RMS
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
The Architects of Western Decline - Cultural Marxism?
- Thread starter Gypsy Nirvana
- Start date
RMS
P
pangolin
!!!
You can't take any newspaper seriously that can't get a picture of a proper full English.
Only one egg, no mushrooms, hash browns not fried bread and where's the f'ing black pudding and cup of tea?
You can't take any newspaper seriously that can't get a picture of a proper full English.
Only one egg, no mushrooms, hash browns not fried bread and where's the f'ing black pudding and cup of tea?
Last edited:
Bobby Boucher
Active member
Thank you.
Its refreshing to hear from someone who actually read the book.
Correct, communism was simply just a tool to initiate the reform that would eventually lead to equanimity or, at the least, civilian empowerment and representation in this new age of industry.
How does a people embrace evolving industry while retaining both Nature and humanity.
I think that was the point of the project and the aim which ‘communist’ dictators forget, or ignore.
White Beard
Active member
Not accurate at all
Not accurate at all
Stripped of the Hegelian dialectic structure - which was not theirs, but an analytical tool they used and NOT central to their work - their chief observation was that capitalism would destroy itself as it ‘matured’ into a never-satisfied maw of acquisition. In this state of affairs, the economy would cease to be based on production of goods and provision of services and instead begin to farm the commoditized work-force, extracting from them every second of work possible, in exchange for as little money as possible, which would then be drawn back to the ruling elite class in ever-higher costs for the necessities of life, ever-higher rents and fees and penalties. They foresaw this trend ending with the mass of the people recognizing that they were in a war, that they were losing, and that their only option would be to fight for their lives as those lives became unsustainable.
Dunno about y’all but it seems to me that we’re just about there, and there’s not a blessed thing that all the neo-Nazi claptrap will do about any of except to push harder on the wheel of desperation.
Worth noting that the ORIGINAL capitalists were non-inheriting young European lordlings dissatisfied with their allowances. It’s no accident we call it ‘capital’: at its simplest, capital is OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY. Capitalism is the desire and intention to enrich oneself at the expense of others (as shown in the original basic frame, the limited-liability corporation - the purpose of which is to shift the burden of risk in a venture from the principals to the investors, who assumed the risk in parting with their money).
Decorum minds me to stop here. For now.
Not accurate at all
The ‘Central Idea’ that Marx and Engels were working on was a detailed examination and analysis of capitalism - a word as confidently misunderstood as socialism.
Stripped of the Hegelian dialectic structure - which was not theirs, but an analytical tool they used and NOT central to their work - their chief observation was that capitalism would destroy itself as it ‘matured’ into a never-satisfied maw of acquisition. In this state of affairs, the economy would cease to be based on production of goods and provision of services and instead begin to farm the commoditized work-force, extracting from them every second of work possible, in exchange for as little money as possible, which would then be drawn back to the ruling elite class in ever-higher costs for the necessities of life, ever-higher rents and fees and penalties. They foresaw this trend ending with the mass of the people recognizing that they were in a war, that they were losing, and that their only option would be to fight for their lives as those lives became unsustainable.
Dunno about y’all but it seems to me that we’re just about there, and there’s not a blessed thing that all the neo-Nazi claptrap will do about any of except to push harder on the wheel of desperation.
Worth noting that the ORIGINAL capitalists were non-inheriting young European lordlings dissatisfied with their allowances. It’s no accident we call it ‘capital’: at its simplest, capital is OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY. Capitalism is the desire and intention to enrich oneself at the expense of others (as shown in the original basic frame, the limited-liability corporation - the purpose of which is to shift the burden of risk in a venture from the principals to the investors, who assumed the risk in parting with their money).
Decorum minds me to stop here. For now.
coconutcurry
High
The architect of western decline is called Donald Trump.
Gry
Well-known member
I would credit his handlers the agency with that myself, but the way
you put it has quite a ring to it ~
theclearspot
Active member
What has happened on the left is that they have abandoned the traditional class base analysis for change: the working class. This was Marx’s idea and a Hegelian belief in ‘progress’ into communism as the ‘end of history’. The new left ( Marcuse, Gramsci) realised that It just wasnt happening with the white working class. They simply didnt buy into liberal multi culturalism ( not because they are ‘nativist’ but because the left FAILED on inequality ( Piketty). Therefore the left came up with ‘Identity Politics’. Abandon the white working class and all in on ethnic/sexual minorities/ feminism. This is were we are now. It wont work because the vast majority do not Support it despite what they tell you on CNN/BBC....
You give him way too much credit.
T
Teddybrae
I see yr threads are Sticky's now
Last edited:
T
Teddybrae
"... dialectical structure". Mr WB ... do you see that dope smokers are locked into a Dialectic of their own? Or are they without dialectic at all? (I apply a wide brush, but in the present context I think that's OK. )
T
Teddybrae
Sorry ... stoned ...
Last edited:
White Beard
Active member
You’ve been busy, Teddy - this will take more than a minute to digest....
Yes - Ted's been busy - and does a great job of describing the circle of life - the ying and the yang - the political food-chain et al -
- I'm just pleased to see that my thread encourages members to make such interesting and well thought out posts -
- maybe could break it down and attempt to contest some points - but no, great post - can't see much there to argue about anyway -
-
- I'm just pleased to see that my thread encourages members to make such interesting and well thought out posts -
- maybe could break it down and attempt to contest some points - but no, great post - can't see much there to argue about anyway -
-
I've haven't read Hegel, but I'm confused why he is being credited with the dialectic, which has always been considered as an offering from Socrates instead.
Both capitalism and communism lead to a very small number of people holding power over everyone else. Socialism is the middle way. A balance between the two, yet somehow seems to lead to the same outcome.
The bottom line is, those seeking power over others, tend to want to control rather than serve. Until we solve the riddle of " whose decision should this be", we seem doomed to a life of conflict or servitude. Most people are unprincipled cowards. They do what's best or easiest for themselves. I have little faith in the future, due to the basic natures of mankind.
Both capitalism and communism lead to a very small number of people holding power over everyone else. Socialism is the middle way. A balance between the two, yet somehow seems to lead to the same outcome.
The bottom line is, those seeking power over others, tend to want to control rather than serve. Until we solve the riddle of " whose decision should this be", we seem doomed to a life of conflict or servitude. Most people are unprincipled cowards. They do what's best or easiest for themselves. I have little faith in the future, due to the basic natures of mankind.
White Beard
Active member
I decided I wasn’t clear enough in my response to this.
“Thesis/antithesis/synthesis” is the structure of the Hegelian analytic method. It has as much to do with Marx, Engels, and socialism as your brand of toilet paper has to do with how your shit smells. IN NO WAY way the Hegelian dialectic the “central idea” of Marx, or Engels, or socialism, or of anyone but Hegel.
Quite honestly, it seems you have no idea what you're talking about at any point of this nonsense.
I would break it down, but I don't think you'd understand it.
Capital = other people's money? Nonsense.
Communist manifesto an examination of capitalism and not of communism, yeah OK, now go outside and play.
The principle of limited liability is to encourage investment by limiting liability to the value of the investment (the clue is in the name). That creates both increased productivity and employment opportunities.
If you hadn't come at me, I'd have left your ignorance unchecked, but ya did, so....
That's like saying, "Mr Benz and Mr Mercedes invented the motor car, don't call a Lamborghini a motor car."
White Beard
Active member
