I’ve studied the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital in college, which is pretty standard. I’ve also read a few of his shorter works like the Critique of the Gotha Programme and On the Jewish Question (which is interestingly one of the more antisemitic works I’ve ever read despite him having Jewish heritage). I also read a few newspapers that featured him during his time, but I don’t really count those.
There’s no denying that his work is influential. This is evidenced by the fact that we’re talking about it right now. But just because it’s influential that doesn’t mean it’s right, or even good. His analysis was flawed and criticized quite a bit, even during his time. But today? A lot of analysis is just irrelevant because it’s a product of a bygone era. You could make an argument that his analysis led to some objectively good things, and that would be true to an extent, however, this is overshadowed by all the disasters that his views led to. What he envisioned for communism and how to get there was a failure in both theory and practice, and this evidenced by the fact that every implementation of his ideas has resulted in catastrophes.
The fact that it’s a utopia? What kind of question is that? A utopia by definition is an imaginary place where everything is perfect. It will never exist because the world is imperfect. You can’t run societies on fantasies, especially through violence and tyranny. The ends don’t justify the means, especially when the ends are impossible to achieve.
I’m just trying to figure out what your perspective is. So you think Marx basically touted how great such a utopia could be and spent a lot of time describing it in great detail without actually considering how or if it would be possible to implement?
My perspective isn’t really that complicated, I think Marxism is pretty flawed and this is evidenced by the logical gaps in the theories and the constant failure in practice. You’re talking as if Marxism is the truth and it is beyond criticism. Marxists treat Marxism, for all intents and purposes, like a religion. Marx is treated like a prophet, his theories are treated like holy scriptures, the communist utopia is like the promised afterlife, critics are attacked and dismissed, and so on. Obviously, I’m not saying Marxism is a religion, but you’re acting no differently than a muslim or a Christian whenever somebody criticizes their religion. Why is hard to accept that Marx was a imperfect person from a bygone era with theories that have many flaws? He and his work are not above criticism. Marx dedicated his whole life to his ideology, of course he thought about it as much as he could, but what I am saying is that despite that the end result is still not that great. Communism remains a utopia in the mainstream sense that won’t ever be achieved.
You’re clearly lying about having read Marx. If you knew anything about the subject you would understood exactly why your responses to my questions betray your complete and utter ignorance. To be clear there are well informed critiques of Marx out there. However, you’re incapable of making those arguments because you have no idea what the man actually said. You should really stop embarrassing yourself.
I’ve seen a lot of Marxists like you. Hell, there’s at least half a dozen of you on this very thread typing the same exact unoriginal replies talking about MUH THEORIES and how I’m wrong but then you refuse to elaborate your positions. It just goes to show that you either have nothing or you’re just disingenuous. In the off chance that I do get one to actually elaborate, they almost never actually disprove anything that I said, they’re just made because I disagree with their holy ideology. You can scroll through my account history and see numerous examples of this.
If you’re as confident and well read as you portray yourself to be then you would’ve just proved me wrong from your first couple of replies, or at least presented an argument that would’ve opened the way for a discussion. But you didn’t and now you’re approaching a dozen replies in this thread and you still haven’t presented anything, and I doubt that you will either. The reality is that you’re just mad that I’m vocal about my disdain for how shitty Marxism is and you can’t stand it. You’ve spent so much energy trying to character attack me instead of trying to be even at least a little substantive. If you don’t want to believe that I read any Marxist works then that’s your problem. I literally don’t care. This is the internet, you won’t believe my credentials and I won’t believe yours, that’s why arguments speak for themselves. But’s it’s clear at this point you have no arguments against anything that I said, this circular accusation is the only thing you have to offer.
For your own sake I hope you’re at least personally aware of your own ignorance and just enjoy trolling. Otherwise you really need to log off and worry less about arguing online.
I’ve studied the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital in college, which is pretty standard. I’ve also read a few of his shorter works like the Critique of the Gotha Programme and On the Jewish Question (which is interestingly one of the more antisemitic works I’ve ever read despite him having Jewish heritage). I also read a few newspapers that featured him during his time, but I don’t really count those.
There’s no denying that his work is influential. This is evidenced by the fact that we’re talking about it right now. But just because it’s influential that doesn’t mean it’s right, or even good. His analysis was flawed and criticized quite a bit, even during his time. But today? A lot of analysis is just irrelevant because it’s a product of a bygone era. You could make an argument that his analysis led to some objectively good things, and that would be true to an extent, however, this is overshadowed by all the disasters that his views led to. What he envisioned for communism and how to get there was a failure in both theory and practice, and this evidenced by the fact that every implementation of his ideas has resulted in catastrophes.
Okay then Marx expert, let’s get into the weeds here. What exactly do you think is wrong with utopian socialism?
The fact that it’s a utopia? What kind of question is that? A utopia by definition is an imaginary place where everything is perfect. It will never exist because the world is imperfect. You can’t run societies on fantasies, especially through violence and tyranny. The ends don’t justify the means, especially when the ends are impossible to achieve.
I’m just trying to figure out what your perspective is. So you think Marx basically touted how great such a utopia could be and spent a lot of time describing it in great detail without actually considering how or if it would be possible to implement?
My perspective isn’t really that complicated, I think Marxism is pretty flawed and this is evidenced by the logical gaps in the theories and the constant failure in practice. You’re talking as if Marxism is the truth and it is beyond criticism. Marxists treat Marxism, for all intents and purposes, like a religion. Marx is treated like a prophet, his theories are treated like holy scriptures, the communist utopia is like the promised afterlife, critics are attacked and dismissed, and so on. Obviously, I’m not saying Marxism is a religion, but you’re acting no differently than a muslim or a Christian whenever somebody criticizes their religion. Why is hard to accept that Marx was a imperfect person from a bygone era with theories that have many flaws? He and his work are not above criticism. Marx dedicated his whole life to his ideology, of course he thought about it as much as he could, but what I am saying is that despite that the end result is still not that great. Communism remains a utopia in the mainstream sense that won’t ever be achieved.
You’re clearly lying about having read Marx. If you knew anything about the subject you would understood exactly why your responses to my questions betray your complete and utter ignorance. To be clear there are well informed critiques of Marx out there. However, you’re incapable of making those arguments because you have no idea what the man actually said. You should really stop embarrassing yourself.
I’ve seen a lot of Marxists like you. Hell, there’s at least half a dozen of you on this very thread typing the same exact unoriginal replies talking about MUH THEORIES and how I’m wrong but then you refuse to elaborate your positions. It just goes to show that you either have nothing or you’re just disingenuous. In the off chance that I do get one to actually elaborate, they almost never actually disprove anything that I said, they’re just made because I disagree with their holy ideology. You can scroll through my account history and see numerous examples of this.
If you’re as confident and well read as you portray yourself to be then you would’ve just proved me wrong from your first couple of replies, or at least presented an argument that would’ve opened the way for a discussion. But you didn’t and now you’re approaching a dozen replies in this thread and you still haven’t presented anything, and I doubt that you will either. The reality is that you’re just mad that I’m vocal about my disdain for how shitty Marxism is and you can’t stand it. You’ve spent so much energy trying to character attack me instead of trying to be even at least a little substantive. If you don’t want to believe that I read any Marxist works then that’s your problem. I literally don’t care. This is the internet, you won’t believe my credentials and I won’t believe yours, that’s why arguments speak for themselves. But’s it’s clear at this point you have no arguments against anything that I said, this circular accusation is the only thing you have to offer.
For your own sake I hope you’re at least personally aware of your own ignorance and just enjoy trolling. Otherwise you really need to log off and worry less about arguing online.
Removed by mod