Marxism is Oligarch Astroturf - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it. Note: nostalgia *is* allowed.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15129086
Karl Johann Kautsky 16 October 1854 – 17 October 1938) was a Czech-Austrian philosopher, journalist, and Marxist theoretician. Kautsky was one of the most authoritative promulgators of orthodox Marxism after the death of Friedrich Engels in 1895 until the outbreak of World War I in 1914. He was the most important socialist theorist during the years of the Second International. He founded the socialist journal Neue Zeit.

In 1880 he joined a group of German socialists in Zürich who were supported financially by Karl Höchberg

Karl Höchberg (8 September 1853 – 21 June 1885), scion of a wealthy banking family, was a German social-reformist writer, publisher and economist, with a Jewish family background, who acted under the pseudonyms Dr. Ludwig Richter and R.F. Seifert. In 1876, he became a member of the Social Democratic Workers Party of Germany (SDAP). From 1877 to 1878, he was responsible for editing the Zukunft ("Future") magazine. He was in exile in Switzerland from 1878 onwards, first to avoid conscription to the Prussian military, and then due to the anti-socialist laws. Eduard Bernstein and Karl Kautsky were his secretaries and pupils in Zurich.

___________________________________________


https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Karl_Kautsky
#15129096
The "father of Russian Marxism", Georgi Plekhanov, wasn't backed by an oligarch, he, like Engels, was an oligarch. He was hereditary nobility and his family owned 200 acres and 50 serfs. He romped around Europe for most of his life and his little revolutionary adventure was financed by his family's profits from all the serf slaves they owned. :lol:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi_ ... arly_years
#15129098
Sivad wrote:Georgi Plekhanov

Plekhanov lent support to the idea that Lenin was a "German agent" and urged the Provisional Government of Alexander Kerensky to take severe repressive measures against the Bolshevik organization to halt its political machinations.


:lol:
#15129099
Fidel Castro came from money and then married into elite money. And get this, Fulgencia Batista gave Castro tens of thousands of dollars as a wedding present that he blew on a three month honeymoon in New York. :lol:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_C ... %80%931950


Castro's father was a brutal oligarch that had a networth of about 5 million dollars(2019 equivalent).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%81n ... ro_y_Argiz

Castro's first wife was from one of Cuba's wealthiest families and his father-in-law was a minister in Batista's government.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_ ... Daz-Balart
Last edited by Sivad on 21 Oct 2020 10:47, edited 1 time in total.
#15129100
Sivad wrote:Castro came from money and then married into elite money.

Caring little for money or material goods, Castro failed to pay his bills; his furniture was repossessed and electricity cut off, distressing his wife.


:lol:
#15129116
skinster wrote:If I was Sivad who claims to be a serious thinker (yeah I know), I would read the responses to his claims. But my guess is he is not interested in learning anything.


If you think ingliz said anything that merits a response then you're the one that's hard of thinking.
#15129146
Sivad wrote:Fidel Castro came from money and then married into elite money. And get this, Fulgencia Batista gave Castro tens of thousands of dollars as a wedding present that he blew on a three month honeymoon in New York. :lol:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_C ... %80%931950

Castro's father was a brutal oligarch that had a networth of about 5 million dollars(2019 equivalent).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%81n ... ro_y_Argiz

Castro's first wife was from one of Cuba's wealthiest families and his father-in-law was a minister in Batista's government.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_ ... Daz-Balart


Yes, everyone knows that. Many Latin American revolutionaries came from money. This should not be surprising. Guevara and Allende also came from money. Sandino is the only one that came from poverty that I can think of off the top of my head.

Can you show that Castro’s dad helped fund the Cuban revolution?
#15129150
Sivad wrote:Marxism

The trouble is you are all over the place.

If your idea of socialism is Stalinism and only Stalinism (Gulag states and all that), you cannot point to Marxists who are not Stalinists and say look at these bastard socialists destroying our society.

According to your lights, they are not socialist.

Marxists who are not socialists, ie. not Stalinists...

Kautsky, who turned Marx into a common liberal.

Plekhanov, who, when push came to shove, was not a revolutionary socialist.

Castro, who was a left liberal* until the US forced him into the Soviet embrace.


