Marx's Folly

[worthless liar]

Whatever ones opinion of Karl Marx he was definitely an intelligent man. He spent his time in the library in London reading and writing, reading and writing; but nobody cared and nobody wanted to read. They were all too busy getting rich off of the industrial revolution. Marx quickly descended into abject poverty, his family was starving yet he still lived at the library. You think how could anyone be so pathetic? I know how.

Fortunately for Marx, Engels came along and solved his monetary problems. Yet Marx never was able to solve his own. Despite immense practice writing he remained an unpublishable bore to the end. His ideas were thoroughly flawed because he never spent any time doing things, he never experienced life the ultimate teacher for the difference between the book interpretation and what really happens. If he had the world would be a very different place today.


-This is a copy and paste off of another page. -- I like it. -- I've lurked in the background for a while and I have to say this forum makes some progressions but for the most part arguing politics, philosophies, and religions is a waste of time. It's a good source of information though. Thanks.

[redstar2000]

Marx was published on many occasions...but his readership was quite small during his lifetime and he never made any significant amount of money in royalties.

When the first volume of Das Kapital was published, he wrote to Engels that "Never before has so much been written about money by one who always had so little of it." :lol:

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[AmericanZionist2004]

Well, Marx wasn't a Communist. He intensely disliked capitalism, but wrote The Communist Manifesto was written as Marx predicting or warning the future of what the world's economic system would morph into if capitalism was not changed, not Marx preaching this "nice new idea". It was the economic version of 1984, so to speak. No comment on the tyranny of 1984, but that they were both predictions and forewarnings more than utopian society reads.

[synthesis]

What are you talking about, man?


In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labor, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.

etc.

Have you actually read the Manifesto? :blink:

[LSD]

Well, Marx wasn't a Communist. He intensely disliked capitalism, but wrote The Communist Manifesto was written as Marx predicting or warning the future of what the world's economic system would morph into if capitalism was not changed, not Marx preaching this "nice new idea". It was the economic version of 1984, so to speak. No comment on the tyranny of 1984, but that they were both predictions and forewarnings more than utopian society reads.


right.......and when Adam Smith wrote the Wealth of Nations, he was also writting a novel. How about Art of War, I guess that was a fun old short story. No, really let's keep going, On Liberty was probably just science fiction, the Magna Carta was a really funny joke.

Jesus Christ man, that has got to be the most pathetic way to dismiss an idea, "oh, well he never really meant it, it was a joke see! A joke!"

[airavata]

It was very easy for Marx to shout.. ''workers unite.. etc etc.''. He was in a library writing, that's it.
He was definitely an intelligent man, however his ideas have several great flaws.

[LSD]

It was very easy for Marx to shout.. ''workers unite.. etc etc.''. He was in a library writing, that's it.
He was definitely an intelligent man, however his ideas have several great flaws.


Although I know it's fun to attack an idea by attacking the man, it is ultimately a pointless exercise. If you think the ideas are flawed then point out those flaws. Otherwise it just demonstrates that you are unable to logically critisize communism, so you just try to critisize Marx's life, and not very well I might add. Adam Smith, the father of your capitalism was no experienced merchant. In his life, Smith held exactly three jobs, proffessor of logic, proddessor of 'moral philosophy', and tutor to the son of the Duke of Buccleuch. Yes!! Clearly he had great 'life experience', just like Marx, he was "in a library writting", that's how most philosphers/writters have done it throughout history. Remember Marx lived in the 19th century, if not the library where would you have him get his information from? The internet?

[Guest1]

fuck, that's hilarious. marx wasn't a communist.

wow.

just... wow...

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 11:49 PM
Well, Marx wasn't a Communist. He intensely disliked capitalism, but wrote The Communist Manifesto was written as Marx predicting or warning the future of what the world's economic system would morph into if capitalism was not changed, not Marx preaching this "nice new idea". It was the economic version of 1984, so to speak. No comment on the tyranny of 1984, but that they were both predictions and forewarnings more than utopian society reads.
Wow, that's a testament to the failure of the education system in this country if I've ever seen one. I seriously hope that you are joking. I've seen some pretty uninformed/ignorant comments on this forum over the years but that one deserves some kind of award. Remarkable.

[Guest1]

1984 was distopian, don't be a dumbass. 1984 was a Democratic Socialist's fictional commentary on authoritarianism, The Communist Manifesto was a non-fictional, political manifesto. It was the first clear definition of Communism. If Marx wasn't a Communist, then I suppose the First International was just some sort of experimental art interactive play, driving at the same message of warning capitalists? They went around the world showing this play and got rave reviews I heard.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by worthless [email protected] 7 2004, 10:46 PM
Marx quickly descended into abject poverty, his family was starving yet he still lived at the library. You think how could anyone be so pathetic? I know how.

...for the most part arguing politics, philosophies, and religions is a waste of time. It's a good source of information though. Thanks.
Yeah really, how could someone be so pathetic as to care about millions if not billions of people in the working class. Obviously you are not so pathetic as to care about other people either. What the hell does that person know? How to waste their life? Arguing politics, philosophies, and religions is a waste of time? Yet you like to use the information gathered in the exchanges? What kind of stupid contradiction is this? Thanks for posting more worthless shit on this site, please lurk in the background some more. Maybe you can waste some more time learning.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2004, 04:49 AM
Well, Marx wasn't a Communist. He intensely disliked capitalism, but wrote The Communist Manifesto was written as Marx predicting or warning the future of what the world's economic system would morph into if capitalism was not changed, not Marx preaching this "nice new idea". It was the economic version of 1984, so to speak. No comment on the tyranny of 1984, but that they were both predictions and forewarnings more than utopian society reads.
Marx wasn't a communist, :D Kind of like how Jesus wasn't a Christian? :P

[ComradeRobertRiley]

LOL let me guess Marx wasnt a marxist? LOL

[Hate Is Art]

No No No Marx was a hardline Stalinist.

[commie kg]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2004, 08:37 AM
LOL let me guess Marx wasnt a marxist? LOL
Well, he actually said "I am not a Marxist"... But it had an entirely different meaning. He was, of course, a communist.

[ComradeRobertRiley]

LOL

Yeah I know he said that but he was talking about others who call themselves marxist and he said something along the lines of:


"If these are marxists then i am not a marxist"


LOL :D

[LSD]

seriously though, you've gotta love this guy actually claiming that Marx was against communism... at least it's a new one....I've definetly never heard that one before.

[Intifada]

news just in ... the pope has confirmed that he is really a protestant.