The image of Marxists as angsty teenage hipsters

[RedHammer]

How do you feel about the modern image of Marxists as angsty teenage hipsters? I think this is hurtful to our movement.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

It is hurtful to any movement and is born out of the same stereotypical conditions which give such a view to the other movements as well; this is to say that the bourgeoisie see some angsty kids claiming to be communist and they label the whole movement as such.

[Questionable]

Ironically, I see this portrayal of Marxists as more prevalent among teenagers themselves. Mostly the liberal petite-bourgeoisie who want to appear intelligent by spouting off bits of pseudowisdom and rejecting everything without any critical analysis.

[JPSartre12]

I just think it's funny that this whole "radical" phase that my family said I started going through a couple years ago hasn't really turned out to be much of a phase ...

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I think your stereotype is a little optimistic as I think most people associate Marxism with greybeards in vneck sweaters

[Lucretia]

I think your stereotype is a little optimistic as I think most people associate Marxism with greybeards in vneck sweaters

Yes, this thread is baffling, since the popular image of a Marxist is a statue in a museum somewhere. I think the OP might have meant anarchist.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

To be fair, I'm an angsty Marxian teenager but I'm actually 21 years old and was a genuine prole before setting aside my tool-belt and producing my notebook. What does it matter?

[Ocean Seal]

Haters gon' hate.

[Book O'Dead]

How do you feel about the modern image of Marxists as angsty teenage hipsters? I think this is hurtful to our movement.

It doesn't worry me one bit. Marxism isn't something you can easily identify with teenagers because it's something that requires years and years of study.

By the time you can legitimately call yourself a Marxist puberty is long gone.

So put your teeny-tiny little mind at rest: no teeny-tiny little teeny-bopper can ever co-opt the politics of adults.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I am an angsty teenager though...

But I think you got the stereotype wrong, Marxists are usually stereotyped as professors who say a lot of nothing in a very smart way that makes the students think they're saying something deeply profound. And in the end they're just trying to get into some college freshmen's pants.

[Book O'Dead]

I am an angsty teenager though...

But I think you got the stereotype wrong, Marxists are usually stereotyped as professors who say a lot of nothing in a very smart way that makes the students think they're saying something deeply profound. And in the end they're just trying to get into some college freshmen's pants.

What you say might be true. But I hope you understand your own limitations.

I hope you acknowledge that to master Marxism and to gain the right to call yourself a Marxist, requires more years than you have lived.

[Misanthrope]

What I think of it? It's mostly true but that is an ad hominem attack and a fallacy and shouldn't be debated because it's irrelevant.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

What you say might be true. But I hope you understand your own limitations.

I hope you acknowledge that to master Marxism and to gain the right to call yourself a Marxist, requires more years than you have lived.
Yeah I do understand my own limitations but my objective is not to "master Marxism", it's socialist revolution. If I "master Marxism" along the way then I do, but I don't think socialist revolution is going to happen by us proles meticulously studying every piece of Marxist literature for more than 19 years(which is my age). If it were true us Marxists would be sitting in our rooms reading books while the revolution happened only to appear from our basements years after socialist revolution proclaiming "Okay, it's time for us to lead the proletarian masses into socialist revolution, I've spent enough years studying Marxism!"

[A Revolutionary Tool]

As to what I would think of this stereotype if it were true? Who cares, they will say this while I am young, and would call me an immature child if I still am a commie at the age of 60. The establishment always says these things of people that dissent, but when it's kids who are conservative, it's a whole different story, they've learned good.
It's like asking what do we care about being portrayed in the mainstream media. It doesn't matter, we'll get negative press anyway you look at it.

[RedHammer]

In no way am I suggesting that all young Marxists are angsty hipsters, only that there is an image of the young Marxists as just latching onto that school of thought because it's "hip", or "cool", or rebellious.

[#FF0000]

i didn't know hipsters were usually angsty.

[Book O'Dead]

Yeah I do understand my own limitations but my objective is not to "master Marxism", it's socialist revolution. If I "master Marxism" along the way then I do, but I don't think socialist revolution is going to happen by us proles meticulously studying every piece of Marxist literature for more than 19 years(which is my age). If it were true us Marxists would be sitting in our rooms reading books while the revolution happened only to appear from our basements years after socialist revolution proclaiming "Okay, it's time for us to lead the proletarian masses into socialist revolution, I've spent enough years studying Marxism!"

I'm not talking about revolution or about leading one or about coming out of a cellar, etc.
I'm talking about some teenager presuming to call themselves 'Marxists' after only reading the first two forewords of the 'Manifesto' or because they have some fetishistic fascination with a picture of Che or some other 20th Century idol.

I'm trying to emphasize my view that no one has the right to call themselves a Marxist until they've spent the required time and effort to master such a vast subject. To do so is akin to calling yourself a doctor just because you know how to apply a band-aid.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I sure hope this thread is active next week, my marxism merit badge hasn't come in the mail yet.

[Book O'Dead]

I sure hope this thread is active next week, my marxism merit badge hasn't come in the mail yet.

You sound like the kind of pimply geek that would be happy with a medal out of a box of cereal.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I'm not talking about revolution or about leading one or about coming out of a cellar, etc.
I'm talking about some teenager presuming to call themselves 'Marxists' after only reading the first two forewords of the 'Manifesto' or because they have some fetishistic fascination with a picture of Che or some other 20th Century idol.

I'm trying to emphasize my view that no one has the right to call themselves a Marxist until they've spent the required time and effort to master such a vast subject. To do so is akin to calling yourself a doctor just because you know how to apply a band-aid.
And it takes more than 19 years? I think kids who haven't read a single word of Marx can give a better Marxist analysis than some Marxists who have been Marxists for years could. Reading books for years doesn't make one a good Marxist. I mean look at you, you think we should be voting for Obama!

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You sound like the kind of pimply geek that would be happy with a medal out of a box of cereal.

Yo this is some ableist bullshit

[RedHammer]

I agree, that was a bit harsh and uncalled for.

