Post AkB9CzHc1AF0cMxc4e by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
 (DIR) More posts by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
 (DIR) Post #AkB9CzHc1AF0cMxc4e by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T04:57:40Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       We have two, fairly big, problems with Marxism as an ideology and school of thought. Though, to be clear, we have infinitely more in common with a principled Marxist than with any Liberal.The first problem is that Marx believed that capitalism was a necessary step to the development of communism, and this analysis is only possible if you first ignore all of human existence prior to the fall of Rome and ignore everyone outside of Europe. (1/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9D0oyIcWHO7Zli4 by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:02:23Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       This analysis reveals a deep seated, and insidious kind of white supremacy. The kind that says that, until a White European names a thing, it cannot be said to exist. It's simultaneously requires that history will and must follow a specific linear path as outlined by the path that Western European society chose to follow. Neither of these critical assumptions are held up by the historical and pre-historic record. The opposite is, in fact, more true.(2/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9D2Z5od0SnSA7Em by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:05:02Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       For hundreds of thousands of years humans existed without capital(ism), during which time language, music, writing, mathematics, and architecture were all developed. This is the time when, long before the advent of industrialised machinery, humans built megalithic structures and spent thousands of hours, individually, creating Great Works. This was done for many reasons, none of which included the acquisition or development of capital. (3/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9D48ZyAzDfnlyBk by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:09:55Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       This selective begining of history, and the pointed exclusion of societies that were not colonised by Europe or did not develop along the same path, creates an inherently flawed analysis, similar to how it would be ridiculous to call the time when Europeans started exporting their unwashed asses across the Atlantic the "Age of Exploration" and thus ignoring the Pacific Island cultures that went far further thousands of years earlier.(4/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9D65ohPxtjoUnA0 by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:13:15Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       This failure to account for non-white societies and peoples is, of course, part and parcel with the kind of basic white supremacy that still underpins Western Ideology. That White Europeans are necessarily the inheritors of the Grand Destiny of humanity, and the path they take is the only path.In the Vedic traditions, we have a saying "Many paths to the same peak". Marxism seems to have trouble integrating this idea without caveats and dilutions.(5/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9D8HEZwHoVnqwEa by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:16:15Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       This leads into the second problem: As principled leftists, there should be an ontological aversion to the dogmatic following of the ideas of any single person.Some will argue that Marxism is a "scientific approach" to human social evolution. But as outlined above, that "science" just like much of Western science, begins with a false premise: Until a White European (man) thinks a thing, it has not been thought. Until he says a thing, it has not been said.(6/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9DAQWaMuFBCDNzc by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:19:40Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Western science has, by all accounts both historic and contemporary, done an incredibly poor job of integrating non-Western thought and history into its Corpus of All Knowledge. Marxism, despite nominally having the toolset to readily and easily integrate new ideas, is still bogged down with that flaw.The fact that we even consider Marxism a political position is part of that problem.(7/🧵)
       
 (DIR) Post #AkB9DCWylLG1hnFZKa by mousefriend@this.mouse.rocks
       2024-07-22T05:22:36Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       This is not to say that this leftist ideology or that one is inherently better. In fact, it is the opposite.If we, as principled leftists, wish to overcome the inherent flaws that any individual school of thought has, we just discard the clinging to factions.You will notice we do not call ourself anything more than a Leftist. This is because it is contradictory to our historical understanding to apply a more specific label. Learn from All of our predecessors, not just the demagogues.(8/🛑)