Are you a Marxist

[two sheds]

I have suggested this to two sheds to at least two times now - including linking to an actual copy of the book. Yet here we are again.

And I’ve read the entry on ‘liberal’ at least two times (three since Dotty quoted it). You keep pointing to the nuanced discussions in there, but people on urban certainly use it to mean “not a revolutionary socialist” and, whether they’re right or not, to someone who doesn’t know the background makes them look like cult members or petulant schoolkids.

Each time we go through this I’ve understood more closely which people you hate and despise, but it’s the hating and despising of the views of such a huge section of society that I think is so unhealthy. Not just believing they’re wrong but full-on hatred and contempt. I don’t care how clever and nuanced your political analysis is, that isn’t going to end well.

So here we are again.

Incidentally it’s a bit rich complaining as you have done of liberals “lack of rigour and of weak and sentimental beliefs” when revolutionary socialists are proposing a revolution where we don’t know who’s going to take over or what they’re going to do when they get there.

I've seen noone join the dots from how we get from the relatively few revolutionary socialists we have now to converting the working classes to stage the full-on up-on-the-barriers-lads revolution that will lead to the destruction of international capitalism and nice fluffy unicorns for everyone.

And why power’s not going to be co-opted along the line by some authoritarian fucker who’s pretending to be right-on socialist.

 

[Pickman's model]

I've seen noone join the dots from how we get from the relatively few revolutionary socialists we have now to converting the working classes to stage the full-on up-on-the-barriers-lads revolution that will lead to the destruction of international capitalism and nice fluffy unicorns for everyone.

And why power’s not going to be co-opted along the line by some authoritarian fucker who’s pretending to be right-on socialist.

Always been a big fan of mick noone.

 

[two sheds]

"A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed"

 

[Pickman's model]

"A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed"

Mick Noone, drummer and revolutionary theorist perhaps best known for his work with Ruddy Yurts.

 

[two sheds]

And that's it, liberalism is reduced to "being against sexism, homophobia and racism", rather than being the very engine by which these prejudices are propagated in our society.

True, but that wasn't what I was saying.

Liberalism is an ideology that is attacking our communities, forcing people's living standards down, it is the liberal EU that is currently attacking immigrants, it is liberalism that is pushing for cuts to welfare the results of which fall proportionally more on women. Liberalism is sexist, liberalism is racist, liberalism is homophobic and liberalism is taking from the poor to give to the rich.

True, but that wasn't what I was saying.

That is why socialists/communists/anarchists should oppose liberalism and the type of bullshit 'alliance' proposed by the Green Party and other liberals.[/QUOTE]

Or, rather than just insulting them, explain why they need to go further than just liberalism.

Judging environmentalists by the standards of revolutionary socialism is I think misguided. They could equally judge you by their standards, try to make you feel guilty for consuming more of the earth's resources than your fair share. After all, if you're not out there protesting against climate change you're one of the moderates in the rich west who is going to be responsible for millions of deaths when the deserts spread.

One of the things I dislike about the 'left' is the little factions that it breaks up into, each proclaiming the True Vision and spitting "splitters" against people who fundamentally want the same things in society.

 

[two sheds]

Mick Noone, drummer and revolutionary theorist perhaps best known for his work with Ruddy Yurts.

I'm sure he did this one, too:

 

[two sheds]

Me, I'm looking forward to having an arguement about how they sneaked in a right winger as our delegate to conference, when we sent a motion locally supportin the left leaning leadership.

Indeed. Labour centrists execute secret plan for months to win conference vote

It's almost as if they're acting as a trotskyite party within a party, using procedures to force their policies on the majority.

 

[inva]

Incidentally it’s a bit rich complaining as you have done of liberals “lack of rigour and of weak and sentimental beliefs” when revolutionary socialists are proposing a revolution where we don’t know who’s going to take over or what they’re going to do when they get there.

I've seen noone join the dots from how we get from the relatively few revolutionary socialists we have now to converting the working classes to stage the full-on up-on-the-barriers-lads revolution that will lead to the destruction of international capitalism and nice fluffy unicorns for everyone.

One of the things I dislike about the 'left' is the little factions that it breaks up into, each proclaiming the True Vision and spitting "splitters" against people who fundamentally want the same things in society.

So I take it you, the Greens and the Lib Dems also 'fundamentally' want an up on the barricades working class revolution and the destruction of capitalism? Perhaps you could do us a favour and explain how it'll work - or, in fact, is the reality that there actually are major differences?

 

[two sheds]

Will give it a go so that we can all have a good laugh and then start off in to each other again

 

[butchersapron]

And I’ve read the entry on ‘liberal’ at least two times (three since Dotty quoted it). You keep pointing to the nuanced discussions in there, but people on urban certainly use it to mean “not a revolutionary socialist” and, whether they’re right or not, to someone who doesn’t know the background makes them look like cult members or petulant schoolkids.

Each time we go through this I’ve understood more closely which people you hate and despise, but it’s the hating and despising of the views of such a huge section of society that I think is so unhealthy. Not just believing they’re wrong but full-on hatred and contempt. I don’t care how clever and nuanced your political analysis is, that isn’t going to end well.

So here we are again.

Incidentally it’s a bit rich complaining as you have done of liberals “lack of rigour and of weak and sentimental beliefs” when revolutionary socialists are proposing a revolution where we don’t know who’s going to take over or what they’re going to do when they get there.

I've seen noone join the dots from how we get from the relatively few revolutionary socialists we have now to converting the working classes to stage the full-on up-on-the-barriers-lads revolution that will lead to the destruction of international capitalism and nice fluffy unicorns for everyone.