[Book O'Dead]

And it takes more than 19 years? I think kids who haven't read a single word of Marx can give a better Marxist analysis than some Marxists who have been Marxists for years could. Reading books for years doesn't make one a good Marxist. I mean look at you, you think we should be voting for Obama!

Look, being a Marxist is more than just studying the required texts. Direct, extensive experience in the class struggle is needed; something you obviously lack.

Moreover, a genuine Marxist is not a doctrinaire or a sectarian. A real Marxist (which only adults are entitled to call themselves) is able to understand the course of history and political struggles enough to make sound electoral choices when required. A real Marxist is not guided by petty party prejudices but by sound, objective, mature pragmatism (something teenagers such as yourself are incapable of).

In re Obama, let me tell you that if by voting for some whacked out third party candidate we'll help empower Romney (who'll bring with him the same crew that commandeered the WH in 2000-2008), give me Obama one hundred fucking years. No amount of juvenile objections such as yours will persuade me otherwise.

But i can't really expect you to understand that because when GW Bush came into office in 2000 you were how old, 5?

Please don't make me laugh. All you know about the past 12 years of politics is what you read in books; you have not lived enough to pass judgement on my opinions.

[Ostrinski]

What you say might be true. But I hope you understand your own limitations.

I hope you acknowledge that to master Marxism and to gain the right to call yourself a Marxist, requires more years than you have lived.Man, I hope someone cracks your head like a melon

[RedHammer]

Look, being a Marxist is more than just studying the required texts. Direct, extensive experience in the class struggle is needed; something you obviously lack.

Do all young people lack this? What about the ones who grow up working, or poor and alienated?


In regards to Obama, let me tell you that if by voting for some whacked out third party candidate we'll help empower Romney (who'll bring with him the same crew that commandeered the WH in 2000-2008), give me Obama one hundred fucking years. No amount of juvenile objections such as yours will persuade me otherwise.

We should not be reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils. Also, perhaps Romney will be good for our movement. Maybe when his policies utterly destroy the economy or reduce the standard of living, people will wake up to reality.

[Book O'Dead]

Yo this is some ableist bullshit

You just feel on the spot because the presumptuous teeny-boppers are getting whacked on this thread.

[Book O'Dead]

Man, I hope someone cracks your head like a melon

Groans of impotent rage.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I think that's the stereotype of anarchists.

[Pretty Flaco]

russians?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Look, being a Marxist is more than just studying the required texts. Direct, extensive experience in the class struggle is needed; something you obviously lack.

Moreover, a genuine Marxist is not a doctrinaire or a sectarian. A real Marxist (which only adults are entitled to call themselves) is able to understand the course of history and political struggles enough to make sound electoral choices when required. A real Marxist is not guided by petty party prejudices but by sound, objective, mature pragmatism (something teenagers such as yourself are incapable of).

In re Obama, let me tell you that if by voting for some whacked out third party candidate we'll help empower Romney (who'll bring with him the same crew that commandeered the WH in 2000-2008), give me Obama one hundred fucking years. No amount of juvenile objections such as yours will persuade me otherwise.

But i can't really expect you to understand that because when GW Bush came into office in 2000 you were how old, 5?

Please don't make me laugh. All you know about the past 12 years of politics is what you read in books; you have not lived enough to pass judgement on my opinions.
haha, ageism for the win right? I was actually 7 when Bush came into office, but that's besides the point. You sound like my conservative uncle. "You can't say anything until you start paying taxes," and, "You can't say anything until you get a job." Now I make the exact same points I made back then before I started doing those things and all he can do is call me a dork because he has no response. So what is your defense when older people say the same things that I do? They're childish? Naive? Not old enough? Now I'm technically an adult, can I consider myself a Marxist?

So how many years of direct class struggle politics taught you that workers being tied down to Democrats is a good move? The Democrats who furthered a lot of Bush's policy and even kept many of the same people in place we should remember. The Democrats that will help push through austerity on workers. A five year old could tell you how wrong/liberal your opinion is, it doesn't take a genius, just like it doesn't take a genius to be a Marxist(or an age requirement).

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I can just imagine Book O'Dead in real life now.
*Sitting outside CPUSA offices, sees youngsters approaching the building*
BOD: I'm just going to let you wipper-snappers know right now, you can't be Marxists, that comes with age and years of class struggle. That's the only way you can gain any knowledge and become intelligent like me, I don't care about your opinion. OBAMA 2012!

*Kids walk away disgusted by this elitism and obvious liberalism to go join an anarchist group because some old guy drove them away from Marxism*

[Leftsolidarity]

You sound like the kind of pimply geek that would be happy with a medal out of a box of cereal.

Why are you such an asshole?

[Positivist]

What you say might be true. But I hope you understand your own limitations.

I hope you acknowledge that to master Marxism and to gain the right to call yourself a Marxist, requires more years than you have lived.

"Mastering Marxism" would suggest an intimate understanding of Marxian analytical method, and conclusions. This is nit dependent on age.

I believe what's you are referring to is the development of class conscioussness. This is, as you suggest, impossible without sufficient class experience.

While more life, and specifically proletarian experience is more likely to drive one towards study of Marxism, this doesn't necessarily occur, and regardless of how you discover Marxism, if you understand the methodology and analyses if it then you can "master it" at any time. Remember Marxism was developed by someone who did not have any experience as a proletarian.

[Book O'Dead]

haha, ageism for the win right? I was actually 7 when Bush came into office, but that's besides the point. [...]Now I'm technically an adult, can I consider myself a Marxist?

Wrong. That is the point. You're not even fully out of adolescence.

If it's presumptuous of a 40 year-old who's never studied Marxism to claim he's a Marxist, how much more presumptuous is it for a 19 year-old who is just now entering the class struggle and has not had enough time to take in a full study of political economy and sociology?

Have some humility; you'll see how much faster and easier your transition to adulthood will be.

From personal experience I know how bitter it is to have to be told by an adult that you don't know squat about anything.

Be thankful it's me and not your uncle Philbert.


