Wednesday, April 7, 2021
What Exactly is Marxism?
This is an excellent rebuttal of so called Marxism as any form of working philosophy. I will not add to it.
What i will say is that all such regimes of rule by the stupid have all ended up quickly killing off its apparent or otherwise opposition.
Rather obviously, the stupid can never trust those clearly smarter and the safe road is the firing squad.
That has been a uniform empirical result. Even today we have the general economic destruction of Venezuela by socialist thugs sitting on an original mountain of cash even. The outright suppression of economic activity produces universal poverty. why is this not obvious?
Governments can also create economic activity by certain simple expedients. The obvious is simply providing a guarantee for mortgage finance at some level, usually first time. Then get out of the way.
What Exactly is Marxism?
By Mike King
FLASHBACK CLASSIC FROM 2018
RE-RUN WITH ADDED MATERIAL
"Happy Birthday Karl Marx!"
ANALYSIS / REBUTTAL BY
Good Lord! The Marxist scum at Sulzberger's Slimes aren't even attempting to hide their true faces anymore! In honor of his bicentennial birthday -- May 5th (2018), Karl Marx's fan base at The Slimes published this pro-Marxist opinion piece by "professor of philosophy," Jason Barker. Notwithstanding a few obligatory jabs at Marxism, Barker's take on Marx is essentially positive and very much in line with the shockingly provocative (even by Slimes standards) headline: "Happy Birthday, Karl Marx. You Were Right!"
But con-artist Marx, though at times correct and passionately persuasive in calling attention to the injustices of "capitalist" society (the bait) was neither correct in his diagnosis of problems, nor in his solutions to them. Let's examine Barker's barking and set the record straight about what "Marxism" is truly all about.
Bolshevik professor Jason Barker pays homage to Marx's 200th.
Barker: ... educated liberal opinion is today more or less unanimous....
Rebuttal: An "educated liberal" is an oxymoron. Though university-trained libtards may be quite "high IQ" and very capable in certain fields of study; when it comes to matters philosophical / political, they are truly the most stupid, narrow-minded, stubborn, insecure, boot-licking, dim-witted and uneducated specimens of humanity that this reporter has ever encountered (and I have known many of these types).
Barker: ... in its agreement that Marx’s basic thesis — that capitalism is driven by a deeply divisive class struggle in which the ruling-class minority appropriates the surplus labor of the working-class majority as profit — is correct.
Rebuttal: No. That is not correct. Profit margins for most businesses and industries are relatively small. It is the various levels of "the state" -- not the evil rich "capitalists," which, through both direct and indirect means, appropriate approximately 50% of the earnings of the average wage holder in America (and Europe). The parasitic theft works hand-in-hand with the state's financing partner-in-crime, the Federal Reserve System (Central Bank) -- a counterfeiting / loan sharking operation whose debt-based monetary system adds a compounding public and private interest charges on top of taxes.
Ironically, both the Fed Gov and the Fed Bank are infested with Marxists and libtards. Rounding out the unholy trinity of thievery are the state-enabled cartels which are given free reign to crush free market completion in areas such as medicine, law, accounting and higher education.
Barker: Even liberal economists such as Nouriel Roubini agree that Marx’s conviction that capitalism has an inbuilt tendency to destroy itself remains as prescient as ever.
Rebuttal: Wrong again, Bolshevik Barker, and Roubini too (cough cough). As previously stated, it is the ever-expanding indebted Federal Government (State & Local too) and ever-inflating debt-money Federal Reserve that are crushing so many working families into the ground -- not "capitalism" (free enterprise).
Echoing Marx, stupid Libtard Savants continue to blame private economy for the struggles of the working class, while ignoring the immensely destructive effects of confiscatory taxation, reckless spending and printing press debt/inflation.
Barker: But this is where the unanimity abruptly ends. While most are in agreement about Marx’s diagnosis of capitalism, opinion on how to treat its “disorder” is thoroughly divided.
Rebuttal: It doesn't matter if modern libtards are divided as to how to treat the "disorder." If these Marxist morons all accept a faulty diagnosis which fails to take into account the crushing levels of taxation and inflation -- and also the break-up of the nuclear family -- as the main sources of decreasing living standards, then all "solutions" are doomed to failure.
Barker: And this is where Marx’s originality and profound importance as a philosopher lies.
Rebuttal: Oh what bloody stinking crap! Marx's only "originality" regarding solutions to the social problems he wrote about was to call for unlimited political power to be handed over to insane and unaccomplished jobless revolutionaries such as himself in a "dictatorship of the proletariat." Then what?
