https://archive.ph/wip/K83op https://spectator.org/teen-vogue-to-teen-girls-marx-good-reagan-bad/
Teen Vogue to Teen Girls: Marx Good, Reagan Bad
Trendy ignorance never had it so good.
by PAUL KENGOR July 20, 2020, 12:06 AM
That Teen Vogue gem, “Who Is Karl Marx: Meet the Anti-Capitalist Scholar,” informs girls how Marx’s “ideas can still teach us about the past and present.” Among those ideas: “There’s this myth of the free market, but Marx shows very clearly that capitalism emerged through a state of violence.”
“My wife, alas, delivered a girl and not a boy,” he regretted to his partner, Friedrich Engels, of his wife Jenny’s deficient birthing abilities. Marx would later lament to one of his daughters, who likewise gave birth to a girl: “I congratulate you on the happy delivery…. I prefer the ‘male’ sex among children who will be born at this turning point in history.”
Marx’s daughters lived lives of hopelessness and despair. In fact, four of Marx’s six children died before he did, including his oldest daughter. Marx’s two surviving daughters committed suicide in joint suicide pacts with their husbands.
As for the sons-in-law, that was another unhappy tale. Marx detested both, whom he viewed as idiots. He wished: “To hell with both of them!” He particularly disliked Laura’s husband, Paul, whom Marx ridiculed as “Negrillo” or “The Gorilla” because he was half Cuban and had some “Negro” blood in his veins.
Actually, it isn’t quite right to say that Lenchen worked for the Marx family, given that she toiled without pay, almost like an indentured servant for life, as Karl’s chattel. The champion of the proletariat never paid Lenchen a penny. The stumpy, frumpy girl gave her everything to the Marx household.
Karl, who refused to bathe, groom, and suffered from boils all over his body (including his penis), eventually bedded Lenchen behind Jenny’s back. Historians have no idea how often or the exact circumstances, including whether or not Marx’s use of Lenchen as sexual receptacle was consensual. Wrote one biographer (Robert Payne): “That she was virtually his bondslave was a matter of entire indifference to him. It was enough that she was available to serve his sexual needs…. We shall probably never know whether he raped or seduced the servant, though the large number of images concerned with rape in his later writings suggest that it was rape rather than seduction. In due course a child was born.”
https://archive.ph/ywIHF https://spectator.org/cancel-karl-marx/
Why Not Cancel Karl Marx?
Racism and anti-Semitism were second nature to him, and yet the cancel culture gives him a free pass every time.
by PAUL KENGOR August 18, 2020, 12:01 AM
Consider how Marx spoke of his own son-in-law, Paul Lafargue, husband of his daughter Laura. Paul came from Cuba, born in Santiago, and Marx thus viewed him as marred by “Negro” blood and denigrated him as “Negrillo” or “the Gorilla.” Karl never let up his ridicule of poor Paul. In November 1882, still 14 years after Lafargue and Laura married, Marx complained to Engels that “Lafargue has the blemish customarily found in the negro tribe — no sense of shame, by which I mean shame about making a fool of oneself.”
Marx had a friendly audience for such views in Friedrich Engels, his Communist Manifesto partner. Engels, a proud Darwinian, averred that Paul possessed “one-eighth or one-twelfth nigger blood.” In 1887, Lafargue had been a political candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. In an April 1887 letter to Paul’s wife, Engels cruelly opined, “Being in his quality as a nigger, a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district.”
It is no wonder that Marx’s son-in-law had such low self-esteem. In fact, one day in November 1911, Paul ended it all. He killed himself in a suicide pact with Marx’s daughter. In fact, two of Marx’s daughters killed themselves in suicide pacts with their husbands.
Karl Marx freely dispensed with nasty epithets aimed not only at blacks but at Jews. Biographer Jonathan Sperber notes that Marx’s correspondence is “filled with contemptuous remarks about Jews.” Even his admiring biographer Francis Wheen, who habitually defends nearly everything about Marx, admits that he “sprayed anti-Semitic insults at his enemies with savage glee.”
