"Are these people stuck in the 1950s "

Or are they living in the 2010s and others haven't caught up yet.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/venezuelan-women-sell-hair-sex-and-breast-milk-to-survive-as-country-crumbles

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3995286/KATIE-HOPKINS-mourning-people-Cuba-selling-thing-bodies-Havana-street-corner-sex-business-Castro-couldn-t-ban.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/the-big-picture/2018/02/riches-rags-venezuela-economic-crisis-180211123942491.html

The 20th century is littered with so-called intellectuals who failed to see communism for what is or was then. People like the Webbs, Durante, Shaw and literally millions of others.

Its hardly surprising that our current times would also have equal myriads who not only fail to learn from history but also fail to see what's happening around them now.

Foxy,

The problem is that most people have no clue of Marxist theory, its derivations and willful amnesia toward the 10s of Millions of people killed in its name. That in many universities up to 40% of social science and liberal arts professors identify as Marxist would indicate that this toxic philosophy has not died the shameful death it should have.

Marxism is more than just authoritarian socialism, it is an economic philosophy based on the assumption that society and identity are social constructs which can be manipulated. Thus the references to "Neo-Marxism" don't target socialism directly, but more the attempts to mould society by example controlling what speech is acceptable etc.

That the left label any utterance contrary to their accepted dogma "hate speech" and the concept of free speech is considered conservative and reactionary would indicate that intelligent peoples' fears are far from anachronistic.

Foxy,

The problem is that most people have no clue of Marxist theory, its derivations and willful amnesia toward the 10s of Millions of people killed in its name. That in many universities up to 40% of social science and liberal arts professors identify as Marxist would indicate that this toxic philosophy has not died the shameful death it should have.

Marxism is more than just authoritarian socialism, it is an economic philosophy based on the assumption that society and identity are social constructs which can be manipulated. Thus the references to "Neo-Marxism" don't target socialism directly, but more the attempts to mould society by example controlling what speech is acceptable etc.

That the left label any utterance contrary to their accepted dogma "hate speech" and the concept of free speech is considered conservative and reactionary would indicate that intelligent peoples' fears are far from anachronistic.

Belly,

Russia may not be communist, but China with its strong state control of both the economy (state-owned enterprises) is clearly closer to communist than democratic.

The number of corpses produced by various Marxist regimes is a large number. I see the Communist Manifesto as a recipe for producing corpses.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12693 points to my article making the connection.

david f,
The trouble with that argument is that there were also a very large number of people killed in the name of anticommunism.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Shadow,
China's certainly not democratic - it's an autocratic authoritarian police state. But despite the Communist Party being in charge, its economy is closer to capitalist than communist.

Marxist theory is not really a consistent philosophy, as Marx contradicted his own writings.

__________________________________________________________________________________

mhaze,
Though the Venezuelan socialists have proven themselves to be extremely bad economic managers, that country's economic trouble has long predated them. The effects of a fixed currency and procyclical economic policy had eroded Venezuela's prosperity throughout the 20th century.

__________________________________________________________________________________

ttbn,
>Aidan: you are in for one hell of a shock in the near future.
What brings you to that conclusion?

Dear Aidan,

The fact that people were killed in the name of anti-communism does not negate the implicit violence specified in the Manifesto.

Communism, in addition to being a real menace, is also used as a label to attack people who want to do something about the oppression of capitalism by calling them communist.

Capitalism in the form it takes in the Scandinavian produces decent societies. Capitalism in the form it takes in some other societies is oppressive. Communism need not be oppressive, but the form specified in the Manifesto is most oppressive.