Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Should the Queen meet Martin McGuinness?

Shocking as it is to many of the political thinkers on urban, things change, and old ideas and assumptions need to be updated to accommodate that.

This is one of the many reasons that the red seeing marxists on here are so irrelevant.

"red seeing marxists " ....ffs, they get worse
 
I'm celebrating 28 years of marriage today and the party spirits have started to have an influence on me. The party has been going on now all afternoon in the garden and I've only nipped in to watch the France - Spain match. Your tomfoolery is the icing on the cake.

a.k.a : wanking into a sock in your mum's basement.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18552221

Apparently after discussions in his party Martin McGuinness has decided to meet the Queen when she is over there next week.

I suppose he is now a politician so why not, but he is also a former terrorist, it appears the hesitancy has been more on his side than on the Queen's which in itself is interesting.

if it pisses off the royalist loons then great
 
If Marxism is more relevant than ever, why is it not as rampant as capitalism?
Comparing Marxism and capitalism is not like for like. The current 'capitalist' economic system is a hybrid, made up of whatever survived the 20th century. Marxism is a body of theory based on the writings of one person.
 
Are you saying it is or isn't relevant today, though?
Of course it's relevant if you want to understand capitalism. Capitalists get this. If you disagree i'm all ears for your informed analysis of why - or maybe, just maybe some sort of reply to the above post. Too much to expect?
 
Of course it's relevant if you want to understand capitalism. Capitalists get this. If you disagree i'm all ears for your informed analysis of why - or maybe, just maybe some sort of reply to the above post. Too much to expect?

Questions, questions but never an answer. I don't know the answer but you do so why don't you tell me?
 
An answer to what? You asked me a question and i answered it. I asked you some that you didn't. What is it it that you're now refusing to answer a few posts later?
 
An answer to what? You asked me a question and i answered it. I asked you some that you didn't. What is it it that you're now refusing to answer a few posts later?

You say its relevant and that capitalists get this. I'm asking why it's relevant & what it is that capitalists "get".
 
Centrality of wage-labour as the key social-relation, new enclosures entailing the dispossession globally of peoples means of self-reproduction, the dynamics of the world market, growth of fictitious capital and credit and how this effects the 'real economy', commodification of circulation, financialisation of domestic economies and social reproduction commodifying them in the process, supply chains, competition, policing policy, international relations, war, invasion, possibilities for overcoming social problems entailed within its historic development. You know, all that informed stuff.

All irrelevant. None of them appearing anywhere in the modern world. Marx and marxism destroyed by grit and krtek. And liked by lock and light.
 
You say its relevant and that capitalists get this. I'm asking why it's relevant & what it is that capitalists "get".
Now you are, you didn't before, you asked if it's relevant. I answered. And now i've answered this latest question as well. Yet you've still not answered one of mine or offered single reason why marx's idea are irrelevant. Go on, have a crack.
 
Now you are, you didn't before, you asked if it's relevant. I answered. And now i've answered this latest question as well. Yet you've still not answered one of mine or offered single reason why marx's idea are irrelevant. Go on, have a crack.
You said it's relevant but didn't back it up. And I haven't destroyed anything, it's a thread about your Queen meeting Martin McGuinness...
 
Questions, questions but never an answer. I don't know the answer but you do so why don't you tell me?
You liked my post about Marxism, so I assume you agree that it's mainly a body of writing. It's for understanding the world. And it's relevant today as a tool to understanding. But I don't think that's really what you meant with your earlier question, you meant political social movements based in marxism?
 
You said it's relevant but didn't back it up. And I haven't destroyed anything, it's a thread about your Queen meeting Martin McGuinness...
You didn't ask me to. When you did i did. But you're not going to bother supporting your own positions at all. Because you can't - you don't actually have any other than to make yourself hated so you can justify even more whining and self-pity. Please, if you have something to say about the relevance or not of marxism then spit it out. I beg you. Otherwise don't bother posting crap like if you like stalin so much why don't you go live there.
 
Sounds like there are plenty of idiots who thought it was safe to fall asleep at the back of the bus whilst capitalism drove them down roads they considered to offer an acceptable view. Waking slowly from their grotesque doze they seem not to have noticed that the view out of the window now shows that the bus is plunging down a ravine in slow motion. Hey man, these special effects are good, oh wait, arghghghghg. No, its can't be, thats not the ground rushing towards us, the ground is obsolete, we banished it, gravity is out of date and discredited. And pay no attention to the ticket collector defiling corpses in the next row.
 