So how many years of direct class struggle politics taught you that workers being tied down to Democrats is a good move? The Democrats who furthered a lot of Bush's policy and even kept many of the same people in place we should remember. The Democrats that will help push through austerity on workers. A five year old could tell you how wrong/liberal your opinion is, it doesn't take a genius, just like it doesn't take a genius to be a Marxist(or an age requirement).

Only a 19 year-old boy could believe that a 5 year-old child would possess enough acumen to tell me anything about the last 12 years!

Accept it: you're a fool to want to debate me.

[Book O'Dead]

Why are you such an asshole?

Because somebody has to be one when there are so many children running around, pretending they know what they have not yet learned.

What's your excuse for being an asshole?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Book 'O Dead: Lay off the flaming and assaults on users or it is an infraction, understand?

[jookyle]

At least angst filled teenagers act out.

[Book O'Dead]

"Mastering Marxism" would suggest an intimate understanding of Marxian analytical method, and conclusions. This is nit dependent on age.

Oh yes it is.


I believe what's you are referring to is the development of class conscioussness. This is, as you suggest, impossible without sufficient class experience.

I haven't even gotten to that in this discussion. I have limited myself to pointing out how fatuous it is for any teenager to presume the label of Marxism when it takes considerable study and years of reflection to obtain that title.


While more life, and specifically proletarian experience is more likely to drive one towards study of Marxism, this doesn't necessarily occur, and regardless of how you discover Marxism, if you understand the methodology and analyses if it then you can "master it" at any time. Remember Marxism was developed by someone who did not have any experience as a proletarian.

I'm sorry, but none that makes sense. This is one reason why the question in the OP is so relevant to me. There are way too many teeny-bopping bubblegummers running around here in Revleft claiming to be Marxists and opining on things they know nothing about. They should stop.

If I, who have lived more than twice as long as they, have not yet fully mastered Marxian science, how can any 18 or 19 year-old make that claim?

What the fuck! Is Revleft the repository of all the child prodigies of the left; a repository of left-wing idiot savants?

[Book O'Dead]

Book 'O Dead: Lay off the flaming and assaults on users or it is an infraction, understand?

I'm surpised that after all of the personal attacks I have been subjected to in other discussions, you or any other mod have not come out to warn against them. Why is that?

[helot]

Have some humility;

You should take your own advice. You've spent the past several posts dismissing someone who presumably you don't actually know purely because they're 19. From your attitude i'd be surprised if you've actually had any experience in struggle at work at it seems you'd easily become isolated from your colleagues by the way you interact with others and while I may still be half a decade off from the big 3-0 i know how much a good rapport with colleagues helps when organising.

[Book O'Dead]

You should take your own advice. You've spent the past several posts dismissing someone who presumably you don't actually know purely because they're 19. From your attitude i'd be surprised if you've actually had any experience in struggle at work at it seems you'd easily become isolated from your colleagues by the way you interact with others and while I may still be half a decade off from the big 3-0 i know how much a good rapport with colleagues helps when organising.

I have no need to show humility when discussing what I know of.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Wrong. That is the point. You're not even fully out of adolescence.And your point? I can't make the right choices politically because I'm not at a certain age in my life? Why is that? Furthermore there are plenty of liberals that I know who think they will make the right decision this year by voting for the first time(for Obama of course). They are making the same choice as you, does that mean they have matured? There are people of young age on this site who have said they will vote for Obama, are they now mature? Do they now have the same pragmatic skills that only come with a fully matured 40 year old who has had years and years of studying about Marxism and first hand experience in the class struggle? But they're young too, how could they come to the same conclusion? Could it be that you're just full of shit? Yeah, I think so.


If it's presumptuous of a 40 year-old who's never studied Marxism to claim he's a Marxist, how much more presumptuous is it for a 19 year-old who is just now entering the class struggle and has not had enough time to take in a full study of political economy and sociology?And again, how much time is needed? I've been reading on these subjects since I was 13 or 14, I picked up the Manifesto before I entered high-school. My bookshelves are full of books concerning exactly those same subjects. But I don't think that really matters, you can spend 5-6 years studying Marx or 30 years, and it won't make you a good Marxist evidently.

I think this really speaks loudly at how you think things are actually going to work. Either you think the revolution will be by a bunch of ignorant workers lead by a small elite group of intellectuals who took it upon themselves to study Marx and others, or you actually think every worker is going to win their liberation once they get fully in tune with learning all you can about political economy and sociology.

[Leftsolidarity]

I have no need to show humility when discussing what I know of.

I almost pee'd myself from laughing at your arrogance.

[RedHammer]

I think Book O'Dead has a valid point when he says there are some things you can only really understand with age, but that doesn't mean young people can't support socialism or oppose capitalism, and be active.

[Book O'Dead]

I think Book O'Dead has a valid point when he says there are some things you can only really understand with age, but that doesn't mean young people can't support socialism or oppose capitalism, and be active.

That's not even under discussion. I 'm not making any claims regarding that.

[Book O'Dead]

I almost pee'd myself from laughing at your arrogance.

And me at your ignorance.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I haven't even gotten to that in this discussion. I have limited myself to pointing out how fatuous it is for any teenager to presume the label of Marxism when it takes considerable study and years of reflection to obtain that title.Oh Jesus, I could just imagine Marx rolling over in his grave right now. Marxism as some prestigious title?


If I, who have lived more than twice as long as they, have not yet fully mastered Marxian science, how can any 18 or 19 year-old make that claim?I never claimed to "master Marxian science". In fact I clearly remember saying I haven't. And by the way you put it, like it's a badge of honor that you have to win, I don't want to.
The point is you're being incredibly idiotic claiming that people who aren't as old as you can't be on the same level of you intellectually. Something I find funny coming from an enthusiastic Obama 2012 supporter.

[eric922]

I'm rather confused by the claim that you can't be a Marxist till a certain age. First of all, it is debatable about what is required to be a Marxist. However, let's assume it requires a basic understand of Marx's analysis of capitalism. Why can't a teenager read Marx and understand him? Granted, most teenagers won't take that time, but there are certainly those who do, as this thread shows.

