Discussion in 'Community' started by Lord Vivec, Jan 25, 2014.
Oh, the McDonald's coffee spill thing. Calling
@Even to clean up on aisle one...
What? Where did you get that idea of Marxism or Communism? Marxism is a political and economic theory. It doesn't concern itself with things like "being offended." Communism can be all kinds of things.
But Lenin's primary focus was political correctness! He even mandated the passage of a law indicating that all Soviets must refer to the Romanovs as "biologically challenged"! That was the impetus for the ENTIRE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION in 1917!
Also they called each other "comrade" so that they would not be offended by the terms mister and missus, see. It's all political correctness!
More like Conservapedia.
"cultural marxism" is a big buzzword in the conservative media right now. i assume that's what he's referring to
anyways, for people actually interested in the study of fascism, i think no thread on fascism is complete without Umberto Eco's "Eternal Fascism: 14 Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt". the article is quite short and elegant in its description of fascism. i recommend it both to people who are confident they can identify fascism and people who admittedly couldnt pick engelbert dollfuss out of a lineup
im too lazy to transcribe several pages and i cant find it online, but I also wanted to share Foucault's preface to Deleuze & Guattari's Anti-Oedipus, which recasts that entire (beautiful, very difficult) work as a guide to avoiding personal fascism. but here's a pithy internet quote excerpted and rearranged from said preface that (i guess) is better than nothing:
That text needs to be bigger. I can't read it.
copy paste dawg
There's that handy dandy "erase formatting" button at the very top left y'know
well **** me
if anyone wants to waste their mod powers on so lowly a task, they're welcome to edit it
I looked up "cultural marxism," admittedly on Wikipedia, and it gave the Frankfurt School as largely responsible for its origin. I confess that my class on the Frankfurt School was a looong time ago, and I hated it, and I threw my copy of "The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere" into the dumpster the moment I was through with it. Still, I can sort of see how the general critique of Western civilization would be scary to some people, although to be fair the Frankfurt School that I remember also wasn't fond of Eastern Civilization, or life in the Soviet bloc, or pretty much anything (although the various authors had differing levels of cynical bitterness).
However, I definitely don't see a connection with the "politically correct" belief that language creates reality, and that if we change the way we speak, we can change fundamental conditions of society. I'm honestly not sure where that came from, although I'd tentatively trace it to Wittgenstein's theory of linguistics. I never thought of Wittgenstein as a Marxist, although a Google search on "Wittgenstein and Marx" turns up a handful of essays.
I freely admit that I know very little about Wittgenstein--I've tried to read him, but I found him boring and nigh-impenetrable. Is there any real connection between him and Marxism? Is this conflation of "cultural Marxism" and "political correctness" just so much fuzzy thinking?
I will look at Eco's essay, btw. It seems interesting.
Cultural Marxism: (n.) a term used by male Christian conservatives to encompass their anger over no longer being considered superior to the rest of society
This definition brought to you by the anakinfan dictionary, motto "calling a spade, a spade since 1971".
i, too, find wittgenstein uninteresting and impenetrable and have classed him with heideigger in the "nope, not even going to try" bin of philosophy. my nearest in-depth exposure was in reading otto weininger's work for a paper i was writing on the concept of "self-hatred" for a german jewish writers class. weininger is a fascinating little neckbeard of a man who was heavily influenced by wittgenstein's semantics and is primarily remembered today for being among the nazis' favorite jews, what with his appreciation of proto- fascist aesthetics, viciously traditionalist attitude towards gender, and antisemitism.
however i do know a number of internet marxists who reference wittgenstein positively from time to time. but i dont know of any direct connection, no
I think you're doing the hard work of finding an intellectual basis for a thoroughly unintellectual (or even anti-intellectual) point of view. I don't think the objection comes from reframing reality or even society through the medium of language. The emphasis on "offense" is just that -- it's taken as a namby-pamby outlook on society. That certain words cannot be used for fear that some groups might take offense. That's basically the extent and limit of the critique.
Any further engagement would be to legitimate "PC," which is not what they are doing in the slightest.
edit: As for those fourteen points on fascism, I disagree with one or two of them (or at least, how they're characterized).
OK, so you admitted you didn't really know what fascism was, but you clearly don't about Marxism either. Communism, incidentally, isn't always Marxist in nature though Marx was probably one of the most famous and historically visible communists of all time. And to suggest a notion of perennial victimhood drives it suggests to me you're borrowing from someone who has only read the first line of the Communist Manifesto and ignored all the bits about how the introduction of socialism and evolution to communism is a solution for that "ill".
As for a "right to their happiness", it's your own damn fault as a nation. You had to go and leave the glory of the greatest Empire on Earth and have a "bill of rights" which enshrined the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness like that was a real thing. Then, then they had the foresight to exclude God from public life, your lot insisted they did no such thing.
Is your world history source a 3 page pamphlet or something?
lol haha its 1 and 10, isnt it?
A bastion of astonishing, back-slapping idiocy. Boggles the mind how it could have ever been birthed into existence, that place.
well its really just the one control-freak who created and administers the site, andy schafly, who produces most of the material, and it only has any visibility/popularity because his mom, phyllis schafly, has for decades been a poster-woman for the anti-feminist reactionary element of evangelical christian conservatism
any edits made to articles that dont line up exactly with his very specific worldview get sanitized. which is the whole thing that's funny about having an ideologically-driven counter to a popular encyclopedia like wikipedia
Conservapedia is actually a thing? Ugggghhhhhh
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not in the Bill of Rights. It's part of the Declaration of Independence.
this was a good post until you injected it with your weird british aristocracy schtick. jello does it better
engelbert dollfuss, fascist leader of austria pre-anschluss is pictured here with other military and political leaders of austria. as you can see he is basically the human equivalent of a pug
On that note, here's a [link=[url]http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_content&task=view&id=1130&Itemid=264]Refutation[/url] of the Declaration of Independence[/link] given in a speech to Parliament by the former colonial governor of Massachusetts.
They're rewriting the Bible because it's too liberal.
You can't make this **** up.