marxism

Their thinkings always refer to the Age of Enlightenment, the III Republic and a little bit to marxism.

I don't like Marxism even though I find some of the analytic tools it provides to be very useful.

Maoism is not marxism, not that China is practicing Maoism today anyway.

Even Marxism at the lowest level is a theory of psychology.

It's called Cultural Marxism for those who don't yet know it.

Any flavor of marxism/socialism/redistributionism is good except what works.

One point which I rarely see addressed in various internet fora is the striking similarity of form between orthodox Marxism and orthodox Objectivism.

As someone who has run coops, been a member of coops, and generally been exposed to real living based on the highest ideals of marxism, it sucks for bringing about change.

(That political agenda, people seem to be calling cultural marxism, which is at least consistent with the marxist ideology most of them have).

So I am conflating socialism and marxism?

Would have been better to just focus on the issue of why an open society needs to be willing to accept diverse political views, even hideous ones like Marxism or neoreactionary craziness, without using it as a platform for pontificating about a crudely conceived culture war.

All I'm hearing is "I don't want to read about Cultural Marxism because I can't deal with the cognitive dissonance".

I also don't see how this is comparable with "scientific Marxism" or whatnot.

These regimes were not much more representative of socialism, or Marxism, than North Korea is representative of democracy just because it has "democratic republic" in its name.

Suspected capitalists encompassed professionals and almost everyone with an education, many urban dwellers, and people with connections to foreign governments." Check the Khmer Rouge link out thoroughly if you haven't yet - it's the most literal attempt to put Orthodox, pure Marxism into action the world has ever seen.

Marxism is basically founded on two ideas: 1) Capitalism will eventually make production efficient enough to produce substantial surpluses.

I can't help noticing that most of the arguments against paying for creative works seem to be rooted in grumpy Marxism.

They were dogmatic about it, it's scary how bought into they were to orthodox, agricultural, labor-based Marxism, anti-capitalism, anti-bourgeois.