currently listening to Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring and guess what state capitalism, patriarchy and racism are still creating misery around the globe
Academics want to get jobs and promotions. To do this, we need to prove that we’re ‘good’. But academia is so specialized that our colleagues are unable to tell how good our papers are. Not by actually reading them, anyway! So, they try to tell by indirect methods—and a very important one is the prestige of the journals we publish in.
The big commercial publishers have bought most of the prestigious journals. We can start new journals, and some of us are already doing that, but it takes time for these journals to become prestigious. In the meantime, most scholars prefer to publish in prestigious journals owned by the big publishers, even if this slowly drives their own libraries bankrupt. This is not because these scholars are dumb. It’s because a successful career in academia requires the constant accumulation of prestige.
John Baez, The Selected Papers Network (Part I)
Why do I mosh Marxists so hard? Because Marxism is the epitome of radical arrogance. Marxism claims to speak for all of the working class while having nothing of substance to say to the real working classes. Marxism is superficially hegemonic in the radical Left; all ideas are judged in relation to Marxism. When radical ideas differ from Marxism, they can either be smoothed over with pretentious and self-crucifying rhetoric about “being first and foremost socialists,” which ultimately results in the triumph of authoritarianism with libertarians as the Marxists’ useful idiots, or they must be exiled from the Left. Many Marxists are not evil, they are well-meaning radicals who genuinely want a better and fairer society, and they simply turn to the loudest and most apparently radical philosophy that rejects the present system.
Marxism, as an idea, is evil. It is fundamentally opposed to human flourishing. Marxism is either deliberately hateful of human life or willfully negligent of human needs. Marxism shrouds human life in painful platitudes and self-aggrandizing jargon. Marxism presents an ahistorical, anti-scientific account of human systems. Marxists, like Liberals, conceive of a State benevolently managed by “the right people.” When we confront the oppressors, those who keep other humans in chains, we should at least regard Marxism as it truly is. Marxism weathers and dulls our radical blade.
Marxism unmasked is Liberalism.
yo peep this homie: anarchism
Open invitation to any and every ex-libertarian Marxist who was very familiar with left-libertarianism before becoming a Marxist to give a detailed explanation as to why they now prefer Marxism, why left-libertarianism fails to address whatever problems exist with libertarianism more generally, and why Marxism doesn’t fall prey to the sorts of problems that left-libertarians (and libertarians more generally) give as reasons to reject it.
This isn’t intended as being confrontational at all, I’m just genuinely interested in why you made that transition. There seems to be something that you’re seeing that I’m just not.
Ok, this is a really long response to this, so I’ll put it under a read more. I don’t think I addressed all of this but I have limited time.