Marxism vs neo-Marxism . . . Which Is Worse?

[ataraxia]

Anyways, we're DEEP in the weeds here. Lets' discuss the differences between Marxism and NeoMarxism, and why one is worse than the other.

Why do you think those are even live topics for anyone to discuss?

A more interesting discussion would be to know whether you see any difference between Marxism and something like the Nordic model- which is basically all that even the most "extreme leftists" in this country are asking for:

Nordic model - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SkyChief]

So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.

NO!!!! Stop this nonsense at once.

So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.

Stop. Please .

Which Congress members have said they want to abolish personal property? Give us your list of the many who have said that.

Nah - I don't need to do that.

You can research that on your own if you're so inclined.

 

[devildavid]

Interesting.

Marxism is a political, economic and social philosophy that primarily seeks to understand how society works and how to change it. Neo-Marxism is a term sometimes used to refer to some of the different strains of Marxism that developed in the 20th century.

Classic Marxism tenets
Historical Materialism
Class Struggle (proletariat/bourgeoisie)
Capitalism as Exploitative
Revolution and Socialism as transitional steps to Communism

NeoMarxism tenets
Focus on Culture and Ideology “cultural hegemony,”
Critique of Reductionism
Incorporation of Psychoanalysis
Global Perspective

all of it is scary and subversive.

What is scary about it?

The American revolution was subversive. All revolutions are.

 

[SkyChief]

Why do you think those are even live topics for anyone to discuss?

Not really. This thread is a POLL which asks the Question: Marxism vs neo-Marxism . . . Which Is Worse?

A more interesting discussion would be to know whether you see any difference between Marxism and something like the Nordic model.

You are welcome to start your own thread about the Nordic Model.

In this thread we're discussing the differences between (Classic)Marxism and NeoMarxism.

 

[Bodecea]

Traditional Marxism was based on class envy and class warfare.
Those are the establishment Democrats, like Pelosi and Schumer.
Neo-marxism is based on racial hatred and cultural hatred.
Those are the new generation of left wing bigot Democrats like the Squad.

 

[aociswundumho]

Why do you think those are even live topics for anyone to discuss?

A more interesting discussion would be to know whether you see any difference between Marxism and something like the Nordic model- which is basically all that even the most "extreme leftists" in this country are asking for:

Nordic model - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From your link:

Overall tax burdens as a percentage of GDP are high, with 35.9%, 41.4%, 41.4%, 42.4% and 43.4% for Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark respectively. This is compared to the OECD average of 33.9%

The US is about 25% now.

That means you want to increase the tax burden in the US by about 70%.

 

[Real blank]

this ain’t ya mama’s Marxism

 

[soylentgreen]

I did. It's an honest sentiment shared by many good Americans.



You you you you you you you you you you you - LOL you said the word 'you' SIXTEEN TIMES in your dumb post!!


Your incessant sanctimonious crap - someone at YOUR level pretending to be morally superior to a person who wants freedom and liberty, instead of the bootheel of Marxism on our necks. There is SO much irony there.

Your posts are nonsense - it's mostly crap based on false premises, emotions and bigotry (an irrational hatred for those who don't agree with you).

Of course I did yours is nothing more than a disingenuous opinion. Not based on fact but misinforming about fact. The game here is to show just how dishonest you are because it is pointless arguing marxism with some one who has never read anything but anti marxist propaganda.

You cannot give a credible context to what marx said. So instead you whinge and cry about how unfairly you are treated. but the only argument here is to point out how dishonestly you are arguing.

 

[StillBallin75]

Nothing is more hilarious than watching people who represent and defend all the worst evils of capitalism cry about the theoretical evils of Marxism.

If you people engaged in any sort of root cause analysis you wouldn't be the right wing bootlickers you are.

 

[George50]

NO!!!! Stop this nonsense at once.

Stop. Please .

That’s pretty funny. You say:

“That's a false assumption. I am not against taxes.”

Then I say:

“So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.”

Which of course all taxes are.

And now you scream NO!!!

I can certainly see why you are frustrated!

Nah - I don't need to do that.

You can research that on your own if you're so inclined.

Then you say:

“we have many Marxists in Congress.”

Again your definition of Marxists being those who want to abolish personal property. Now you can’t even name one?

Why should anyone believe you?

