Marxism

Well, there you are with the typical leftist mantra, and it's interesting how it's always a vicious attack on character. You won't give Horowitz the slightest benefit of the doubt, you just want to chew him up and leave nothing left of him.And I bet you've never read a thing he ever wrote, just leftist hate tracts against him, right?But when he was a Marxist radical oh how you would have loved him.

You are right. It took guts for him to leave his ingrained political upbringing, oppose his own parents, turn his back on the radical movement of which he was once a leader. It took guts and soul searching. It still takes guts because he has to put up with the hatred of all his former friends and colleagues and those who are indoctrinated by them.Radical Son is a good read. But I lived through those times myself in the San Francsico Bay Area and he invokes vividly the political atmosphere I remember so it touches me in a way it might not touch someone younger. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Have you read any of the stuff I posted about him?
Thought not.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I did read what you posted. Short tidbits out of context. Read his book.Oh and quoting all those professors objecting to his characterizations of them is really really funny. Like I said above, leftists don't know they are leftists -- today's leftists anyway. They're so indoctrinated they think they are just expressing a standard American doctrine of "peace and freedom" instead of a Marxist-defined idea of peace and freedom. {abe: Actually she said "peace and social justice." Same situation}You have to read a LOT more to begin to get a picture of both sides. For starters you've got to read the side you don't like. Take a look at Horowitz's book Radical Son at Google Books.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It isnt illegal to be leftist

No, it isn't illegal to be leftist or Marxist either. Be leftist all you want. What I'm talking about is people not KNOWING they are leftist and being completely ignorant of the source of their ideas and how they are opposed to the fundamental principles of the founding of this country as generally understood before the last few decades of Marxist revisionism in the universities. The poster on the other thread was incredulous at the idea there was any kind of Marxist/Communist influence in this country at all. I hope I've made it clear that his knowledge of history is sadly deficient. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

DO you understand what Horowitz attempted to do with people he thought were leftist?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I think so, yes, but I can hardly wait to hear what you think he attempted to do.

He tried to get them fired, thats what. For teaching things HE didnt agree with. Even if he didn't know the subject matter. He attempted witch hunts.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

That is leftist propaganda right there. He did no such thing.

Hi Faith,I'll reply to your post from the other thread here. I will also be referencing ICANT's post, since it is relevant to the context. Ok, my original point to ICANT was that he was buying into US propaganda, which he claimed he doesn't do. My point was that ICANT, even though he feels he's not buying into one form of propaganda, is actually, perhaps unknowingly, falling for another form.Why do I say that. Well, take your reply for example. The "Marxist Movement" in the US that you mention is NOT Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels original meaning for communism/Marxist Theory. The type of marxism you're talking about is the hybrid abortion form of communism that the Russian's created, Marxism-Leninism. Followed by Stalinism, and Trotskyism.The 1917 October Revolution, led by Vladimir Lenin, was the first attempt ever to implement Marxist ideology, but it wasn't actually Marxist theory. It was Leninism, or Marxism-Leninism. And Marxism-Leninism is different from the Communist Manifesto written by Marx and Engels.The communist/marxist movements here in the US was the fake propaganda that the Russians promoted. Which, without Marx's approval mind you, Lenin created. Marx himself would not have agreed with some of Lenin's ideologies. Source

quote:

---

Marx defined "communism" as a classless, egalitarian and stateless society. To Marx, the notion of a communist state would have seemed an oxymoron, as he defined communism as the phase reached when class society and the state had already been abolished. Once the lower stage towards communism, commonly referred to as socialism, had been established, society would develop new social relations over the course of several generations, reaching what Marx called the higher phase of communism when not only bourgeois relations but every class social relations had been abandoned. Such a development has yet to occur in any historical self-claimed socialist state.

