• ComradeSharkfucker
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Marxist philosophy isn’t just a prediction of what will be it’s also a analysis of how we ended up where we are and where we are headed. If you’re interested in learning about how Marx processed the world it’s worth reading into dialectical materialism. Marxism is much more complex than a simple capitalism eventually fails and socialism comes next.

    In short, dialectical materialism is a philosophy that emphasizes the effects of material conditions and opposing interests on social relations. It is not specifically an economic philosophy but it is a very useful toolset for understanding the intricacies of socioeconomics. It also suggests that the best way to resolve contradictions is to restructure society so that those contradictions are eliminated. While that last bit sounds really obvious there’s been a lot of fighting about it, I’d elaborate but Hegelian dialectics is fucking gibberish if you aren’t familiar with the terminology.

    So basically yeah some guy saying something doesn’t make it true but it’s worth checking when that guy has had his work holds up after being scrutinized and expanded upon for 2 centuries

    Some of the og stuff

    • @aidan
      link
      010 months ago

      Yeah no, Marx’s predictions were wrong. The most obvious one is he thought the workers revolutions would come from industrialized nations, that was completely wrong. But, with many of his other claims, those who support his ideology will twist any event happening to fit their narrative, just as a christian may twist any event into fulfilling a biblical prophecy.

      • ComradeSharkfucker
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Oh fuck I forgot, Marx did get one thing wrong. I guess the entire philosophical and logical scientific analysis developed by 100s of scholars is just trash, my mistake

        • @aidan
          link
          2
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Where did I say that? I did say he wasn’t a scry, he had no peer reviewed studies. He cherry picked history to interpret what he wanted to. That isn’t “scientific” socialism.