Why is Marxism in the first world so dedicated to a few causes?

[Comrade Thomas]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

So, er, do you have any political experience with an actual socialist group? Because most of them do focus on capitalism. Unless by "economic issues" you mean nonsense about banks and inane reformist plans like a universal basic income.

Or are you one of those people who thinks that any discussion of gay rights, for example, is too much?

[Connolly1916]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

In short, it's because they are trendy lefties. To be fair, most of them are well intentioned, but as you say, until they come to realise that all the single issue campaigns they embark on are in fact caused by one thing - neo-liberalism - then they will never play a part in bringing about radical change in society.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

Huh. I haven't noticed a trend among younger comrades of focusing on feminism or LGBT liberation to the exclusion of anti-capitalism, so I have no idea what you're talking about.

[tuwix]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

I think you probably met only so-called Marxists. Now, it's becoming very fashionable to be Marxist. In Poland, there is one journalist of neoliberal newspaper who admitted that he voted for neoliberal party but he also admitted he's Marxist. In my opinion, he's best example of so-called Marxist. And also in my opinion economic problems are the most important for real Marxists, but it isn't for so-called ones.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

how peculiar, these sorts of posts always seem to define liberation struggles (e.g womens, LGBT etcetera) as the root cause of the general malaise of the left rather than the legions of other actual legitimate complaints you could make about a wide variety of leftist groups, not least the polar opposite of this 'problem' of groups who believe for whatever reason that focusing solely on economic issues is a magical panacea for all humanity's ills.

[Slippers]

Wow such a gross sentiment.

Yeah; def too much focus on woman's liberation definitely too much focus on lgbtqia liberation REAL socialists should focus on REAL issues :roll eyes: /sarcasm

Apologies if you didn't mean it like that but I've seen far too much bigotry-appologism from so-called leftists to not feel peeved and threatened when I hear that sort of sentiment.

We need liberation for all people and I'm uninterested in any "revolutionary" movement that doesn't put the socially oppressed at the front.

Sorry if I'm not making sense; I'm (again) posting when I should be asleep.

[Црвена]

Ethnic minorities, women, LGBTQs, disabled people and poor people are all oppressed. No type of oppression is worse than another, and creating a hierarchy of importance of oppressed peoples is pure hypocrisy. Everyone who's being oppressed in any way needs to be the focus of the communist movement otherwise we lose our identity as a movement for the people.

[Per Levy]

In short, it's because they are trendy lefties.

wanting womens liberation and that lgbt workers dont get discriminated against is "trendy" now? wow!

To be fair, most of them are well intentioned, but as you say, until they come to realise that all the single issue campaigns they embark on are in fact caused by one thing - neo-liberalism

oh neo-iberalism is the root of all problems? not capitalism? so shall we just go back to keynesiastic social democracy and everything is "good" again? capitalism as a whole is to be opposed and not just one way of managing it.

then they will never play a part in bringing about radical change in society.

most leftists wont play a part in "radical change", no matter how "trendy" they are or not. since its not up to leftists if that change is happening but up to the working class.

@op: "Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights."

i have not seen that, and i had plenty of contact with marxists under the age of 30 on here on other forums in real life and so on. i have seen the opposite of that though a few times. so yeah i dont know where you are comming from.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

A nice generalisation there.

Though I understand the perception of 'so-called Marxists' who only care about certain social issues and are ignorant / indifferent to the class struggle and the goal of communism, I don't think it's the norm for most comrades 'under 30'.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

Because half the population are women, and if you include the LGBT community then you're probably going over half. That's why so much time is spent on social issues - because generally the people who are campaigning on these issues are directly affected by such discrimination.

[Kingfish]

I would wager that firstly because of people of this type seem to be much more vocal and memorable (for better or worse) than those more concerned with economic issues thus inflating the perception of their numbers and significance. Secondly these types of issues are closer to home for younger people and are ones that are fairly easy (both in regards to theory and risk of retribution) to get into.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I would wager that firstly because of people of this type seem to be much more vocal and memorable (for better or worse) than those more concerned with economic issues thus inflating the perception of their numbers and significance. Secondly these types of issues are closer to home for younger people and are ones that are fairly easy (both in regards to theory and risk of retribution) to get into.

What are you talking about?

Inflating numbers? Half the population are women.

"These types of issues are closer to home for young people"? So being gay is just a new 'fashion' is it?

"Fairly easy (...in regards to...risk of retribution) to get into?" I take it you've never been raped. Or blamed for the HIV/AIDS crisis. Or died from being refused an abortion on moral grounds during pregnancy.

[MEGAMANTROTSKY]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

From what I have read, there are many reasons, some that stand out more than most because of the history that has followed the end of the Second World War. But here are the biggest I've encountered in person.

