Marxism is outdated but there are aspects worth incorporating in a modern state

Only good book in there I see is "Seeing Like A State" but that one is both critical of the West and East in terms of hyper-modernist statist planning of the 19th and 20th century.

I don't think he read the book considering the YouTuber is a fan of grand state-building projects

What makes Marxism outdated

Whatifalthist is a /lit/ s***poster that somehow got a following

His "takes" and a***ysis on history is genuinely awful, Just watch "Understanding Latin America" if you don't believe me.

To be clear I was referring to the original conception by Marx and Engels in the mid 19th century

Simply because it does not account for the changes in the world since. Not a failing imo, as it was written for a certain capitalist period

Will check this out. I don't agree with everything artist says but I find his perspectives interesting

Depends on what you refer to as "Marxism" but when I use the term, it refers to the direct descendants of the Second International which was intellectually tied to Marx, Engels and Lasalle

I find Marxism-Leninism (canonizing Bolshevik thought into a system) as defined mainly by Stalin and his side of the post-Lenin struggle to be fulfilling the revolution envisioned by Ferdinand Lassalle and 'the renegade' Karl Kautsky than anything else.

I don’t see what it hasn’t accounted for though

First of all, its now clear labour theory of value is wrong

Many Marxists don't really believe the LTV anymore, I think it's irrelevant, Marxists shouldn't be Ricardian and Marx wasn't either, he was directly critical of the bourgeois economists of his time and believed LTV wouldn't be able to work in capitalism. Some suppose he had a value theory of labor (digamo.free.fr/elson79-.pdf), which I am more sympathetic towards.

I recommend you look into value-form theory and the various debates around it, lots of interesting stuff, but it is very abstract.

cominsitu.wordpress.com/2021/01/10/a-guide-to-value-form-theory

You’re conflating what Marx and Engels literally and solely wrote as being the same as Marxism as an ideology and framework of thought

Of course there were things Marx and Engels did not and could not speak specifically on or elaborate fully on. This does not mean Marxism is outdated. Marxism is a means of interpreting, criticizing, and changing the world. It is a living science that gives us the tools to a***yze social formations in all their varieties and remains vital for this reason

James Lindsay

I would claim Marxism is much closer to a pseudoscience than science, Popper wrote about this

3 Thomas Sowell books

Couldn't be more out

My own criticisms of Marxism as I defined it, particularly in its most hegemonic variants of Leninism and its descendants such at Trotskyism or Maoism (which has its own sub-categories) is that its variant of materialism becomes more of an ironically metaphysical all-encompassing science rather than a method of a***ysis. Nature is not "dialectical" in a Marxist sense, IMO dialectics only matters in Marx in so far that he uses Hegel's method as a***ysis of capital and the social structures surrounding it, nothing more. I blame this shift mostly on old Engels's positivist interpretation in "Dialectics of Nature" as well as "Anti-Duhring".

There is also an issue of stageism which largely descends from Hegel, but you can largely blame the Enlightenment itself, as all liberal thinkers thought like this at the time.

Also the ironic presence of personality cults within revolutions, largely began with the original "Lassalle cult" which Marx and Engels panned in private letters not released years later after their deaths

Popper

Chiang was literally the hitler of asia

Type of terror instituted in his controlled areas Chiang
“beheaded the chief of the . . . general labor union and kicked his head about with their feet, then filled his belly with kerosene and burned his body.” Peasants in Hubei who belonged to wealthy clans exterminated entire villages with the help of Guomindang troops. They gouged out the eyes of victims, cut out their tongues, cut off their heads, smashed their bones, drew and quartered them, cut off their legs, doused them with kerosene and burned them alive, and branded them with red-hot irons. “In the case of women, they would run string through their breasts and parade them around naked in public, or simply hack them into pieces.” In just three counties of Hubei thousands of people were killed in the first weeks after the coup.3”

Excerpt From
Mao: The Real Story
Alexander V . Pantsov and Steven I. Levine
itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewBook?id=0
This material may be protected by copyright.

Mao literally beat Hitler 1 (Chiang) and Hitler 2 (Hirohito) of asia

Mao is a saint

Popper also called Lenin “Empiro-criticism” one of the best material philosophy he read

also if ur gonna be an anti-communist read someone interesting like Nemits instead of this dweeb lol

this guy is saying that altist is a bad historian because he doesnt use references from established historians and instead uses sources that are considered alternative or outdated

i think that these are valid criticisms but they dont completely undermine his actual points nor do they definitively disprove any of his claims. He doesnt have evidence of particular instances where altist outright lied

I am not familiar with any of the texts mentioned in this video, but i do feel like i can relate to a lot of the things he says, although i do think he exaggerates this incoming "social collapse"

op spitting

shoulda posted this in life sxn tho not politix wrong audience

what

they moved it

typical communist ad hominem based argument