Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:48 AM
 
3,498 posts, read 2,223,286 times
Reputation: 646

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastern Roamer View Post
I can appreciate what you're getting at, but your point carries little weight. How many Left Wingers (or Right Wingers, for that matter) have never read Mein Kampf but are quick to call someone a nazi or fascist? How many economists have actually read the original writings of Adam Smith or John Meynard Keynes?

More directly to the point, the followers of a movement like marxism can actually change the definition of marxism in the way they apply his ideology. It matters less what Carl Marx said and more what 'marxists' have done or failed to do in the name of marxism. The original text was just a template.
Fascism predates Mein Kampf, so not sure why you would need to read it to understand Fascism. This forum is proof that many left and right wingers don't understand Fascism or Nazism. The word Fascism is probably just as misunderstood as Marxist. If you are an economist and you've never studied Adam Smith or Keynes, than you are a pretty sad excuse for an economist. Modern day Marxists cant even agree as to what a Marxist is. Even Karl Marx, spelled with a K, said "I am not a Marxist" Would you feel comfortable blaming the sermons of Jesus Christ for the bombings of abortion or the Spanish Inquisition?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:55 AM
 
3,265 posts, read 3,200,921 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammbriggs View Post
it's just that in a world of freer markets we don't have to pass that totalitarian stage on the way there
Actually, that's exactly what happens. It's covered in Chapter 10 Vol. 1 of Capital as a matter of fact. We came out of a more totalitarian labor-wage model after the Civil War, when overall wages were indexed to slavery and thus kept artificially low. It's no coincidence the labor movement began in the years immediately after when the violence of the state was no longer overtly used to set wage prices and the period from post-Reconstruction through the Gilded Age up to the beginning of the Progressive Era is the key economic policy focus of libertarianism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,210,318 times
Reputation: 6963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
Amazing that people get hung up on labels and try to gain high ground in an academic discussion when it matter not a whit.

The words we hear comming from Obama and his minions are not what we want to hear, call that collection of policies whatever you want, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the content is repulsive to the majority of America.
You missed the whole point of this thread. It's in the OP, on page 1.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:00 PM
 
3,498 posts, read 2,223,286 times
Reputation: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
You missed the whole point of this thread. It's in the OP, on page 1.
When they can't spell his name correctly, is there any wonder that they don't understand his teachings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:01 PM
 
14,247 posts, read 17,954,214 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
Amazing that people get hung up on labels and try to gain high ground in an academic discussion when it matter not a whit.

The words we hear comming from Obama and his minions are not what we want to hear, call that collection of policies whatever you want, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the content is repulsive to the majority of America.
I would suggest that we wait for the next election to determine that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:24 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,820,814 times
Reputation: 1398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinny Puppy View Post
What is the diffence between Stalinism and Trotskyism. What about Stalinism and Marxism? Stalinism and Communism?
They are all socioeconomic theories based on Marxism and created to justify murmurous tyrannies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,210,318 times
Reputation: 6963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirdik View Post
They are all socioeconomic theories based on Marxism and created to justify murmurous tyrannies.
What are the "socioeconomic theories based on Marxism'. and how do you know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,869,517 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirdik View Post
They are all socioeconomic theories based on Marxism and created to justify murmurous tyrannies.
Marx never preached about centralized power but "people power".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:30 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,350,238 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
Which books did Reagan read?
Zane Grey novels, man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:31 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,820,814 times
Reputation: 1398
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Likely more than you do, as did Hitler about Capitalism. See, there is more to things, in reality, than the name you want to associate with them. Your being clueless about Marx and his take on economy is something you claim to have read, but you clearly didn't get it. Besides, your examples also assume politics and economics being integral and interchangeable. That itself is a problem you might want to address first. Then perhaps take up and study Marx.
Capitalism is not a theory. Capitalism is an economic system in which the means
of production are privately owned and operated for profit, usually in competitive markets.

Marxism is a theory and can be interpreted differently by different people.
We've seen different interpretations through history.
They have at least one thing in common though they've served to justify tyrannical regimes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:13 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top