1.) These days, Marxism is usually viewed as vulgar economic determinism. Whether consciously or unconsciously, many of today's Marxists believe that absorbing themselves in the rhetoric of bourgeois identity politics will give them enough "revolutionary street cred" to be taken seriously. Some may be overwhelmed by their obligation to befriend other leftists at the risk of isolation or dismissal and become little more than bourgeois liberals. "Privilege theory" is adopted uncritically and used to browbeat others or shut down discussions. Moderators and admins at RevLeft do this with the utmost glee. (Even worse, the bourgeois press love to compare Marxism and fascism and declare them to be twins at the opposite ends of violent "extremism", highlighting the acts of such figures as Pol Pot or Stalin to muddy the waters.)

2.) Marxism is also becoming viewed as nothing more than a futile, albeit interesting, intellectual and academic exercise. This view has apparently become so prevalent that at one point Marx's collected works were almost placed exclusively in the hands of university libraries, with the internet archive (marxists.org) being forced to remove all covered works under copyright (of the English translation).

3.) As a result of the first two points, less and less emphasis is placed upon Marxism's philosophical method, the materialist dialectic. Doubtless you will see many posters here condemn dialectics as mysticism without offering an alternative explanation that does justice to an assessment of Marx's thought as he grew older. Dialectics is rejected in favor of a more empirical approach that relies on superficial reading and misunderstandings of economic issues, which leads to equally superficial rejections. Andrew Kliman recently wrote a book defending Marx's most maligned concept, "The tendency of the rate of profit to fall", and how it is crucial for an understanding of the 2008 crash; there are not many books like this one that attempt to explicate Marx's actual ideas. Debates here tend to argue Marx's "intent" with "quote wars", rather than any theoretical discussion. It won't be long until you sense a parallel between these "orthodox" leftists and priests trying to grow closer to the Holy Father by praying louder.

[Kingfish]

What are you talking about?

Allow me to clarify.

Inflating numbers? Half the population are women.

When I was talking about inflating numbers I wasn’t referring to people affected by these issue. I was however talking about how vocal and more memorable (for better or worse) activists on these issues can stick out in people’s minds disproportionately (often as a form of confirmation bias) hence giving the false perception that activists are not concerned with economic issues.


For example when Gough Whitlam was deposed in Australia there was a great deal of protests initially and it appeared as though he was in a position to not only win the election but to outright resist the governor generals orders. However he chose not to and the resulting election revealed why; the perception of his strength was illusory and that the militancy of his few supporters gave a very inflated perception of his popular support.

"These types of issues are closer to home for young people"? So being gay is just a new 'fashion' is it?

Not at all, for many young people in school or just starting their career economic issues are more remote and abstract compared to the social challenges facing women and people in the LGBT community. It’s much easier to be optimistic (and often accept) the poorer working conditions which youth experience directly and that can inspire and fuel economic activism when it is viewed as a merely a temporary stage before ones “real” career starts, the same optimism just cannot be present for these social issues. This is why I say it is closer to home than economic issues.

"Fairly easy (...in regards to...risk of retribution) to get into?" I take it you've never been raped. Or blamed for the HIV/AIDS crisis. Or died from being refused an abortion on moral grounds during pregnancy.

Firstly you just demonstrated a proof for my point that these issues are much easier to get into than economic problems because as you have shown these are problems that can be understood (and accordingly acted on) without having to wade through heavy and dusty tomes of 19th century thinkers and reams of 20th century statistics simply because they are so simple and present.


*Note* being simpler does not imply that they are automatically mean they are lesser issues


Secondly when I was referring to risk of retribution I was referring to retribution incurred as a result of activism. The loss of wages and retribution that can come from illegal sympathy strikes is something that an activist on social issues is much less likely to face these days (which course is not to suggest that it never has which is of course false), retribution like we see in Russia (though wether one would call Russia 1st World by the OPs description is debatable) is an exception not the rule.

[Sea]

Communists advocate for the oppressed. Many of us are the oppressed. Of course some of us, like myself, are multi-billionaires.

We'll spend out Tim [sic] as we damn well please.

[#FF0000]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

I wouldn't say they're focusing less on these issues. I hear communists talk about class all the time as well as issues of feminism and anti-racism. I think, though, that class struggle is at a hella low point and so talking about "class" doesn't have the legs that talking about these other issues might.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Let's be honest folks, most Marxists under the age of 30 only seem to focus on issues like feminism and gay rights. Why are less and less Marxists focusing on more economic issues? I am not saying that women's rights are disconnected from economics and they are not important; it is just I feel that too much Tim is spent debating it and practical action should be against the root cause of this: capitalism.

Bourgeois decadence + insidious revisionism but I mean really, who cares about women's rights or the gays, amirite?

[FSL]

Identity politics is a real thing and in some countries constitutes maybe 90% of what is considered left and progressive. But how many of the people acting like that really describe themselves as marxists?

[Prometeo liberado]

Most so called "Marxists" have little to no understanding of Dialectics, Internal Relations or any deep knowledge of how he and Engels came to the conclusions they did. As result young comrades take what ever the cause de jour may be.