[Book O'Dead]

[...]
I think this really speaks loudly at how you think things are actually going to work. Either you think the revolution will be by a bunch of ignorant workers lead by a small elite group of intellectuals who took it upon themselves to study Marx and others, or you actually think every worker is going to win their liberation once they get fully in tune with learning all you can about political economy and sociology.

You're conflating all kinds of things here.

I'm not talking about how the revolution is going to come down or who will "lead" whom.

This is not at issue.

What is at issue is whether a teenager who has not had enough time live or to study the lessons of Marxian science can legitimately claim to be a Marxist.

He can claim to be a socialist, a radical, a communist, a left-winger, which is all right because it's generic, but they cannot claim to be a Marxist, which is quite specific and entails years of study and reflection.

To claim to be a Marxist without truly understanding it, is to cheapen it and turn it into a worthless label.

[Book O'Dead]

Oh Jesus, I could just imagine Marx rolling over in his grave right now. Marxism as some prestigious title?

I never claimed to "master Marxian science". In fact I clearly remember saying I haven't. And by the way you put it, like it's a badge of honor that you have to win, I don't want to.
The point is you're being incredibly idiotic claiming that people who aren't as old as you can't be on the same level of you intellectually. Something I find funny coming from an enthusiastic Obama 2012 supporter.

Marxism IS a prestigious title!

[Leftsolidarity]

You're conflating all kinds of things here.

I'm not talking about how the revolution is going to come down or who will "lead" whom.

This is not at issue.

What is at issue is whether a teenager who has not had enough time live or to study the lessons of Marxian science can legitimately claim to be a Marxist.

He can claim to be a socialist, a radical, a communist, a left-winger, which is all right because it's generic, but they cannot claim to be a Marxist, which is quite specific and entails years of study and reflection.

To claim to be a Marxist without truly understanding it, is to cheapen it and turn it into a worthless label.

Where might I go to get this glorious badge of Marxist honor that you are so valiantly defending against the younger generation?


Marxism IS a prestigious title!

Oh come on! Marxism is a form of analysis!

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I think Book O'Dead has a valid point when he says there are some things you can only really understand with age, but that doesn't mean young people can't support socialism or oppose capitalism, and be active.
Like what? What things are there that only come with age? Because I see a lot of people older than me that are way off of the mark and make mistakes all of the time. Like Mr. Book O'Dead over here and his lesser of two evils excuse to vote for Democrats, something "left-wing" groups have been doing for decades which have not helped us as a strategy at all. I'm 19 and I can see this, he's apparently double that age and he still falls for it. There is a lot of this throwing out of accusations that the young can't comprehend this or that, but not really any proof to back it up.

[Yuppie Grinder]

It is hurtful to any movement and is born out of the same stereotypical conditions which give such a view to the other movements as well; this is to say that the bourgeoisie see some angsty kids claiming to be communist and they label the whole movement as such.

The bourgeoisie in America don't think about the communist movement because it's not a threat. The popular image of a communist is either a paranoid despot who's eager to send people to labor camps and approve executions, or some socially-inept neckbeard.

[Lucretia]

Look, being a Marxist is more than just studying the required texts. Direct, extensive experience in the class struggle is needed; something you obviously lack.

Moreover, a genuine Marxist is not a doctrinaire or a sectarian. A real Marxist (which only adults are entitled to call themselves) is able to understand the course of history and political struggles enough to make sound electoral choices when required. A real Marxist is not guided by petty party prejudices but by sound, objective, mature pragmatism (something teenagers such as yourself are incapable of).

In re Obama, let me tell you that if by voting for some whacked out third party candidate we'll help empower Romney (who'll bring with him the same crew that commandeered the WH in 2000-2008), give me Obama one hundred fucking years. No amount of juvenile objections such as yours will persuade me otherwise.

But i can't really expect you to understand that because when GW Bush came into office in 2000 you were how old, 5?

Please don't make me laugh. All you know about the past 12 years of politics is what you read in books; you have not lived enough to pass judgement on my opinions.

How hilarious. You pompously lecture people about being adult enough to have the wisdom, discretion, and maturity to call themselves a Marxist. Then you regurgitate the single dumbest fucking thing you can say if you claim to be a Marxist revolutionary: that Romney is sooooo scary and bad (boogah! boogah!) that we would need to support Obama. Tell me in terms of a class analysis how there is any difference between the two of them, O Mighty (Adult) Marxist.

[Lolumad273]

I'm an 18 year old Anarchist, I'm not sure of the dichotomy between Marxism and Anarchism... But I don't think I'm too naive. Perhaps I'm too Naive to know better...

[Art Vandelay]

Personally, the only Marxists I generally associate with angsty young teenagers is M-L's.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Marxism IS a prestigious title!

No it absolutely isn't. You are the worst sort of Marxist. Learning for you isn't a collaborative process, but a competition. Marx would have disagreed with you strongly.
If you subscribe to the philosophy of historical materialism and are an internationalist revolutionary socialist, feel free to call yourself a Marxist.

[foda]

I believe that concept is applied more to anarchists than anyone else.

[NewLeft]

I am an angsty teenager though...

But I think you got the stereotype wrong, Marxists are usually stereotyped as professors who say a lot of nothing in a very smart way that makes the students think they're saying something deeply profound. And in the end they're just trying to get into some college freshmen's pants.
lol Yes, the pseudoscience Marxist professor indoctrinating college students..

[Book O'Dead]

Where might I go to get this glorious badge of Marxist honor that you are so valiantly defending against the younger generation?

Not against the younger generation, but against your own ignorance; your own inability to properly valuate things and ideas.

How can they, the young people be taught to value important and liberating ideas when older people allow those ideas to be belittled, to be heaped together with less worthy principles?

The fact that you scoff at the proposition that Marxism is a badge of honor betrays a lack of working class consciousness, a lack of understanding of the tools that facilitate our emancipation and a vandal's contempt for sound education.

