Mr. Clown maybe does not understand that bringing in Hegel opens up a whole new can of worms--dialectically. For example, the antiquation of Marxism is itself explanable in Hegelian terms.
& Listen to the way he talks about armed struggle! He wouldn't be there even if he WERE there.
Maybe he missed his history lesson on Marxism's [synthetic?] transformation which started in 1956, a transformation which seriously problematized the dialectical approach as both licentious and inhuman...
another thing that was missing was the term proletariat! holy crap. do you need a thesaurus? jesus, i mean i suppose if I used the term middle class, or rich folks instead of bourgeois it would piss you off.
Dialectics isn't as complicated as it's made out to be. It's the unity of opposites, sort of like yin & yang, but with a focus on the way everything is in motion and transformation. Google "dialectics for kids" for more help (you want the first result, it's a pink page).
@Irtidad I didnt like the way he came off confrontational but he is right in a few ways. I've come to realize in my time studying Marxist and Anarchist literature, with my own opinions being greatly influenced by both that the answer lies with the continuity of the state until such time that more and more functionality can be handled "horizontally" as the speakers would say. It would never really disappear as many seem to think, but it would slowly be stripped of purpose. Not to a collapse tho
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Marxist class analysis fails. It was developed from previous liberal analysis of class which were much more accurate and which are reflected in a proper Agorist analysis of class
I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you've never read Capital much less have an informed critique of Marxism. Whether you want to admit or not, Marx was a genius and his legacy outshines that of anyone that will ever crawl out of the Mises institute or some Ayn Rand think tank. Hell he's probably more relevant today than ever. Kid yourself that he "fails" but try reading him first.
@thorsmitersaw It doesnt fail, the only way you could saw that it has shortcomings is with the eventual "withering of the state". You could argue Marx means the State COMPLETELY disappears or that its function as an instrument of class oppression does. I think the latter is more accurate, Marx didn't glamorize the "primitive communism" of the aboriginals and peoples of pre-history like many do today, so theres no reason to assume he would advocate an over-simplification of abstract interactions
Results 1 - 10 of about 132,000 for al gore jeff fisher The other day it was 112,000 Meeting place the next 5 days from noon to 2 p.m. Idlewild Books Neighborhood: Manhattan/Flatiron 12 W 19th St (between 5th Ave&Avenue Of The Americas)NewYork, NY 10011 (212) 414-8888 idlewildbooks com Please bring me a cigar A cigar puts me into many different modes of thinking, creating & expounding on my unique abilities to end the police state in America & World wide. janeewadeshalwendachrist blogspot com
Is that Rasputin sitting in the background?
TheEsotericDesi 10 months ago
this is the most valuable clip i have ever seen in youtube.
Lord123881 10 months ago
Mr. Clown maybe does not understand that bringing in Hegel opens up a whole new can of worms--dialectically. For example, the antiquation of Marxism is itself explanable in Hegelian terms.
& Listen to the way he talks about armed struggle! He wouldn't be there even if he WERE there.
Maybe he missed his history lesson on Marxism's [synthetic?] transformation which started in 1956, a transformation which seriously problematized the dialectical approach as both licentious and inhuman...
pokeweedpathos 2 years ago
"...the subjective conditions are evaluated objectively so that we can change..."
Isn't that historical materialism? Are dialectical materialism and historical materialism interchangeable terms?
TheAssholearchist 2 years ago
it's not just class struggle. it's about domination in all spheres of life. this guy needs to read murray bookchin.
mrtyles 2 years ago
as well as the frankfurt school.
rocinante316 2 years ago
another thing that was missing was the term proletariat! holy crap. do you need a thesaurus? jesus, i mean i suppose if I used the term middle class, or rich folks instead of bourgeois it would piss you off.
mrtyles 2 years ago
" a relective dialectic in which the subjective conditions are evaluated objectively so we can change the state" blablabla. speak english man!
mrtyles 2 years ago
WTF is "dialectic" supposed to mean? What a tool
t0kt0k 2 years ago
Dialectics isn't as complicated as it's made out to be. It's the unity of opposites, sort of like yin & yang, but with a focus on the way everything is in motion and transformation. Google "dialectics for kids" for more help (you want the first result, it's a pink page).
CapitalistHell 2 years ago
Yeah, great. Now tell me what the hell it's supposed to mean in this (or any) context.
That's what I thought.
Empty rhetoric doesn't become less empty when you write 5000 words about it.
t0kt0k 2 years ago
Comment removed
CapitalistHell 2 years ago
Yuck, the first guy to ask a "question" is really annoying and dogmatic.
Irtidad 2 years ago 5
@Irtidad I didnt like the way he came off confrontational but he is right in a few ways. I've come to realize in my time studying Marxist and Anarchist literature, with my own opinions being greatly influenced by both that the answer lies with the continuity of the state until such time that more and more functionality can be handled "horizontally" as the speakers would say. It would never really disappear as many seem to think, but it would slowly be stripped of purpose. Not to a collapse tho
patient0Studios 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Marxist class analysis fails. It was developed from previous liberal analysis of class which were much more accurate and which are reflected in a proper Agorist analysis of class
thorsmitersaw 2 years ago
sorry to burst your marx bubbles
thorsmitersaw 2 years ago
I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you've never read Capital much less have an informed critique of Marxism. Whether you want to admit or not, Marx was a genius and his legacy outshines that of anyone that will ever crawl out of the Mises institute or some Ayn Rand think tank. Hell he's probably more relevant today than ever. Kid yourself that he "fails" but try reading him first.
buddhagem 2 years ago
and I will bet you have never even read Konkin's critique of Marxism or anyone else's.
Marx is the source of so much political nonsense and economic fallacy that the world would be far better off if he had never lived.
thorsmitersaw 2 years ago
Who is Konkin, and why should we care?
necronomicjustice 2 years ago
@necronomicjustice
unlike you I am not concerned with appeals to authority so much as the merits of the writing, ideas, or critique. So suck a dick.
thorsmitersaw 1 year ago
@thorsmitersaw It doesnt fail, the only way you could saw that it has shortcomings is with the eventual "withering of the state". You could argue Marx means the State COMPLETELY disappears or that its function as an instrument of class oppression does. I think the latter is more accurate, Marx didn't glamorize the "primitive communism" of the aboriginals and peoples of pre-history like many do today, so theres no reason to assume he would advocate an over-simplification of abstract interactions
patient0Studios 1 year ago
Great, great uploads, man. Where and when was this?
Philfa 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LoveAmericaStyle 2 years ago