7 minutes ago, blazes said:

 

Ironic that this particular edition of ThaiVisa headlined the massive toxic plastic waste that afflicts the Gulf of Thailand (and the world's oceans generally), and yet here you are smugly congratulating the capitalist world on being so incredibly superior to the Victorian world of Marx and Engels.  

  Look around you, whether in Thailand or, if you are a Canuck, have a look at Trudeau and his soft-in-the-head liberalism, and tell us all that these countries are "working" well.  Take a look at the murderous foreign policy of the USA in the last 50 years, especially in the Middle East, and take a look at the war criminal, Blair, who assured us all that Iraq had 'weapons of mass destruction' (as if nuclear weapons had never been invented.)

To blame Marx for how others have used his analysis of history is like blaming Henry Vlll for the pedophilia of thousands of Catholic priests ...absurd.

Just imagine what it was like 400 years ago. When has it ever been this good?

Oh and Trudeau is a lifelong Marxist. So yes he is trying to screw it all up.

Edited May 6, 20188 yr by canuckamuck

Saw this today

Link

3 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Just imagine what it was like 400 years ago. When has it ever been this good?

Oh and Trudeau is a lifelong Marxist. So yes he is trying to screw it all up.

Trudeau is a hippy like his mother and does not have the smarts to understand, as his father did, the intellectual depth of Marxism.

 

As for 400 years ago....how many died of cancer in Shakespeare's time?

5 minutes ago, blazes said:

Trudeau is a hippy like his mother and does not have the smarts to understand, as his father did, the intellectual depth of Marxism.

 

As for 400 years ago....how many died of cancer in Shakespeare's time?

They never got old enough to die of cancer. They died of plague, smallpox and syphilis.

Edited May 6, 20188 yr by canuckamuck

5 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Saw this today

Link

Don't give up, we'll get there. Just a few hundred million more bodies to go!

26 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

So are you making a trip to Venezuela soon to experience the latest rendition of Marx in action.

As I said " So far the posters here have no clue about Marx's ideas. ".

3 minutes ago, underlordcthulhu said:

Don't give up, we'll get there. Just a few hundred million more bodies to go!

Whatever the actual answer is, we are still a long, long way from finding it.

 

Excellent thread.

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

As I said " So far the posters here have no clue about Marx's ideas. ".

So, let's listen to the man himself: “The Communists … openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. There is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.”

 

Marx would have been delighted at the hundreds of millions of corpses his insane notions caused. Otherwise, he'd have been just another obscure 19th-century dissident.

Is this some kind of nightmare? An intellectual discussion about Marx? No, thought not; back to The Famous Grouse ?

 

BTW, of course he should have a commemorative memorial in Trier! I shall drink a bottle of Mosel to his memory.

7 hours ago, puck2 said:

Again and again stupidity and prejudice prevail in most comments (until #15) when they hear or read the derivations of „communism“. For those who like to read more than the headlines, pleas look here about the life of Karl Marx →

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx

 

Marx's life is like a coin with two sides. Let me relate to the positive one. He was aware of the new industrialization with its abusive capitalistic results.

 

 

 

That his ideas have bee abused by many leaders (Lenin, Stalin, Mao … the list goes on) for dictatorships isn't Marx's fault. If you think yes, than you should make Jesus Christ responsible for all the incredible cruelties made in his name and his new religion re. philosophy since the year zero. It's recognized worldwide that Marx's ideas developed as a wakening call against the negative, abusive consequences of extreme capitalism/money.

 

You may have pro, anti or mixed feelings and ideas about Marx. You cannot deny that he gave useful ideas against the inhuman results of capitalism.

 

Therefore I agree with the people of Trier allowing the Chinese to donate a statue of Marx in the town of his birthplace. Many late world leaders have had an inconsistent character, but are remembered by statues. Lincoln, not a „negro“ lover, is one example out of many.

 

One does not have to agree with Marxism but he did make many think about the evils of unrestrained unfettered Capitalism. Remember Capitalism is about Profit taking and has no Social Conscience. Marxism is idealism. Redistribution of wealth is found in other doctrines as well. his was an intellectual view. Do not blame the genocidal actions of others on his theories. As you say Marx's life was like the 2 sides of a coin.

3 hours ago, faraday said:

Excellent thread.

Induction?

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Induction?

 

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Induction?

Not really, no. I posted my comment because there has been a civil exchange of opinions.

 

How's the Grouse?

 

Water, or neat?

 

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

So, let's listen to the man himself: “The Communists … openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. There is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.”

 

Marx would have been delighted at the hundreds of millions of corpses his insane notions caused. Otherwise, he'd have been just another obscure 19th-century dissident.

My interpretation of his statement is not that he relished the thought of bloodshed, but that he recognised that profound transformation was not painless, and that drastic efforts should be made to minimise the pain. Certainly Marx never invented discontent, nor did he invent revolution. Europe had a pretty bloody 18th and 19th century as the masses became increasingly dissatisfied and more assertive, while the gentry failed or were unwilling to recognise that the balance of power was tilting away from them. That is what, I believe, he was alluding to. As Kiwiken said, Marx created a vision that people could look to with hope - unfortunately the notion was exploited repeatedly, and in the worst possible way, by psychopaths.

The relationship Marx identified between capital, power and the abuse of that power by those who own and control the capital explains exactly why, in 2018, ordinary working people are in comparison to workers a generation ago earning less than they did, have fewer work place rights than they did, are less likely to have a work place pension anywhere near as good as their parents, will not get to enjoy a retirement.

 

He also explains why, while ordinary working people are being impoverished the owners and controllers of capital are amassing obscene wealth.

 

With these insights Marx has to be a villain.

