Discussion: Marxism as a Science. Does it Matter? (hexbear.net)

submitted 3 months ago by Antiwork@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Read this: I don't want this to turn into a struggle session so please do not engage in such a way.

Does Marxism being "scientific" matter? Or does this need to want to cling to science to prove its legitimacy actually hinder its effect? I've been wrestling with this question for the past day and I still don't have a concrete opinion.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 15 points 3 months ago

Marxism doesn't have a "need to cling to" science. It simply is scientific in its nature. The lack of materialism in other ideologies is why they are broken.

If you ask a Marxist what they believe they will give you a concrete answer with definitive and measurable outcomes eg. public ownership of the means of production.

If you ask a liberal they give you undefinable, unmeasurable, and/or contradicting plans like freedom, equality, protection of personal property.

Define "freedom" How can people be free if they are not free to take other peoples property? How can everyone be equal if some people have all the stuff and aren't forced to give some of it away? These ideals can not be upheld because they are undefined.