You said it's relevant but didn't back it up.

He just has you thick cunt. If you knew anything about Marx you would know his critique of Capitalism has not been topped by anyone else's critique of Capitalism. Which is why it remains relevant to Marxists and non-Marxists alike. Now, set out your stall to dispute this. You're continuing to embarrass yourself because you can't. And if you had actually read Marx (which you clearly haven't) you would know this and not show yourself up in this way.
 
You didn't ask me to. When you did i did. But you're not going to bother supporting your own positions at all. Because you can't - you don't actually have any other than to make yourself hated so you can justify even more whining and self-pity. Please, if you have something to say about the relevance or not of marxism then spit it out. I beg you. Otherwise don't bother posting crap like if you like stalin so much why don't you go live there.

You haven't answered the question, I see. Just random bullshit on Stalin and self pity, which I think is your problem. Too much projecting and getting ready for conflict rather than simply trying to address a question to someone who doesn't think along your lines. I really wish you'd rise up above your petty snobbery & know it all schtick but you can't help yourself.

@ Random - thanks for that, I do think it's a series of writings (like the bible) that have some relevance to some people in this day & age but has to be modified and refined in order to fit into the modern world. I'm just wondering why it isn't more widespread than say parts of the Americas and the East... and yes, I know that socialism and communism and whatever the hell it is in NK is not the same as Marxism. What I'm trying to say is why isn't there true Marxism in action or would it have to be watered down in order to "succeed" today?
 
He just has you thick cunt. If you knew anything about Marx you would know his critique of Capitalism has not been topped by anyone else's critique of Capitalism. Which is why it remains relevant to Marxists and non-Marxists alike. Now, set out your stall to dispute this. You're continuing to embarrass yourself because you can't. And if you had actually read Marx (which you clearly haven't) you would know this and not show yourself up in this way.

I read Marx nearly 30 years ago and 2 biogs on Marx & Engels. I wrote my intermediate project on them and amazingly passed. Can I remember any of it? No. I don't have the best memory & I find it hard to take information in the older I get. So fuck off, you condecending git. No wonder your ideals aren't widespread if this is how you preach them. We're not all experts in the minutae of left wing diversity.
 
You haven't answered the question, I see. Just random bullshit on Stalin and self pity, which I think is your problem. Too much projecting and getting ready for conflict rather than simply trying to address a question to someone who doesn't think along your lines. I really wish you'd rise up above your petty snobbery & know it all schtick but you can't help yourself.

@ Random - thanks for that, I do think it's a series of writings (like the bible) that have some relevance to some people in this day & age but has to be modified and refined in order to fit into the modern world. I'm just wondering why it isn't more widespread than say parts of the Americas and the East... and yes, I know that socialism and communism and whatever the hell it is in NK is not the same as Marxism. What I'm trying to say is why isn't there true Marxism in action or would it have to be watered down in order to "succeed" today?
Yes i have - and you were saying no such thing as your hastily constructed back-track justification above. You were doing your best to join in with the ill-informed marx is outdated line from lock and light - it's there in black and white.

And if you were really asking for the reasons you now suggest you'd be falling over yourself to at least attempt a reply to the points i put to you - one in particular: does dominance of one system demonstrate a) the sort of relevance we're talking about here b) the fittingness of the ideas for the period and if not then c) what sort of things do you think might been working to stop other ideas with more relevance or fittingness being so 'rampant'? Go on, i dare you - open up a productive informed dialogue on the stuff you say that you wanted to talk about.
 
Yes i have - and you were saying no such thing as your hastily constructed back-track justification above. You were doing your best to join in with the ill-informed marx is outdated line from lock and light - it's there in black and white.

And if you were really asking for the reasons you now suggest you'd be falling over yourself to at least attempt a reply to the points i put to you - one in particular: does dominance of one system demonstrate a) the sort of relevance we're talking about here b) the fittingness of the ideas for the period and if not then c) what sort of things do you think might been working to stop other ideas with more relevance or fittingness being so 'rampant'? Go on, i dare you - open up a productive informed dialogue on the stuff you say that you wanted to talk about.

Do you find your audience walking out on you much, when you start to berate them for not seeing things your way? You're a disgrace, you really are.
 
Back
Top Bottom