Left-Wing Discussion Thread II: Behind 700,000 Bunkers

[Kubra]

Oh wow a law student using latin
In any case, you'd be a bit daft to consider the roman proletarian to be a significant social force, bruv. Marx sure didn't.

>If you were a poor chimney sweeper living in a shitty run-down London tenement, you were Jesus
nah, lumpens generally got a bad rap with Marx. Illiterate chimney sweeper might have too great a penchant for little napoleons.

Oh wow get a load of this guy, he's found out that philosophy does not effect the movement of the sun and has now figured he's solved it. Look, if you don't care for philosophy in general, why puzzle over philosophical differences in the first place?

>Marx just thought he was unique because he considered his ideology "scientific"
Everyone considered their ideology science. Even Hegel. The 19th century was a weird century, the transition between the magic of alchemy to the mathematical rationality of modern chemistry.

Correction: Law student drop-out

True, the proles of Rome were quite the insignificant demographic. Still, didn't stop Marx from adopting them as the name-sake of his end-all be-all oppressed group which he could use as a rallying cry ad perpetuum. I guess the plebs just didn't make the cut. Far too bourgeois you see, relying on that daily bread dole.

>Everyone considered their ideology science. Even Hegel.
That's not really an excuse. Especially when "scientific Socialism" is still lauded in many modern Socialist circles. Then again modern Socialism does seem to have a bit of a problem letting go of outdated half-rate relics from the 19th century. :^)

a law dropout is still a law student
Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.

Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.

[Kubra]

Hot take: is mccarthyism secular religion?????

[Northern Davincia]

Correction: Law student drop-out

True, the proles of Rome were quite the insignificant demographic. Still, didn't stop Marx from adopting them as the name-sake of his end-all be-all oppressed group which he could use as a rallying cry ad perpetuum. I guess the plebs just didn't make the cut. Far too bourgeois you see, relying on that daily bread dole.

>Everyone considered their ideology science. Even Hegel.
That's not really an excuse. Especially when "scientific Socialism" is still lauded in many modern Socialist circles. Then again modern Socialism does seem to have a bit of a problem letting go of outdated half-rate relics from the 19th century. :^)

If libertarians get to keep worshipping Adam Smith, and Americans in general get to treat the Founding Fathers like timeless geniuses, we get to give Uncle Karl some more love.

Adam Smith and the Founding Fathers actually had good ideas, though.

Hot take: is mccarthyism secular religion?????

For me, yes.

[Sanctissima]

Correction: Law student drop-out

True, the proles of Rome were quite the insignificant demographic. Still, didn't stop Marx from adopting them as the name-sake of his end-all be-all oppressed group which he could use as a rallying cry ad perpetuum. I guess the plebs just didn't make the cut. Far too bourgeois you see, relying on that daily bread dole.

>Everyone considered their ideology science. Even Hegel.
That's not really an excuse. Especially when "scientific Socialism" is still lauded in many modern Socialist circles. Then again modern Socialism does seem to have a bit of a problem letting go of outdated half-rate relics from the 19th century. :^)

If libertarians get to keep worshipping Adam Smith, and Americans in general get to treat the Founding Fathers like timeless geniuses, we get to give Uncle Karl some more love.

Yes, but the former were successful businessmen, entrepreneurs, authors and assorted revolutionaries.

The latter was a law school drop-out who, in between being an adulterer and siring a bastard son he refused to acknowledge, spent most of his time dallying in philosophy while mooching off of his parent's (and later BFF's) wealth.

You might as well dump the half-rate philosopher for someone more hardcore like Uncle Joe. Or, if you're just in it for the memes, Stirner.

[Kubra]

If libertarians get to keep worshipping Adam Smith, and Americans in general get to treat the Founding Fathers like timeless geniuses, we get to give Uncle Karl some more love.

Yes, but the former were successful businessmen, entrepreneurs, authors and assorted revolutionaries.

The latter was a law school drop-out who, in between being an adulterer and siring a bastard son he refused to acknowledge, spent most of his time dallying in philosophy while mooching off of his parent's (and later BFF's) wealth.

You might as well dump the half-rate philosopher for someone more hardcore like Uncle Joe. Or, if you're just in it for the memes, Stirner.

and they all incessantly use latin. Coincidence?

What, dump a "half rate" philosopher for a fourth rate one? Stalin had theoretical writing, and it ain't good.

[Sanctissima]

Correction: Law student drop-out

True, the proles of Rome were quite the insignificant demographic. Still, didn't stop Marx from adopting them as the name-sake of his end-all be-all oppressed group which he could use as a rallying cry ad perpetuum. I guess the plebs just didn't make the cut. Far too bourgeois you see, relying on that daily bread dole.

>Everyone considered their ideology science. Even Hegel.
That's not really an excuse. Especially when "scientific Socialism" is still lauded in many modern Socialist circles. Then again modern Socialism does seem to have a bit of a problem letting go of outdated half-rate relics from the 19th century. :^)

a law dropout is still a law student
Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.

Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.

> a law dropout is still a law student
That's like putting a bunch of alma maters in your resume to sound impressive but dodgily avoiding the subject of whether or not you actually graduated from any of them.

>Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.
That's... a fair point.

*cries in Latin over Vatican II allowing priests to give sermons in unwashed barbarian-speak*

>Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.
Marx's works aren't part of a very small and limited selection of writings due to wide-spread civilizational collapse. Medieval scholars at least had the excuse of the Dark Ages and lack of reading material for why they had such a strong circlejerk for Aristotle.

Hot take: is mccarthyism secular religion?????

I regularly give praise to McCarthy while worshiping our Lord and Saviour Saint Ronnie and sacrificing goats to Pinochet.

[Sanctissima]

Yes, but the former were successful businessmen, entrepreneurs, authors and assorted revolutionaries.

The latter was a law school drop-out who, in between being an adulterer and siring a bastard son he refused to acknowledge, spent most of his time dallying in philosophy while mooching off of his parent's (and later BFF's) wealth.

You might as well dump the half-rate philosopher for someone more hardcore like Uncle Joe. Or, if you're just in it for the memes, Stirner.

and they all incessantly use latin. Coincidence?

What, dump a "half rate" philosopher for a fourth rate one? Stalin had theoretical writing, and it ain't good.

Eh, at least they have good tastes in linguistics.

Stalin had gulags and convinced an entire generation of Russians he was their saviour whilst simultaneously killing off most of their family. Also kulaks, because fuck them, I suppose. Truly he was the Communist Machiavelli.

[Kubra]

a law dropout is still a law student
Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.

Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.

> a law dropout is still a law student
That's like putting a bunch of alma maters in your resume to sound impressive but dodgily avoiding the subject of whether or not you actually graduated from any of them.

>Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.
That's... a fair point.

*cries in Latin over Vatican II allowing priests to give sermons in unwashed barbarian-speak*

>Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.
Marx's works aren't part of a very small and limited selection of writings due to wide-spread civilizational collapse. Medieval scholars at least had the excuse of the Dark Ages and lack of reading material for why they had such a strong circlejerk for Aristotle.

>widespread civilizational collapse
Aristotle died in 322 BC, Rome didn't fully collapse until like 472 AD or something, by which time the greeks were running a really dope empire by greek standards

I regularly give praise to McCarthy while worshiping our Lord and Saviour Saint Ronnie and sacrificing goats to Pinochet.

Gentlemen, I rest my case.

[Kubra]

and they all incessantly use latin. Coincidence?

What, dump a "half rate" philosopher for a fourth rate one? Stalin had theoretical writing, and it ain't good.

Eh, at least they have good tastes in linguistics.

Stalin had gulags and convinced an entire generation of Russians he was their saviour whilst simultaneously killing off most of their family. Also kulaks, because fuck them, I suppose. Truly he was the Communist Machiavelli.

I mean that's a lot of good reasons to dislike joe tho
I mean labour camps are one thing, the tsars had em and the russian federation has em, but generally that lot are smart enough to figure that they're better off keeping competent albeit politically sensitive folks in uniform rather than in camps, else you lose a war to finland.

[The Parkus Empire]

tbf though Marxism is itself pretty idealistic

That's not what he means by idealism.

Idealism is philosophical stance that that the unfolding of ideas is what drives history and human society. Marxism is materialist.

I would say idealism makes cosmic claims.

[Sanctissima]

> a law dropout is still a law student
That's like putting a bunch of alma maters in your resume to sound impressive but dodgily avoiding the subject of whether or not you actually graduated from any of them.

>Sure it didn't stop him, because you can't stop a lawyer using latin. You just don't. Better luck convincing a catholic priest, and he thinks he's got a religious duty to the language.
That's... a fair point.

*cries in Latin over Vatican II allowing priests to give sermons in unwashed barbarian-speak*

>Come now, we don't blame Aristotle for everyone staying really orthodox aristotlean for the next few centuries. He wasn't writing shit by then.
Marx's works aren't part of a very small and limited selection of writings due to wide-spread civilizational collapse. Medieval scholars at least had the excuse of the Dark Ages and lack of reading material for why they had such a strong circlejerk for Aristotle.

>widespread civilizational collapse
Aristotle died in 322 BC, Rome didn't fully collapse until like 472 AD or something, by which time the greeks were running a really dope empire by greek standards.

I assumed we were talking about the hard-on Middle Ages scholars had for Aristotle. In which Byzantine scholars typically aren't included, because reasons.

[Liriena]

If libertarians get to keep worshipping Adam Smith, and Americans in general get to treat the Founding Fathers like timeless geniuses, we get to give Uncle Karl some more love.

Adam Smith and the Founding Fathers actually had good ideas, though.

So did Marx. Don't be so biased, m'dude.

