• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    If I’m wrong, explain. I very clearly explained exactly why you’re going against Marxism to the point of invalidating it as Socialism.

    Secondly, even if we only accept Marx alone, and ignore Engels, Lenin, every other Marxist who has expanded upon and contextualized Marxism (at which point we move from materialism to idealism, dogmatism), there is nothing Marx wrote that implies “beaurocracy” constitutes a class! The “administration of things” is done via *central planning and public ownership," and you cannot do so without managers! You even admitted to only reading “a bit” of Marx, and never once could explain why direct quotations that ran counter to your claims don’t matter.

    Marx’s texts are not “sacred.” We keep what we can test and verify, and toss what we can’t. You haven’t made a proper case for tossing aspects of Marxism, and in fact in the Rocker article, you showcase endorsement for what History proved wrong! Your reply to direct quotations disproving you? Ignore them and call me a dogmatist. That’s not how we have constructive conversations, that’s refusing to engage with theory you haven’t made a case for ignoring!

    Finally, you resort to gendered attacks. I have no idea what gender or sex you are, you don’t list your pronouns nor would I have any way of otherwise knowing. That’s a thought-terminating cliché that avoids the conversation. I am explaining Marxism to an Anarchist that displayed a lack of understanding of Marxism, at any other point you could have disengaged, but instead chose to resort to personal attacks the whole way through.

    The good thing is that your comment string is useful for anyone walking in here to see an example of someone arguing in bad-faith.

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Thanks for proving my point. Mansplaining can be done by anyone, btw. Not directed at your identity, but what you’re doing. Have fun writing the next essay as a reply. I probably won’t read it, as I’ve got a household to manage.

      Edit: I changed my mind. Sorry for the gendered term. Should have said “tanksplain” or “MLsplain”.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Gotcha, you’re just going to double down on name-calling and thought-terminating clichés. I appreciate the removal of the gendered insult, but keeping the insult keeps the main point of issue I take with avoiding a conversation around Marxism.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            You did, though, back when we were trying to have a conversation. Maybe that was one-sided, and it was only me trying to have a conversation, but then why bother replying to me?

            • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              back when we were trying to have a conversation.

              You were trying to have a conversation and managed to goat me into replying. Again, I said:

              I don’t considersit fruitful to argue with such a devout Leninist in a meme community.

              but then why bother replying to me?

              Because social media has addictive properties and I couldn’t help myself. I’m not accusing you of malcontent, but please stop enabling me.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                15 hours ago

                Fair enough, though if you wanted to disengage you shouldn’t have written points one would naturally want to engage with in a disengagement comment. Perhaps in the future you can just say “disengage” or otherwise, trying to disengage while also trying to get the last word in pointwise doesn’t work.