Posted on 08/20/2009 3:33:21 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out
New York Times book critic Dwight Garner on Wednesday enthused over a new biography of Friedrich Engels, cooing that Marxism is “back in vogue” and adding that the founding communist comes across as a “jovial man of outsize appetites” in Tristram Hunt’s new biography “Marx’s General.”
Garner opened the review by insisting that decrying capitalism is now hip again: “Thanks to globalism’s discontents and the financial crisis that has spread across the planet, Karl Marx and his analysis of capitalism’s dark, wormy side are back in vogue.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
NYT - Acute, Chronic, Recto-Crainal Inversion Syndrome.
How an ideology that invariably produces human misery and death on a massive scale can be “in vogue” is beyond me.
no foolin’
Capitalism is great.
We oughta try it sometime!
I’ve never figured that out, either. Nowhere has Marxism ever worked, nowhere has it ever produced prosperity or peace, nowhere has it ever existed without death camps or mass extermination campaigns. I fail to see its charm.
I hope it's not true that every generation has to learn this lesson first hand.
It's the same old serpent that's been around since the beginning; as Lincoln said.
Now, sirs, for the purpose of squaring things with this idea of ``don't care if slavery is voted up or voted down,'' for sustaining the Dred Scott decision, for holding that the Declaration of Independence did not mean anything at all, we have Judge Douglas giving his exposition of what the Declaration of Independence means, and we have him saying that the people of America are equal to the people of England. According to his construction, you Germans are not connected with it. Now I ask you in all soberness, if all these things, if indulged in, if ratified, if confirmed and endorsed, if taught to our children, and repeated to them, do not tend to rub out the sentiment of liberty in the country, and to transform this Government into a government of some other form. Those arguments that are made, that the inferior race are to be treated with as much allowance as they are capable of enjoying; that as much is to be done for them as their condition will allow. What are these arguments? They are the arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it. Turn in whatever way you will---whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent,
It’s only “in vogue” with the people who have benefited from capitalism and the freedom to ignore history. It is made up of those who believe they would be in charge in such a society, and those who believe they would get all their neighbors’ stuff.
A friend of mine is from the former East Germany. He went off on a guy one night who decided to wax poetic about how wonderful socialism would be when he found out where my friend was from.
They really need to put Stalin’s head in that graphic - the first guy killed no one, the second guy got a few after he returned to Russia, the third guy murdered 60 million, Stalin murdered 30 million, and Hussein? Will he be a philosopher or a mass murderer?
I wonder if this idiot realizes that, under socialism, the first ones into the chambers are the 'critics'.
He used the same deception in handling of one of his main sources, Dr. J. P. Kay's Physical and Moral Conditions of the Working Classes Employed in the Cotton Manufacture in Manchester (1832) which had helped to produce fundamental reforms in local government sanitation; Engels does not mention them.
He misinterpreted the criminal statistics, or ignored them when they did not support his thesis. Indeed he constantly and knowingly suppresses facts that contradict his argument or explain away a particular 'iniquity' he is seeking to expose."
...In one section alone, Chapter Seven, 'The Proletariat', falsehoods, including errors of fact and transcription, occur on pages 152, 155, 157, 159, 160, 163, 165, 167, 168, 170, 172, 174, 178, 179, 182, 185, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191, 194 and 203."
Intellectuals by Paul Johnson
I think they say that cockroaches are the only thing that will remain alive after a nuclear attack. Coincidence?
we will see where zer0bama goes...I see him more of a national socialist/fascist than pure Marxist...time will tell. But I hope his time is 4 years or less....I pray for his impeachment daily.
The only thing in vogue about Karl Marx is to see what the jOker is going to do next.
The rehabilitation of Karl Marx has begun.
Next, the rehabilitation of the misunderstood genius that was Pol Pot.
sarc//
Responsible is not the same as ordering. Marx may be responsible, but he was not himself a mass muder. Nor was Lenin - his NKVD killed many, but it was not until Stalin took over that the mass puges in Russia and Europe took place. Be it as it may, the point is which will Hussein be?
Hussein is a Maoist. Never a fascist- fascist do not hire communists (Van Jones) to work with them. The two variations are mortal ememies.