 

[ataraxia]

Those things are not really "Basic infrastructure".

they should be. They the foundation and what define modern democracies and economies. Democracy and modern economies are not possible with an uneducated and unhealthy society.

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[Ahlevah]

My opinion- anyone who couldn't get through the first three pages of Das Kapital has no business talking about Marxism.

“If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bullshit.”

 

[Ahlevah]

And now showing that you don't know what a 'red herring' is.
It took Karl Marx three volumes of heavy going to explain Marxism. Go ahead, show the class your exceptionally superior intelligence by condensing it into a bumper sticker.

I can’t speak for him, but I wasn’t going to read three volumes of that crap. I got the CliffsNotes version in a one-semester survey class on political economy. It was bullshit then, it’s bullshit now—except in our household, where we practice communism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” In this case, it’s “her need,” because I don’t need much while my wife needs everything, like manicures and regular trips to Academy Sports & Outdoors to buy athletic shoes.

 

[bomberfox]

Both Pelosi and Schumer use the class envy Marxist phrase "tax cuts for the rich"

Marxism aint about class envy. Its about liberating the working class from the dictatorship of capitalism. Every business internally is a dictatorship. When capitalists had absolute rule in this country they controlled how much you made, where you lived, and dictated where you could spend your company scrip. In Ford’s case, he fired people for just smiling. Right now capitalists feel that even minor concessions are an existential threat and billionaires are taking control of our government directly. I dont care about billions of dollars, the thing i absolutely resent is the power capitalists exert over our daily lives.

If i had to choose between the dictatorship of capital or the dictatorship of the proletariat. I am choosing my class, the working class.

 

[bomberfox]

WTF??? Racist theory? What a nonsensical question.

Your posts are so ignorant. You obviously have NO idea what you're talking about, and you ask REALLY dumb questions.

What a dumb straw-man argument!!! I never said, or even implied that Marxists are coming for my house. You made that doltish nonsense up.

You're having a lot of difficulty formulating a sensible argument. Here are the core tenets of each ideology:

Classic Marxism tenets
Historical Materialism
Class Struggle (proletariat/bourgeoisie)
Capitalism as Exploitative
Revolution and Socialism as transitional steps to Communism

NeoMarxism tenets
Focus on Culture and Ideology “cultural hegemony,”
Critique of Reductionism
Incorporation of Psychoanalysis
Global Perspective

In my opinion, NeoMarxism is FAR worse. Incorporation of Psychoanalysis???? that's some scary shit right there.

Classic marxism is also a global perspective, the internationale and all that.

 

[bomberfox]

The principle of private property is what makes countries prosperous.

The principle of cooperation makes countries prosperous

 

[bomberfox]

As has been pointed out by others. You have never read anything about marx. That is obvious by the lies you tell about what marx has said. It is relevant because all you are doing is spreading misinformation.

Of course it is ambiguous. It lacks content and given an actual understanding of marx you would know that the context is in talking about open revolution against the bourgeoisie. Not on how an economy should be run.

Your arguments are based on ignorance and the desire to spread fear .

Its just the logical conclusion of said revolution. In context he has it right.

 

[Grand Mal]

I can’t speak for him, but I wasn’t going to read three volumes of that crap. I got the CliffsNotes version in a one-semester survey class on political economy. It was bullshit then, it’s bullshit now—except in our household, where we practice communism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” In this case, it’s “her need,” because I don’t need much while my wife needs everything, like manicures and regular trips to Academy Sports & Outdoors to buy athletic shoes.

I've sometimes thought that the most successful model was a small communism operating in a larger capitalism. I remember my father figgering, when he and my mother and brother and I were all working and living in the same house, how much money that represented and what could be done with it, but being not that way inclined we all did our own things.
But Marxism was a reaction to the huge, sudden changes that the industrial revolution brought to Europe. That's why Marx thought the revolution of the proletariat would happen in an industrial country like England, not a rural peasant society like Russia.
And Marx 'way over-thought it all. I tried to plow through it just out of curiosity, like I read Mao's Little Red Book and Hitlers Mein Kampf, but my gawd it's heavy going, to nowhere.

 

[ataraxia]

Not really. This thread is a POLL which asks the Question: Marxism vs neo-Marxism . . . Which Is Worse?

You are welcome to start your own thread about the Nordic Model.

In this thread we're discussing the differences between (Classic)Marxism and NeoMarxism.

