is  MARXISM  RELEVENT TO DAY?
465458
Is Marxism relevant. Hmm. that's a subjective term. Relevant to what? To our economy, to our life, to our pocketbook, to our banking system, to the stock market, what? \n\nOr are you asking if Marxism is alive and well; where, in Russia, Germany?\n\nOr are you asking is Communism relevant today? But of course, there's more to Marxism than just Communism.\n\nMarxism lost popularity after the deline of Marxism in Russia, but his ideas are still in effect today and still influential in both political and academic cirlces. \n\nIt's very difficult to understand why. Marxism is great if you're part of the ruling class, but just doesn't work for the masses. So either we have some great conspiracy going on in the U.S., or the masses don't care; maybe both. \n\nThere are 10 Planks to the Communist Manifesto, and at least eight, and probably nine of the Marxist Planks are in effect in the U.S. And it isn't even covered up or secret, but neither is it blazened across the media screens and tabloids what a great discrepency our laws are in with our Constitution, and how our founding beliefs are in direct opposition to what exists in Washington today, but nobody seems to recognize it or care.\n\nAlways for the same reason, every time, every great nation in the history of mankind has only lasted for 200 years before complacency sets in. And when that happens, the few in power take advantage of the lethargy, and seize it all, take complete control, and squeeze it until it throws up on itself.\n\nThose in power have already bypassed the Constitution, made it almost non-existent, and the power of the Federal Government is now unlimited. The death of a great nation is upon us, and yes, Marxism is near the helm and at the root of the deception.
1183511
Someone who believes in the communist ideology.
126467
In some communist countries yes.
762908
Christianity and jewish thoughts certainly conditioned the thoughts of Karl Marx and the Crusades that lasted from 1090s till 1260s had certainly influenced his conclusions on the general nature of organised religions in Europe. But apart from that there is nothing that warrants any comparison between the two.\n\nMarxism minus proletarian dictatorship is not Christianity, nor if Marxism starts believing in God it becomes Christianity.
984127
Since you're obviously new to the game of rhetorical slandering, I'll go easy this time and offer a bit of advice:\n\nExamine closely which party most resembles the  Marxist doctrine, and try again.\n\n\nFozzy: if I could give thumbs up, I'd give you one.\nnice lesson.
877078
Yes it's only a slight difference... In Asia communism is the chief underlying political movement... In the US, socialism is the primary force guiding the leftist - moving government we have had now for over 12 years.
1023297
Ha. The "commies" are truly viewed as ev-il and injust, only because of Stalin and the other soviets who mucked up Marx's ideals! \n\nThe ignorance surrounding communism is outrageous.  People will never know that communism was supposed to benefit the whole and that the "Proletariat" was the group that misinterpreted and ruined it.  Also, they don't know that Marx had ideas for an INDUSTRIAL country to adopt his theories not an AGREGARIAN country like China. \n\nIgnorance is the key here. If people under 18 don't go to college, don't read Marx and have parents that grew up in the 50's and 60's the answer is YES. There is an anticommie sentiment prevelant here.
754685
Progressive = marxist
305716
Marx is observing that we as humans seem to make the same mistakes over and over again.  The first time we repeat itself, it is a tragedy, since we are stupidly repeating our mistakes.  The next time the mistake is repeated, it's almost a comedy of bad errors from a neutral perspective.  How could we do the same stupid thing again?\n\nHow it fits into dialectical materialism is this:  Marx observed that time and time again the Proletariat would work against it's own interests by supporting revolutions of the Bourgeois to replace the Aristocracy, only to find the Bourgeois becoming the new Aristocracy rather than actually fulfilling the needs of the Proletariat.  So the Proletariat kept making the same mistake over and over (helping the Bourgeois rather than seizing the mantle of power for itself).
367108
the aclu says yes to child pornography and no to baby jesus.\n\ni'd say that's beyond communism. that's f*cked up secular humanism...and even that is being nice about it.
1071757
You should read Karl Marx's book.  I read it in 9th grade, and was supprised by how differently it was portrayed.  The idea of communism in it's simplest is perfect.  Every one has food, clothing, and more than enough to thrive.  Communism would be the perfect government if we could find a ruler who wasn't self absorbed and greedy.  Unfortunately, that's not how most humans function.  (In enland, with the Monarch, Parliment was established to make sure that the King/ Queen wasn't abusing his/her powers, and I bet something similar would function well in a Communist community).  Communisim is only condsidered bad or evil because dictators in the past have proven to be bad or evil.
846928
Yes.\nToday is one of those days.
463493
Read the communist manifesto by Karl Marx.  It explains his theory.\n\nThe reason China is communist is because FDR was a marxist at heart, and wasn't concerned about what Mao Se Dong would do to China
388170
i believe they already have. just look at today's issues.\n\ngun control??? abortion??? income redistribution to such an extreme?????  secularization????\ncommunist countries typically have these things.\n\n\nwe are flirting with communism.
385281
The bourgeoisie could be termed revolutionary in the sense that this class overturned the feudal society and took dominance over the previously dominant classes (nobility and clergy). This is stated in chapter 1 of the manifesto.\n\nThe proletariat is revolutionary in the sense that it will overturn the social order once more and create a communist order.\n\nRevolution is not so much the battle of one group against the other. Marx and Engels recognise it as a SOCIAL FORCE that drives history and social development.
934132
Yes, it probably will be a major force again someday.  We historians have a quote we live by: "The only thing we learn from History is that we don't learn anything from History."  Ideologies like communism never die because people forget what happened before them.  There are still people who believe in it as the way to stop world strife.  They often claim that Soviet communism just wasn't "done right" or that it has to be tried worldwide to be successful (communism can't survive copmetition which should make one wonder if it is a viable system to begin with).  Every ideology has its true believers and someday, communists will get an upper hand in some unfortunate nation where they'll wreck havoc for a couple of generations before being tossed aside again.
154344
For Karl Marx, the basic determining factor of human history is economics. According to him, humans — even from their earliest beginnings — are not motivated by grand ideas but instead by material concerns, like the need to eat and survive. This is the basic premise of a materialist view of history. At the beginning, people worked together in unity and it wasn’t so bad. \n\nBut eventually, humans developed agriculture and the concept of private property. These two facts created a division of labor and a separation of classes based upon power and wealth. This, in turn, created the social conflict which drives society. \n\nAll of this is made worse by capitalism which only increases the disparity between the wealthy classes and the labor classes. Confrontation between them is unavoidable because those classes are driven by historical forces beyond anyone’s control.