Ask a Marxist

[Revoltingest]

The exact same logic could apply to staunch capitalists who have never experienced poverty but try to tell poor people how to "lift [themselves] up by the bootstraps," but it would also be just as fallacious due to its focus on the character of the person making an argument than the substance of the argument itself.

Some capitalists started out poor.
(And some remain poor.)
You should try getting to know some.
It would be a life changing experience.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Thanks, as usual, @Debater Slayer

I understand you are not thrilled with my characterizations of Marx, but at least you have verified that my reading of him, as a person, is not off base. Thanks.

Actually, I don't have any investment at all in Marx as a person as opposed to his work, so your characterization doesn't bother or thrill me. It's just not something I find consequential one way or the other.

For the record, I find it problematic more often than not when authors and philosophers are made into cults of personality or quasi-prophets by a subset of people who agree with their work. I think the focus should primarily be on ideas and the logic and evidence behind them, not on the celebrity of some thinkers or on the popularity contests involving them.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Some capitalists started out poor.
(And some remain poor.)

And many didn't or don't. The point is that ideas stand and fall on their own merit, not based on who proposes them.

You should try getting to know some.

You mean like most people in my life? Sure.

Marxists are a minority in my region, and there are many capitalists where I live, so it's not exactly hard to meet and know them.

 

[Revoltingest]

And many didn't or don't. The point is that ideas stand and fall on their own merit, not based on who proposes them.



You mean like most people in my life? Sure.

Marxists are a minority in my region, and there are many capitalists where I live, so it's not exactly hard to meet and know them.

Any of those capitalists start out poor?
If so, listen to them about that bootstrap scenario.
Ambition & work really do tend to enable success.
Sloth & making excuses do the opposite.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Any of those capitalists start out poor?

Quite a few. Poverty is widespread where I'm from, as you probably know.

If so, listen to them about that bootstrap scenario.
Ambition & work really do tend to enable success.
Sloth & making excuses do the opposite.

I haven't heard a single one of them talk about the "bootstrap scenario"; only about how poverty sucks and is something nobody should have to deal with in a humane and reasonable economic system. These are also people who have played relatively bad hands dealt to them by life and managed to get out of poverty, not stereotypically "lazy" individuals.

The mostly American ideas of "bootstrap scenarios" rarely apply neatly to most of the Global South (or anywhere, really, but especially the Global South where the systemic issues are much more pronounced overall). I think the history, context, and reality of many countries simply undermine such an idealistic and oversimplified notion. There's a reason countries like Chile, Colombia, and Bolivia have freely voted for Marxists and socialists in democratic elections after decades of exploitation and abuse by kleptocrats and foreign powers.

 

[Revoltingest]

Quite a few. Poverty is widespread where I'm from, as you probably know.



I haven't heard a single one of them talk about the "bootstrap scenario"; only about how poverty sucks and is something nobody should have to deal with in a humane and reasonable economic system. These are also people who have played bad hands dealt to them by life and managed to get out of poverty, not stereotypically "lazy" individuals.

The mostly American ideas of "bootstrap scenarios" rarely apply neatly to most of the Global South (or anywhere, really, but especially the Global South where the systemic issues are much more pronounced overall). I think the history, context, and reality of many countries simply undermine such an idealistic and oversimplified notion. There's a reason countries like Chile, Colombia, and Bolivia have freely voted for Marxists and socialists in democratic elections after decades of exploitation and abuse by kleptocrats and foreign powers.

People vote for things.
This isn't evidence for the cromulence of those things.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Are you familiar with Proudhon, and if so can you explain your alignment with Marxism over Proudhon or other contemporaries?

In particular, your views on societal change seem more aligned with Proudhon than Marx.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Are you familiar with Proudhon, and if so can you explain your alignment with Marxism over Proudhon or other contemporaries?

In particular, your views on societal change seem more aligned with Proudhon than Marx.

I've read about some of his views but haven't explored them in any real depth yet. This is on my reading list:

System of Economical Contradictions, or The Philosophy …

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (15 January 1809 – 19 January 18…

www.goodreads.com

That said, I'm definitely not an anarchist, and I wouldn't say that I'm aligned with Marxism without a considerable number of stipulations. I see immense analytical value stemming from certain Marxist concepts, but I don't agree with communism, Marx's ideas of revolution (as I find them too rigid, focused on violence, and utopian), or some of his economic theories that simply don't map well onto our current world and its vastly different circumstances compared to Marx's time.

In my opinion, possibly the most valuable insight that Marxism provides is the concept of dialectical materialism and the notion that social changes are inseparable from economic and other material conditions. Conflict theory, which is currently prominent in sociology, borrows many concepts from Marxism, and I see a lot of merit to it, although I also wouldn't view it as some prophetic or impeccably reliable tool. It just has a lot of analytical and explanatory utility.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've read about some of his views but haven't explored them in any real depth yet. This is on my reading list:

System of Economical Contradictions, or The Philosophy …

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (15 January 1809 – 19 January 18…

www.goodreads.com

That said, I'm definitely not an anarchist, and I wouldn't say that I'm aligned with Marxism without a considerable number of stipulations. I see immense analytical value stemming from certain Marxist concepts, but I don't agree with communism, Marx's ideas of revolution (as I find them too rigid, focused on violence, and utopian), or some of his economic theories that simply don't map well onto our current world and its vastly different circumstances compared to Marx's time.

