Tristan Ewins, "onthebeach - what are you talking about re: 'two warnings left'??"

Too easy, but explaining the mild joke ruins it. Bolt was referring to university and as students of some humanities subjects would likely confirm, critical thinking is not necessarily rewarded where cultural Marxism prevails. Bolt's observations are spot on.

I couldn't agree more with Tristan. Marxism is part of the fabric of the modern era. In fact, we are all "Marxists" whether we know it or not in that certain basic concepts used in diverse fields of endeavour originated with Marx. Marxism has produced some of the most constructive, humanist political movements in history even though it has also (mostly via gross distortion of Marx' own ideas) produced truly abominable regimes.
Just as an ironic aside, it is forbidden to study Marx in North Korea. Apparently the official line is that the Juche of Kim Il Sung is superior to Marxism anyway. So, in trying to ban Marx, Andrew Bolt can take his honoured place next to Kim Il Sung, Hitler and Pinochet. Perhaps, given the crimes committed in the name of "democracy" we should ban that too, or perhaps we should forbid Christianity in recognition of the inquisition and other sundry crimes committed in its name. You see how preposterous this idea is?
Tristan is right, Bolt simply doesn't understand Marxism.

Tristan: not being a Marxist, I don't use words as Marxist technical terms ... politics being best conducted in plain speaking, I use words according to the common parlance meaning! Therefore I was not even trying to allude to socialisms utopian and scientific!

However, I have read left sociologist Alvin Gouldner on the two marxisms. In For Sociology he argues about the strains between the more insurrectionary and romantic alienation theorist marxisms and the more academic and party hierarchy scientific marxisms ... in my opinion the whole ideology of Marxism has split asunder and the different strands will never make common cause again! But both strands tend towards a use of historical destiny and horror of nothing ever being achieved ever to convince the followers to take the leadership's orders!

I'd rather a leadership more honest with the followers. That doesn't use the ideology of horror for social control. That interacts democratically with the movement, is part of the movement, and that listens to the ordinary members of the working class. Leaders who look down their noses at the lumpen proletariat are part of the problem not the solution!

But then I find social democracy and anarcho-syndicalism more attractive than any Marxist theorist I have ever read!

It's Shayn, Yebiga, and Tristan who don't understand Marxism. You are either displaying stupidity or dishonesty, there's no other possibility.

For example, Tristan says he's not a totalitarian. When I ask, what does he believe government should *not* control, he goes quiet, and pops up later arguing for total government control of everything. What is that but dishonesty or stupidity?

Yebiga comes fresh from two threads in which he has been repeatedly asked how he defines the legitimate limits of government - in other words, why is he not a totalitarian?
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16018&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16031&page=0
He repeatedly tries to evade answering the question on which his whole argument depends, then when he can't squirm out of it, he goes quiet, cannot answer because he does not believe in any degree of human freedom from state control, and then pops up here re-running the same argument he's just lost. What is that but dishonesty or stupidity?

It's laughable to talk of Marx's alleged contributions to economics. What are they supposed to be?

To say that his theory advanced understanding of exploitation only presupposes his theory was right in the first place - what is that but stupidity?

We have just established that you know you're wrong by the fact that you can't answer any of the questions I've just asked because they disprove you - and that you are defending what you know is wrong. What is that but dishonesty or stupidity?

I challenge anyone here to answer the 8 questions I have asked above, and I will demonstrate that you're contradicting yourself or Marx or both.

I think we can do without slanders such as "stupidity or dishonesty" as laid out by Jardine K. Jardine and others.

Similarly falsely associating Marxism with cartoons such as "Animal Farm" as cited by cohenite (up thread) also do not indicate the honesty that Jardine K. Jardine seems to hold dear.

But questions of honesty also apply to those who pretend to ask:

"It's laughable to talk of Marx's alleged contributions to economics. What are they supposed to be? "

You have so many internet search engines available that such questions can only indicate bad faith by those who introduce such canards.

Marx demonstrated that unlike slavery, fuedalism, and merchantilism, capitalism had a structural tendency for crisis that threatened its very existence. These tendencies also created injustice in the meantime particularly in that the factor share going to labour would fall as the factor share going to capital would increase. Marx demonstrated that workers real wages would fall as confirmed by the ILO - see: http://www.tinyurl.com/Marxist-Exploitation and
http://www.tinyurl.com/Marxist-Crisis

While capitalism has a period of strong growth, it finally reaches a point of crisis and in the old capitalist nations, wages fall and malnutrition spreads. For the UK see report from UK Daily Mail - http://archive.is/YLXoI

In the USA millions are on food stamps and cannot get decent health care or homes. This is all very different for how things were in the middle of the 20th century.

But the real problem is that capitalism attempts to stave-off crisis by increasing increasing debt to astronomical amounts. According to the Wall Street Journal, capitalist debt is now over 200 trillion dollars. See: http://www.tinyurl.com/200-trillion

This is unimaginable. In dollar notes 15 cm long, it would reach from the earth to the sun and back again over 100 times!

The solution is, as Marx noted, a revolutionary reconstitution of society, and we are already seeing this in the spread of cooperatives such as Mondragon (Spain)and elsewhere, eg:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative

I HAVE RESpect..for FOR THE PREVIOUS POSTERS
i tried replying the 8 questionsbut distracted by the links
there are so many more than 8

anyhow warren..has replied much
just to fill in come gaps[i ben waiting to listen to these]
they explain..a bigger global picture[in fact..2de/3rd hour..still havnt been allowed POSTING AT THE RBN SITE

but michael does via his forum
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/podcast.php

the shows i refer to are the second..on the list..[yesterdays]..podcast

it replies many questions/hence the attempt to hide
http://republicbroadcasting.org/Stang/index.php?cmd=archives.month&ProgramID=77&year=14&month=2&backURL=index.php%253Fcmd%253Darchives.getyear%2526ProgramID%253D77%26year%3D14%26backURL%3Dindex.php%253Fcmd%253Darchives

MY IDEA..is thE WORKER TRADITIONALLY Owns his tools
in argentina/when the bankers drained cash money from their system
the workERS MOVED INTO THEIR WORKPLACES..en mass..to protect and keep going..their only income stream..by co-operatives/collectives/think like A SHARED HOUSE..shared workplaces..community

we must reduce govt servants..in public service..as we sell off

yes i agree..that big business becomes much like big govt[too many middle managers/hiding accountability..DO NOTHINGS..IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.

these COMPLICIT[USEFUL/Idiots]..are the CURSE
NO WORK SKILLS..yet reaping off the wealth/cream..its obscene