He analyzed capitalism (and religion), and his model predicted regular worsening crises when the market couldn’t expand further, leading to its eventual abolition.
He was employed as a journalist and published books on history and economics.
I swear libs just make stuff up that sounds right and then believe the shit they fantasized
> post made by 4chan user
> lib
Pick one.
Yes, historically that is the case. Semantics drift over time, though. Even though both liberals and conservatives are classical liberals, only one actually still uses the liberal label. When you don’t acknowledge semantic drift, you alienate others because they can’t follow what you’re saying. If you want to destroy capitalism, you need to make the circle of people bigger, not shoulder people out before they begin.
Phrased another way, you want to move the Overton window leftwards, not contribute to it shrinking to the right.
Maybe, but arguing over the meaning of words is not Marxism. The moment we get drawn into defining who is and who is not a “lib” we have abandoned Marxism for philosophizing. Paired with Gramscian formulation of hegemony, its pointless. The bourgeoisie still controls the mass media, so individual liberals aren’t a practical subject for criticisms, as much as structural criticisms of liberalism. To do that ,we dont have to demonize individual views, or the individuals that hold them, but rather, teach people to critique their own ideas and experiences.
For example, the moment the capitalists made a new meaning of the word “woke” their meaning became dominant. Now all discussions about the word are so abstract to be completely pointless. Emphasizing the objective or prior meaning of “liberal” removes the subjective element of Marxist criticism, downgrading our criticisms into bourgeois academics. Marx is explicit about this In Theses on Feuerbach.
If you wanna argue that Stalin and Mao wrote on these subjects (true) and they were Marxist (Mao yes, Stalin sometimes) I’d argue that Stalinism had already achieved hegemony in Russia when he wrote it (although his interview with H.G Wells in Marxism vs Liberalism is very funny) and Mao was writing about ideological struggle and party discipline more than trying to pin the term liberal on various individuals.
Tldr: arguing over who or what is “liberal” is not Marxism.
🍹Early to RISA 🧉
Alcoholicorn