Philosophy Now Forum

In the 20th Century, "Marxism" was the predominant ideology which attempted to undo, destroy, or overthrow "Class Warfare", and attempted to bring about "Class Equality". This was, and still is, the underpinning of Postmodern Liberalism and "Neo-Liberalism". Today, in USA, it is referred to as "Diversity-Equity-Inclusion" propaganda.

Yet how effective was Marxism? Are Classes more "Equal" now, or less? Consider that the Top 1% gained more and more, the Top 1 of the Top 1%, are richer and more powerful than ever before, in human history. Thus, if Liberalism or Marxism had any effects at all...then they were completely the opposite of the intention. If you are a Liberal or Marxist today...then you need to admit, now more than ever, that your Ideologies have failed. In California, there has been political drama the last year, that $25,000,000,000.00 was spent on "combating homelessness", only for MORE homelessness to occur. It would have been better if NO MONEY was spent "combating homelessness". The same can be said for Liberalism and Marxism. Their ideologies were WORSE than the original starting points.


So at what point, did Liberalism and Marxism go wrong? This question is pointed mainly at self-proclaimed Liberals and/or Marxists, on the forum.

Why did it fail? When did it fail? Why keep trying, when your ideology makes matters worse?!


Here is my proposal: Let's go back to Class Warfare...as attempting to lift up the middle and lower classes. Let's emulate their, the Top 1%er's (Superior) Morality and Ethics. Let's reinforce Class Divisions, understand what and why they are, and try to rise up? Aren't the Top 1% as they are...because they have Stricter, more Disciplined, more Conservative values???

If you want to compete in Bodybuilding, shouldn't you go to the Gym, to start out??? Don't you have to beat them at their own game, instead of...what, destroying the game altogether? Destroying the game, didn't work!!! Classism is WORSE than ever before!

YOU LOST!

I suspect, in the 1990s or whereabouts, when Liberals and Marxists realized that they couldn't actually follow through with their ideologies...they just down-shifted into Nihilism. And this 'Nihilistic' attitude, of utter Defeat, has defined the recent Generations of Westerners. Their "class warfare" turned out worse. Their ideals and dreams were shattered, so they just gave up and became drug-addicts, or tech-addicts, addicted to low-haning fruit and dopamine hits, getting 'Likes' on the internet, a simple and highly effective diversion, that erased any notion of ideological "Progress".

The Progressivists have been pretty Silent since then...

Substituting Liberal-Democrat political 'wins' as 'good enough', when it wasn't.

Capitalism feeds on addiction. It's capitalism in its purest form, delivering dopamine for a price to the perfect customer (an addict). Only it's cheaper than ever to get the dopamine. Capitalism has probably won. Socialism, responsibility and duty have lost.

responsibility and duty to self has won...

existing on the largesse of others is no way to exist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_9dcuQQJlQ

-Imp

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:14 pm Here is my proposal: Let's go back to Class Warfare...as attempting to lift up the middle and lower classes.

People no longer work in large factories where they can unionize.

They are trying to unionize at Starbucks, for example, but a chain of coffee shops is not an industrial plant where the workers can unite. Furthermore, Starbucks barely has a 10% profit margin. If Starbucks increased wages, they would have to charge more for the coffee, while they operate in a competitive market.

Another possibility is that the government could increase the minimum wage at all employers. However, that means that the customers -- not necessarily rich people themselves -- would have to pay more. The resulting price increases and inflation would turn into a problem for another group of "lower" classes.

The workers who can negotiate higher wages, already do. The ones who don't, don't because they can't, often because their jobs would end up in Mexico or China, if they did.