- Joined
- Aug 6, 2019
- Messages
- 19,489
- Reaction score
- 8,584
- Location
- Bridgeport, CT
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
What a useless thread.No. Worry about Marxism - it’s still alive and kicking, and it needs to be figuratively stabbed in the heart with a wooden stake whenever you get the chance.
This is a thread for all of my friends on the political right who (correctly) find cultural Marxism to be morally repugnant. Neo-Marxism and cultural Marxism are not exactly the same thing, but they are close enough for this post.
The key difference, imo, between Marxism and Neo-Marxism is that is that Marxism is seductive - not just to leftists but to ordinary people as well. It promises an end to poverty, a classless society, and a fairer distribution of wealth. Even if the details are murky, the emotional appeal is strong: take from the rich, give to the poor, and level the playing field. You can't really blame someone for supporting those ideals.
Neo-Marxism, otoh, is something normal people reject right out of the gate. It demands that we deny obvious truths - like the difference between men and women in sports - in the name of inclusion. Go interview a thousand people on the street and only a handful will say they support biological men competing against women. Same with "equity" versus "equality": normal people instinctively support treating everyone the same, not engineering outcomes based on group identity. Equity sounds like fairness until you realize it means treating people unequally in order to get the results they want. It's simply awful.
In short, Marxism sells utopia, while Neo-Marxism sells guilt, grievance, and reparations, and that makes it a political loser. Memes are really the best weapon against it.
No. Worry about Marxism - it’s still alive and kicking, and it needs to be figuratively stabbed in the heart with a wooden stake whenever you get the chance.
This is a thread for all of my friends on the political right who (correctly) find cultural Marxism to be morally repugnant. Neo-Marxism and cultural Marxism are not exactly the same thing, but they are close enough for this post.
The key difference, imo, between Marxism and Neo-Marxism is that is that Marxism is seductive - not just to leftists but to ordinary people as well. It promises an end to poverty, a classless society, and a fairer distribution of wealth. Even if the details are murky, the emotional appeal is strong: take from the rich, give to the poor, and level the playing field. You can't really blame someone for supporting those ideals.
Neo-Marxism, otoh, is something normal people reject right out of the gate. It demands that we deny obvious truths - like the difference between men and women in sports - in the name of inclusion. Go interview a thousand people on the street and only a handful will say they support biological men competing against women. Same with "equity" versus "equality": normal people instinctively support treating everyone the same, not engineering outcomes based on group identity. Equity sounds like fairness until you realize it means treating people unequally in order to get the results they want. It's simply awful.
In short, Marxism sells utopia, while Neo-Marxism sells guilt, grievance, and reparations, and that makes it a political loser. Memes are really the best weapon against it.
TBH, I think if Marx were alive today he would despise identity politics.
Idiot rightists retain the right to define everyone they disagree with, or who disagrees with them, as Marxists(Classic) Marxism tenets
Historical Materialism
Class Struggle (proletariat/bourgeoisie)
Capitalism as Exploitative
Revolution (violent, if necessary) and Socialism as transitional steps to Communism
NeoMarxism tenets
Focus on Culture and Ideology “cultural hegemony,”
Critique of Reductionism
Incorporation of Psychoanalysis
Global Perspective
I think NeoMarxism is worse. Modern society has history to look back on, and we should acknowledge the perils of communism. Freedom loving people should resist any attempts by NeoMarxists to gain positions of power.
Your little tantrum is noted. . .Idiot rightists retain the right to define everyone they disagree with, or who disagrees with them, as Marxists
Idiot rightists don't know what the term Marxism means. Idiot rightists reached their Peter Principal level of incompetence when they learned to spell Marxism.
Who decides what is or isn't neo-Marxism?Neo-Marxism, otoh, is something normal people reject right out of the gate. It demands that we deny obvious truths - like the difference between men and women in sports - in the name of inclusion. Go interview a thousand people on the street and only a handful will say they support biological men competing against women. Same with "equity" versus "equality": normal people instinctively support treating everyone the same, not engineering outcomes based on group identity. Equity sounds like fairness until you realize it means treating people unequally in order to get the results they want. It's simply awful.
