Quite a few of our posters on this forum bring up
Marxism when views are expressed that seem to be
directly opposed to the ideology they prefer.
They try very hard to spread the fear that the
ideology of Marxism is infiltrating society by
underhand means. Marxism to them appears as a
bogeyman.

Are these people stuck in the 1950s and are they
still feeling the existential fears of that time?

What do you think?

Yes and yes.

They also seem to fail to comprehend that economic and political philosophies don't have to be completely accepted or rejected, but are collections of features we can pick and choose.

It certainly is a 'powerful evil'; and nobody has to “.. try very hard to spread the fear that the ideology of Marxism is infiltrating society by underhand means”. It is clearly happening, and has been happening for the past 30 years or more, as it has 'marched through the institutions'. That last phrase is a trifle trite, but anyone who hasn't noticed the changes really isn't taking much notice of what's going on around them.

As for 'picking and choosing', Aidan: you are in for one hell of a shock in the near future.

Foxy – I am particularly amazed by your naivety, given all the 'research' you do. You are going to the wrong sources. The ones you use are all part of the threat. They are not going to tell you the truth.

China and Russia are no longer communists Foxy
But yes it still is a danger to us all.
Not because it has any strength but because Conservatives/ read far right, insist on using it to scare
Only in the minds of those folk does it even exist other than in minor country's bound for failure

I'm tending to lean towards Aidan's observations
more than ttbn's at this point in time.

I find it interesting, although understandable,
considering the age of some posters, that they so
emphatically see only their own versions of "normality"
"decency" as being good. They are in effect defending
orthodoxy - by which they mean that "normality" and
"decency" is white, Christian, patriarchal, and of
course heterosexual. Anything else to be suggested
appears to them to be a heresy. And anyone who thinks
differently or disagrees is a Marxist - or worse -
evil.

Dear F foxy,

As an ex myself, I have to say that Marxist socialism has, every time, gone off the rails pretty quickly and degenerated into a sort of fascism. What am I saying ?! Into fascism, pure and simple: gulags, mass executions, a prohibition on any deviating thinking, a huge secret police apparatus, no better conditions for the workers (in a worker's state) than anywhere else in the world. So it goes with any philosophy which veers away from democracy with all its inevitable faults.

These days, what passes for Marxist socialism in countries like Australia tends to veer towards Gramscianism: Gramsci was always close to the anarchists (and flirted with Mussolini's fascists early on) and their repudiation of any sort of state - which grotesquely meets the extreme right-wing's abhorrence of the state. I suspect that the remnants of the Yellow Vests in France are a mixture of extreme-'left' (i.e. anarchists, smash the world) and extreme-right fascists (smash the world and start again, with much fewer but 'the right sort' of people).

What's the answer ? Democracy, always democracy, with all its faults, and a willingness to compromise, so that the middle 60 or 70 per cent across the political spectrum consciously strive to form workable governments willing to compromise, even horse-trade if you like, but to keep the political system more or less together in the workable interests of the majority. On that basis, I'm neither entirely happy nor unhappy with either the Coalition or Labour, or even some sort of workable 'United Front' government, based on workable compromise. I don't see much sense coming from the children of the cross-benches.

Happy New Year !

Love,

Joe