Why do you think this distinction is of any interest today other than of historical interest? Isn’t there there a history discussion section this should be under? We can also discuss the merits of alchemy vs necromancy there.

 

[Buster Keaton]

In 1981, the top marginal income tax rate in the US was 70%. Were we a Marxist country then? Now it’s 37% Pelosi and Schumer are saying that we’ve gone too far in lowering the rate. Nothing at all wrong with or Marxist about that.

Talking about class envy, can you explain why we should support Republicans in congress who want to take money from the middle class and poor and give it to their donors who make more than a billion dollars a year? The House has just passed a bill to do exactly that. That doesn’t sound like class envy on the part of those at the bottom. That sounds like class warfare started by those at the top!

Class envy works great for the Democrat Party
The Democrat Politicians are dependent upon ignorant and envious voters

 

[Buster Keaton]

Marxism aint about class envy. Its about liberating the working class from the dictatorship of capitalism. Every business internally is a dictatorship. When capitalists had absolute rule in this country they controlled how much you made, where you lived, and dictated where you could spend your company scrip. In Ford’s case, he fired people for just smiling. Right now capitalists feel that even minor concessions are an existential threat and billionaires are taking control of our government directly. I dont care about billions of dollars, the thing i absolutely resent is the power capitalists exert over our daily lives.

If i had to choose between the dictatorship of capital or the dictatorship of the proletariat. I am choosing my class, the working class.

This is why the Democrats are unpopular

 

[Buster Keaton]

The principle of cooperation makes countries prosperous

Like Cuba?

 

[George50]

From your link:

Overall tax burdens as a percentage of GDP are high, with 35.9%, 41.4%, 41.4%, 42.4% and 43.4% for Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark respectively. This is compared to the OECD average of 33.9%

The US is about 25% now.

That means you want to increase the tax burden in the US by about 70%.

Apples and oranges.

Nordic countries offer citizens extensive social benefits that are largely absent or much less comprehensive in the US. These include universal healthcare, free higher education, generous parental leave, and a strong social safety net that includes unemployment benefits, childcare subsidies, and housing allowances, all of which are largely funded by taxes.

We pay for those things that Nordic countries have in this country too, just not through taxes. Add those things in and who pays the most for the whole package? Personally, I don’t give a crap about big vs small government. I’d just prefer to do whatever is the most efficient and less costly for the whole package.

In my opinion, are a number of things that the US is doing that are stupid. For example, in 2023 the first country on your list, Norway, spent 9% of their GDP on healthcare. We spent 17.6%. Half of ours is government spending the rest is private spending (mostly employers) or 8.8% for private. Add the 25% we spend on taxes to the 8.8% additional we spend on healthcare and you are at 33.8%. Pretty close to the 35.9% Norway spends for their whole package. For that extra 2.1% Norway citizens are getting things like:

free higher education, generous parental leave, and a strong social safety net that includes unemployment benefits, childcare subsidies, and housing allowances, all of which are largely funded by taxes.

Makes you wonder if somewhere we are doing something seriously wrong.

 

[SkyChief]

That’s pretty funny. You say:

“That's a false assumption. I am not against taxes.”

Then I say:

“So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.”

Which of course all taxes are.

FALSE. You obviously don't even know the difference between Direct Taxes and indirect taxes. If you did, then you wouldn't make such a ludicrous statement.

OMG There IS SO MUCH that you don't understand. I'm not even going to waste time explaining it to you - you're not at a level where you can understand why we must make the distinction between Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes.

Don't feel bad. I'm pretty sure that not one Marxist in this thread could make the distinction between the two. If they could, then they wouldn't be Marxist!

And now you scream NO!!!

I can certainly see why you are frustrated!

You have no Idea why I'm frustrated. I waste so much time on this explaining simple concepts to ignorant people who can never grasp it.

Then you say:

“we have many Marxists in Congress.”

Again your definition of Marxists being those who want to abolish personal property. Now you can’t even name one?

I don't need to name ANY of them. informed people KNOW who the Marxists are. It's obvious.

If you want to pretend that there are no Marxists in Congress, THEN YOU DO THAT.

Why should anyone believe you?

I just don't care, George. If I may impart ANYTHING on you, it is this: I just don't give a shit.

 

[Isidore]

I voted for no Marxism being a worse alternative.

(I hope I read that right..jkwhat is this thread about?)