Faith- did the tan text in
Message 244 help readability for you? I thought less contrast would help. Let me know if that did not work for you.
Perhaps you are all ignorant of the symbology of sixties style Marxism. "Herstory" is a mild little clue but you never see that phrase in any other but a Marxist feminist context. "Struggle," the "Black Struggle," is a Marxist phrase. "Black Liberation" is a Marxist phrase. The symbol of the raised fist -- which of course suggests violence. The whole thing is wrapped around Marxist rhetoric and symbology.
No. I'm quite aware of the symbology from the sixties, and it was much more than Marxism, so I just don't think it can be associated solely with Marxism. For instance
"herstory" is just simply a feminist (womens equality) term to use instead of "HIStory" - where history has been traditionally written by men. Feminism is not Marxism.
"Struggle" is just that, and it owes no allegiance to any political stripe. That Marx recognized the struggle poor people and working people face under capitalism does not mean he invented or owns the term. People struggle to pay their rent because the pay they get from work is not sufficient.
"Black struggle" is the struggle blacks face to live a prosperous life in a country with systemic racism.
"Black Liberation" is what the civil war was about, liberating PoC (People of Color) from oppression.
The raised fist is a generic symbol, it can mean anger or solidarity or resistance or victory (Trump with raised fist).
At the very least it shows the leaders are up on the Marxist frame of reference, use the terminology, and have no doubt absorbed a lot of the doctrine. They also, or at least one of them, has ties to Black Panthers.
No Faith, it shows that you see Marxists under every bed. Being familiar with the "frame of reference" just means being well read and educated on the issues of socioeconomic justice and injustice.
But more importantly, if they
were Marxist that doesn't change the BLM protest movement for civil rights and civil justice being a valid movement that identifies real problems in our society.
Nor is Marxism
per se necessarily bad:
quote:
Marxism
Marxism is a method of socioeconomic analysis that analyzes class relations and societal conflict using a materialist interpretation of historical development and a dialectical view of social transformation. It originates from the mid-to-late 19th century works of German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
Marxist methodology originally used a method of economic and sociopolitical inquiry known as historical materialism to analyze and critique the development of capitalism and the role of class struggle in systemic economic change. According to Marxist perspective, class conflict within capitalism arises due to intensifying contradictions between the highly productive mechanized and socialized production performed by the proletariat, and the private ownership and appropriation of the surplus product (profit) by a small minority of the population who are private owners called the bourgeoisie. ...
For "proletariat" you can substitute "workers," and for "bourgeoisie" you can substitute "corporate owners," and this description is more valid today than ever as income and wage gaps are increasing.
Being aware of the problems inherent in our socioeconomic system is half the battle in dealing with it in a just and equitable manner.
That people naturally object to being oppressed in this manner doesn't make them Marxist, it makes them people that are angry and resentful of being oppressed, and it makes them want to change the system.
Even if I allow that it might be more window-dressing than strict Marxist ideology to some extent, it turns me away from it as a serious movement I could support.
Not all activists are Marxist (follow Marxist doctrine) they can simply be protesting the systematic oppression of poor working people.
That you see evil is your problem.
Enjoy
™ Version 4.2