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The relationship Marx identified between capital, power and the abuse of that power by those who own and control the capital explains exactly why, in 2018, ordinary working people are in comparison to workers a generation ago earning less than they did, have fewer work place rights than they did, are less likely to have a work place pension anywhere near as good as their parents, will not get to enjoy a retirement.

 

He also explains why, while ordinary working people are being impoverished the owners and controllers of capital are amassing obscene wealth.

 

With these insights Marx has to be a villain.

We are also experiencing the second industrial revolution which is of course the digital age. Things are changing rapidly. Don't you think there is going to be some instability. Not really the time for a revolution which would bring back the age of steam power. And the bloodshed of the 20th century.

Edited May 6, 20188 yr by canuckamuck

7 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

We are also experiencing the second industrial revolution which is of course the digital age. Things are changing rapidly. Don't you think there is going to be some instability. Not really the time for a revolution which would bring back the age of steam power. And the bloodshed of the 20th century.

I’m not at all sure what you are referring to when you say ‘Not really the time for a revolution which would bring back the age of steam power. And the bloodshed of the 20th century.’

 

Marx was a philosopher, not a revolutionist, and there is nothing in Marx’s writings that dictates anything you’ve said.

 

There is however a great deal of anti Marx propaganda which might explain the hyperbole of your comment.

 

 

6 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

We are also experiencing the second industrial revolution which is of course the digital age. Things are changing rapidly. Don't you think there is going to be some instability. Not really the time for a revolution which would bring back the age of steam power. And the bloodshed of the 20th century.

No sane person would wish for violence, but social upheaval usually has its roots in gross inequality, or at least in its perception. Regardless of whether our collective lot is better than it was a century ago, there is an growing sense of inequality that our leaders seem unwilling to address. As George Santayana said, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it".

 

Quote

As George Santayana said, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it".

 

Good point. So if we cannot remember that Marxist regimes were responsible in the 20th century alone for the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people, the imprisonment, enslavement and ruin of countless millions more, we are likely to repeat it.

 

Given the history, putting up a new statue of Marx is an obscenity and an insult.

Just now, RickBradford said:

 

Good point. So if we cannot remember that Marxist regimes were responsible in the 20th century alone for the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people, the imprisonment, enslavement and ruin of countless millions more, we are likely to repeat it.

 

Given the history, putting up a new statue of Marx is an obscenity and an insult.

Just because those regimes have been branded Marxist does not mean they are Marxist.

 

Go read Marx, you’ll learn why very rich and very powerful people wish you to believe he’s evil.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Just because those regimes have been branded Marxist does not mean they are Marxist.

 

Go read Marx, you’ll learn why very rich and very powerful people wish you to believe he’s evil.

Yes, we all know the old exculpatory argument:  "That wasn't real Communism." It was, time and again.

 

I suggest you go and read The Gulag Archipelago to give you an idea of what went on.

 

If you want to try and excuse the killing of hundreds of millions of people for no reason except the pursuit of Marx's ideas, then no further discussion is possible.

 

 

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

Yes, we all know the old exculpatory argument:  "That wasn't real Communism." It was, time and again.

 

I suggest you go and read The Gulag Archipelago to give you an idea of what went on.

 

If you want to try and excuse the killing of hundreds of millions of people for no reason except the pursuit of Marx's ideas, then no further discussion is possible.

 

 

I have nowhere made excuses for any killings.

 

I suggest you go read Marx, you might then stay on topic.

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

Yes, we all know the old exculpatory argument:  "That wasn't real Communism." It was, time and again.

 

I suggest you go and read The Gulag Archipelago to give you an idea of what went on.

 

If you want to try and excuse the killing of hundreds of millions of people for no reason except the pursuit of Marx's ideas, then no further discussion is possible.

 

 

Love the reply. Marx knew what would be required to implement his murderous ideology. He absolutely knew. Read what he wrote, his ideology was not hijacked, it was faithfully implemented in multiple countries and in every country that tried Marxist/communism it has failed completely. Failed completely, unless killing tens of millions people is what you set out to accomplish.

 

If you are defending Karl Marx (after the 20th century) you are simply a fool, a moron, or both. 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I have nowhere made excuses for any killings.

 

I suggest you go read Marx, you might then stay on topic.

If you support Marx's ideology you absolutely are making excuses for millions of killings. Maybe you need to reread exactly what he wrote. 

27 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m not at all sure what you are referring to when you say ‘Not really the time for a revolution which would bring back the age of steam power. And the bloodshed of the 20th century.’

 

Marx was a philosopher, not a revolutionist, and there is nothing in Marx’s writings that dictates anything you’ve said.

 

There is however a great deal of anti Marx propaganda which might explain the hyperbole of your comment.

 

 

Rick Bradford posted this Marx quote in post 39. But I don't think he'll mind me reposting it here.

Quote

“The Communists … openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. There is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.”

 

1 minute ago, Ahab said:

If you support Marx's ideology you absolutely are making excuses for millions of killings. Maybe you need to reread exactly what he wrote. 

Hogwash.

 

Marx produced a philosophy, not ideology.

 

The ‘ideology’ was the work of others.

 

 

3 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Rick Bradford posted this Marx quote in post 39. But I don't think he'll mind me reposting it here.

 

Well we you got the quote from RB, now go find evidence that it came from

Marx.

I find it quite ironic that so many people in my country hate socialism.  I would like to remind them that if Jesus was alive today he would be a socialist.  Jesus was a communist Jew but somehow this other guy is a piece of slime.  The irony of it all.

Edited May 6, 20188 yr by james1995

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well we you got the quote from RB, now go find evidence that it came from

Marx.

It is from his 1841 publication The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature. 

It was the basis for his PHd

7 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

It is from his 1841 publication The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature. 

It was the basis for his PHd

Then you can link a reference to RB’s quote (the exact wording) not a misquote.