Barker: First, let’s be clear: Marx arrives at no magic formula for exiting the enormous social and economic contradictions that global capitalism entails ...
Rebuttal: Ah, the obligatory truth gem! Thanks for that, Barker. So if Marx has "no magic formula" to make the world a better place, then he actually has no "profound importance as a philosopher" after all.
Barker: What Marx did achieve, however, through his self-styled materialist thought, were the critical weapons for undermining capitalism’s ideological claim to be the only game in town.
Rebuttal: Wrong again, Barker. Marx was still in diapers while thinkers far greater than he had already identified and fully diagnosed the injustices of Rothschild-owned Britain (where Marx published many articles between 1850-1860) and European society in general. Though his stories were fictional, author Charles Dickens, during the decade before Marx's Communist Manifesto, severely critiqued the social situation in books such as Oliver Twist (1838) and A Christmas Carol (1843).
Going back even further, the genius Thomas Jefferson, in an 1816 letter to Samuel Kerceval, had this to say about conditions in England:
"To preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers."
Jefferson wrote those words two years before Marx's bitch of a mother had even pooped him out. So please, Mr. Barker, spare us this foolishness about Marx's "originality" in spotting the inequities and injustices of the day. That was just the "bait" of his bad act -- an act financed, guided and promoted by the "international financier class" (cough cough) and their agents in the press and quackademia.
1 & 2. Thomas Jefferson and Charles Dickens not only spoke about the unjust conditions of 19th Century England BEFORE Kooky Karl "discovered" these problems; but in Jefferson's case, he correctly diagnosed the problem and knew the solution. 3. The unoriginal pretend "philosopher" Marx was nothing but a hired hack who was distantly related to the Rothschilds. During his time in London, jobless Marx was so committed to revolutionary writing that his family endured extreme poverty and hunger. His main income source was Frederick Engels, whose source in turn was his rich daddy.
Mikhail Bakunin (below) was a true revolutionary socialist of the 19th Century who despised Marxism and regarded Marx as a Rothschild tool of totalitarianism.
"Marx is a Jew and is surrounded by a crowd of little, more or less intelligent, scheming, agile, speculating Jews, just as Jews are everywhere, commercial and banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades; in short, literary brokers, just as they are financial brokers, with one foot in the bank and the other in the socialist movement, and their arses sitting upon the German press. They have grabbed hold of all newspapers, and you can imagine what a nauseating literature is the outcome of it.
Now this entire Jewish world, which constitutes an exploiting sect, a people of leeches, a voracious parasite, Marx feels an instinctive inclination and a great respect for the Rothschilds. This may seem strange. What could there be in common between communism and high finance? Ho ho! The communism of Marx seeks a strong state centralization, and where this exists there must inevitably exist a state central bank, and where this exists, there the parasitic Jewish nation, which speculates upon the labor of the people, will always find the means for its existence.
In reality, this would be for the proletariat a barrack regime, under which the workingmen and the working closely and intimately connected with one another, regardless not only of frontiers but of political differences as well - this Jewish world is today largely at the disposal of Marx or Rothschild. I am sure that, on the one hand, the Rothschilds appreciate the merits of Marx, and that on the other hand, women, converted into a uniform mass, would rise, fall asleep, work and live at the beat of the drum; the privilege of ruling would be in the hands of the skilled and the learned, with a wide scope left for profitable crooked deals carried on by the Jews, who would be attracted by the enormous extension of the international speculations of the national banks."
-- Mikhail Bakunin, Etude sur les juifs allemands, 1869
Barker: In the “Communist Manifesto,” Marx and Engels wrote: “The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage laborers.”
Rebuttal: There is a bit of truth to that. The money-grubbing of modern professionals, even worse today than in Marx's day, is undignified and degrading. But that's a problem of declining morals and ethics, not one of "capitalism." And does it really require a "philosopher" to point that out? Finally, what's Marx's "solution" then? Total government takeover (greedy politicians & untalented bureaucrats) with price and wage control over of all the professions? No thanks!
Barker: The key factor in Marx’s intellectual legacy in our present-day society is not “philosophy” but “critique,” or what he described in 1843 as “the ruthless criticism of all that exists: ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be. The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it,” he wrote in 1845.
Translation: Destroy! Destroy! Destroy! We'll figure out the "solutions" later on, after the glorious "revolution."
Barker: Racial and sexual oppression have been added to the dynamic of class exploitation. Social justice movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, owe something of an unspoken debt to Marx through their unapologetic targeting of the “eternal truths” of our age. Such movements recognize, as did Marx, that the ideas that rule every society are those of its ruling class and that overturning those ideas is fundamental to true revolutionary progress.