In my opinion, possibly the most valuable insight that Marxism provides is the concept of dialectical materialism and the notion that social changes are inseparable from economic and other material conditions. Conflict theory, which is currently prominent in sociology, borrows many concepts from Marxism, and I see a lot of merit to it, although I also wouldn't view it as some prophetic or impeccably reliable tool. It just has a lot of analytical and explanatory utility.

it seems that you reject some Marxist fundamentals.
What makes you a "Marxist", as opposed to some other
label, eg, "socialist", "state capitalist", or "welfare capitalist".
(The last one would be Scandinavianish.)

 

[Debater Slayer]

it seems that you reject some Marxist fundamentals.
What makes you a "Marxist", as opposed to some other
label, eg, "socialist", "state capitalist", or "welfare capitalist".
(The last one would be Scandinavianish.)

I do identify with democratic and, to a much lesser extent, libertarian socialism. Agreeing with some parts of Marxism doesn't preclude agreement with those varieties of socialism.

I see major issues with capitalism even as employed in Scandinavia, primarily its inherent unsustainability, so I don't call myself one. However, I don't reject its usage in a temporary or partial manner.

 

[YmirGF]

it seems that you reject some Marxist fundamentals.
What makes you a "Marxist", as opposed to some other
label, eg, "socialist", "state capitalist", or "welfare capitalist".
(The last one would be Scandinavianish.)

I was wondering much the same thing. It'll be interesting to hear @Debater Slayer response.

(It sort of like saying I believe in 2 of the pillars of Islam, but not the rest.)

 

[Revoltingest]

I do identify with democratic and libertarian socialism. Agreeing with some parts of Marxism doesn't preclude agreement with those varieties of socialism.

Do you have any examples of socialism & democracy coexisting?
And of socialism that is libertarian?

I see major issues with capitalism even as employed in Scandinavia, primarily its inherent unsustainability....

What makes it unsustainable?
Are there any examples of sustainable alternatives to capitalism?
(Let's limit that last one to modern societies with technology.
We won't be returning to primitive subsistence lifestyles.)

 

[Revoltingest]

I was wondering much the same thing. It'll be interesting to hear @Debater Slayer response.

(It sort of like saying I believe in 2 of the pillars of Islam, but not the rest.)

I was thinking of....
"I'm a Christian, but I don't believe in God."

BTW, we often hear that socialism & Marxism are so
varied in nuances & flavors. But capitalism is naught
but greed, exploitation, & the destruction of Earth.
Consider....

The 6 Types of Capitalism (With Examples)

There are six types of capitalism: oligarchic capitalism, state-guided capitalism, corporate capitalism, entrepreneurial capitalism, laissez-faire capitalism, and welfare capitalism. Capitalism describes any economic system that is based around the private ownership of capital. It’s usually

helpfulprofessor.com

 

[Debater Slayer]

I was wondering much the same thing. It'll be interesting to hear @Debater Slayer response.

(It sort of like saying I believe in 2 of the pillars of Islam, but not the rest.)

Marxist schools of thought are so diverse that I wouldn't say the overarching label had "pillars" except in very broad, generalized terms. For example:

Libertarian Marxism

Libertarian Marxism is a broad scope of economic and political philosophies that emphasize the anti-authoritarian and libertarian aspects of Marxism. Ear...

encyclopedia.pub

Some anti-authoritarian Marxists were purged by Stalin, and George Orwell, who is frequently cited for his criticism of the Soviet Union, was a staunch democratic socialist as well.

 

[YmirGF]

I was thinking of....
"I'm a Christian, but I don't believe in God."

BTW, we often hear that socialism & Marxism are so
varied in nuances & flavors. But capitalism is naught
but greed, exploitation, & the destruction of Earth.
Consider....

The 6 Types of Capitalism (With Examples)

There are six types of capitalism: oligarchic capitalism, state-guided capitalism, corporate capitalism, entrepreneurial capitalism, laissez-faire capitalism, and welfare capitalism. Capitalism describes any economic system that is based around the private ownership of capital. It’s usually

helpfulprofessor.com

You're doing great with the questions, so I'll withdraw and make it easier for DS to respond.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I was thinking of....
"I'm a Christian, but I don't believe in God."

That problem goes away when one keeps in mind that philosophies and ideological perspectives don't have to require rigidity or orthodoxy that mirrors religious adherence to a worldview.

 

[Revoltingest]

Marxist schools of thought are so diverse that I wouldn't say it had "pillars" except in very broad, generalized terms. For example:

Libertarian Marxism

Libertarian Marxism is a broad scope of economic and political philosophies that emphasize the anti-authoritarian and libertarian aspects of Marxism. Ear...

encyclopedia.pub

Some anti-authoritarian Marxists were purged by Stalin, and George Orwell, who is frequently cited for his criticism of the Soviet Union, was a staunch democratic socialist as well.

