Jardine K. Jardine

Judging by your language and rationality, it seems you do not want a reply.

You use such tone that anyone replying would be bound to use the same, but would be totally embarrassed in doing so.

The only audience you deserve is the bathroom mirror.

Old zygote, like all good commies persists. There is an immense, well pitiful, irony in someone called old zygote supporting Marxism; both are the result of arrested development.

Old arrested development says new Marxism is going to be different from the past one which caused all those deaths and destruction; trust Marxism he says, it's changed.

Yet here we have inner city trendy Yvonne saying:

"The Andrew Bolts of this world spew out the most ridiculous tripe and have far too big a platform to do so, sadly it gets mindless sheep bleating loudly and in unison."

Nothing has changed. The left have always been snobs who look down on the hoi polloi. Such snobbery motivated Finkelstein who was upset the "mindless sheep" were being led astray by Murdoch and for instance no longer believed the priests of AGW.

The left like the workers; as pets; same with the aboriginals and the boat people; they like victims so they can make rules and regulations and look important. Marxism is perfect from them; everyone is equal except the bosses and the bosses are the most useless but the most strident whingers who are the left.

Rhian mentions social capital; Alexis de Tocqueville's definition of SC is still the best and still depends, indeed is a product of individual rights and an open transparent society. This is the antithesis of Marxism. And isn't it odd there is no philanthropy in commie nations; I suppose the Marxists will say none is necessary since everyone is equal.

Anyway Bolt's piece was not about banning the study of Marxism but the advocacy of it by the usual leftie academics who have had such a pernicious influence in recent times.

Chris Lewis is upset at the QE; I guess this will make him distraught:

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2014/02/22/the-end-of-the-age-of-austerity-even-before-it-began/

cohenite,

No I have toughened up a bit, although some documentaries and movies still cause me to shed a tear.

Yes, it is sad. These people, those in power, simply make up new strategies as they go along.

I have my doubts that QE is good for the US or world in the long-term.

NB: I am making a correction to my last post here where I wrote:

"Finally: That's not saying that there are not forces which exist which are outside what can be verified immediately and empirically. ...The boom-bust cycle in capitalism, the tendency to monopoly, the falling wage share of the economy, reserve army of labour and so on."

These things - boom-bust cycle, monopolism, falling wage share etc - are things that CAN be verified though empirical research. But only collectively...through social effort. Hence my error which funnily enough no one else picked...

What cannot be determined is whether or not capitalism will collapse. Because there is constant technological innovation that improves living standards even as the wage share falls and exploitation intensifies.

But modern capitalism is also based on 'core-periphery' economic relations where the Third World is 'externalised' from the core capitalist economy; serving both as a market to dump some goods; but even more so as a source of cheap labour - which faces hyper-exploitation...

But rebellion against this could upset the whole core-periphery economic order - on which the prosperity of core economies partly rests; And through which many of us are "bought off"; We are exploited ourselves - but we accede to it because we benefit in the grand scheme from the exploitation of others. (the same can occur WITHIN the domestic working class as well; 'aristocracy of labour' etc; lack of respect for the working poor, welfare dependents etc...

The possibility that the advanced capitalist world could ultimately establish such a global order as the basis of peace within that world - was referred to as 'ultra-imperialism' by Karl Kautsky. No more world wars would be good; but a tendency towards such an arrangement is still unjust... Though 'ultra-imperialism' has not been realised in the sense that there is still Great Power rivalry; eg: Russia and 'the West'; China and its neighbours etc...

A few more responses:

Andrew Oliver says that he's sympathetic with Popper's critique of Marxism; But he does not refer to anything specifically said about AUSTRO-MARXISM and its particular history - to which I again point to their historic record. (see: the original article)

Neither is there a response to my point re: Francis Fukuyama. (the logic of my point being that you cannot dismiss socialism on account of objections to Hegelianism - because by the same logic you'd rule out liberal democracy on account of Fukuyama)

The problem with the Hegelian dialectic is that "the real" is identified with "the rational" and it "inevitable" in the logical schema; But even if one thinks something is 'rational' or 'inevitable' does not mean you accept it as right. (See: Adorno and Negative Dialectics, 'bad totality'.

IN any case there are many who have been strongly influenced by Marxism who do not accept 'monism', 'hard materialism/determinism" or 'closure'. (again: take Bernstein and the Post-Marxists) I consider myself very much influenced by Marxist tradition - but also by Post-Marxism and 'democratic Revisionism.' I believe in a mixture of 'logic' or 'structure' and 'agency'... ie: History is partially determined by the logic of economy and class struggle - but while it is difficult - it is not impossible to overcome this through collective 'will to power'; THOUGH hopefully not a take on 'will to power' which involves repression, war and Terror...

re: Absolutism - there were parallels in the sense that if you take a (non-Marxist) definition of class - the privileged strata who benefited most under Stalinism could be interpreted like that... Though even then the distributive inequalities were negligible compared with modern capitalism....

Cohenite admits he knows of Orwell - and yet seems to think it is *irrelevant* that he fought alongside Marxists an was a democratic socialist. (enough said)

He mentions Churchill; But seems to think the First World War and over 20 million deaths is NOT worth mentioning.

Cohenite

Now quoting catallaxy?! - Blimey. The world's worst, crudest, dumbest, redneck, and rightwing peddlers of Bolted rubbish.

They are in a world of their own.

I am OK with Marxism in universities because this is where it can be intellectually test, applied, and developed.

Keep catallaxy out, I say. They seem intent into turning Australia into a debt ridden, low-wage, police-driven, capitalist wasteland.