Translation: In the name of "justice" -- Destroy! Destroy! Destroy! Economy, politics, law, culture, art, history, science, literature, philosophy, music, morals, tradition, family, gender roles -- and everything else (including millions of people!) that is "bourgeoisie." Destroy! Destroy! Destroy!
Barker: But enlightened or rational thinking is not enough, since the norms of thinking are already skewed by the structures of male privilege and social hierarchy, even down to the language we use. Changing those norms entails changing the very foundations of society.
Rebuttal: And still: Destroy! Destroy! Destroy! (the real meaning of "change") Barker, ironically, manifests the same philosophical deficiencies as he attributed to Marx in that he himself offers no solutions -- other than the "revolutionary progress" that is the blind destruction of anything and everything related to the existing societal order.
Barker: The transition to a new society where relations among people, rather than capital relations, finally determine an individual’s worth is arguably proving to be quite a task.
Rebuttal: Actually, Barker, Hitler (oh my God! Did Mike King just say the forbidden H-word?!) achieved that lofty ideal in only a few years time. If you're truly sincere about building a better world not based on money, money, money -- you ought to have a look at what Germany achieved under debt-free National Socialism -- aka "Fascism." (see "What is Fascism?")
1 & 2.The Marxist ideal (put forth by Marx as boob-bait for the Globalist trap) of a just and less class-centered society in which people are judged upon social merit instead of "net worth" was actually achieved by the man the Marxists hate more than anyone -- Adolf Hitler! // 3. A 1932 Election poster demonstrates the anti-class philosophy of the National Socialists: “Workers of the mind and hand! Vote for the front soldier Hitler."
Barker: Marx, as I have said, does not offer a one-size-fits-all formula for enacting social change.
Rebuttal: Then drop that bearded ass-clown already!
Barker: But he does offer a powerful intellectual acid test for that change.
Rebuttal: Wrong again, Barker. The only "intellectual acid test" offered by Marx is the deadly and painful lessons learned from the many countries which suffered under the brutal misrule of his Godless, heartless, soulless, brainless, traditionless and solutionless disciples with their empty promises. Fortunately, many of those states (Russia, China, Eastern Europe) later regained their senses and abandoned his junk philosophy. The true-believing American and European libtards -- who remain oblivious to the realty that Marxism has always been, and still is, nothing more than a tool of economic degradation, cultural pollution and societal dismantlement used for totalitarian Globalist objectives -- should do the same.
--- End of Rebuttal ---
We really hate the idea of having to summon up from the deepest pits of Hell that drunken, cigar-chomping, plagiarizing, mass-murdering homosexual and possible boy-rapist Winston Churchill to support our position; but in accordance with the principle that even broken clocks are right twice a day, we quote a line from his 1920 article about supporting Zionism over Bolshevism as a better path for the Jews, in which wicked Winnie dropped a profound truth gem about the cult of criminality, degeneracy and death that is Marxism, aka "Bolshevism":
"This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing."
Tell it, Winnie. Tell it! “Envious malevolence” – so true!
Though he later became a willing participant in the "worldwide conspiracy," even a fool like Zionist agent Churchill knew that "malevolent" Marxism, as an envy-based social construct, had nothing to offer but "arrested development."
Are you the product of a broken or dysfunctional family? Become a “Red.” Your boss is a jerk? Become a “Red.” No money & no job? Become a Red. Rejected by the girl you want? Become a Red. Not exactly the “Belle of the Ball?” Become a “Red. Hate White people? Become a Red.
At the top end of the communist spectrum -- are you from an old line elite family with tons of money and high-society privileges; but are bored to tears with your meaningless life and crave the excitement that comes with being a high-level conspirator? Become a Red.
Control freak? Become a Red. Hate the healthy moral constraints associated with Christianity and religion in general? Become an atheistic Red. Enjoy raping little boys, girls and even babies? Become a Red. Don’t actually care for Marxism, but want to magically advance your career in the arts ("modern art"), entertainment, business or the fake "sciences" ("Evolution," "Climate Change," Covid Hoax etc) ? Become a Red -- or least just go along with "the tide of history."
Membership, open or secret, in the Communist parties of the world offered both the maladjusted misfits and the elite psychopaths described above the perfect vehicle for “getting even” with, or just “getting ahead” in, the world at large. The generational War on Sanity which we call Marxism is not just wrong, but also very evil. And that is why Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, General Franco, Joe McCarthy and many others tried to stop the spread of this deadly societal cancer which is and has always been nothing but a weaponized tool of that Globalist Monster Plot: The New World Order