Would still be a milquetoast social Democrat if it wast for Chomsky. Love you buddy, please stick with us if you are able.
(note: No health scares with chom or anything, I just wanted to tribute him real quick, he’s fine afaik)
Would still be a milquetoast social Democrat if it wast for Chomsky. Love you buddy, please stick with us if you are able.
(note: No health scares with chom or anything, I just wanted to tribute him real quick, he’s fine afaik)
I’m not really a Marxist leftist, so I still agree with quite a few of his takes. He’s anti-antifa stance and things like that I heavily disagree with, but I still respect the man immensely for pulling me out of that (social democratic societies are perfect’ rabbit hole.
What do you mean by this? All modern anarchists, as far as I am aware, derive from Marx's work. To be a "marxist" is to believe in Marx's theory of historical materialism and dialectical analysis. It doesn't refer to being a communist in the marxist-leninist/trot/ultra/leftcom sense.
I said I lean towards anarchism, not that I am an anarchist, and I mean I just don’t really adhere to a strict ‘material only’ analysis that it seems to me like a lot of Marxists seem to employ. I’m not like super well read on this stuff. I’ll just say I’m nonsectarian left with an appreciation for anarchism.
Much love
I see I see. Well, just to clear it up, a "marxist" is a person that believes in historical materialism -- the theory that history is driven by class struggle, that the contradictions of class eventually drive every society towards revolution and that those societies then reorganise themselves based on the desires of the revolutionary forces. One class overthrows the other class and reorganises, played out via the exploiter/exploited relationship. For example, slaves overthrowing slavers and demanding a more equitable organisation of society. Or liberals overthrowing the monarchies.
This theory underpins almost every socialist ideology today, because almost everyone believes that capitalism will end in reorganisation into socialism caused by class struggle.
It's also possible to not be a leftist and still be a marxist. Many members of the bourgeoisie who are fighting against us are almost certainly marxists in that they recognise and understand this theory, even believe it, but are still fighting it in order to keep their wealth and power for as long as possible.
Sure, I appreciate the man immensely. Just find stuff by people who would describe themselves as anarchists (Emma Goldman for example) more compelling than things written by people who would identify as Marxists. Maybe I’m confused about the Marxists I’ve met, I’m concerned with class struggle as well as anti-racism and anti fascism. A lot of the self identified Marxists I’ve met seem to think class is the only thing worth talking about in leftists circles.
I also haven’t read much from Marx besides the manifesto and German ideology. Capitol looks cool, but I’m way too ADHD for a tome like that. If you ve read and finished capitol, major props to you.
I believe in big tent shit. We as leftists need to come together as it is to push back against this current wave of right-wing reactionaries
In the sense that all struggles need to fold into class struggle, yes. No other struggle is going to produce socialism, only class struggle is going to produce it. The other struggles need to be built in a way that they lead to folding into class struggle.