At a time when the far right is indulging in anti-science it is important to see that one of the worst offenders is the world of science itself as the natural progress of biological evolutionism research is captured by its mysterious ‘fake science’, the at theory natural selection. Continue reading “Darwinism as science’s own ideological anti-science? Science itself is the worst offender. The whole science culture has been turned in a bunch of idiots, laughing stocks next to the right’s Darwin exposes”
Update on short thread of today’s posts.
I will leave this thread as is for the moment but suggest its relevance and importance. Modern society has no correct evolutionary or historical frameworks, none. And professionals are in general belligerent as to the foundational issues, in reality almost all wrong. Science has been miscontrued in the fields beyond physics and biochemistry.
Professional historian, Darwinians, and note even physicists will reject the logic of history we have found, But their opinions are mostly worthless.
For over a century the entire professional caste starting with biologists has been confused by Darwinism, made it a dogmatic ideology, no doubt due to capitalism, and corrupted every field they have touched.
So I may excused for a curt ‘so long sucker..,.’ Continue reading “History, theory, and slavery, a set of posts”
Two posts from yesterday collated and to be continued as a single essay/post below.
The question of socialism has been controversial for so long and socialism such an underdog, apparently, confronting the capitalist ideology made common sense by the immense factor of its propaganda, that the idea of socialism is on the defensive. But times have changed and suddenly we can see the prescience of the early socialists, the superset that Marx/Engels ended up dominating dogmatically, as the implications dawned of the world of capitalism coming into existence so suddenly. The Second International shows the sudden global popularity of the core ideas, then trounced and discredited by bolshevism/Stalinism. The planet is at risk from capitalism and the capitalists themselves are blind to what they have created. Not only that they have generally refused to consider
Marxists would like to think that they can simply try again with the old format/formation. That’s like thinking a rocket launch that fails can be followed by a second attempt with no consideration of what went wrong. The external social world has indeed considered the flaws of marxism, but Marxists are a kind of cult that can never question basic assumptions. This stalled mentality is holding back the left. Continue reading “A new path to socialism”
Some suggestions for moving beyond Marx…
Drop the term ‘Marxism’: it has generated a cult of personality based on a cult leader who can’t be questioned, Marx was a domineering cult leader type and could barely deal with Engels, let alone the general public. His manner has made a cult of marxism that is counterproductive now.
Abandon ‘historical materialism’, period. It is pseudo-science and a philosophical quagmire. It had a great effect on the way to secular humanism, but its history is not relevant now. The materialism that battled Hegel’s idealism is dated now and in the age of quantum field theory doesn’t even represent science. There is no sequence of economic epochs generating world history. That’s nonsense. Capitalism is a continuous stream in universal history starting with Paleolithic barter. It is suddenly amplified by the Industrial Revolution and becomes dominant but it is not an epoch in itself. It arises and then dominates modernity, which is indeed the start of a new epoch. To label capitalism an epoch Marx makes a monumental blunder which suggests it will persist for centuries. In reality it is a set of economic and technological chmaracters that can be changed at any time, and given the outcome it should be absorbed under socialism as soon as possible. The sequence feudalism, capitalism, communism is a fiction and we should look at world history, where Marx had never even heard of Sumer, as a simple chronology and abandon the futile effort to make history a science.
The legacy of socialism/communism ended up in jackknife against liberal systems, which provoked the excuse for total destruction of democracy.
Socialism needs to create a viable economy: our idea of democratic market neo-communism shows a simple way to blend the two types of system.
Democracy, markets, planning, a Commons…there are multiple components to a new social system. We can’t just exclaim socialism without specifying the multiple components essential.
Marx’s basic theories are idiotic oversimplification from the age of early scientism.
Leftists must disown the old, and be wary of old terminology. The public is not aware of the difference between idealistic Marx groups and North Korean communism. Marx never acknowledges failure where the public is more sensible and sees the problem at once. It would be nice to move from the terms socialism/communism. But that might not work. We have created the term neo-communism and moved on. We define these terms fresh and they don’t have to conform to Marx’s boilerplate nonsense.
Marxists have confused everyone and made socialism an impossible task/
A socialist system should be based on a liberalism, save on the issue of private property, capital.
