#1
Kurdt
Post rating: ~
Marxsplain it to me

Edited by gyrofry ()

#2
[account deactivated]
#3
Post rating: ~
well you see on dec. 25th of every year the big bad capitalist comes down your chimney and exploits your productive labor while giving you, the petit bourgeoisie, trinkets to subdue your revolutionary instincts
#4
[account deactivated]
#5
Post rating: ~

discipline posted:

#6
desire be, desire go
Post rating: ~

animedad posted:
well you see on dec. 25th of every year the big bad capitalist comes down your chimney and exploits your productive labor while giving you, the petit bourgeoisie, trinkets to subdue your revolutionary instincts



ah, i see youve discovered ahistorical materialism. santa is not a capitalist, he does not sell the commodities he produces (and you may also notice that the elves are not waged labor). to properly understand santa im going to have to read bataille, which ironically probably wont happen until after christmas

#7
Chacabuco
Post rating: +
Marxsplaining is another word for pointing out the gigantic power imbalance that always exists whenever ideologies like feminism are articulated as universal or transnational. Marxism is a sustained attack on the universalizing influence of the bourgeoisie (and therefore on liberalism, on capitalism) and so it's obviously going to distrust ideas like universal feminism because, with the soviet union gone, the only globally saturated power structure left is that of capitalism and liberalism.

What I'm saying is that any normative statement made about oppression w/r/t any "global" group of people has behind it all of the force of neoliberal globalization, and, as a result, will end up on the wrong side of anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle in many situations. Supporting, for example, an initiative by women in the Cuban government for greater gender equality is one thing, and supporting Iranian women trying to overthrow the regime (purportedly) for the same reasons is another, but in light of power imbalances between the international capitalist consensus and both countries it is completely incoherent to support both because "women's rights."

As a final note, I don't think the working class or peasantry constitutes a global group like that. I think it's better to think of the bourgeoisie as the only truly international group, and the only real arbiters/mediators of global culture. The working class is more "everyone else," and it seems that national forms of resistance with the possibility for expansion/counterglobalization have so far been better and stabler forms of casting off the bourgeoisie than ones that try to be internationalist from the get-go.
#8
north pole
Post rating: ~
use lots of obscure terminology and do not make any effort to make your philosophy accessible or understandable. since you are actually mumbling along in an intellectually dishonest manner the purpose of this is to be a smoke screen to criticism and make stupid people think you know what you are talking about. warning tho, a smart person might try to understand your sentences and will complain that you are being incoherent or inconsistent with established definitions of words. assuming your sentence parses they might complain that its content does not reflect an accurate understanding of reality. in that case have them killed
#9
Chacabuco
Post rating: ~

discipline posted:


ahhaha i odnt know how to qoute Thigns but thats a good Video right there!

#10
[account deactivated]
#11
drivel of drunken hags
Post rating: ~

christmas_cheer posted:
use lots of obscure terminology and do not make any effort to make your philosophy accessible or understandable. since you are actually mumbling along in an intellectually dishonest manner the purpose of this is to be a smoke screen to criticism and make stupid people think you know what you are talking about. warning tho, a smart person might try to understand your sentences and will complain that you are being incoherent or inconsistent with established definitions of words. assuming your sentence parses they might complain that its content does not reflect an accurate understanding of reality. in that case have them killed



but often enough the people guilty of dismissing Marxist explanations are oddly enough radicals themselves associated with some strain of marxism and far maore likely to engage in an obscurantist race to the bottom

#12
Post rating: ~
lungfish srs q. for a sec.: when have u ever asked for clarification for a sentence u were trying to understand. or are you trying to say that u aren't smart?
#13
Post rating: -

Francisco_Danconia posted:
As a final note, I don't think the working class or peasantry constitutes a global group like that.


You're a revisionist.

#14
Post rating: ~
Marxplaining is shitty logical positivist faux analysis that eliminates all social variables sans class and is the primary domain of people with no training in the social sciences beyond reading a couple excerpts of capital and maybe quotations from chairman Mao, hope this helps.
#15
[account deactivated]
#16
Post rating: ~
yw
#17
Post rating: ~
marxsplaining is not an actual word lol
#18
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:
marxsplaining is not an actual word lol


Neither are you.

