What a great summing up of an entire school of thought. Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature. Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman. He just claimed what communists want. You didnt adress that bcause he clearly was right there
To be fair, the USSR was the best thing to happen to Eastern Europe. Their points on the Soviets were terrible, but I do think the Soviets were better than modern capitalism in Eastern Europe.
I agree for the early ussr. Later starting from khruschev and especially brezhnev i think the leadership got weak and larded. If not for them it never had to fall. Also i dont cede any such ground. Better then capitalists? They were the firsr sucessful leftist revolutionaries. I totally respect them, and was many times amazed by their history. I think its uniquely priviledged position to criticize the liberator for his missteps.
my personal favorite is Einsteins quote about his view of lenin: “I honor Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realization of social justice. I do not consider his methods practical, but one thing is certain: men of his type are the guardians and restorers of the conscience of humanity.”
I definitely agree that latter administration was weaker, but it was still socialist up until it was dissolved, and still a better system than capitalism. That was my real point. As for the dissolution of the USSR, it’s more complicated than that, but not in a way that dooms socialism.
Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with
I assume you are referring to Das Kapital? It is essential college reading for any third level student. Marx should be everybody’s starting point in politics, when it is also your end point, as it is with most of your crowd, you run into serious problems.
Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature
I’m a much bigger fan of Henry George, Progress and Poverty is a much better book in both writing and content.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman
It was not a straw man, our entire conversation is about Russia and the article we are commenting on is also about Russia, in the context of our conversation how is it not relevant? Should I have referred to some other random successful communist state that actually followed the teaching of Marx perfectly? The point was what communists want and what happens in reality are two very different things. This clearly went over your head, don’t worry about it though buddy, I am used to it from your crowd.
Yes it clearly did. When you respond to something, and just ignore the point, that kidna defeats the purpose of the response. What is this “your crowd”? I dont know what that is, lets define what you mean by that.
Ok honestly didnt expect you read marx, it typically serves as filter, and from your response i assumed it impossible. Are you much into econ? Bcs some parts of capital arent too simple. Do you like structuralism?
Regarding the point about russia. Well the point about what happens could be relevant. Thats why your claim about ussr was so derailed. Who said ussr? There are many communists whod argue for it, and many whod argue for some other form. Its exactly a strawman to pick a battle, which was nowhere in the original claim. Proximity from previous context doesnt change this, he said communists, you assumed soviets.
Ah, you’re a Georgist! Makes sense, that’s why you keep claiming Marx has been “debunked,” Marx already debunked Henry George long ago. It seems to be more of a vendetta of yours. Either way, what communists want and what happens in reality are far closer than you allude, you maintain a bourgeois line on existing socialism and make unbacked claims of Marx being “debunked.”
What a great summing up of an entire school of thought. Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature. Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman. He just claimed what communists want. You didnt adress that bcause he clearly was right there
To be fair, the USSR was the best thing to happen to Eastern Europe. Their points on the Soviets were terrible, but I do think the Soviets were better than modern capitalism in Eastern Europe.
I agree for the early ussr. Later starting from khruschev and especially brezhnev i think the leadership got weak and larded. If not for them it never had to fall. Also i dont cede any such ground. Better then capitalists? They were the firsr sucessful leftist revolutionaries. I totally respect them, and was many times amazed by their history. I think its uniquely priviledged position to criticize the liberator for his missteps.
my personal favorite is Einsteins quote about his view of lenin: “I honor Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realization of social justice. I do not consider his methods practical, but one thing is certain: men of his type are the guardians and restorers of the conscience of humanity.”
I definitely agree that latter administration was weaker, but it was still socialist up until it was dissolved, and still a better system than capitalism. That was my real point. As for the dissolution of the USSR, it’s more complicated than that, but not in a way that dooms socialism.
I agree with you totally
I assume you are referring to Das Kapital? It is essential college reading for any third level student. Marx should be everybody’s starting point in politics, when it is also your end point, as it is with most of your crowd, you run into serious problems.
I’m a much bigger fan of Henry George, Progress and Poverty is a much better book in both writing and content.
It was not a straw man, our entire conversation is about Russia and the article we are commenting on is also about Russia, in the context of our conversation how is it not relevant? Should I have referred to some other random successful communist state that actually followed the teaching of Marx perfectly? The point was what communists want and what happens in reality are two very different things. This clearly went over your head, don’t worry about it though buddy, I am used to it from your crowd.
Yes it clearly did. When you respond to something, and just ignore the point, that kidna defeats the purpose of the response. What is this “your crowd”? I dont know what that is, lets define what you mean by that.
Ok honestly didnt expect you read marx, it typically serves as filter, and from your response i assumed it impossible. Are you much into econ? Bcs some parts of capital arent too simple. Do you like structuralism?
Regarding the point about russia. Well the point about what happens could be relevant. Thats why your claim about ussr was so derailed. Who said ussr? There are many communists whod argue for it, and many whod argue for some other form. Its exactly a strawman to pick a battle, which was nowhere in the original claim. Proximity from previous context doesnt change this, he said communists, you assumed soviets.
Ah, you’re a Georgist! Makes sense, that’s why you keep claiming Marx has been “debunked,” Marx already debunked Henry George long ago. It seems to be more of a vendetta of yours. Either way, what communists want and what happens in reality are far closer than you allude, you maintain a bourgeois line on existing socialism and make unbacked claims of Marx being “debunked.”
G