IMHO, Bill and Hillary are ambitious crooks, not Marxists. Far less dangerous...
Noooo. Pol Pot was too much a minor player — Joe Stalin and Mao Tse-Tsung will be the next up.
Perhaps Trotski.
Third Way crooks, however.
Where is Joe McCarthy when you really need him????
Excellent quote! Thanks!
Hillary, on the other hand, was a disciple of Saul Alinsky as was Obama. Interestingly, she declined the opportunity to go with his organization and Obama accepted. If one considers Hillary's preposterous book, It Takes a Village, which really ought to have been titled, It Takes a Federal Entitlement, one can see the same tendencies in Hillary as are evident in Obama.
My thesis on the commitment to Marxism for people like Obama is perhaps best described by Whittaker Chambers in his forward to his classic, Witness, in which he describes the religious fervor of the communist. I like to embroider this insight with the observation that Marxism offers the most effective platform for the operation of the ego to run the world. That is the essence of communism and what Saul Alinsky, and The Frankfurt School, are fashioned to enable.
It is not mere coincidence that sociopaths and narcissists are drawn to the ideology. How big an ego does Hillary have?
The elites are bored. They stir the pot by trying to incite people at the bottom to fight the middle class - it makes their "elite" position all the more elite.
His "prize" was a disgraceful moment in the history of journalism - and many - for years - felt the prize should be withdrawn.
The New York Times sucks more because a well turned lie is not as good as a poorly written truth.
“but as long as the right people are running it/they have good intentions” paraphrasing the agrument made by a liberal freind of mine
Yeah, I’ve heard about that horrific NYT episode. Accomplices to mass murder.
Hundreds of thousand of extra people died because that "journalist" covered for the killers. And has the New York Times apologized yet? Nope.
They need to write a Mea culpa and fall on their knees and beg for forgiveness. They don't need to be pushing "Marxism is cool" shit. Effing murderers.
The "charm" for the New York Times liberals is they see themselves at the top - in elite Marxist power positions.
While it might be a horror to be at the bottom of a totalitarian society ( ask Jews who saw their children ripped apart) - to be at the top is an indulgence of unbelievable evil. That's who the boys at the "we suck more" paper must think they'd wind up. Sickening.
What is so awful about Duranty is that Times top brass suspected that Duranty was writing Stalinist propaganda, but did nothing. In her exposé "Stalin's Apologist: Walter Duranty, the New York Times's man in Moscow," S.J. Taylor makes it clear that Carr Van Anda, the managing editor, Frederick T. Birchall, an assistant managing editor, and Edwin L. James, the later managing editor, were troubled with Duranty's Moscow reporting but did nothing about it. Birchall recommended that Duranty be replaced but, says Taylor, "the recommendation fell by the wayside."
The first photo accurately describes the American electorate especially the younger voters.
Yes Marx is back in vogue. Look at the White House and the Congress.
Looks like Dwight Garner is Walter Duranty’s spirtual son... two men awed by a horrible form of government/slavery.
Very interesting.
The present credit catastrophe was caused by reckless lending and spending. Solution by present day Marxists?
Urge the banks to lend even more. Marx again:
“That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.”
They are simply paving the way for the end game: a Communist state created in an advanced industrial society
“the end game: a Communist state created in an advanced industrial society”
Right, absolutely. But to whom does “communism” and “marxism” have any relevance now? A few American leftists who have never lived it maybe? Maybe not even them?
All I see are standard wars between nations, but now those wars are sanitized by being about some “ideology”. Use of these “ideology” fronts is a method of gaining support inside the enemy nation. Leftism is just tribal now. You can beat a leftist down on any issue, and they just pop up another like a whackamole, because it’s not about the issues, it’s about the tribe.
And now Russia is able to stand back, act as if it has nothing to do with it, while America tears itself apart with the tribal idiomatic self-destructive “politics” the KGB dreamed up.
Actually in many respects Russia and eatern Europe having emerged from the nightmare of the secular marxists are far more conservative both politically and economically than the West - western Europe and the US.
No I still see the strife in terms of ideologies: Islam and secular corporate capitalism on one hand (states and borders are not important) and ths sanctity of the state and values on the other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.