#19
Poronto
Post rating: ~
more like FARTsplaining
#20
Post rating: ~
instability inscribed in every sentence
#21
Poronto
Post rating: ~
these are my principles, sir. if you dont like them, i have others
#22
Post rating: +
mansplaining is not a real thing either. enwhitenment, however, is
#23
Post rating: ~
poor rich people
#24
Post rating: ~

Francisco_Danconia posted:
What I'm saying is that any normative statement made about oppression w/r/t any "global" group of people has behind it all of the force of neoliberal globalization, and, as a result, will end up on the wrong side of anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle in many situations. Supporting, for example, an initiative by women in the Cuban government for greater gender equality is one thing, and supporting Iranian women trying to overthrow the regime (purportedly) for the same reasons is another, but in light of power imbalances between the international capitalist consensus and both countries it is completely incoherent to support both because "women's rights."


you're coming perilously close to saying women's concerns should be subordinated to the geopolitical struggle between Iran and the United States, which is what real marxsplaining is. not that i disagree with highlighting real or potential conflicts of interest between differing working class populations, which are manifold under capitalist imperialism, but when they're deployed specifically to undermine social struggle it's rarely constructive or informative.

#25
[account deactivated]
#26
Post rating: +
oh you like actually want to know what it is. a few posters on wddp are big on feminism, and a lot of working feminists, especially first worlders who deal constantly with white libertarian male types, coined the term mansplaining, which i suppose basically means when a man explains something to a woman in a condescending but ignorant way. it's a ridiculously stupid term, but it exists, and a few major posters on wddp used it. marxsplaining came along when some of the dumber weirdos decided that anybody who invokes marx is coming from the same "position of ignorance" that certain men do when they approach feminism, and marx and men both start with 'm', so it is probably a similar thing, and hence marxsplaining
#27
Post rating: ~

Lessons posted:

Francisco_Danconia posted:
What I'm saying is that any normative statement made about oppression w/r/t any "global" group of people has behind it all of the force of neoliberal globalization, and, as a result, will end up on the wrong side of anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle in many situations. Supporting, for example, an initiative by women in the Cuban government for greater gender equality is one thing, and supporting Iranian women trying to overthrow the regime (purportedly) for the same reasons is another, but in light of power imbalances between the international capitalist consensus and both countries it is completely incoherent to support both because "women's rights."

you're coming perilously close to saying women's concerns should be subordinated to the geopolitical struggle between Iran and the United States, which is what real marxsplaining is. not that i disagree with highlighting real or potential conflicts of interest between differing working class populations, which are manifold under capitalist imperialism, but when they're deployed specifically to undermine social struggle it's rarely constructive or informative.



way to entirely miss the point of that post lol

#28
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:
oh you like actually want to know what it is. a few posters on wddp are big on feminism, and a lot of working feminists, especially first worlders who deal constantly with white libertarian male types, coined the term mansplaining, which i suppose basically means when a man explains something to a woman in a condescending but ignorant way. it's a ridiculously stupid term, but it exists, and a few major posters on wddp used it. marxsplaining came along when some of the dumber weirdos decided that anybody who invokes marx is coming from the same "position of ignorance" that certain men do when they approach feminism, and marx and men both start with 'm', so it is probably a similar thing, and hence marxsplaining


Meanwhile empirical evidence demonstrates Marxsplaining is a real thing as shown by the existence of Baby "Asians Are Racial Scum Because Marx" Huey P. Newton. Owned by the scientific method.

#29
[account deactivated]
#30
Post rating: ~
Also first world marxists are on average ignorant stupid ugly antisocial babies so in the context of an english speaking forum I think marxsplaining makes sense of a neologism. goatse.
#31
Post rating: +
first world marxists basically don't exist and if they did they certainly wouldn't be found on internet forums. marxsplaining defeated again
#32
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:
first world marxists basically don't exist and if they did they certainly wouldn't be found on internet forums. marxsplaining defeated again


Counterpoint: you.

#33
[account deactivated]
#34
Post rating: ~
I'm cool as hell.
#35
Post rating: ~

discipline posted:
oh I doubt that's what he actually said. you're exaggerating I bet!


he said that asians more or less don't count as a minority in the US because their average household income is too high. which is repulsive and might as well be what mm said.

#36
drivel of drunken hags
Post rating: +
this is a terrible thread
#37
Post rating: ~

Hawking_Radiation posted:
goatse.


it's happening again!!!

#38
[account deactivated]
#39
Post rating: ~

Groulxsmith posted:
this is a terrible thread


So's your fucking face.

#40
Poronto
Post rating: ~
gas