How are memes a weapon at all against it?In short, Marxism sells utopia, while Neo-Marxism sells guilt, grievance, and reparations, and that makes it a political loser. Memes are really the best weapon against it.
Advocates of either are afflicted with Economic Necrophilia.(Classic) Marxism tenets
Historical Materialism
Class Struggle (proletariat/bourgeoisie)
Capitalism as Exploitative
Revolution (violent, if necessary) and Socialism as transitional steps to Communism
NeoMarxism tenets
Focus on Culture and Ideology “cultural hegemony,”
Critique of Reductionism
Incorporation of Psychoanalysis
Global Perspective
I think NeoMarxism is worse. Modern society has history to look back on, and we should acknowledge the perils of communism. Freedom loving people should resist any attempts by NeoMarxists to gain positions of power.
Indeed. Marxism (of either persuasion) is a profound ignorance of economics.Advocates of either are afflicted with Economic Necrophilia.
Neo-Marxism, or Cultural Marxist if I understand you correctly, is so toxic that even the original Marxists would have rejected it. (For example, the old Communists in the USSR and other countries were deeply homophobic, as was most everyone else at that time.) But economic Marxism is incredibly seductive. Have you ever seen the movie The Grapes of Wrath? That movie was based on a book written by a Communist and is Communist propaganda. But it’s so effective that I want to overthrow Capitalism whenever I see it.No. Worry about Marxism - it’s still alive and kicking, and it needs to be figuratively stabbed in the heart with a wooden stake whenever you get the chance.
This is a thread for all of my friends on the political right who (correctly) find cultural Marxism to be morally repugnant. Neo-Marxism and cultural Marxism are not exactly the same thing, but they are close enough for this post.
The key difference, imo, between Marxism and Neo-Marxism is that is that Marxism is seductive - not just to leftists but to ordinary people as well. It promises an end to poverty, a classless society, and a fairer distribution of wealth. Even if the details are murky, the emotional appeal is strong: take from the rich, give to the poor, and level the playing field. You can't really blame someone for supporting those ideals.
Neo-Marxism, otoh, is something normal people reject right out of the gate. It demands that we deny obvious truths - like the difference between men and women in sports - in the name of inclusion. Go interview a thousand people on the street and only a handful will say they support biological men competing against women. Same with "equity" versus "equality": normal people instinctively support treating everyone the same, not engineering outcomes based on group identity. Equity sounds like fairness until you realize it means treating people unequally in order to get the results they want. It's simply awful.
In short, Marxism sells utopia, while Neo-Marxism sells guilt, grievance, and reparations, and that makes it a political loser. Memes are really the best weapon against it.
No. Worry about Marxism - it’s still alive and kicking, and it needs to be figuratively stabbed in the heart with a wooden stake whenever you get the chance.
This is a thread for all of my friends on the political right who (correctly) find cultural Marxism to be morally repugnant. Neo-Marxism and cultural Marxism are not exactly the same thing, but they are close enough for this post.
The key difference, imo, between Marxism and Neo-Marxism is that is that Marxism is seductive - not just to leftists but to ordinary people as well. It promises an end to poverty, a classless society, and a fairer distribution of wealth. Even if the details are murky, the emotional appeal is strong: take from the rich, give to the poor, and level the playing field. You can't really blame someone for supporting those ideals.
Neo-Marxism, otoh, is something normal people reject right out of the gate. It demands that we deny obvious truths - like the difference between men and women in sports - in the name of inclusion. Go interview a thousand people on the street and only a handful will say they support biological men competing against women. Same with "equity" versus "equality": normal people instinctively support treating everyone the same, not engineering outcomes based on group identity. Equity sounds like fairness until you realize it means treating people unequally in order to get the results they want. It's simply awful.
In short, Marxism sells utopia, while Neo-Marxism sells guilt, grievance, and reparations, and that makes it a political loser. Memes are really the best weapon against it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?