• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Alright You Lefty Radicals -- It's Time for Marx Madness!

Nice Squirrel

Contributor
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
6,083
Location
Minnesota
Basic Beliefs
Only the Nice Squirrel can save us.
http://marx-madness.com/

Marx Madness is the ultimate war of all against all. We start with 64 Marxists competing one-on-one in 32 match-ups. These elimination rounds continue every week throughout March until only one thinker is left. Voting opens now, and closes Friday, March 13. From then on, voting will open every Monday morning, and close the following Friday at midnight.

Not a Marxist and don't want to play? Yes, you can ridicule the concept below.
 
Why are the marxists competing rather than combining their efforts for the benefit of the masses?
 
It seems like Karl Marx would be the favorite, but I didn't see him listed. Maybe all that "if that's Marxism than I an not a Marxist" schtick got him tossed out.

Of those left I'd put my money on Stalin. I see him gaining control of the score-keeping apparatus and ruthlessly purging the other leading threats to consolidate his power.
 
Just to add a bit to the notion that Republican ideas are brain dead I'm adding Charles Blow's analysis of CPAC: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/02/o...d-and-hollow.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0 . Putting it together with an all too obvious ripoff of the road to the final four - One must try to use different terms from really idiotic terms to leave some breathing space for such as Marx Madness - should turn on the lights of all but the most Palin among them.

But hell. Why not celebrate? After all we could bring back good stuff like this.  Hollywood blacklist Talk about being Palin.
 
Last edited:
It seems like Karl Marx would be the favorite, but I didn't see him listed. Maybe all that "if that's Marxism than I an not a Marxist" schtick got him tossed out.
Because, of course, he is playing football, not basketball.


- - - Updated - - -

No Debs or Thomas?
Which Thomas? Clarence? Sowell? Aquinas?

A better question might be: why no Jimmy Higgins. Isn't he supposed to be a big figure in Marxist circles? :tonguea:
 
Last edited:
Stalin and Engels in the same bracket doesn't seem fair.

Ok, my final four are:

Che Guevara
Leon Trotsky
Freidrich Engels
Antonio Gramsci

And final winner: Engels
 
Stalin and Engels in the same bracket doesn't seem fair.

Ok, my final four are:

Che Guevara
Leon Trotsky
Freidrich Engels
Antonio Gramsci

And final winner: Engels

These competitions do not usually end well for Trotsky.

I can see Che winning in the early rounds but then having his run end badly as well.
 
Stalin and Engels in the same bracket doesn't seem fair.

Ok, my final four are:

Che Guevara
Leon Trotsky
Freidrich Engels
Antonio Gramsci

And final winner: Engels

These competitions do not usually end well for Trotsky.

I can see Che winning in the early rounds but then having his run end badly as well.

you make some good points
 
It seems like Karl Marx would be the favorite, but I didn't see him listed. Maybe all that "if that's Marxism than I an not a Marxist" schtick got him tossed out.

I think its more that Marx cannot be a Marxist, much like Jesus cannot be a Christian. You can't follow yourself. Speaking of Jesus, he would be on there, except the list only includes non-fiction characters.
 
These competitions do not usually end well for Trotsky.

I can see Che winning in the early rounds but then having his run end badly as well.

you make some good points

Fact check. Nope they weren't found in any of the microfilms Whitaker
Chambers passed on.

This thread, as I'm trying to demonstrate, is sooo much more lethal than the political correctness thread.

Making light of sentiments on Marxism in the US is beyond the Palin.
 
http://marx-madness.com/

Marx Madness is the ultimate war of all against all. We start with 64 Marxists competing one-on-one in 32 match-ups. These elimination rounds continue every week throughout March until only one thinker is left. Voting opens now, and closes Friday, March 13. From then on, voting will open every Monday morning, and close the following Friday at midnight.

Not a Marxist and don't want to play? Yes, you can ridicule the concept below.

What purpose does this serve? So many modern socialist leaders do not even appear on the list.

What has to happen before any Socialist theory can serve the people? All of the participants have to attempt to the best of their ability to be HONEST. Actually, for any economic or social system to work, the guy that would bring the required lubricant would be Immanuel Kant. Whether you followed or attempted to implement anyone's social system from Marx to Adam Smith, you would run into this nasty little German philosopher biting at your heals the moment you started to attempt to lead...and bite he should.

We have a human tendency to allow our leaders to narrow our vision of the world. This tendency allows liars and advertisers to control far too much our human activity. For instance, take Mao. I read some of Mao's earliest works and found him to be genuinely concerned about human welfare...especially in the matter of education. Yet, you have to admit that as his power increased, he was able to lead his country into a "great leap forward" that landed flat on its face...starving and killing millions. He failed to understand there is no such thing as "the dictatorship of the proletariat." There are only dictatorships of dictators and dictators are notorious for being susceptible to flatterers and liars in their inner circle. He and his cause were lost once he assumed that role.

There is a great similarity between our leaders today, whether they call themselves Marxists or Bolivarians or Democrats and the notorious dictators of the past that is troubling to say the least. The dictator only narrows the potential of the people to live in a civil society. Some are luckier than others and do less social damage, but there are always creatures like Dubbiya and Putin and Hitler in the mix. So to vote for some high official in this Marxian mix makes very little sense. What Marx gave us was a theory that analyzed the liabilities of capitalism. His blueprint for a socialist society was primitive and only a guess on his part.

In the old FRDB forum in MF&P, one of the longest running threads was one on how to implement democratic socialism. There was such a wide range of far better thought out policy suggestions than anything Marx ever devised. We are witnessing some rather interesting experiments in socialism in some of the South American countries. They of course start their experiment greatly disadvantaged by foreign exploitation for centuries, but there are a few bright lights there.

We have forgotten how Washington very graciously stepped back from assuming long term leadership of our own country. True he was a slave owner etc., but he did have the good sense to step down and attempt to allow his nation to carry on without a dictator. I give him credit for that. That being said, my vote would probably go the Che, but possibly only because he didn't live long enough to be tested by the temptation of narcissistic dictatorship.
 
Back
Top Bottom