and they had many defeats on their way to the victories they had. The trannies have not had a single set back in anything they have ever done

>>14110546
Sry, I mistyped this, my english is somewhat rusty.
There should be a "not" between "which also" and "rejects the fact that many of our basic instinct-driven emotions.......". I forgot the negation.

The point I was trying to make is that when marxists talk about "material conditions", they almost always exclusively talk about the environmental conditions a human being faces after it was born, but almost never about the genetic basis of the human being which decides how the human being responds to material stimula of these "environmental conditions".