Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Choose Liberty, Not Dependency
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Saving Hawaii" data-source="post: 58425079" data-attributes="member: 231533"><p>In the <em>real world</em>, there are not always "laws to deal with that". It's fine to say that "in most circumstances in the modern world" we can handle these issues relatively well, but that is to ignore the world that Marx was writing about. He lived in a world where the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" was not applicable, a world where even the basic rights secured in the Magna Carta were not applicable. That was his world. Coercive trade was a very real part of that world and in many ways it still lives in our modern world Look at some of the tinpot dictatorships that have used force to secure their power or that have secured their power through use of force generations ago. That's a very extreme and undeniable example, but the more mundane examples are far and widespread.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Your remark tells me that you do not even <em>understand</em> "Marx's views on altruism". I don't like Marx and I think that he had a very naive and optimistic view of human altruism that doesn't reflect what we've actually seen in the real world. Your attack on him is an attack against a strawman though. <em>You don't have a clue what Marxism is</em>.</p><p></p><p>The true Marxist society would have no government. If a society has a government it is, by definition, not Marxist, and not in line with what Karl Marx theorized. Marx envisioned a future world that was extremely similar to what the Christian Church teaches: "from each... to each". This is exactly the charitable society that you support: no government, simply individual human beings who truly care about their neighbors lending a helping hand. Marx had a vision of how this society was reached, a roadpath, and I understand why you don't like that. I don't like it either. But you don't understand at all what Marx was even about and you're attacking him not for what he said or did, but because of what sheer and utter frauds, false prophets even, did in his name. I really do like the conclusions of Marxism and I think if you would take off your ideological blinders and examine the world that Marx envisioned, you would like it to. The problem with Marx is that the roadpath he saw the world following was not the roadpath it actually was on... his understanding of history and his understanding of the future were flawed. That was Marx's mistake. You're attacking Marx for things that, I think, if you examined them deeply you would like him for.</p><p></p><p>If you want to despise Karl Marx, at least learn what he actually believed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Saving Hawaii, post: 58425079, member: 231533"] In the [I]real world[/I], there are not always "laws to deal with that". It's fine to say that "in most circumstances in the modern world" we can handle these issues relatively well, but that is to ignore the world that Marx was writing about. He lived in a world where the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" was not applicable, a world where even the basic rights secured in the Magna Carta were not applicable. That was his world. Coercive trade was a very real part of that world and in many ways it still lives in our modern world Look at some of the tinpot dictatorships that have used force to secure their power or that have secured their power through use of force generations ago. That's a very extreme and undeniable example, but the more mundane examples are far and widespread. Your remark tells me that you do not even [I]understand[/I] "Marx's views on altruism". I don't like Marx and I think that he had a very naive and optimistic view of human altruism that doesn't reflect what we've actually seen in the real world. Your attack on him is an attack against a strawman though. [I]You don't have a clue what Marxism is[/I]. The true Marxist society would have no government. If a society has a government it is, by definition, not Marxist, and not in line with what Karl Marx theorized. Marx envisioned a future world that was extremely similar to what the Christian Church teaches: "from each... to each". This is exactly the charitable society that you support: no government, simply individual human beings who truly care about their neighbors lending a helping hand. Marx had a vision of how this society was reached, a roadpath, and I understand why you don't like that. I don't like it either. But you don't understand at all what Marx was even about and you're attacking him not for what he said or did, but because of what sheer and utter frauds, false prophets even, did in his name. I really do like the conclusions of Marxism and I think if you would take off your ideological blinders and examine the world that Marx envisioned, you would like it to. The problem with Marx is that the roadpath he saw the world following was not the roadpath it actually was on... his understanding of history and his understanding of the future were flawed. That was Marx's mistake. You're attacking Marx for things that, I think, if you examined them deeply you would like him for. If you want to despise Karl Marx, at least learn what he actually believed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Choose Liberty, Not Dependency
Top
Bottom