New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
It's more nuanced than you may think. We all know that marx was a jew, but marxism itself is only halfway made up of marx's jewish worldview. The other half of it comes from Engels, who was aryan. This leads to an interesting dichotomy and is likely the cause of marxism's splintering during the early days of the labor movement.

And I can categorize the splintering of marxism into 3 separate categories:

Orthodox marxism. This is the core of what marxism was originally and it has never been particularly successful. The only people who have ever really represented orthodox marxism are anarchists such as kropotkin.

Sorelian marxism. This is where it gets... weird. Georges Sorel was a French heterodox marxist thinker active in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Sorel was unique in combining marxist theory with blatant reactionary and monarchist theory. This is the variant of Marxism that spawned mussolinis fascism and therefore every third positionist movement afterwards. It played a smaller role in the formation of the 3rd type of marxism:

Leninism. Somewhere between sorelianism and classical marxism. Has more reactionary traits than orthodox marxism but fewer than sorelian marxism, and it was inspired by both. Leninism would spawn multiple cadet ideologies like stalinism, maoism, juche, etc.

What is important to understand: it can be valuable to cherry-pick the theories of Marxism in the same manner as Georges Sorel or Mussolini. Why? Because marx wasn't wrong about anything, we are currently living in the era of the fulfillment of what he wrote about in Kapital. The issue with marx was in his solution, but his and engels' predictions are very much true. The wise person sees the writing on the wall and learns from this. When you read marx you understand the problem, but it should be up to you to decide the solution for the problem.
You must log in or sign up to comment
8 comments:
cis_scum on scored.co
8 months ago 7 points (+0 / -0 / +7Score on mirror )
Marx was a schizo jew whose only aim was to destroy European society and the White race, so no you shouldn't take any of his insane ramblings seriously.

Communism predates Marx and it seems his main aim was to inject as much destructive jewish influence into the socialist/communist/leftist movement as possible as well as weaken the anti-semitism which was common among non-jewish leftists like Bakunin, Fourier, Proudhon etc.
PurestEvil on scored.co
8 months ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
> but his and engels' predictions are very much true

Not really. Remember the "tyranny of the proletariat" thing? So far it only happened by jews running it and becoming the tyrants in various countries. So that didn't happen even where it was supposed to. And it didn't happen anywhere else.

> we are currently living in the era of the fulfillment

Which isn't a particularly big revelation. If you look into history, it's all about looking at the trajectory of things. This process spans multiple centuries, and namely the relative amount of peasants in countries significantly decreased, plus the industrial revolution.

Einstein also didn't invent anything - he just stole from German physicists, and was pushed by jewish media. Or why do you think a jew is known as the smartest man in existence? Because it's all jewish propaganda. The same reason why the Holocaust™ is so popular - jewish propaganda.

So let's not pretend like Marx is some kind of Nostradamus figure.

> The issue with marx was in his solution

Which is utterly retarded. Like a hippie commune that *somehow* just works, even though nobody actually works. It's effeminate nonsense. And the only way it works is if a class of people play hippie commune while there are countless men slaving away doing the real work to uphold their asses, but those who point it out get put into the gulag, because the hippie commune has to pretend it doesn't exist. And that did happen in the Soviet Union.

> When you read marx you understand the problem

I understand the problems without lobotomy. And from a perspective of today. The problems and their solutions are VERY simple to elaborate:

1. The jew is 90% cause of the problems.
2. It needs to be solved once and for all.
3. After that, and not before, we can approach actual problem solving. The jew will do everything in his power to prevent solutions. TND? Guess who'll be first in line to prevent that.
deleted 8 months ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 2 children
devotech2 on scored.co
8 months ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror ) 1 child
Definitely georges sorel. Without his theory we would be trapped between 2 different jews without a coherent, modern, and viable ideology against them. Before sorel, the only counter to jewish capitalism and orthodox marxism was feudalist monarchism, which simply is not a viable belief in a post industrial world.

Sorel, ironically a heterodox marxist, was the inventor of the blueprint for fascism. And fascism was the blueprint for national socialism. We also have other movements like the national syndicalist Falange, which is undiluted sorelianism. None of this would have happened if sorel never wrote any theory, and if he hadn't been a once orthodox marxist who dabbled in reactionary beliefs.

That being said though, there are some things about sorel that are kind of jarring and odd by modern standards because sorelian thought is effectively the evolutionary transitory period from marxism to fascism. Such examples include his support of Lenin and mussolini simultaneously, or his praise by both Lenin and mussolini as well. 3rd positionism by this stage obviously wasn't fully developed and completely coherent yet and it still had a lot of vestigial leftovers from marx
el_hoovy on scored.co
8 months ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
doesn't national socialism, which developed sort of alongside fascism, have nothing to do with either fascism or marxism?

from what i understand, mussolini's trains ran on time, but he had no loyalty to his people and worked with whatever mercenaries (metaphorical) would serve the state the best - you could almost call it a fluke that he happened to be a competent statesman. marxism is mostly insane ramblings to justify jewish genocidal tyranny... what's WW2 Germany got to do with either of those?
devotech2 on scored.co
8 months ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
National socialism has about the same distance between fascism as communism has with fascism. That is to say, you technically could not have one without the other, but they differ quite significantly.

What hitler took from mussolini, and in turn what mussolini took from sorel, was organization, glorification and use of justified violence, hostility to bourgeoisie democracy, and the theory of mythos leading to a cultivation of power (this was also shared by Lenin as well), they also both shared collectivism and identity. What they both agreed on, but did not take from sorel, was class collaborationism. Where they differed was mussolinis belief of national identity and hitlers belief of racial identity, although mussolini would later on believe in racial identity as well.
PurestEvil on scored.co
8 months ago 0 points (+0 / -0 )
> This place has kind of run into a wall

Creativity isn't going to solve anything. Like coming up with novelty is somehow better for the sake of novelty.

> Who, in your opinion, is the most overlooked thinker of the 19th and 20th centuries?

Adolf Hitler. And people today grow to realize it. And he wasn't just "overlooked," but actively suppressed.
USSDefiantJazz on scored.co
8 months ago 0 points (+0 / -0 )
>but it should be up to you to decide the solution for the problem.

I know a Solution, one that is very Final you might say.
Toast message