5 ms·

Thank you for being a voice of reason and empiricism in this thread. Seems like too many people took a class in marxist sociology and all of a sudden see the wh

by oskarth 13y ago

Thank you for being a voice of reason and empiricism in this thread. Seems like too many people took a class in marxist sociology and all of a sudden see the whole world in terms of The Capitalists and The Exploited Class. EDIT: Taking a class in economics and thinking everything has a monetary value attached to it, or that homo economicus actually exists would obviously be just as bad.

moocowduckquack 13y ago
Personally I don't agree with Marx a lot (I'm more of a Groucho Marxist and am therefore not allowed to join any club that would have me as a member), but I do have Marxist family members and know a fair amount of what it is and what it is not. India is definitely not an example of a Marxist state. edit - Folk keep framing stuff in the economic dogma-battles of the superpowers in the 19th and 20th century, but to me the problem is 14th century economics combined with 21st century logistics. Retaining a caste system in a world of global networks can give you a fucking big pyramid and systemise abuse on an unprecedented scale with the money that flows in from those outside the structure.
- oskarth 13y ago
  Groucho Marxism is the best kind of ideology. I didn't mean to imply that India is in any way a marxist state. I was referring to the unreflected usage of words like exploitation in this thread (not in the article) - a usage that I could easily see being picked up after taking a class or two. Pre-packaged vocabulary has a certain smell, just like bad code.
- cromulent 13y ago
  Actually Marx chose to resign from the Friars Club, citing its low standards in allowing "people like me as a member", rather than not being allowed to join.
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  Not only that, if I recall correctly there's actually a few Maoist groups in India that are trying to start a revolution as well... They certainly don't see India as anything but capitalist.
  - wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
    Indeed, the communist party in India is about as militant as they come. You're probably referring to the naxalites[0], they're not shy about targeted violence[1], especially since they're active in a lot of poor, "backward" [2] areas that go ignored by the central government until there is an industrial resource to exploit. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite%E2%80%93Maoist_insurgency http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite%E2%80%93Maoist_insur... [2] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-27/news/42427766_1_special-category-status-raghuram-rajan-backwardness http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-27/news... Edited to include a reference to "backward" - a term used in official language.
    - steveklabnik 13y ago
      Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking of, thank you.
nzp 13y ago
What's wrong in taking a class in anything including Marxist sociology? Are there some domains of knowledge which should be intentionally left unexplored, lest we corrupt all our precious bodily fluids? What is this--Texas Board of Education? Seems to me too few people take classes in anything these days, let alone Marxist sociology.
- cynicalkane 13y ago
  The Popperian argument would be that Marxism is not a domain of knowledge, because it is not very good at making testable predictions about the world. Popper compared Marx to Freud, in that both people spawned a theory of knowledge that is very good at explaining what has already happened but horrifyingly bad at telling you how things will be tomorrow, and how to change those things. Almost sixty years after this observation nothing has changed. We now recognize Freud as pseudoscience, but Marxism remains unfortunately persistent. Marxists like to talk about how well Marx predicted the nature of the class struggle and stuff like that, but in a theory which sees everything in terms of class struggle, this is not a scientific prediction at all.
  - skylan_q 13y ago
    Marxists like to talk about how well Marx predicted the nature of the class struggle and stuff like that, but in a theory which sees everything in terms of class struggle, this is not a scientific prediction at all. And they typically do him a dis-service. I find when "Marxists" speak of such things, "bad" is synonymous with capitalism just as "capitalism" is synonymous with bad.
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    Popper does not have a monopoly on the definition of 'science.' For example, quantum mechanics is not exactly falsifiable... And the general idea of falsifiability has been criticized by many, including non-Marxists. When Marxists talk about it being 'scientific socialism,' they are contrasting with 'utopian socialism.' Scientific socialism takes the approach of examining the world, making changes, seeing how those work out, and then re-examining the theory. You can see how that relates to the scientific method.

by oskarth 13y ago

moocowduckquack 13y ago

Personally I don't agree with Marx a lot (I'm more of a Groucho Marxist and am therefore not allowed to join any club that would have me as a member), but I do have Marxist family members and know a fair amount of what it is and what it is not. India is definitely not an example of a Marxist state. edit - Folk keep framing stuff in the economic dogma-battles of the superpowers in the 19th and 20th century, but to me the problem is 14th century economics combined with 21st century logistics. Retaining a caste system in a world of global networks can give you a fucking big pyramid and systemise abuse on an unprecedented scale with the money that flows in from those outside the structure.

oskarth 13y ago
Groucho Marxism is the best kind of ideology. I didn't mean to imply that India is in any way a marxist state. I was referring to the unreflected usage of words like exploitation in this thread (not in the article) - a usage that I could easily see being picked up after taking a class or two. Pre-packaged vocabulary has a certain smell, just like bad code.
cromulent 13y ago
Actually Marx chose to resign from the Friars Club, citing its low standards in allowing "people like me as a member", rather than not being allowed to join.
steveklabnik 13y ago
Not only that, if I recall correctly there's actually a few Maoist groups in India that are trying to start a revolution as well... They certainly don't see India as anything but capitalist.
- wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
  Indeed, the communist party in India is about as militant as they come. You're probably referring to the naxalites[0], they're not shy about targeted violence[1], especially since they're active in a lot of poor, "backward" [2] areas that go ignored by the central government until there is an industrial resource to exploit. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite%E2%80%93Maoist_insurgency http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite%E2%80%93Maoist_insur... [2] http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-27/news/42427766_1_special-category-status-raghuram-rajan-backwardness http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-09-27/news... Edited to include a reference to "backward" - a term used in official language.
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking of, thank you.

nzp 13y ago

What's wrong in taking a class in anything including Marxist sociology? Are there some domains of knowledge which should be intentionally left unexplored, lest we corrupt all our precious bodily fluids? What is this--Texas Board of Education? Seems to me too few people take classes in anything these days, let alone Marxist sociology.

cynicalkane 13y ago
The Popperian argument would be that Marxism is not a domain of knowledge, because it is not very good at making testable predictions about the world. Popper compared Marx to Freud, in that both people spawned a theory of knowledge that is very good at explaining what has already happened but horrifyingly bad at telling you how things will be tomorrow, and how to change those things. Almost sixty years after this observation nothing has changed. We now recognize Freud as pseudoscience, but Marxism remains unfortunately persistent. Marxists like to talk about how well Marx predicted the nature of the class struggle and stuff like that, but in a theory which sees everything in terms of class struggle, this is not a scientific prediction at all.
- skylan_q 13y ago
  Marxists like to talk about how well Marx predicted the nature of the class struggle and stuff like that, but in a theory which sees everything in terms of class struggle, this is not a scientific prediction at all. And they typically do him a dis-service. I find when "Marxists" speak of such things, "bad" is synonymous with capitalism just as "capitalism" is synonymous with bad.
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  Popper does not have a monopoly on the definition of 'science.' For example, quantum mechanics is not exactly falsifiable... And the general idea of falsifiability has been criticized by many, including non-Marxists. When Marxists talk about it being 'scientific socialism,' they are contrasting with 'utopian socialism.' Scientific socialism takes the approach of examining the world, making changes, seeing how those work out, and then re-examining the theory. You can see how that relates to the scientific method.