7 ms·

I think it's clear that no Communist nation has ever succeeded in being the bastion of democratic, personal freedom that it was ever intended to be. I actually

I think it's clear that no Communist nation has ever succeeded in being the bastion of democratic, personal freedom that it was ever intended to be. I actually sort of feel bad for Karl Marx. I mean, dude just wanted people to live happier lives and not worry about owning stuff so much. Now he's forever tied to some of the most oppressive regimes in modern history. Idealism fail.

aaronblohowiak 17y ago
Maoism is not marxism, not that China is practicing Maoism today anyway. There are models of collective ownership that pre-date Marx.
- CWuestefeld 17y ago
  You'll note my parenthetical acknowledgment of that in my post. Mao would have claimed to have embraced and extended the Marxist philosophy. But Mao was a complete idiot in every way except as a politician who could play people. Certainly his philosophy was no better than junior-high-school grade.
  - aaronblohowiak 17y ago
    Oh, I wasn't arguing with you, but to my other comment's parent.
  - light3 17y ago
    >Certainly his philosophy was no better than junior-high-school grade. He was well read and educated, you may disagree with his philosophy, but to say it was 'junior-high-school' grade would be incorrect. From wiki: 'Mao was a prolific writer of political and philosophical literature' 'In China, Mao was considered a master calligrapher during his lifetime' 'Politics aside, Mao is considered one of modern China's most influential literary figures'
lionhearted 17y ago
> I think it's clear that no Communist nation has ever succeeded in being the bastion of democratic, personal freedom that it was ever intended to be. Nuh-uh, no, you can't give him this sort of pass. He introduced the concept of "class struggle" and "class warfare" that took over so much of modern labor/monetary/commerce/market vocabulary, and specifically said that the transition to socialism/communism will take proletariat violence. The man has inspired as much harm and destruction as any person in history. And he's not even right - his labor theory of value is so completely flawed it's hard to know where to start debunking. He had it in mind that there was a "socially necessary abstract labor-time" of every action - which take a very limited view based on a very limited period in history. Take for instance, Louis Pasteur, who invented pasteurization. How much socially necessary abstract labor-time was that worth? Ten million units of necessary abstract labor-time? How much was creating GMail worth? How much abstract labor time is Picasso's best work worth, compared to Matisse? Publius Syrius said back in Roman times, "Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it." - and so far, that's the only model we've found that does a decent job of handling contributions without going to totalitarianism. When you start letting third parties dictate value to people who want to buy and sell, you throw the world off equilibrium, you get black markets and create a new class of crime. I'd implore you to please, please, please stop seeing Marx as a misguided would-be hero. Almost every bad person in history thought of themself that way. Marx's works were both incorrect from an academic standpoint, very emotionally appealing to certain kinds of people, and generally fostered violence and hostility between groups of people that do the best when they work together to create the best world together. Marx was no friend of humanity, and should be remembered as someone who had bad and violent ideas that led to millions of people oppressed and killed as part of the "proletariat revolution to overthrow the bourgeois". Marx brought this kind of thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_rouge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_rouge Please, please get educated and stop whimsically giving him a nod. The man's philosophies have led to more misery than just about anyone else in history.
- CWuestefeld 17y ago
  Thank you for formulating such a concise, clear, and true reply. I've tried many times, and never been able to express it so well. I'm going to copy this off into my notebook for future use, if you don't mind.

aaronblohowiak 17y ago

Maoism is not marxism, not that China is practicing Maoism today anyway. There are models of collective ownership that pre-date Marx.

CWuestefeld 17y ago
You'll note my parenthetical acknowledgment of that in my post. Mao would have claimed to have embraced and extended the Marxist philosophy. But Mao was a complete idiot in every way except as a politician who could play people. Certainly his philosophy was no better than junior-high-school grade.
- aaronblohowiak 17y ago
  Oh, I wasn't arguing with you, but to my other comment's parent.
- light3 17y ago
  >Certainly his philosophy was no better than junior-high-school grade. He was well read and educated, you may disagree with his philosophy, but to say it was 'junior-high-school' grade would be incorrect. From wiki: 'Mao was a prolific writer of political and philosophical literature' 'In China, Mao was considered a master calligrapher during his lifetime' 'Politics aside, Mao is considered one of modern China's most influential literary figures'

lionhearted 17y ago

> I think it's clear that no Communist nation has ever succeeded in being the bastion of democratic, personal freedom that it was ever intended to be. Nuh-uh, no, you can't give him this sort of pass. He introduced the concept of "class struggle" and "class warfare" that took over so much of modern labor/monetary/commerce/market vocabulary, and specifically said that the transition to socialism/communism will take proletariat violence. The man has inspired as much harm and destruction as any person in history. And he's not even right - his labor theory of value is so completely flawed it's hard to know where to start debunking. He had it in mind that there was a "socially necessary abstract labor-time" of every action - which take a very limited view based on a very limited period in history. Take for instance, Louis Pasteur, who invented pasteurization. How much socially necessary abstract labor-time was that worth? Ten million units of necessary abstract labor-time? How much was creating GMail worth? How much abstract labor time is Picasso's best work worth, compared to Matisse? Publius Syrius said back in Roman times, "Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it." - and so far, that's the only model we've found that does a decent job of handling contributions without going to totalitarianism. When you start letting third parties dictate value to people who want to buy and sell, you throw the world off equilibrium, you get black markets and create a new class of crime. I'd implore you to please, please, please stop seeing Marx as a misguided would-be hero. Almost every bad person in history thought of themself that way. Marx's works were both incorrect from an academic standpoint, very emotionally appealing to certain kinds of people, and generally fostered violence and hostility between groups of people that do the best when they work together to create the best world together. Marx was no friend of humanity, and should be remembered as someone who had bad and violent ideas that led to millions of people oppressed and killed as part of the "proletariat revolution to overthrow the bourgeois". Marx brought this kind of thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_rouge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_rouge Please, please get educated and stop whimsically giving him a nod. The man's philosophies have led to more misery than just about anyone else in history.

CWuestefeld 17y ago
Thank you for formulating such a concise, clear, and true reply. I've tried many times, and never been able to express it so well. I'm going to copy this off into my notebook for future use, if you don't mind.