We know or should communism was once thought to be the answer not the problem
Those who are listed as British spys should say it was not just a working class dream
We saw in uprisings and eventually the Berlin wall falling it no longer is some thing we want
My true fear is that the new right poses a far greater fear than communism
Seems lower wages and poorer working conditions for many of us is needed or claimed to be
A fairer caring more world is not communism,it is just about balance

Foxy,

I think that you are being a bit over dramatic, many people such as myself have been accepting of homosexuality and gay marriage for many years, but find the new identity politics incl safe schools as a bridge too far (and unsupported scientifically) and far too close to racism.

Secondly, rather than the conservatives labelling the left Marxist, it is far more common to find left whingers at just about every protest etc calling those they disagree with Fascists in a bid to silence any discussion that differs from their opinions.

Why is it Fascism to support free speech?

Aidan,

"Though the Venezuelan socialists have proven themselves to be extremely bad economic managers..."

Not just the Venezuelan communists...all communists. In all the nations that have ever turned their economies over to Marxist theory, not one has succeeded. Not a one. The theory is utterly flawed and the implementation of the theory always, ALWAYS, exaggerates those flaws.

But the apologists for it always, ALWAYS, have little local reasons why it failed in this place or that place while averting their gaze from the overall truth that it never works.

"...that country's economic trouble has long predated them [the Chavistas]..."

Yes they had some economic problems due to ill-management. But those problems were minor in comparison to now. Pre-Chavez Venezuelan women weren't reduced to selling their hair (and much much worse) just to escape the country, hospitals functioned, food and oil plentiful and cheap. The previous economic problems were on the lines of Venezuela not keeping up with its neighbours. Now Venezuela is a by-word for economic disaster. It makes North Korea look like an economic miracle.

That you'd try to dismiss these problems as merely a continuum reveals true motive.

"economic policy had eroded Venezuela's prosperity throughout the 20th century."

Now we are in the realms of economic illiteracy or make-believe. For much of the 20th century Venezuela was the wealthiest nation in central America. It was only the latter part of that century where there was a slowing of economic growth.

There are two constants with regards to communism:

1. That economically it always fails.
2. that there will always be people around who will try to paper over or outright deny those failures. There are a million wannabe Walter Duranty's even today. Which is why those who know the truth about communism need to constantly call them out.

Aidan,

Not just bad economic management. Venezuela is about as big as South Australia, 350,000 sq. miles, but without any deserts, only lush forests and farmlands, and rainfall all-year-round. So it could be producing crops all-year-round for its 35 million people and still exporting food.

So how on earth can there be food shortages, particularly if land was supposed to be re-distributed to the poorest ? Surely the people there are not all relying on little more than oil revenues - they can't all be rent-seekers, can they ?

Maybe there's more to it than mismanagement: communist regimes tend to be both opportunist and organised along patron-client lines, in which party bosses give out benefits to their cronies and persecute those who won't kiss their arses. Communist parties are inevitably patron-client systems. Schemers quickly learn the value of joining, and becoming lifelong, well-paid functionaries, perhaps in the armed forces or the secret police - there's always plenty of work for the secret police under communist regimes.

But the problem with giving out land to cronies is that they don't want to work hard either, they aspire to be functionaries. So the land lies locked-up and uncultivated, while most people live on the edge of starvation, outside the fence, looking in.

Joe

Shadow Minister,

I'm not being over dramatic.

The focus on Marxism politics and the use of blunt
words has for a long time been personal not only
on this forum but in the media as well. Many have
experienced it. This is due to the speed with which
modern societies are adapting to the upending of
conventional ideas. These ideas are now becoming
mainstream enough to cause a sustained backlash.

In Australia Safe Schools are a target - possibly
due to the pace of change and what it means. It is
most acute when it comes to children. Many of the
ideas presented in the Safe Schools program push
the boundaries for some. Particularly older people -
although young people find concepts like gender
fluidity not controversial at all. A lot of the
moral panic comes from very conservative groups,
Right-Wing Conservative MPs and the Australian
Christian Lobby -
in some cases, as a front for lingering homophobia
and transphobia - a resistance to accepting that
anything but heterosexuality as fully "normal."

The words thrown around are emotional and often
ignore what the program is. It began and largely
still is, a voluntary professional development program
for teachers IF a school requests it.

Yet according to people like Conservative Senator
Cory Bernardi it "indoctrinates kids with Marxist
cultural relativism." It "is tantamount to a paedophile
grooming a child." And Liberal National Party MP
George Christensen regards it as "ideological madness."
The Australian newspaper has campaigned against it.

And so it goes.

Question- Is Marxism still a powerful totem of evil in 2019?

Answer- Simply- Yes.

* Although as with most things it's more complex than that.

Marxism is related to Communism/ Trotskyism/ New Left/ etc- you can see disturbing elements of the New Left in other Marx related ideologies that tend not to be embodied in other ideologies (or not in the same way). From experience modern Socialists do read and place weight on Communist archives.

I've had a passing interest in politics and philosophy for many years- I prefer the old books (The Republic, The Politics, Art of War, The Prince, even the Communist Manifesto, Adam Smith, Nietzsche, Ayn Rand, many others- I have many books on my "to read list" that I'll never get to). Coming from an engineering background I approach content analytically.

* I've been viewing a number of pieces of material recently that have added to my understanding of the "current state of affairs"- including how Communism has evolved in relation to older ideologies.

- a brief biography of Durkheim (father of the Social Sciences)- Helps to understand how the Social Sciences have become influential within universities and society;

- Marcuse (Father/ Grandfather of the New Left- Trotskyism/ Neo Freudism)- Seems to link Communism with contemporary Social Liberalist Ideology;

- a book on Britain describing the revolution of capitalism and the rise of the "Landed Gentry" starting in the 1500's- this describes how the peasants, who could not sell the land but owned it in name - premogeniture, were forcibly disenfranchised from the land by the crowns desire for profit- the principle being those that created the greatest profit control the land - "land utility" and "trickle down economics";

- Prof Patrick Deneen- an Australian podcast- relates to the Landed Gentry- says that in order to understand the current environment we should go back much further in history and understand the very roots of our own culture through works such as Locke 1632-1704 (enlightenment thinker commonly known as the "Father of Liberalism", inspiration behind The US Declaration Of Independence, all men are equal),