* At the dawn of the Cuban revolution Castro was careful enough to avoid Marxist concepts in his speeches, but after the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 Castro embraced socialism as the ideology of the revolution.


:lol:
#15129711
ingliz wrote:Kautsky, who turned Marx into a common liberal.


Plekhanov, who, when push came to shove, was not a revolutionary socialist.


:knife:

Kautsky was brought in by Engels himself to edit the writings of Marx and Engels strongly endorsed Plekhanov's popularization of Marx and thanked him for his work. Your claim that their political falling out with Lenin somehow negates their decades of proselytizing and organizing for Marxism is fucking retarded. All your bullshit shows is that when it came right down to it they weren't stone cold psychopaths on board with Lenin's plan to gulag all of Russian society.


Castro, who was a left liberal* until the US forced him into the Soviet embrace.


* At the dawn of the Cuban revolution Castro was careful enough to avoid Marxist concepts in his speeches, but after the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 Castro embraced socialism as the ideology of the revolution.


:knife:

Castro was a Marxist since at least 1948, he didn't broadcast it but he was definitely well versed in Marx and running with hardcore known Marxists.


The trouble is you are all over the place.

If your idea of socialism is Stalinism and only Stalinism (Gulag states and all that), you cannot point to Marxists who are not Stalinists and say look at these bastard socialists destroying our society.

According to your lights, they are not socialist.

Marxists who are not socialists, ie. not Stalinists...


:knife:

My idea of socialism is most definitely not Stalinism. Stalin, Lenin, and even Marx himself, were all fucking fascists. They definitely weren't socialists, they were all antisocial oligarchical totalitarian collectivists and that's exactly what fascism is. The trouble is you don't know what's what so let's get it straight here, I'm the socialist, you are the fucking fascist, and whatever half baked ideology you're working with is nothing but gulagist oligarch astroturf put out to subvert and undermine real socialism.
#15129714
ingliz wrote:Caring little for money or material goods, Castro failed to pay his bills; his furniture was repossessed and electricity cut off, distressing his wife.


:lol:


Yeah, Castro cared so little for money or material goods that he had private islands and yachts and numerous private residences all over Cuba. He cared so little for money that he embezzled half the wealth of his country and lived like a fucking king while his people went to ruin. What a fucking joke. :knife:
#15129717
Sivad wrote:I'm the socialist

Please, tell us about your 'socialism'.

What platform will you be standing on?


:)
#15129720
When every anarchist that was a contemporary of Marx said 'hey, Marx, you're a psychotic authoritarian', Marx didn't deny it, he just replied 'hey, anarchist, psychotic authoritarianism is absolutely necessary and you're a naive fucking idiot'.

Marx was a fascist.
#15129745
@Sivad

All socialist movements that have gone anywhere eventually faced militant opposition from capitalism and the state. What are socialists supposed to do at that point?

Also, which socialist movement do you support?
#15129757
Pants-of-dog wrote:
All socialist movements that have gone anywhere eventually faced militant opposition from capitalism and the state.



This thinking is stupid for oh so many reasons but the main one being that gulaging society and committing mass human rights abuses totally defeats the whole purpose of socialism. These deranged gulagists are all like 'we had to burn that village in order to save it'. :lol: :knife: gulagism is just totally fucking absurd.

What are socialists supposed to do at that point?


Socialism is by definition pro-social so engaging in extreme anti-social despotic repression of whole societies just isn't an option for anyone who's truly committed to the principles of socialism.


You people aren't socialists, you're gulag collectivists. And gulag collectivism may be better than other extreme forms of tyranny like caudillo capitalism but it's definitely not an ideal to aspire to or anything to be celebrated. It's fucking horrible and the fuckers that impose it on society aren't liberators or heros of the people, they're violent oppresive maniacs and the best you can say about them and their regimes is that they were slightly less violent oppresive maniacs than the worst violent oppressive maniacs in history.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

The 70% figure is based on another study (Ngongha[…]

Religion & spirituality

Where'd you get the idea human survival depends[…]

What is God?

I’m trying to determine the contours of what God […]

Today I heard Whitney Webb say that Iran is a demo[…]