Do you guys also completely choke when explaining or discussing Marxism irl?

Do you guys also completely choke when explaining or discussing Marxism irl?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.org/details/MarxForBeginners-English
youtu.be/G4gPXvW3DG4?t=4525
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

No

teach me

Step 1: Explain why capitalism is a problem (Exploitation, global warming, limited resources, third world, wage slavery, homeless people, authoritarianism, wars, apathy).
Step 2: Explain how Marxism will solve these problems.

If you choke you either have stage anxiety which we can't fix. Or you don't know enough about Marxism to discuss it properly, so you have to read a book.

Read more books.

This guy is correct.
Don't read to try and convince others though, it's a wasted effort: read for yourself. There's literally nobody on the planet who argues disregarding their emotions. Whenever someone talks to you he's actually talking to hear themselves. The only people who can be convinced are the ones who are already on the verge of agreeing with you.

No, but I get tripped up by some of the bizarre assumptions people make. I find it easy to explain the theory I know, but knocking down other people's bullshit in real time throws me for a loop because of how fucking zany it is. The smarter the person is, the worse it is, because they will come up with the most intricate and ridiculous justifications. The awe it inspires is almost enough to shut me up on its own, but on top of that it's a baffling pile of absurdities. And you can't get very far into unpacking any of it before they unleash the gish gallop and throw out even more nonsense.

I just laugh in their face and incoherently scream about ghosts apparitions e.g. phantasms spooks etc.

No, I legitimately blame my audience. I can create the most logical materialist analysis of why a problem in the end comes down to the capitalist system which induces people to show such behavior, and in response I'll just get a whole lot of angry petty moralism which fails to acknowledge that nothing will change as long as the overarching structure remains the same. It's like debating a brick wall. Another good one is the "You can't just blame everything on capitalism" when discussing socio-economic problems as if a lot of problems having the same source is somehow unbelievable.

Were you by any chance at HWNDU by any chance?

Most people I know have never read Marx so no.

Atheist detected

plebs aren't worthy of muh diamat

full immersion vr when?

Atheist isn't a slur.

This is part of the problem. People sometimes raise "objections" to Marxism that aren't even tangentially related to his work, and you're left trying to explain an entire theory during a bar talk.

...

You also aren't helping op at all.
You should've done that, instead of blaming the evil of the world on voluntary market participation.

I don't necessarily choke but I don't even get into it if I don't have at least 1 hour of time available to talk about it. Shit's complicated.

I would need to understand Marxism first…

Please enlighten us corporate feudalist, on how corporate oligarchies and corporate control of the political/legal system is "voluntary market participation".

I can't take ancaps seriously, especially since you vile sort want to have child markets.

archive.org/details/MarxForBeginners-English

If you were to pay more attention, you'd realize that this isn't happening.

This might clarify a few things: youtu.be/G4gPXvW3DG4?t=4525

Would you stop replying to people with cancer flags
is this your first day on the internet

The trick is you have to take the cock out of your mouth BEFORE discussing marxism

It's okay. I'm sure you'll learn it over time.


I think were you really need enlightenment, is the way you seem to treat the truth.
Don't take it too easily, neither you nor anybody else can ever be 100% sure about anything. Generalising is the best way to avoid it alltogether.
Well, I'm sure you already know what any ancap would answer here. It's the government that allows for such control in the first place. Which is brought in place by "socialism".
By that I wanted to say that you treat capitalism as some sort of entity, where it's actually just people working their jobs.
"especially" implies other reasons, that you don't mention, however. I also don't understand what you mean by child markets.
But I'm also not an actual anarcho capitalist.

Well, I'm specifically talking about
Capitalism as I understand it refers to property being private. Thereby enabling any free market. Feel free to show me otherwise

No?

Generally I go one step more left wing than the conversation otherwise is. In a right wing conversation I consider it a victory to get an admission that yes there are other perspectives to look at the situation from. When people are complaining about the effects of capitalism I like to talk about the whole thing is systemic. I don't necessarily point them straight to Marxism though, my hope is that first pointing them towards an understanding of what the problem is means that they'll more readily accepted the solution when presented to them later. I feel like I make more progress the less I seem like an ideologue.

This was inadequate, I'll have to read the original works I guess.