How is the economic authoritarianism of Marxism
& socialism made compatible with libertarianism?

 

[Revoltingest]

You're doing great with the questions, so I'll withdraw and make it easier for DS to respond.

No, let's overwhelm him with a barrage of queries.
It's the RF way, bubala!

 

[Revoltingest]

That problem goes away when one keeps in mind that philosophies and ideological perspectives don't have to require rigidity or orthodoxy that mirrors religious adherence to a worldview.

If one's views stray quite far from fundamentals
of a label, tis best to find a new label.
It avoids confusion.
Notice how I added "pragmatic" before "libertarian".
This is designed to say that I'm a libertarian, with all
the loopy beliefs about liberty gone wild, but to also
inspire doubt about my being doctrinaire.
Perhaps you could find something that doesn't
suggest the ultimate goal of communism?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Do you have any examples of socialism & democracy coexisting?

So far, the only formally "socialist" countries have been based on Marxism-Leninism or an offshoot thereof (e.g., Stalinism and Maoism), so there haven't been any major examples where, say, democratic socialists have governed a country and then shaped its systems according to their political views.

That said, there are currently socialists in power in a few South American countries after winning democratic elections, such as in Bolivia, Chile, and Colombia.

And of socialism that is libertarian?

Yes:

What is implied by the term ‘libertarian socialism’?

The idea that socialism is first and foremost about freedom and therefore about overcoming the domination, repression, and alienation that block the free flow of human creativity, thought, and action. We do not equate socialism with planning, state control, or nationalization of industry, although we understand that in a socialist society (not “under” socialism) economic activity will be collectively controlled, managed, planned, and owned. Similarly, we believe that socialism will involve equality, but we do not think that socialism is equality, for it is possible to conceive of a society where everyone is equally oppressed. We think that socialism is incompatible with one-party states, with constraints on freedom of speech, with an elite exercising power ‘on behalf of’ the people, with leader cults, with any of the other devices by which the dying society seeks to portray itself as the new society.

What is Libertarian Socialism?

Ulli Diemer What is Libertarian Socialism? 1997 Originally published in Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of The Red Menace.

theanarchistlibrary.org

I align much more with democratic socialism because, among other things, I don't believe in anarchy or direct democracy, and I also think that some constraints on freedom of speech (e.g., hate speech laws) are necessary and useful.

The idea of a complete social transformation also strikes me as unrealistic, so my own views are essentially an amalgmation of different ideas rather than falling under one label that could express them all accurately or in detail.

What makes it unsustainable?

The consumerism that inherently results from it, the excessive accumulation of wealth that enables disproportionate environmental destruction by few individuals, and the current acceleration of the climate crisis by the focus on economic growth and industrialization beyond the planet's capacity for natural resources and environmental health.

I brought this up in a previous post:

What is the US interest in Ukraine?

No, this isn't our first rodeo. Every single time, clarifications don't seem to make a difference to you, and you end up repeating the same arguments that don't remotely represent my position. Back at ya. As I've oft said, you & I don't communicate well. It always strikes me that you see a...

www.religiousforums.com

As for the abovementioned disproportionate impact:

The world’s top 1% of emitters produce over 1000 times more CO2 than the bottom 1% – Analysis - IEA

The world’s top 1% of emitters produce over 1000 times more CO2 than the bottom 1% - A commentary by Laura Cozzi, Olivia Chen, Hyeji Kim

www.iea.org

‘Wasteful luxury’: Private jet pollution more than doubles in Europe

As millions face fuel poverty, a Greenpeace study has found that number of private jet flights is soaring in Europe.

www.euronews.com

Climate inequality report 2023, Fair taxes for a sustainable future in the global South - WID - World Inequality Database

Climate inequality report 2023, Fair taxes for a sustainable future in the global South The source for global inequality data. Open access, high quality wealth and income inequality data developed by an international academic consortium.

wid.world

The outsized carbon footprints of the super-rich

Private flights have boomed since the pandemic. Are taxpayers picking up the tab?

The wealthiest flyers create a outsized amount of carbon pollution while barely contributing to the public aviation system, group says.

www.cbsnews.com

Flying shame: the scandalous rise of private jets

Last week, Rishi Sunak flew from London to Blackpool – his third private jet trip in 10 days. He’s far from the only one using air travel for short journeys. Just how much damage is this doing?

www.theguardian.com

I would ideally post an excerpt from each of these articles, but I'm posting from a phone.

Are there any examples of sustainable alternatives to capitalism?

I think we will have to figure out an alternative that can tackle our unprecedented issues, mainly climate change. We will never have a sustainable alternative if we refuse to try to change the most damaging elements of our current systems.

(Let's limit that last one to modern societies with technology.
We won't be returning to primitive subsistence lifestyles.)

Exactly. Previous thinkers and theorists lived in different times, under different circumstances, and without the current existential threat we're facing due to climate change. I don't think we can rely on them for solutions.