The so-called radical who disdains proper education is more useful to the forces of reaction than to any revolutionary cause.

You can tell me to "go fuck myself" as you already have, privately, sneakily, where you can't be censured for it, but it only shows that you lack the necessary good faith to be a revolutionary.

[Book O'Dead]

How hilarious. You pompously lecture people about being adult enough to have the wisdom, discretion, and maturity to call themselves a Marxist. Then you regurgitate the single dumbest fucking thing you can say if you claim to be a Marxist revolutionary: that Romney is sooooo scary and bad (boogah! boogah!) that we would need to support Obama. Tell me in terms of a class analysis how there is any difference between the two of them, O Mighty (Adult) Marxist.

There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?

[eric922]

There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?

What does it matter who their parents are? Are we feudalists that we should care about one's lineage? What matters is whose side they are on. Both are firmly on the side of the capitalists. Obama isn't even very left wing by capitalist standards.

[Positivist]

I can agree that understanding Marxian theory can require many years, but it can also be understood much sooner. The rate that someone comes to a thorough understanding of Marxism is heavily determined by the amount of time and energy they are able to expend trying to understand it.

Students are at school less than workers are at work, and are usually less exhausted by their occupation, leaving them more time and energy to devote to studying Marxism. Furthermore, students get significant breaks from any form of occupation leaving even more time to advance their education.

Oh and can we please cut down on the personal attacks, on both sides, and stay on topic.

[Lucretia]

There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?

Uh, yes. You do need say more. For starters, why don't you point to any text in the classical Marxist canon where you learned the presumably adult lesson of judging a person's politics by the conditions in which they grew up, or who their parents were? I must have missed it in the Grundrisse or the Prison Notebooks.

This is either a terrible trolling job, or you need to do some serious introspection about the past several pages in this thread.

[Art Vandelay]

There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?

Are you fucking trolling? Dear god I hope so and if not please don't call yourself a Marxist, so that the rest of us don't have to be associated with your shit analysis.

[Book O'Dead]

What does it matter who their parents are? Are we feudalists that we should care about one's lineage? What matters is whose side they are on. Both are firmly on the side of the capitalists. Obama isn't even very left wing by capitalist standards.

Nothing Feudal about it.

Our class origins play an important role on who we are as adults and informs our choices.

Barack Obama comes from the working class. Whereas Mitt Romney is a member of the capitalist by birth, third generation, I believe.

[eric922]

Nothing Feudal about it.

Our class origins play an important role on who we are as adults and informs our choices.

Barack Obama comes from the working class. Whereas Mitt Romney is a member of the capitalist by birth, third generation, I believe.

Yes, but Obama clearly doesn't represent the working class. Not even as a reformist.

[Art Vandelay]

Nothing Feudal about it.

Our class origins play an important role on who we are as adults and informs our choices.

Barack Obama comes from the working class. Whereas Mitt Romney is a member of the capitalist by birth, third generation, I believe.

Oh I thought that we as marxists, defined class by one's relation to the means of production; not by who there parents were, I must have missed the memo where that changed.

[Book O'Dead]

Are you fucking trolling? Dear god I hope so and if not please don't call yourself a Marxist, so that the rest of us don't have to be associated with your shit analysis.

It's this kind of abuse that makes me question your bona fides and also makes me question the competency of our moderators.

Throughout this discussion it was not me who brought up the side issue of my choice for president.

[Lucretia]

Nothing Feudal about it.

Our class origins play an important role on who we are as adults and informs our choices.

Barack Obama comes from the working class. Whereas Mitt Romney is a member of the capitalist by birth, third generation, I believe.

According to your schema, people have no choices. They are formed in toto by the structures that characterize their upbringing, and can't escape from them, no matter how much they might want to. So person X grows up wealthy, discovers Marxism, but just can't become a Marxist because his rich-frat-boy prejudices are so deeply ingrained in him that he can't break free.

This is a dressed up version of the "Engels can't be a Marxist because he was a capitalist" line of thinking that, oddly enough, has been surfacing more and more on this forum. Not sure if it's the same troll (you) with different accounts, or if the Obama faction of the bourgeoisie is making Romney's background an issue in a way that is seeping into the consciousness of the more gullible aspiring Marxists here. Either way, both arguments reduce consciousness to a single aspect of somebody's background.

I suppose I could point to Marx's remark in the Eighteenth Brumaire about how people make history and have agency, even if that agency is is circumscribed (NOT strictly determined) by structures outside of their control. But why feed the "Adult Marxist" trolls?

[Book O'Dead]

Oh I thought that we as marxists, defined class by one's relation to the means of production; not by who there parents were, I must have missed the memo where that changed.

Go back and read what I wrote, Einstein. I said "class origins" and called Obama a "son of the working class".

[Book O'Dead]

According to your schema, people have no choices. They are formed in toto by the structures that characterize their upbringing, and can't escape from them, no matter how much they might want to. So person X grows up wealthy, discovers Marxism, but just can't become a Marxist because his rich-frat-boy prejudices are so deeply ingrained in him that he can't break free.

This is a dressed up version of the "Engels can't be a Marxist because he was a capitalist" line of thinking that, oddly enough, has been surfacing more and more on this forum. Not sure if it's the same troll (you) with different accounts, or if the Obama faction of the bourgeoisie is making Romney's background an issue in a way that is seeping into the consciousness of the more gullible aspiring Marxists here. Either way, both arguments reduce consciousness to a single aspect of somebody's background.

I suppose I could point to Marx's remark in the Eighteenth Brumaire about how people make history and have agency, if it is is circumscribed (NOT strictly determined) by structures outside of their control. But why feed the "Adult Marxist" trolls?

Only extraordinary individuals are able to fully transcend their class origins.

Karl Marx, the object of my admiration, is the best example of that.

[Lucretia]

Only extraordinary individuals are able to fully transcend their class origins.

Karl Marx, the object of my admiration, is the best example of that.

Do you have any evidence to support this statement? If anything, the logical argument would be that only extraordinary individuals are able to transcend their PRESENT-DAY class interests by fighting for the workers. But even then, there are many examples of wealthy individuals who have devoted considerable time and effort fighting against capitalism. Why is this, you might ask?

