Liberal Forum

LowIQTrash » 02 Feb 2024, 4:07 am » wrote: ↑

02 Feb 2024, 4:07 am

Marxism is based on Hegelian dialectics, which is more of a pseudo-science than anything else.

It is a framework (heuristic) applied to political economy that may or may not be true depending on one's interpretation of Marxist dogma.

For example, the great number of sects in Marxism (left communism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, "libertarian" Marxism, MLM, even the modern CPC's implementation of Dengism, de Leonism) cannot agree whether the Soviet Union that arose after the Russian Revolution and Civil War adhered to or betrayed Marxism.

(It's a well kept secret that radical left circles just as often direct their criticism toward each other as they do liberal ideologues)

While the same can be said for just about any political ideology (including the obstinate, quarter-wit filled cesspool of "libertarianism"), Marxists including...I daresay...Mr. Harvey Mushman...spend too much time trying to "interpret the [religious, pseudo-scientific Marxist] scripture" rather than simply figuring out whether or not an idea is legitimate/true.

For example, the debate is on whether or not a "one world, borderless" communist system is even feasible. I say it isn't because humans are hard-wired to accept "certain races" (their own) more than others, and attempting to integrate people of various races without any concern for this pesky little fact will inevitably lead to catastrophe in the real world.

Since Marxism deals with abstract political philosophy and does not incorporate biological determinism, the logical defense for Marxists is to simply deny that humans are racist/ethnocentric (which is a grave mistake and is easily disproven). On the other hand, National Socialism does not suffer this flaw because its primary foundation is based on "race" and biology.