[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[red_elk]

There's nothing particularly Marxist in the BLM movement, they only share some common traits (anti-racism, workers rights)
Nothing bad if they were Marxists, either.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Being an academic Marxist is still being a Marxist. Hence why we would never use the term academic fascist if some professor came out sympathizing with Hitler.

We call academic fascists "evolutionary psychologists", and the various race 'scientists' that still seem to have hold amongst supposedly respectable peoples minds.

As a non-Marxist I'd say that Tolina is right. Some Marxists would argue against participation in movements like BLM as distractions from the class struggle.

Which would be idiotic, as race is a fundamental characteristic of class within the U.S. One cannot advance the class struggle by ignoring race at all, unless they already want to focus on certain elements of the working classes. This is a lesson from the CPUSA that you would think that ostensible Marxists would have learnt by now.

 

[Joij21]

There are no redeeming features to fascism. "Marxism" is one of those things like "Capitalist" where there's a foundation of useful stuff that inevitably gets bungled. There's no doubt that Marxism should be something people keep an eye on, but fascism will be a completely different ballgame.

Yes but my point is if someone claims they are in fact a Marxist then I think we should take their word for it.

 

[gay_Aleks]

There is an enormous gap between a CLAIM, and an ACTION, so unless you already think that the BLM is a roving gang of Marxists, ready to end the U.S, you have to face the overwhelming material proof that they are absolutely not in the final analysis.

 

[El_Machinae]

I think it's more a reason to look for trouble in the views they are espousing. "Marxist" as a self-label is going to be like "Christian". Sure, the fact that you self-identify might mean you have certain biases or leanings. But it only matters insofar as you understand any specific doctrine or actually care about it.

I know there are always "two sides" to the debate, but the mainstream pushback to BLM cannot even articulate the concerns the BLM movement is expressing. The 'leader' of the BLM movement isn't really all that powerful, since it's mostly being expressed as an anti-racism zeitgeist. But you shouldn't be surprised if people are side-eyeing their own readings of Marxism (which, again, has an entire academic tradition separate from all your fears about it) when the American faux-capitalism has failed them. The warning signs were there for a decade now.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Just for the record, there is nothing 'faux' about U.S capitalism as we see it right now. What you see is what you get; but I suppose that there is no one blinder than the man who refuses to see.

 

[Joij21]

There is an enormous gap between a CLAIM, and an ACTION, so unless you already think that the BLM is a roving gang of Marxists, ready to end the U.S, you have to face the overwhelming material proof that they are absolutely not in the final analysis.

If a person claims they want to murder people and likes chopping of the heads of dogs like Geffrey Dahmer. Would you give them the benefit of the doubt that they will not become a serial killer despite claiming they clearly would as well as having taken previous actions that indicate they would?

 

[El_Machinae]

If a person claims they want to murder people and likes chopping of the heads of dogs like Geffrey Dahmer. Would you give them the benefit of the doubt that they will not become a serial killer despite claiming they clearly would as well as having taken previous actions that indicate they would?

You're continuing to compare marxism to fascism, which means your analogies are too severe. There are entire aspects of academia where learning Marxism is going to be useful. It's more akin someone claiming to be Christian than it is to claiming to be a fascist.

You're at a disadvantage here, because you've only heard "Marxism" in boogeyman terms. It's like hearing that someone is trained in evolutionary biology and then assuming they're proponents of Survival of the Fittest.

Now, I've not listened to the interview, so I don't know what she means when she says she's 'trained' in it.

 

[EnglishEdward]

If a person claims they want to murder people and likes chopping of the heads of dogs like Geffrey Dahmer.

Never heard of him. Had to read wiki. His only good quality is his deadness.

 

[El_Machinae]

Just for the record, there is nothing 'faux' about U.S capitalism as we see it right now. What you see is what you get; but I suppose that there is no one blinder than the man who refuses to see.

I guess you're not inspired by the Trump version of the American Dream: where if you inherit hundreds of millions of dollars, you'll probably be a billionaire someday.

I call it 'faux-Capitalism' because there are too many tweaks in the system that are sold as 'supporting Capitalism' that end up not doing so. There are many fixes that would liberate the economy and concomitantly improve things, without being the least bit 'socialist'.

 

[Moriarte]

Yes but my point is if someone claims they are in fact a Marxist then I think we should take their word for it.

Why take their word for it? We can proceed to their official website and find out what BLM officially proclaim, whether they are a marxist movement or something else.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

 

[Joij21]

There is an enormous gap between a CLAIM, and an ACTION, so unless you already think that the BLM is a roving gang of Marxists, ready to end the U.S, you have to face the overwhelming material proof that they are absolutely not in the final analysis.

Right. Except communists like you probably use that old commie tactic of lying about the intentions of other organizations to protect your precious "united front". As a matter of fact your probably an accelerationist as well.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Da, tovarisch, I have come here on Civilization Fanatics Community Forums to debate with anticommunists until I go blue in the face, and then, I also lied during it all. My fellow comrades are robbing banks to fundraise our front organisation, BLM. You really got me!

It is either that, or the fact that communists have been at the forefront of all antiracist struggles thorough history. For all its faults, the CPUSA was one of the few organisations to struggle against white supremacy in the 30s and 40s. You cannot have communism, really, you can't even create the dictatorship of the proletariat, unless you set out to exterminate racism.

As to your accusations of accelerationism: nothing could be further than the truth. The fact of the matter is that Black people have been treated in the most miserable and degraded conditions. This has not produced a revolution of any sort. Therefore, it is a moronic, worthless approach, one that ends up in misery, and one cannot escape from the tasks at hand, they won't come on their own.