Because one of the first things an Adult Marxist learns as a Marxist-Aspiring Child is that class interests condition political consciousness, not determine it.

[Book O'Dead]

Do you have any evidence to support this statement? [..].


Hey, I offered Karl Marx as the supreme example. What the fuck more do you want?

[Lucretia]

Hey, I offered Karl Marx as the supreme example. What the fuck more do you want?

Evidence for your claim that such people are "extraordinary," not that they exist. You're definitely either high, or a troll, or both.

[Book O'Dead]

Evidence for your claim that such people are "extraordinary," not that they exist. You're definitely either high, or a troll, or both.

I guess it's obligatory to accuse someone of trolling when your own aims are frustrated, eh?

[Ocean Seal]

You sound like the kind of pimply geek that would be happy with a medal out of a box of cereal.
Dude quit it, IIRC you didn't know jack shit till a lil' while ago.

[Art Vandelay]

It's this kind of abuse that makes me question your bona fides and also makes me question the competency of our moderators.

Throughout this discussion it was not me who brought up the side issue of my choice for president.

The fact that someone who lends his support to Obama in the upcoming election is not restricted makes me question the competency of our moderators.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Not against the younger generation, but against your own ignorance; your own inability to properly valuate things and ideas.As I point out again, coming from the guy supporting Obama...


How can they, the young people be taught to value important and liberating ideas when older people allow those ideas to be belittled, to be heaped together with less worthy principles?Less worthy principles like liberalism? Like instead of getting workers politically independent of the two bourgeois parties, tell them to vote for the lesser of the two evils? Please tell me about these principles of yours.


There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?
Hell yes. Considering I know people who are working class, and poorer than I have ever been, and conservative, I'd say what class you're born into=/= you becoming ideologically bent this or that way.

[Lucretia]

I guess it's obligatory to accuse someone of trolling when your own aims are frustrated, eh?

Trust me. The second I take Revleft seriously enough to let it stress me out is the second I request that my account be closed. It's useful for some rhetorical target practice every now and then, and also to help guide and educate the people here who are seriously and earnestly trying to learn more about the world, themselves, and how Marxian socialist politics fits in with both. Something tells me from the mess you've made in this thread that you do not fit that category, so you have been shifted into the easy target practice category.

[Book O'Dead]

The fact that someone who lends his support to Obama in the upcoming election is not restricted makes me question the competency of our moderators.

It's opinions like yours that bring disrepute to the cause of socialism. Your preference for repression against someone merely for expressing an unpopular opinion places you outside of genuine Marxism. Shame on you!

[A Revolutionary Tool]

It's opinions like yours that bring disrepute to the cause of socialism. Your preference for repression against someone merely for expressing an unpopular opinion places you outside of genuine Marxism. Shame on you!
I wouldn't complain, you've already placed yourself outside of genuine Marxism whilst insultingly telling other people that they can't be Marxists because of age. And considering this is Revleft, not Libleft, I'm surprised you've been here for so long, considering you're about as revolutionary Comrade Obama himself.

[Book O'Dead]

I wouldn't complain, you've already placed yourself outside of genuine Marxism whilst insultingly telling other people that they can't be Marxists because of age. And considering this is Revleft, not Libleft, I'm surprised you've been here for so long, considering you're about as revolutionary Comrade Obama himself.

In my support for Obama's re-election I stand firmly in the tradition of the International Workingmen's Association.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen%27s_Association

[Art Vandelay]

In my support for Obama's re-election I stand firmly in the tradition of the International Workingmen's Association.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen%27s_Association

Hahah; yeah because reformism is as progressive as it was in Marx's time.

[Book O'Dead]

Hahah; yeah because reformism is as progressive as it was in Marx's time.

Sarcastic innuendo does not make for good counter-arguments.

[Comrade Samuel]

Well of corse the ruling class will stereotype us as angst filled teenagers who sit around smoking weed and fighting "the system maaaaaaaan". Haven't they proven with racism, sexism, nationalism ect. that it is our immediate reaction is always to believe stereotypes and live in our bubble of ignorance than to actualy research and understand anything or anyone?

Also maybe maybe its worth saying that instead of it being the anarchists or the MLs or who ever that the left is collectively in this situation and the responsibility lies with nobody but the capitalists for it.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

In my support for Obama's re-election I stand firmly in the tradition of the International Workingmen's Association.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen%27s_Association
I don't even know what you want me to look at here...
But there's big differences between doing stuff like freeing millions of slaves and doing...what has Obama done again? The best he's done is some really weak ass healthcare reform that makes health insurance companies happy.

[Art Vandelay]

Sarcastic innuendo does not make for good counter-arguments.

Reformism at one point in time, was a progressive force. Things like the eight hour work day, five day work weeks, etc...were essential in helping build class consciousness. If you think that is similar to what reformism is able to accomplish nowadays (which you seem to, given the link and argument you made) then I do not know what to say to you. I shouldn't have to have this discussion with a "Marxist." Bourgeois politics, nowadays, are good for little more than using as a platform for denouncing electoral politics and drawing attention to proletarian causes; not cheerleading for the democrats.

[Le Socialiste]

A real Marxist is not guided by petty party prejudices but by sound, objective, mature pragmatism (something teenagers such as yourself are incapable of).

In re Obama, let me tell you that if by voting for some whacked out third party candidate we'll help empower Romney (who'll bring with him the same crew that commandeered the WH in 2000-2008), give me Obama one hundred fucking years. No amount of juvenile objections such as yours will persuade me otherwise.

The irony.

[Yuppie Grinder]

There is considerable difference between the two.

One is a son of the working class. The other is the son of a son of a son of a capitalist.

Need I say more?

Obama's father was a bourgeois economist. He is not from the working class, and even if he were it wouldn't matter. Richard Nixon had impoverished origins, should we support him too?

