Comment on [deleted]
Objection@lemmy.ml 4 days agoLiterally can’t cite any leftist author on anything ever without people jumping down my throat with this “holy scripture” crap.
You should study Marx regardless of your own beliefs and ideology if for no other reason than how much his ideas have shaped history. You can disagree with him all you like, contrary to what you instantly jump to whenever anyone quotes him on anything, Marx is not “holy scripture” and I’m more than happy to listen to critiques, and make them myself. But you should have a basic familiarity with what he believed and the basic outlines of arguments regarding the National Question before dropping uninformed takes and declaring everyone else as wrong. Otherwise, you’re doing the political equivalent of someone who never studied physics declaring that they’ve invented a perpetual motion machine and that all of physics is wrong.
lugal@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
Why am I not surprised that that’s the only thing you take away from my comment? Must be all the brainworms at work. You use “theory” synonymous with “Marx” and now you’re rationalizing it. That’s what gives the impression of holy scripture. And for what it’s worth: I think of Marx much more positively than about most of his successors.
Objection@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Sorry, what else did you say that you want me to respond to?
No I fucking don’t. I cited Marx because Marx is one theorist.
I’m so fucking sick of you libs acting like this. Like citing a source makes me some kind of religious fanatic. You don’t see me accusing you of worshipping David Graber or saying that you “treat him as synonymous with theory.”
But more than that I’m sick of you lot taking pride in your ignorance and anti-intellectualism. No different than a MAGA chud. You’re not hostile to me because I only read Marx, because I don’t only read Marx and even if I did, there’s not a single thing I’ve said that would indicate that. You’re hostile me for reading Marx at all. You act like it’s some kind of heretical text that corrupts the minds of all that read it. Or at least, you pretend to, because by lobbing accusations like that, you can avoid any sort of informed, intellectual discussion, and conceal the fact that you don’t know shit about ass.
So congrats, you’ve sufficiently derailed the conversation to cover your ignorance, like y’all always do. Tankies are the only people on earth who do the fucking homework.
lugal@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
You started by accusing me of not reading theory at all, I answered by asking what qualifies as theory. You didn’t answer.
There is a rich intellectual tradition dating back to Marx’s time that’s critical of him (Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman, Bergman, Simon Weil, …). Does that qualify as theory? What are your criteria or prototype of what counts as theory?
Objection@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Sure.
If you have criticisms of Marx’s arguments and analysis regarding the national question, then let’s hear them. But if it’s just gonna be, “it’s bad because states are bad,” I could get that from a damn an-cap.