 

[El_Machinae]

Right. Except communists like you probably use that old commie tactic of lying about the intentions of other organizations to protect your precious "united front". As a matter of fact your probably an accelerationist as well.

Would you care to summarize what the BLM movement intends? What parts do you agree with? How do we get to the necessary solutions without triggering your fear of Marxism?

 

[Traitorfish]

If a fascist came out and publicly admitted they were a fascist no one would ever doubt it. So if black lives matter admits that they are Marxist then you better believe it. Of course you could always doubt their seriousness and commitment to the ideology. However the benefit of the doubt would not be given as in the other case.

The key word here is "admitted", because it describes the acknowledgement of something which a person would prefer not to be known. But affiliation with Marxism is only something which is admitted, is only a confession on the right, where Marxism is regarded as abhorrent. On the left, even on those parts which are fundamentally liberal in outlook, identification with Marxism is something which carries radical cachet, it is something which carries positive associated and therefore which can be boasted about. At the most vulgar level, it is something which freaks out the normies, which can garner approval even of those who do not affiliate themselves with Marxism. There is an incentive to misrepresent or exaggerate an affiliation with Marxism, and limited incentives to deny an affiliation with Marxism.

People do not publicly identify with fascism because fascism is almost universally regarded as a bad thing, to the point were genuine fascists will disguise or obscure their affiliation of fascism. There is an incentive to acknowledge affiliation an affiliation with fascism, and strong incentives against doing so. Happily, we also possess an exception which proves the rule: semi-anonymous edgelord alt-right forums, in which people identify themselves with fascism even if their actual politics are in essence a fairly conventional conservatism. The specific weirdo fringe culture of those forums creates an incentive to misrepresent or exaggerate an affiliation with fascism, but very limited incentives against doing so, and participants will therefore claim to be fascists when really they're just racist dorks.

All this is doubly true online, where a great part of political discourse, possibly the majority, is about competitions for status within a subculture rather than about affecting political change.

 

[Joij21]

On the left, even on those parts which are fundamentally liberal in outlook, identification with Marxism is something which carries radical cachet, it is something which carries positive associated and therefore which can be boasted about. At the most vulgar level, it is something which freaks out the normies, which can garner approval even of those who do not affiliate themselves with Marxism. There is an incentive to misrepresent or exaggerate an affiliation with Marxism, and limited incentives to deny an affiliation with Marxism.

The fact of the matter is that Black people have been treated in the most miserable and degraded conditions. This has not produced a revolution of any sort. Therefore, it is a moronic, worthless approach, one that ends up in misery, and one cannot escape from the tasks at hand, they won't come on their own.

So you both agree that BLM is playing a sham to get leftist support?

 

[Seon]

Honestly she might even be saying the truth if what she claimed to be trained in is viewing things through dialectic materialism, rather than pursuing Marxist-Leninist theory of creating a vanguard political party.

There’s little need for sham or care for the left whether BLM’s goals and policies are Marxist. It’s clear that their anti-racist strand of thought inevitably leads to alignment with socialism as the struggles of the blacks are intrinsically linked at fundamental level with class struggle, and all anti-racist thought will lead to anti-classism thought if logically pursued to its conclusion. Accelerationism is podunk, as solidarity can be built and message spread through acts that make the world better.

 

[Traitorfish]

So you both agree that BLM is playing a sham to get leftist support?

I believe that American leftists are quite capable of bamboozling themselves into imagining that they are more radical than they really are, and that the leadership fo Black Lives Matter are not immune to this tendency.

There’s little need for sham or care for the left whether BLM’s goals and policies are Marxist. It’s clear that their anti-racist strand of thought inevitably leads to alignment with socialism as the struggles of the blacks are intrinsically linked at fundamental level with class struggle, and all anti-racist thought will lead to anti-classism thought if logically pursued to its conclusion.

Sixty years of black "community leadership" does not clearly support this. You can argue from a socialist position that organisations such as Black Lives Matter should align themselves with class-based politics, but it doesn't clearly follow that they will, and because they are presently a numerically small organisation primarily comprised of college-educated activists without an organised mass base in the black working class, I don't think we can expect that they will take that turn.

It has been suggested that Black Lives Matter are superior to the Democratic Socialists of America, but the DSA represents just the sort of model which DLM is going to have to follow if it is to remain a "left" organisation, of a grass-roots mass organisation (in spirit, if not in membership numbers). If it remains a small, essentially elitist organisation, it is going to follow the normal path of liberal NGOs and become dependent on political and corporate patronage, and therefore limit its work to providing acceptable policy packages to its patrons.

 

[Seon]

Oh whether the leadership of the organization will turn towards that or not is irrelevant, and neither am I claiming that BLM as an organization should turn to class based politics. I'm saying that it is rather apparent that race-based politics leads to much more active class-based politics alongside it, because the two issues are intrinsically linked. Increased awareness of racism in our society also increases awareness of the struggling poor. Study of history of racism inevitably leads to analysis how stripping of material wealth and opportunities leads to decrease of political power and representation. Before that, we are confronted with how the slave drivers in their pursuit of wealth indulged in inhumane practices.

Why would I want BLM to abandon race-based politics or align themselves more with class based politics? I allege that's a false dichotomy, because for the most of the cases, the two are simply one and the same. As long as BLM retains their anti-racist and anti-establishment drive, they would be aligned with the socialist goal of an egalitarian society. More their message gets spread, more people will be able to see the class-based injustice that is also inherent in racism.

 

[JohannaK]

Where do you even get that?