[Drowzy_Shooter]

I'll just see myself out of this thread :lol:

[Book O'Dead]

I don't even know what you want me to look at here...
But there's big differences between doing stuff like freeing millions of slaves and doing...what has Obama done again? The best he's done is some really weak ass healthcare reform that makes health insurance companies happy.

Here you misconstrue history. The primary aim of Lincoln's during the civil war was not the emancipation of the slaves, although it was consequential to it; Lincoln's primary objective was the preservation of the Union.

Of course, Obama is no Lincoln. But he and the American people whom he claims to represent is faced with considerable challenges going forward that, if left in the hands of his political and ideological opponents, will overwhelm and fracture this country so deeply as to make any future effort at socialism impossible.

If the Republicans win the upcoming presidential elections they will continue down the path that Bush & Co. were taking us, that is, permanent global war and covert class warfare against the American working class.

I see no difference in the International's support for Lincoln (a lawyer, a petit bourgeois-minded statesman) and mine of Obama (another lawyer whose loyalty to capitalism is no less intense). But if you carefully regard the alternative to Obama, you'll see that what awaits us is worse than what Obama intends to serve up.

[Le Socialiste]

We should not be reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils.

Yup.


Also, perhaps Romney will be good for our movement. Maybe when his policies utterly destroy the economy or reduce the standard of living, people will wake up to reality.

As if Obama hasn't already been doing so for the last four years...

Either way, it's a shit idea. There are many ways we as a movement can turn potential supporters away - one of which being the intentional degradation and impoverishment of their living standards and general welfare. :rolleyes:

[Book O'Dead]

Reformism at one point in time, was a progressive force. Things like the eight hour work day, five day work weeks, etc...were essential in helping build class consciousness. If you think that is similar to what reformism is able to accomplish nowadays (which you seem to, given the link and argument you made) then I do not know what to say to you. I shouldn't have to have this discussion with a "Marxist." Bourgeois politics, nowadays, are good for little more than using as a platform for denouncing electoral politics and drawing attention to proletarian causes; not cheerleading for the democrats.

You keep relying on innuendo and mischaracterization of my position to make your fatuous arguments.

I am not advocating reform measures nor am I "cheeleading" for any party. I've simply stated that to not vote for Obama in the upcoming elections is to give your passive support to his far more reactionary and dangerous opponent.

You seem blinded to the danger by your dogmatic approach to American politics!

[Leftsolidarity]

Here you misconstrue history. The primary aim of Lincoln's during the civil war was not the emancipation of the slaves, although it was consequential to it; Lincoln's primary objective was the preservation of the Union.

Of course, Obama is no Lincoln. But he and the American people whom he claims to represent is faced with considerable challenges going forward that, if left in the hands of his political and ideological opponents, will overwhelm and fracture this country so deeply as to make any future effort at socialism impossible.

If the Republicans win the upcoming presidential elections they will continue down the path that Bush & Co. were taking us, that is, permanent global war and covert class warfare against the American working class.

I see no difference in the International's support for Lincoln (a lawyer, a petit bourgeois-minded statesman) and mine of Obama (another lawyer whose loyalty to capitalism is no less intense). But if you carefully regard the alternative to Obama, you'll see that what awaits us is worse than what Obama intends to serve up.

First off, this is way off topic.

Second off, you're a liberal yet saying that people can't be Marxists until they hit a certain age?


You are either a troll or a complete fool. Possibly both from what I've seen of your posts lately.

[Book O'Dead]

Originally Posted by RedHammer http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2487260#post2487260)
We should not be reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils.

But the fact is--and we have to face it--that we have been reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils! And the only mature thing for us to do is to choose which will cause the least amount of harm to ourselves as individuals and as communities.

There are no viable electoral alternatives out there but we must not allow our political dogmas to prevent us from making the right choice among wicked people.

[RedHammer]

Like what? What things are there that only come with age? Experience comes with age. There is a difference between discussing something and living through it. It's easy to talk about war and poverty when you are sitting comfortably on a couch; it's just ideas. Just talk. But it's harder when you've lived through hardship. When you've experienced alienation; when you've witnessed the concepts in the real world.

That doesn't make you more knowledgeable; just, more experienced. It means that, when you talk about struggle, you actually know what it is.


There is a lot of this throwing out of accusations that the young can't comprehend this or that, but not really any proof to back it up.

Not so much comprehension, but true understanding by experience.

[Book O'Dead]

First off, this is way off topic.

Second off, you're a liberal yet saying that people can't be Marxists until they hit a certain age?


You are either a troll or a complete fool. Possibly both from what I've seen of your posts lately.

Quit trying to characterize me.

Be a grown up for once and try to advance an argument that makes a point instead of trying to silence me with your false accusations.

I did not sidetrack this argument. You and other did by insisting on dredging up an old argument to counter my assertions about the need for maturity, study and experience as requirements to make the claim of Marxism.

It's gone off topic? Unless a moderator intervenes, you'll have to live with it because you created it.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Here you misconstrue history. The primary aim of Lincoln's during the civil war was not the emancipation of the slaves, although it was consequential to it; Lincoln's primary objective was the preservation of the Union.

Of course, Obama is no Lincoln. But he and the American people whom he claims to represent is faced with considerable challenges going forward that, if left in the hands of his political and ideological opponents, will overwhelm and fracture this country so deeply as to make any future effort at socialism impossible.

If the Republicans win the upcoming presidential elections they will continue down the path that Bush & Co. were taking us, that is, permanent global war and covert class warfare against the American working class.

I see no difference in the International's support for Lincoln (a lawyer, a petit bourgeois-minded statesman) and mine of Obama (another lawyer whose loyalty to capitalism is no less intense). But if you carefully regard the alternative to Obama, you'll see that what awaits us is worse than what Obama intends to serve up.

