this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
405 points (91.8% liked)

Memes

45727 readers
753 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml
sexy_peach@feddit.de
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
405
Something everyone agrees with until you name it (lemmy.ml)
submitted 4 months ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
113 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

cool ur jets buddy

it wasn't, and doesn't even really make sense when read through that lens

what kind of person comes into a thread and posts a pro-communism video clip and then angrily equates marxism to nazism?

I dunno, why bring up the Nazis as though they had popular ideas?

honestly the term "marxism" is nebulous enough that just deciding on what counts as "in-scope" is kind of non-trivial

are we talking about the economic theory? marxist communism? the whole body of marx's work?

What parts of Marxism do you want to chop off? I am referring to the whole of Marxism, ie critique of Capitalism, philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism, and Communism.

are you saying that that, for those two concepts, you don't think you could pitch the basic ideas behind them in a way such that the average person would agree?

Yes, people generally don't agree with the ideas posed by Nazism.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run -3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I dunno, why bring up the Nazis as though they had popular ideas?

i didn't and i've already clarified that?

i'm not sure what more there is to say on this

What parts of Marxism do you want to chop off?

if you're referring to everything then that would include stuff like das kapital which i don't think you can reasonably refer to as "easy to understand"

"philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism" also seems like it would be a fairly hard thing for the average person to understand

also, marx didn't invent communism, so to say communism is contained within marxism is incorrect

the opening of the communist manifesto literally references the fact that european powers were already trying to "exorcise" the idea from the continent at the time

Yes, people generally don't agree with the ideas posed by Nazism.

nazism proposed pre-natal scanning and graduate family planning stimulus? that's news to me

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

if you're referring to everything then that would include stuff like das kapital which i don't think you can reasonably refer to as "easy to understand"

"philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism" also seems like it would be a fairly hard thing for the average person to understand

also, marx didn't invent communism, so to say communism is contained within marxism is incorrect

the opening of the communist manifesto literally references the fact that european powers were already trying to "exorcise" the idea from the continent at the time

All of these are fairly straightforward and easy to understand, it just takes a while to get into the nitty gritty. Marx did not invent Communism, but Communism is core to Marxism.

nazism proposed pre-natal scanning and graduate family planning stimulus? that's news to me

Ah, "the trains ran on time." We both know that's not Nazism.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run -3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

All of these are fairly straightforward and easy to understand, it just takes a while to get into the nitty gritty

i feel like everything's "easy to understand" if you assume infinite time to explain it, but for the sake of argument, let's agree that these in fact "easy to understand"

in which case, the ideas behind pre-natal scanning and graduate family stimulus are also easy to understand, so we haven't really moved anywhere.

this post still doesn't make any case for marxist ideals being sound other than "people like them when they hear them without the label". which i'm arguing (via the use of the provided two examples) is also true for eugenics.

and if "people like the ideas when they hear them without the label" is justification for ideas being good, then eugenics must be good, but we know eugenics isn't good, so it's not a good justification

so the post doesn't make a good argument for marxism being good

and we already know the post is attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good, because you already acknowledged it's making the case that "people have a negative connotations about marxism", and combined with the point about nazis from earlier you enjoyed so much, that's sufficient to show that it's attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good

Ah, "the trains ran on time." We both know that's not Nazism.

what are you talking about? why are you trying to bring nazis into everything now?

(also, "trains ran on time" is mussolini, who was a fascist, not a nazi)