Of one contemporary, Marx blasted his “cynical, oily-obtrusive, phony-Baronial Jew-manners.” Particularly loathsome to Marx was anyone he suspected of part Jewish and African roots. Marx referred to his fellow German socialist Ferdinand Lassalle as a “greasy Jew,” “the little kike,” “water-polack Jew,” “Jew Braun,” “Yid,” “Izzy,” “Wily Ephraim,” “Baron Itzig,” and “the Jewish Nigger.” In a July 1862 letter to Engels, Marx confidently observed of Lassalle, “It is now perfectly clear to me that, as the shape of his head and the growth of his hair indicates, he is descended from the Negroes who joined in Moses’ flight from Egypt.” Lassalle’s “cranial formation,” detected Marx, was the giveaway. Marx did, however, allow for an exception: “unless his mother or grandmother on the father’s side was crossed with a nigger.” Marx chortled, “This union of Jew and German on a Negro base was bound to produce an extraordinary hybrid.” He also hastened to add, “The fellow’s importunity is also niggerlike.”
Karl Marx summed it up plainly in a letter to his longtime friend Arnold Ruge in 1843: “the Israelite faith is repulsive to me.”
https://archive.ph/Hj4AA https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/05/10/ugly-racism-karl-marx/
The Ugly Racism of Karl Marx
Walter E. Williams / @WE_Williams / May 10, 2017
For example, Marx didn’t think much of Mexicans. When the United States annexed California after the Mexican War, Marx sarcastically asked, “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?”
Engels shared Marx’s contempt for Mexicans, explaining: “In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.”
Marx had a racial vision that might be interesting to his modern-day black supporters. In a letter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor Ferdinand Lassalle, Marx wrote:
It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Moses’ exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a n—–. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product.
Engels shared Marx’s racial philosophy. In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marx’s son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Lafargue had “one-eighth or one-twelfth n—– blood.”
In a letter to Lafargue’s wife, Engels wrote, “Being in his quality as a n—–, a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district.”
Marx was also an anti-Semite, as seen in his essay titled “On the Jewish Question,” which was published in 1844. Marx asked:
What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. … Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man—and turns them into commodities. … The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. … The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.
Bruh.
The banks are not privately funded. They exist as extension of government authority & power.
In fact, this was a major complaint of the banks during Bush's initial bailout. The government ordered the banks to take loans, even if they didn't need them. Banks that were relatively unscathed by the financial collapse were required to accept government loans, which they would have to pay back, making the state a major creditor and further influencing their decisions on policy. And it was the government who had ordered them to create a housing bubble in the first place.
I'm not going to stand here and simply defend these banks though. They, themselves, accepted to be partly government run since they are also share holders in the the Federal Reserve, and accept congressional mandates to manipulate the economy into keeping unemployment perpetually low, and inflation continually going. They also are granted legal protections to engage in "fractional reserve lending" where they print money electronically by lending out more than actually exists.
The government funds them, protects them, issues them orders, places them in charge of currency manipulation, rewards them, and it is all done to fulfill socialist goals of 0% unemployment and economic justice to sectors of the economy that are not growing enough according to the government's objectives.
The merger of the public corporations and their unions into and under state control is Socialism. It may also be Fascism and Corporatism, but I repeat myself.
Yes.
FDR and the Soviets won. FDR allowed the Soviets to annex Eastern Europe. Don't know how capitalist the UK was.
How did the state get the money in the first place.
I may or may not be doing that to annoy you. But really, what's you point?
The Democratic Socialist / Fabian Socialist forces of the Allies in WW2.
Keynesianism is absolutely socialist
I just don't think the Jews need to be "reconciled with he world".
Addressed elsewhere. It is the state that is promoting consumer spending, because they are managing the economy through public corporations, which are legal entities defined by the state.
Not capitalist, either.
Just parasitic.
Disagree. Devaluation of value to increase monetary velocity is not capitalist. It's meth for capitalism, which creates a lot of opportunities to extract wealth without providing value, but capitalism doesn't really need it.