Gun control

Man Marxism is a series of concepts and plans for action ok? You don't need to buy ALL of them to be Marxist, if you do make yours a portion of them, that's still Marxism.

Same as you can claim that drug liberalization is a libertarian goal, and you can call libertarian for that topic an otherwise non libertarian person who is in favour of drug legalization.

Is it more clearer like this? Can you agree on the above?

These are the main pillars of Marxism

Agreeing with any of them, and acting on any of them, is marxism, dictionary-wise Marxism.

Which of these principles were the Jan 6th "Marxists" acting on?

Class struggle and revolution of course.

You know all the references to the evil elite in Washington doing evil to the people and so on? That's class struggle 101.

Revolution is what you aim to achieve literally when you try to subvert the constitutional order

Protesting with Violence is apart of democracy.

Welcome to America.

The alt right are Marxists now. Every day is a school day.

You can frame everything in politics as "class struggle" and call anyone a Marxist by your logic. But that is in fact what you are trying to do - everyone you don't like is Marxist, Marxists are evil and killing them is moral. Dude, you are deranged.

I see. So an act that is illegal in Alabama but legal in New York -- e.g., getting an abortion after X weeks--would be immoral in Alabama but moral in New York.

Makes sense. Does that work with all laws? For example, you can get a learner's permit to drive at age 14 in North Dakota but you have to be 15 in Minnesota. Does that mean that the morality of driving with your parent at age 14 is state-dependent also?

First amendment = you cant stop us from peacefully protesting

Second amendment = stopping us from violently protesting is going to be harder than you thought

Third amendment = can’t keep soldiers in my house which would stop me from protesting

Fourth amendment = can’t just be searching and harassing me on my way to protest

Fifth amendment = don’t have to tell you **** about where my protests are

Man it's not like i am the only one saying so.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/re...

And check the actual voters in europe especially. Check the actual voters of the matxist right parties (like Salvini Lega), where they come from. They don't come from liberal, technocratic, pro capitalism positions lol.

Btw not all alt-right is marxist. Tea party types aren't marxist. Wilders (netherland) types aren't marxist.

I laud your continued and indefatigable efforts to live up to your screen name.

But what if they break a window?

I don't understand what is unclear about the idea that breaking the law is immoral PER SE, for people who believe in the utility of the rule of law and it's importance.

I also don't understand what is unclear about the idea that the same act can be moral or not depending on external circumstances.

For example if i am in a country where it's extremely disrepectful to passionately kiss in public and i do, it can be immoral to do so while the same act wouldn't be immoral in other places, because being disrespectful to people that did nothing to you can be considered immoral to some.

IF they start organizing violent riots to pursue their political preferences they become marxists yes

This isn't your "assessment." It's just you trying to save your point by defining Marxism in a highly idiosyncratic way.

Also, it is terrible logic to say X is a tactic used by Y group, therefore all people who use X tactic are part of Y group. By your logic, right wing political violence, by definition, would be impossible.

And by your logic, any government that engaged in propaganda was fascist because fascists engaged in propaganda.

The communists were literally the first people mentioned in the poem, you are a very silly person.

Is it possible to have an unjust law? Was it immoral for slaves to try and escape their masters in 1830?

I almost don't want to know your answer to that last question.

Bologna Massacre was by neo-Fascists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclei_Arm...

IE not Marxists. Marxists aren't the only group to engage in violence to further their cause. To state that all violent riots or political violence is inherently marxist is a novel interesting take but you're still extraordinarily wrong. And it astill isn't morally right to kill others of a differing political opinion to yours.

Again Dublin riots had nothing to do with class struggle or revolution and probably only 5-10% of the rioters were alt right agitators, the rest were opportunistic looters.

Even if they disagree with all of the basic tenets of Marxism?

So Eric Rudolph was a Marxist, even though one of his professed motives for the Olympic bombing was anger about global socialism?

Luciom gone full... err... unhinged with anti-Marxist rantings ITT.

I realize I'm late to the party and luciom has gone completely off the marxist rails, but Kyle Rittenhouse is no hero. He and the skateboarder are the same person - stupid idiots looking for trouble. And they found it. Since we're in the gun control thread, it bears noting that Rittenhouse is a perfect example of why we need strict gun control.

Do you think your posts are not pointless words?

On the contrary, mine have rather sharp barbs.

And for others he is the perfect example of why widespread ownership of guns is instead a positive.

If you do political terrorism, you don't disagree with all the basic tenets of Marxism, as revolution is one of them.

I wasn't too familiar with the guy you mentioned so i looked it up and i read the rant he wrote , his "political manifesto".

(sorry if the source is bad but this is what wiki linked to, for the full manifesto)

https://www.armyofgod.com/EricRudolphSta...

It appears to me that his rant is much more about abortion being legalized than about "global socialism" per se.

He literally talks about the founding fathers rebelling as his moral example to why people should rebel with force if the government passes unjust laws.

He is basically a true believer in the idea of violent revolution even against established democracies if laws that he dislikes enough get passed.

That is indeed marxism 101 and if you change the rant about abortion with a rant about income inequality the piece could be written by any material actual marxist, and you know that.

You also know that some marxists drop the revolution tenet, ask for non-violent ways to achieve socialism/communism, but they are still marxists even without sharing that specific element right? well the same is true if you purse revolution against a democracy for reasons different from those marx wanted to revolt against.

What i ask you to do is to simply sever the connection between specific content asked for by actual material marxists, and the framework for achieving that, and the moral justifications behind the proposed actions.

This is like when people call any organization pursuing violent eugenetics nazist. Even if that organization doesn't have other nazi elements. Because violent eugenetics was one of the defining elements of nazism.

I am asking you to understand that i do the same with marxism, i am not doing something unheard of, crazy, or silly.

I am taking one of the core elements of marxism, the moral justification for politically motivated violent rioting, political terrorism and so on to fix a perceived social injustice, *against established democracies with enshrined classicl liberal constitutional rights* and calling marxist anyone who does that or promotes that.

Seemingly paradoxically, i know, this would make the october revolution non-marxist, and in fact it wasn't . What happend later after the czar was gone was marxism (widespread political violence to pursue the "dream" of a marxist state, and then the establishment of one).

But toppling an anti-democratic regime isn't marxism per se

EDIT: as for the "he was against global socialism so he can't be a marxist" implication of your post, please remind that marxists killed and hated each others in great numbers a lot of times in history.