Spoken like a true liberal, if Obama doesn't get elected the apocalypse will come. I see considerable difference between the International's support of Lincoln and your support of Obama. Like how they didn't think the world would end if they didn't support Lincoln. You're supporting a guy who will most likely pass most all of the crappy legislation Romney would pass anyways(if you haven't paid much attention to politics)

[Lucretia]

Spoken like a true liberal, if Obama doesn't get elected the apocalypse will come. I see considerable difference between the International's support of Lincoln and your support of Obama. Like how they didn't think the world would end if they didn't support Lincoln. You're supporting a guy who will most likely pass most all of the crappy legislation Romney would pass anyways(if you haven't paid much attention to politics)

The thing is, there was a definite revolutionary strategy behind support of Lincoln (the freeing of bonded blacks so they could organize in conjunction with their wage-slave brethren in the North - a way of expanding and strengthening the working class organizationally and politically in the US). There's no conceivable way to reconcile supporting Obummer with any serious or logical present day revolutionary strategy.

[Leftsolidarity]

Experience comes with age. There is a difference between discussing something and living through it. It's easy to talk about war and poverty when you are sitting comfortably on a couch; it's just ideas. Just talk. But it's harder when you've lived through hardship. When you've experienced alienation; when you've witnessed the concepts in the real world.

That doesn't make you more knowledgeable; just, more experienced. It means that, when you talk about struggle, you actually know what it is.



Not so much comprehension, but true understanding by experience.


And what, can younger people not have experienced the horrors of capitalism? Do young people not experience discrimination, poverty, war, violence, racism, homophobia, exploitation, homelessness, oppression, alienation, sexism, police brutality, drug abuse, prison systems, hunger, hopelessness, etc.?

Are younger people spared from any of this? No.

Do you need to go through any of this to be a Marxist anyways? No.

[Book O'Dead]

Spoken like a true liberal, if Obama doesn't get elected the apocalypse will come. I see considerable difference between the International's support of Lincoln and your support of Obama. Like how they didn't think the world would end if they didn't support Lincoln. You're supporting a guy who will most likely pass most all of the crappy legislation Romney would pass anyways(if you haven't paid much attention to politics)

Stop characterizing me; that is not a fair or honest way to argue.

If indeed you want to prove that you're big enough to handle difficult arguments then you'll have to learn to address the topic at hand.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Experience comes with age. There is a difference between discussing something and living through it. It's easy to talk about war and poverty when you are sitting comfortably on a couch; it's just ideas. Just talk. But it's harder when you've lived through hardship. When you've experienced alienation; when you've witnessed the concepts in the real world.

That doesn't make you more knowledgeable; just, more experienced. It means that, when you talk about struggle, you actually know what it is.



Not so much comprehension, but true understanding by experience.

You just used two examples that don't prove your point at all, I grew up in poverty, although I've never been in war kids live on battlefields these days. These are things children can and do experience before becoming Marxist Adults.

[Lucretia]

I will cease my participation in this thread by kindly reminding all of you to stay off my lawn.

[Leftsolidarity]

Stop characterizing me; that is not a fair or honest way to argue.

If indeed you want to prove that you're big enough to handle difficult arguments then you'll have to learn to address the topic at hand.

Why would anyone want to bother debating anything with someone who's already said that they are inferior simply because of their age? Talking with you is pointless because you have shown yourself to be an elitiest and ageist asshole.

[Book O'Dead]

Why would anyone want to bother debating anything with someone who's already said that they are inferior simply because of their age? Talking with you is pointless because you have shown yourself to be an elitiest and ageist asshole.

And you've shown yourself to have no scruples.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Stop characterizing me; that is not a fair or honest way to argue.

If indeed you want to prove that you're big enough to handle difficult arguments then you'll have to learn to address the topic at hand.

Sorry I can't, I'm too much of a child. I'm done with this nonsense, I will now go read a book concerning political economy so that I can grow up to be just like you.

[RedHammer]

And what, can younger people not have experienced the horrors of capitalism? Do young people not experience discrimination, poverty, war, violence, racism, homophobia, exploitation, homelessness, oppression, alienation, sexism, police brutality, drug abuse, prison systems, hunger, hopelessness, etc.?

They can and do. I did. I was born in the USSR just before its collapse and moved to America; had a single mother. Struggled alot.

I'm only playing devil's advocate. As we age, we tend to have more perspective.


Do you need to go through any of this to be a Marxist anyways? No.

Agreed, comrade. I never suggested that. What I talked about in the OP was the typical teenage hipster who latches onto Marxist ideas because he wants to look "cool" and "rebellious"

[Leftsolidarity]

They can and do. I did. I was born in the USSR just before its collapse and moved to America; had a single mother. Struggled alot.

I'm only playing devil's advocate. As we age, we tend to have more perspective.



Agreed, comrade. I never suggested that. What I talked about in the OP was the typical teenage hipster who latches onto Marxist ideas because he wants to look "cool" and "rebellious"

I'd just like to say that I was not thinking that you hold the views I'm disagreeing with. I was just making a point off of your statement.

[Althusser]

Nothing Feudal about it.

Our class origins play an important role on who we are as adults and informs our choices.

Barack Obama comes from the working class. Whereas Mitt Romney is a member of the capitalist by birth, third generation, I believe.

What about Karl Marx's own class origin.

[Book O'Dead]

Sorry I can't, I'm too much of a child. I'm done with this nonsense, I will now go read a book concerning political economy so that I can grow up to be just like you.

I'm glad you finally admit your ignorance. It's a step in the right direction. I forgive you for the unwarranted personal attacks.

[Book O'Dead]

What about Karl Marx's own class origin.

Karl Marx isn't running for president of the U.S.

[#FF0000]

hey chill

[RedHammer]

Karl Marx isn't running for president of the U.S.

What does Obama's class origin have to do with his policies? He represents the interests of capital, and not workers. It doesn't matter if he grew up in a working class family. It matters where he is right now.

No offense, comrade, but seriously, why are there Obama supporters on RevLeft? I joined to get away from this shit.

[Martin Blank]

Yeah, I'm going to close this thread. It's been nothing but flame bait from the first page. I'm also going to issue a verbal warning to every person in this thread who threw ad hominem attacks, regardless of whether you felt you were being provoked or not. You know better than that.

Thread mercifully closed.