And why power’s not going to be co-opted along the line by some authoritarian fucker who’s pretending to be right-on socialist.

Presumably as you've now read the Raymond Williams entry on numerous occasions you would have recognised “lack of rigour and of weak and sentimental beliefs” as paraphrasing the definitions that he outlined. Or maybe you wouldn't given that you don't seem to have grasped anything at all about what the piece says or seem prepared to do any work yourself. And i'm fucked if i'm going down this lazy personalised rabbit hole you've dug again. I know damn well next month or so you'll be back with the same anyway,

 

[redsquirrel]

True, but that wasn't what I was saying.

Or, rather than just insulting them, explain why they need to go further than just liberalism.

I (and most people I've seen) don't use liberal only as an insult but also as a description of people's politics, and as a shorthand to explain why I have such problem with those politics.

Judging environmentalists by the standards of revolutionary socialism is I think misguided. They could equally judge you by their standards, try to make you feel guilty for consuming more of the earth's resources than your fair share. After all, if you're not out there protesting against climate change you're one of the moderates in the rich west who is going to be responsible for millions of deaths when the deserts spread.

I've no idea what this has to do with anything, it's utterly unrelated to anything I've said.

One of the things I dislike about the 'left' is the little factions that it breaks up into, each proclaiming the True Vision and spitting "splitters" against people who fundamentally want the same things in society.

And there you are rolling together socialists, communists and anarchists with liberals into a wet 'left' mush. As much as you and others pretend that this is some minor ideological difference, People's Front of Judea, it isn't. It's a fundamental break between two political philosophies that have different aims, different ways to understanding and are actively opposed to each other. This has been explained to you repeatedly, you want to pretend that it isn't true but it is.

 

[brogdale]

Indeed; a 'wormhole' as Butchers said.
two sheds irrational insistence that socialism (& anarchism) merely represents some sort of development of/from liberalism seems to be the root of his/her confusion. Anyone who can say this:-

Or, rather than just insulting them, explain why they need to go further than just liberalism.

...is in an intellectual mess wrt ideological analysis.

 

[Athos]

Good post, and a nice little bit of research. I certainly agree that the majority of marxists are not transphobic, and that they recognise trans people are an oppressed group to be supported.

But most marxists also view gender as socialy constructed. This (not particularly great from what I can see) article in the SWP'S ISJ certainly takes this position while recognising that many trans people do not. Look for the section titled 'The social construction of gender'. I think that gender is a social construction but I'm pretty sure Stella disagrees and I imagine this would be the major problem she would have with even otherwise supportive Marxists. Anyway, I am dangerously close to putting words in her mouth so will shut up now. I just wanted to bring up what I think might be the root cause of disagreement. Stella can comment further if she wants, or not I know these discussions can make her uncomfortable.

Yes, some trans people's essentialist understanding of gender would be at odds with Marxists' emphasis on material factors. Similarly, some Marxists would feel the focus on this form of identity politics distracts from - and undermines the solidarity necessary for - the more far-reaching 'solution': the end of capitalism.

But, I would not class such people as transphobic, particularly where they support trans people's right to freedom from oppression based upon how they perceive their gender (as the overwhelming majority of Marxists do).

Sadly, though, it seems that AuntiStella is very quick to ascribe that label to anyone who cannot be shouted down into uncritically accepting everything she says (even other women who question why they ought to accept a definition of the gender to which they belong that's imposed on them by people born with male bodies and socialised as males).

It's a dishonest and cynical way to stifle a legitimate debate (i.e. what it means to be a woman) that's of crucial and immediate importance to billions of women.

 

[Cliff Promise]

I'm a liberal Marxist

 

[butchersapron]

I'm a liberal Marxist

is that right frances?

 

[Cliff Promise]

is that right frances?

No it's to the left and don't call me Shirley.

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

No. I am not a Marxist. I lean towards capitalist.

 

[Cliff Promise]

No. I am not a Marxist. I lean towards capitalist.

From which direction though?

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

From which direction though?

LEFT ... if you want.

 

[Pickman's model]

No. I am not a Marxist. I lean towards capitalist.

capitalotropick

Like heliotropick only you are attracted to capital rather than the sun.

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

capitalotropick

Like heliotropick only you are attracted to capital rather than the sun.

What the fuckk are you on about?

 

[ManchesterBeth]

Should be called StinkyBumTime tbh.

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

Should be called StinkyBumTime tbh.

Yes it should. Satire at its best.

 

[Cliff Promise]

SpeakyMumBrine

 

[Cliff Promise]

LeakyGunTide?

 

[SqueakyBumTime]

LeakyGunTide?

Poor

 

[Cliff Promise]

SquealyGumMine? C'mon help me out I've had a few

 

[Cliff Promise]

In seriousness I notice that the only person to clearly say they're a Marxist is phildwyer.

I would be interested to see what he thinks it means to be a Marxist, as I've never really been that clear.

 

[Ole]

bout halfway through. What I was trying to get at clumsily was that liberals are appaled at what must be done, and I think that they think it will be bloodless. In the context of n your own country iyswim? But I take your point, liberal ideology is murderous- I was googling to see if I could put the triangle slave trade on the tradition but, well. The multidnuos positionism around what 'liberal' means defeated me with wrong search results.


Its mainly horrific stats and equally grim 1st person testimony in that book btw. One of the most fucked up things for me was the way the kill count became a quota, that officers racking up bodies could be blessed from on high and be looking at promotion. Profoundly depressing. I will visit the second half when I have some calming herbs.

What's the book mate?

 

[ViolentPanda]

No. I am not a Marxist. I lean towards capitalist.

"Lean toward"? You've got your tongue firmly up capitalism's arse, as is apparent to anyone who goes through your short posting history.