---

So you see, ICANT's claim about not buying into propaganda is in fact false. My parents are immigrants, trust me, I'm not any type of US-made product. That's why I know what real Marxism is, not the propaganda you and ICANT have bought into.{Edit} No I wasn't, I was well aware of the Russian lead propaganda called Marxism-Leninism that was also tried here in the US. It is not true Marxism though. It is Leninism. You have made clear that many people in the US have a very narrow knowledge of history.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

I do believe you don't fully understand the words you are using.socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system.Communism, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. To keep everyone equal in a society.Socialism seeks to manage economy through social control. Socialists, see capitalism as a possible part of the state and believe that socialism can exist in a capitalist society. One of the ideas of socialism is that everyone within the society will benefit from capitalism as much as possible as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow by a centralized planning system to keep it within a state in which it doesn't do serious damage to any members of the society.Please don't let the "Conservative" brainwashing of the 1980's persist in modern times. Calling someone a socialist and a communist is very ignorant and lacks understanding. To top it off many people throw the word Nazi in with these two even though the Nazi Party was founded to fight the "evil" communists.

Hello slevesque, I just now saw your post here. Yes, but they CHOSE to get together and share their resources, and they did this only as a group among themselves, for EACH OTHER.This was not government forcing them to do it and do it for people they didn't even know. To do that is against the spirit of this passage, and it is stealing.There is not even anything in that passage to require Christian believers to organize ourselves in that fashion, although it is a model we can follow among ourselves if we want to. I like the idea and wish I were among Christians who think that way. I think more Christians should live like that and not be so dependent on worldly systems such as socialism.But again, that's entirely different from a secular government's forcing it on the entire citizenry. Surely, again, it IS stealing to take from anyone who doesn't willingly offer it, to give to someone else. There is no empathy in coercion. Empathy volunteers to give. There is only bitterness and resistance in coercion.And I don't think capitalism is about greed, I think it is about people working freely to support themselves and produce goods and services and inventions and everything else people do when left to themselves to be creative in their work.What one DOES with one's money is what is sinful or not, but earning it fairly and squarely and getting rich by it is not greed.Greed is just one human sin that poor people certainly have as well as rich, and Marxists have it as much or more than capitalists. The leaders of the Communist Party in Russia lived like the czars they had overthrown, while they murdered everyone who opposed them and the people stood in lines all day for bread that never came. That's Marxism at its rawest of course. We only have a modified Marxism.

It's possible to get so precise about the words that one misses the point. There are all kinds of socialism, but what I've been talking about is what was understood by its American practitioners in the thirties to be Marxist Communism and even drew some Americans to Russia. They were people who read Marx and sincerely tried to follow his teachings. My sources are people who experienced it, such as David Horowitz, but including some of my own friends.The children of those Communists became the founders of Sixties radicalism which they also understood to be Marxism and they read Marx and some of them read Mao's Little Red Book. I was around these people and saw this and read and heard their stuff and I know it's alive and well today, all the stuff they were teaching then, in the form of multiculturalist notions and "American imperialism" and all the liberationisms that are now just standard American morality. Straight out of their playbook.One friend was a history professor who taught Marxism for years. He told me that Cultural Marxism was not considered by true Marxists to be "really" Marxism -- but he sort of laughed when he said it, as if what's pure Marxism is up to whoever is defining it -- but he gave me some books by the Cultural Marxists and he taught them in his courses too.There may be many Marxisms but we certainly have one or a few of them solidly entrenched in Americans' minds today.Yes there are all kinds of socialism but what's the point in trying to parse it all out so closely? The original statement was that there is NONE. Now it turns out onifre, whose post I hope I'll get to next -- but they told us where I live that they're going to shut down the power in about twenty minutes for the rest of the night because the wind knocked down a pole so I don't know if I'll get to his or not -- Anyway he also is getting so sophisticated about different kinds of Marxists and socialists that the point is getting lost. There are cultural and philosophical and political and economic influecnes all going on in different ways taht can be traced to teachings that called themselves Marxism or Communism back when. We don't need to split hairs here. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Please read the last post I wrote. You are making such fine distinctions about what's really Marxism that you seem to forget you acted absolutely incredulous to ICANT that he considered anything in America to be Marxist and that's not fair if you just mean he has a Marxism in mind that to your mind isn't pure Marxism. You implied there is NO Marxism in this country. But there's a ton of it that comes from sources that called themselves Marxist and Communist in the early and middle 20th century. And it's thoroughly embedded in the culture today. I don't care if it's "pure" by someobody's definition or not, it uses Marxist quotes and Marxist concepts and for all intents and purposes it is Marxism and it's in every aspect of our lives today.