How are objections to Communism still valid? Marx answered a lot them....

[RadioRaheem84]

I just re-read the Communist Manifesto and Marx nailed the system to the wall. I mean the stuff he wrote was WAY ahead of its time and still relevant today. What I found puzzling though is that most of the claims against communism he was up against back then seem like the same claims against the left today. When I was reading Section Two, I thought that Marx was arguing against a right wing radio pundit. Its the same drivel!

If the right hates Marxism so much, why haven't they bothered to read the Communist Manifesto? They're throwing out the same old tired arguments that Marx answered years ago.

[GPDP]

I just re-read the Communist Manifesto and Marx nailed the system to the wall. I mean the stuff he wrote was WAY ahead of its time and still relevant today. What I found puzzling though is that most of the claims against communism he was up against back then seem like the same claims against the left today. When I was reading Section Two, I thought that Marx was arguing against a right wing radio pundit. Its the same drivel!

If the right hates Marxism so much, why haven't they bothered to read the Communist Manifesto? They're throwing out the same old tired arguments that Marx answered years ago.

The right is not a misguided entity that can be defeated through ideological debate alone. It represent specific class interests, and as such its primary purpose is to defend it against all manner of criticism, especially from the communist left. That includes using the vast reach and power of the corporate media, which is readily at their disposal (and nowhere near ours) to smear the left in any way they can, even if it means rehashing the same old tired arguments over and over again ad nauseum. They are not interested in a fair debate. Their interests lie in protecting the capitalist system at all costs.

[danny bohy]

The right wing arnt the smartesst lot. They dont understand marxism and probably wouldnt have heard of the communist manifesto(if they can read at all). they dont come up with their own arguments they are just quoting what the media/goverment has told them.

[Axle]

I just re-read the Communist Manifesto and Marx nailed the system to the wall. I mean the stuff he wrote was WAY ahead of its time and still relevant today. What I found puzzling though is that most of the claims against communism he was up against back then seem like the same claims against the left today. When I was reading Section Two, I thought that Marx was arguing against a right wing radio pundit. Its the same drivel!

If the right hates Marxism so much, why haven't they bothered to read the Communist Manifesto? They're throwing out the same old tired arguments that Marx answered years ago.

Marx wasn't a hack, that's for sure.

The right has never been interested in what's already been debunked. They exist to maintain a status quo by any means necessary for as long as those means continue to work.

And ignoring facts, stretching truths, lying outright, fear mongering and the same handful of 150-year old arguments still continue to work for Capital because they have a monopoly on mass media.

The cycle can be broken with a well-planned and extensive propaganda campaign. I'm fully confident in that.

[absurd_planet]

Marx was a brilliant social scientist and much of his analysis of the capitalist system is still relevant. Yet his concept of the state withering away after the revolution is wrong and will never happen in reality. This was one of the few problems with his theory, also the text needs to be constantly re-interpreted in able for it to apply to current conditions. Slavoj Zizek speaks of the importance of adapting the fundamentals of communism to the modern world and I find this to be more useful. Similar to Guy Debord, Baudrillard etc.

[RadioRaheem84]

I agree that Marx's solution needs to be tweaked a bit but his analysis of capitalism is near flawless.

Am I to believe that the right dissolve themselves of all reason and logic in order to continue hating something they don't quite understand?

[GPDP]

I agree that Marx's solution needs to be tweaked a bit but his analysis of capitalism is near flawless.

Am I to believe that the right dissolve themselves of all reason and logic in order to continue hating something they don't quite understand?

Oh, they understand, alright. They understand our goal is to take away their immense privilege and freedom to exploit us mercilessly. That is why they oppose us, not because they misunderstand us.

Of course, some portions of the right-wing are lunatics, and are truly incapable of logic and reason. If that's who you're referring to, then that is my answer to your question. But the majority of the right-wing propaganda machine is not like that. They are perfectly capable of reasoning and understanding what we stand for - it's just our solutions go against their interests, so they attack them, by dishonest means if need be.

[cb9's_unity]

Marx was a brilliant social scientist and much of his analysis of the capitalist system is still relevant. Yet his concept of the state withering away after the revolution is wrong and will never happen in reality. This was one of the few problems with his theory, also the text needs to be constantly re-interpreted in able for it to apply to current conditions. Slavoj Zizek speaks of the importance of adapting the fundamentals of communism to the modern world and I find this to be more useful. Similar to Guy Debord, Baudrillard etc.

The concept of the state withering away is one yet to be tested. It is also a concept that right-wingers are either unaware of or simply do not care about.

However I think the essence of Marxism is that you always have to adapt it to the world around you. Marxism is a way of analyzing society and trying to progress it. That means different conditions may require different revolutionary approaches. And that is actually the true beauty of Marxism.

[NecroCommie]

The right knows very well the true meaning of a debate. They don't even really need to win any arguments, for their true objective lays in converting the masses that are listening. They can easily state the most ridiculous of claims, provided that it feeds some other thing that the masses identify with, let it be patriotism, nationalism, racism or liberalism. In my oppinion it is imperative that the left learns this method also. I have been trying to adopt to this style of arguing myself, ofcourse not forgetting logic but simply portraying it in an appealing way.

What I find frustrating is how so many communists are quick to defend communism when under attack. When your ideology is questioned, you must above all deny the credibility of the accuser. Say that he is obviously ignorant or that he's claims are ancient and not to be taken seriously. If continuing this denial long enough you might force the cappie on a defensive and that is way more impressive for someone who is listening. Also, if the cappie by chance wins that argument he has not "disproven" communism but simply secured his credibility, thus ending the debate in a stalemate.

[New Tet]

I just re-read the Communist Manifesto and Marx nailed the system to the wall. I mean the stuff he wrote was WAY ahead of its time and still relevant today. What I found puzzling though is that most of the claims against communism he was up against back then seem like the same claims against the left today. When I was reading Section Two, I thought that Marx was arguing against a right wing radio pundit. Its the same drivel!

If the right hates Marxism so much, why haven't they bothered to read the Communist Manifesto? They're throwing out the same old tired arguments that Marx answered years ago.

Hate to be a party pooper but your question assumes that the defenders of capitalism are, like you, after the truth. History demonstrates that the capitalist is more interested in profits than in truth.

[Unregistered]

Marx was a brilliant social scientist and much of his analysis of the capitalist system is still relevant. Yet his concept of the state withering away after the revolution is wrong and will never happen in reality. This was one of the few problems with his theory, also the text needs to be constantly re-interpreted in able for it to apply to current conditions. Slavoj Zizek speaks of the importance of adapting the fundamentals of communism to the modern world and I find this to be more useful. Similar to Guy Debord, Baudrillard etc.

Yes, but Zizek also cautions that we should not seek to shape past philosopher's views to contemporary times, but rather we should attempt to view contemporary times through the lenses of past philosophers.

After all, paraphrasing from Zizek's Marxism 2009 speech, as Adorno stated, Communism is eternal.