[Kubra]

>widespread civilizational collapse
Aristotle died in 322 BC, Rome didn't fully collapse until like 472 AD or something, by which time the greeks were running a really dope empire by greek standards.

I assumed we were talking about the hard-on Middle Ages scholars had for Aristotle. In which Byzantine scholars typically aren't included, because reasons.

I guess tbf the romans were more plato than aristotle when they cared about philosophy at all, and the only romans philosophers we bother to remember (and are worth bothering to remember) were stoics, but day to day philosophy, speaking practically, you'd mostly describe things in aristotlean terms. Plato isn't super useful in explaining how an Onager works.

[Liriena]

If libertarians get to keep worshipping Adam Smith, and Americans in general get to treat the Founding Fathers like timeless geniuses, we get to give Uncle Karl some more love.

Yes, but the former were successful businessmen, entrepreneurs, authors and assorted revolutionaries.

The latter was a law school drop-out who, in between being an adulterer and siring a bastard son he refused to acknowledge, spent most of his time dallying in philosophy while mooching off of his parent's (and later BFF's) wealth.

You might as well dump the half-rate philosopher for someone more hardcore like Uncle Joe. Or, if you're just in it for the memes, Stirner.

Your ad hominems are duly noted.

[Sanctissima]

Eh, at least they have good tastes in linguistics.

Stalin had gulags and convinced an entire generation of Russians he was their saviour whilst simultaneously killing off most of their family. Also kulaks, because fuck them, I suppose. Truly he was the Communist Machiavelli.

I mean that's a lot of good reasons to dislike joe tho
I mean labour camps are one thing, the tsars had em and the russian federation has em, but generally that lot are smart enough to figure that they're better off keeping competent albeit politically sensitive folks in uniform rather than in camps, else you lose a war to finland.

Yes, but one can't be very picky when the next most influential Socialist leader is a guy who hated sparrows so much he organized a massive genocidal anti-sparrow campaign to wipe them out and inadvertently caused a famine that wiped out 50 million of his own people in the process. Also sweet potatoes are good and we should plant more of them, because reasons.

[Northern Davincia]

Yes, but the former were successful businessmen, entrepreneurs, authors and assorted revolutionaries.

The latter was a law school drop-out who, in between being an adulterer and siring a bastard son he refused to acknowledge, spent most of his time dallying in philosophy while mooching off of his parent's (and later BFF's) wealth.

You might as well dump the half-rate philosopher for someone more hardcore like Uncle Joe. Or, if you're just in it for the memes, Stirner.

Your ad hominems are duly noted.

Do adulterous parasitic child-abandoning dropouts deserve love?

[Valgora]

Your ad hominems are duly noted.

Do adulterous parasitic child-abandoning dropouts deserve love?

Do slave-owning founding fathers deserve love?

See, I can make that kinda argument too.

[Northern Davincia]

Do adulterous parasitic child-abandoning dropouts deserve love?

Do slave-owning founding fathers deserve love?

See, I can make that kinda argument too.

Did all of the Founding Fathers own slaves?
No.
Your argument holds no water.

[Valgora]

Do slave-owning founding fathers deserve love?

See, I can make that kinda argument too.

Did all of the Founding Fathers own slaves?
No.
Your argument holds no water.

Neither does yours.
I responded to your idiotic argument, with another idiotic argument.

[Northern Davincia]

Did all of the Founding Fathers own slaves?
No.
Your argument holds no water.

Neither does yours.
I responded to your idiotic argument, with another idiotic argument.

I wasn't making an argument, I was asking a question. Surely you can tell the difference?

[Valgora]

Neither does yours.
I responded to your idiotic argument, with another idiotic argument.

I wasn't making an argument, I was asking a question. Surely you can tell the difference?

You say that; however, you said that my argument holds no water when I pretty much did the same thing.

And I think questions can be used as arguments.

[Liriena]

Your ad hominems are duly noted.

Do adulterous parasitic child-abandoning dropouts deserve love?

If they wrote really, really good stuff? We can apply some "death of the author". I do it with Borges and Ridley Scott.

[Northern Davincia]

I wasn't making an argument, I was asking a question. Surely you can tell the difference?

You say that; however, you said that my argument holds no water when I pretty much did the same thing.

And I think questions can be used as arguments.

Liriena suggested that Marx, a man with all of the attributes I listed, deserved to be loved in a manner similar to the Founding Fathers. I merely asked for clarification.
Marx in his lifetime accomplished very little. The Founding Fathers, however, have innumerable achievements under their belts. Comparing the two is simply absurd.

[MERIZoC]

If you're denying any virtue in Marxism then why are you in this thread in the first place tbh

[Northern Davincia]

Do adulterous parasitic child-abandoning dropouts deserve love?

If they wrote really, really good stuff? We can apply some "death of the author". I do it with Borges and Ridley Scott.

But the predicament here is that he didn't write anything good.

If you're denying any virtue in Marxism then why are you in this thread in the first place tbh

Debating is fun.