It is not crazy! Look at Exxon-Mobil: such monsters should have been expropriated at the start, as Marx and Engels originally thought in the 1848 era. The public has let these gangster capitalists sieze control of all human resources. Property in the large doesn’t refer to property in the small, personal belongings, small shops, etc… It was obvious very early but now the public is almost too conditioned to change. But the issue is no longer private belief system: we can start to see the whole world system set to crash.
to be continued
The biggest obstacle to socialism is the cult of Marx idiots…/The Question of a Stagnant Marxism: Is Marxism Exegetical or Scientific?
It is almost shocking to read this. It suffers from its own diagnosis, and is stuck still in the confusions of Marxism as a science.
We have critiqued that view here over and over again, but any such discussion means instant cancellation in the Marx cult and Marxists can never critique their own subject.
To be fair, this article cleverly manages to critique Marxism and get away with it. Bravo, but the core difficulties are not faced, and it remains to be seen whether our rebel will end canceled.
Having failed to maintain a line of communication and banned from two major Marx lists, I continue because time is running out and there is not much time for preventing a second Marx disaster like Bolshevism. The point now is to find a new path to socialism that sees the failures of Marx and Engels. And a new audience. Time to just leave Marxists behind. Many on the left have done so but they tend to be reformists.
If Marx meant anything it was his stance of the question of revolution. In a severe crisis Marx will seem the path to revolutionary change. But in the end it is Marxism that produced Stalinism, and that mistake may cost the future the chance of socialism.
Much in Marx can be used if Marxists can evade the pitfalls of fallacy.
The idea that Marxism is a science is still pitifully dominant in a closed cult of Marx the great genius. Genius or not, Marx failed to produce a science and what is taken as science is so amateurish bad science as to leave one to wonder how the confusion still survives.
The biggest obstacle to socialism is the cult of Marx idiots. We will try to assemble the massive amount of material here, once again.
I am not a dogmatic revolutionary: the issue of revolution is probably ill-served by revolutionary ideologues. But the revolution will come on its own, and the path to a new form of society is in permanent danger of tragic mistakes. But look at the Pandemic: for one breathtaking moment, capitalism seemed to simply shut down. No left was there to move into a new world. So revolution will be thrust upon us. I am almost superstitiously a Gaian: nature is in revolt and mad as hell at the era of capitalism as planetary wreckage.
Two Manifestos version
The Anthropocene and The Coming of Postcapitalism ver 12
Capitalism, Communism and the Evolution of Civilization(1)
And much more.
This material is rough but it contains everything needed for a new revolutionary/evolutionary path to socialism.
This approach critiques Darwinism which has sabotaged the left, with class war as genocide and embraced the one
ideological mainstay of capitalism.
Science has sought to shrink the realm of the inexplicable. We now understand – at least approximately – the laws of nature that govern the weather and catastrophic events like an earthquake. Telescopes and rocket-ships have also allowed us to probe deeper into the heavens to make a little more sense of the universe outside our tiny corner of it. More
The left is caught in a time warp of early nineteenth-century intellectual culture when the battle of science, secularism, and philosophy were in the early innings of a battle that was crucial to modernity but is a bit old-fashioned now. The battle between Hegelian idealism and reductionist materialism was artificial and resulted in the pointless antagonism to idealism in the name of Hegelian extravagance. The far more intelligible brand of Kant was lost in the contraction of thinking that operated on a set of cliches and classic incidents.
The end result has been a left crippled on the questions of philosophy, science, and culture and a worldview that almost noone can accept anymore, making the rejection of socialist thinking a certainty. There is no battle of good and evil between materialism and idealism, and no need for any track toward postcapitalism to even have to bother with such a question.
The eonic model beyond materialism/idealism May 12th, 2018 We keep repeating our critique of marxist theory, suggesting a different approach, e.g. cf. WHEE: One of the reasons to suggest the macro …
Hilary Rose, a sociologist, and Steven Rose, a neuroscientist, were two of the principal founders of the British Society for Social Responsibility in Science in the late 1960s in London. The British Society for Social Responsibility in Science was linked to radical science initiatives like the Radical Science Journal, the Centre for Alternative Technology, and the magazine Undercurrents, and was responsible for the magazine Science for the People.
Source: Science and Politics | Portside