US ambassador killed over a film

[FireIceTalon]

One problem: Marxism isn't a philosophy, it is a science, and mode of analysis. Now, if you had said communism, you might sort of have a point, although communism itself isn't really a philosophy either, it's actually an ideology though the context of what you are saying may be applicable to it.

Please point me to the volumes of Marx's reproducible experimentation. One does not become a self-proclaimed scientist merely because they hate philosophers.

I would accept Popper's characterization of Marx/Engels as pseudoscience. "Historicism" is unscientific. Its claims cannot be tested and, in particular, are not subject to being tested as falsifiable.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/critical_th...ility.html

Of course you would, much in the same way most Idealists also deny evolution, and think that ideas shape the world we live in - when in fact it is the opposite, the material world is what shapes and necessitates ideas.

Marxism is a soft science, much like the broader fields of sociology and economics are, and in fact, the former had a HUGE impact on the latter two. It is a mode of analysis that doesn't inject any ideology or moralism into the dialectical relationships in the history of class struggles. It scientifically examines and critiques the 'natural (f)laws' of capitalism (and other class relationships within it, or other modes of production), and therefore it uses objective, and observable facts in its observations; as opposed to using subjective moralities to push an ideological agenda, and thus resulting in a slanted, unscientific analysis.

For example, lets take the development of racism in America in conjunction with Capitalism. The Idealist perspective would view capitalism and racism as independent of one another, both their developments and their continual processes, which implies that racism can be reformed out of existence in capitalism. Of course, all solutions would be futile, as history has proven - because they ignore the material laws of how capitalism functions. Idealists want to solve the problem by injecting ideology, morality, universalism, and other reformist nonsense into it. "If only capitalists were more moral, it could work!!" - This is the kind of unrealistic crap that I would find hilarious, if it wasn't so repulsive.

The Marxist analysis shows otherwise though. Racism and capitalism are NOT independent of one another, and in fact have a dialectical relationship. Biological racism as we know it, and the concept of a "superior race" and an "inferior race" are a historical development under and as a result of the development of capitalism. Granted, the form of racism based on an corresponding idea has changed over time in America, but that happens only when material conditions change, and ultimately, it still exists, and necessarily so, because you cannot have a capitalist society without racism. Not scientifically possible - the economic laws of capitalism will prevent this, always. So as with class, revolution is required to eliminate racism as well, because race and class so greatly overlap and because the capitalist system requires many divisions of labor, racial included.

Marxism is a science, and I know it kills you inside that it is more sound than any of your crazy idealist, and irrelevant Ivory Tower philosophies. The lolbertarian philsosophy: "Everyone should be treated equally and fairly, have maximum individual freedom possible, love one another and be one big happy family, and we could if capitalists were more moral and ethical, it could just be the perfect system for everyone!!!!". LMAO. Snap out of your dream world. It won't ever happen, because you cannot have it both ways - not in class based societies anyway. We have tried putting a human face on capitalism for over 2 centuries now, and guess what? It hasn't worked. Cause or correlation? Both, I'm sure. Indeed, the definition of insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result.