Miscellaneous News

taxiya · Oct 20, 2023

coolgod said:
Have you read Marx's <On The Jewish Question> ?

No, but from reading briefly the wiki summary, I don't see any problem with it or with Marxism. He was talking about the relationship between secular state and religion using the "Jewish question" to counter the other school. He was arguing against the over simplification of the other school who dimised the influence of religion, but that does not contradict Marxism's fundation that is economy (material interest) creates everything else including religion, state which in turn have great inpact on economy (materialistic activities).

If Marx was living in India he could use the "Muslim question" as a subject to prove his point, or being a Afro-American arguing against the BLM movement's approach under the book name "Black question". The very eye-catching reason that made this book attractive is the name"Jewish Question" which was made famous by Hitler. So the name of the book becomes a cheap-shot by anti-Marxist to discredit Marx or redicule Jewish people. Having a question is nothing right or wrong, the answer is.

Marxism fundation is dialitic materialism. Materialism means "materialisc activity" creates social activity. Dialitic denote that social activity created by materialistic activity has impact in return but never the fundation. The two words can NOT be taken apart, missing any one of them is not Marxism. Marxism does not reject religion's great inpact but only reject it being the root of everything. Religion is a cloak to legimitize the economy order that benifit the ruling class, a drug to anaesthetize the people's desire to change, it is no more different from a gun.

I think people who keep using this book as some sort of "antisemitic" or "Jewish thinker against Jew" is looking through the lense of anti-Marxism anti-Materialism, because only in anti-Materialism one would see religion as a foundamental and determining element. Once again as I said before, people fighting the west are actually unkowningly spiritually their own enemy. In a Buddhist term, 心魔, the devil in one's own heart. It is easy to identify who is the enemy outside (the west), but difficult to find the enemy inside our own mind (fed by western papers).

So no, I don't see any meaning of bringing up this book, nor is there anything significant for Karl Marx to talk about the situation of Jews or any minority groups in Europe back in his time. Nor is there any reason to take in Karl Marx' enthnity background into the equation.

TK3600 · Oct 20, 2023

taxiya said:
No, but from reading briefly the wiki summary, I don't see any problem with it or with Marxism. He was talking about the relationship between secular state and religion using the "Jewish question" to counter the other school. He was arguing against the over simplification of the other school who dimised the influence of religion, but that does not contradict Marxism's fundation that is economy (material interest) creates everything else including religion, state which in turn have great inpact on economy (materialistic activities).

If Marx was living in India he could use the "Muslim question" as a subject to prove his point, or being a Afro-American arguing against the BLM movement's approach under the book name "Black question". The very eye-catching reason that made this book attractive is the name"Jewish Question" which was made famous by Hitler. So the name of the book becomes a cheap-shot by anti-Marxist to discredit Marx or redicule Jewish people. Having a question is nothing right or wrong, the answer is.

Marxism fundation is dialitic materialism. Materialism means "materialisc activity" creates social activity. Dialitic denote that social activity created by materialistic activity has impact in return but never the fundation. The two words can NOT be taken apart, missing any one of them is not Marxism. Marxism does not reject religion's great inpact but only reject it being the root of everything. Religion is a cloak to legimitize the economy order that benifit the ruling class, a drug to anaesthetize the people's desire to change, it is no more different from a gun.

I think people who keep using this book as some sort of "antisemitic" or "Jewish thinker against Jew" is looking through the lense of anti-Marxism anti-Materialism, because only in anti-Materialism one would see religion as a foundamental and determining element. Once again as I said before, people fighting the west are actually unkowningly spiritually their own enemy. In a Buddhist term, 心魔, the devil in one's own heart. It is easy to identify who is the enemy outside (the west), but difficult to find the enemy inside our own mind (fed by western papers).

So no, I don't see any meaning of bringing up this book, nor is there anything significant for Karl Marx to talk about the situation of Jews or any minority groups in Europe back in his time. Nor is there any reason to take in Karl Marx' enthnity background into the equation.

There is a realist element in our mind and an idealist. The idealist element say all race are political constructs that should have no basis to judge fellow human beings. The realist element say racism is rampant and that is how the world operates. You could try not perpetuate this vicious cycle, but you cannot escape living in it. The material condition has no regard to our ideology.

The Jewish Question basically stated Jewish will never be freed until it give up being Jewish. The dominant society is not Jewish, therefore can only tolerate it. If that is not sufficient, then society can only give prevliges to the Jewish at cost of itself. Why should that happen? It is not as if Jewish people are fighting to end the plight of commoners around them? They only fight for themselves. Why would others fight for their prevliges? This is an impossible contradiction. The only solution is if both Christians and Jewish end their religion as their central identity. In other words, it is not enough for the broad society to end its difference to Jews, Jews also must end its difference to the broad society. Otherwise it is a zero sum relationship.

In our modern context, the contradiction still exists but in a different form than Christian vs Jewish. It is their identity. These Jewish community must end their ethnic centrism and recognize it is silly. This is just as important as world need to end its discrimination against Jewish people. If these Jewish people keep fighting for their own interest only and refuse to integrate with the broader society, the contradiction remains, only this time they are the oppressors.

taxiya · Oct 20, 2023

TK3600 said:
I disagree. Race/ethnicity is central to the problem.

I don't expect you to agree since you are not a Marxist thinker. We will have to agree to disagree.

TK3600 said:
Israel act like this because Jewish people refuse to assimilate.

Nobody should be force to assimilate to anybody else. Chinese Indonesian should not have been forced to assimilate either. If someone don't want to join the party, leave him alone.

TK3600 said:
People thinking in terms of race because that will be how people treat them, regardless how not racist one might be. I don't mean anything toward Jewish people in particular. See this post.

I agree that "race play a big part in social relationship even though it may have nothing to do with racism". It is a fact that nobody should deny but it isn't what my post was about to be clear. My post was that "letting racial perspective occupy a prominant position in thinking is counter productive" in my Marxist thinking, and I ackownledge that you disagree.

TK3600 · Oct 20, 2023

taxiya said:
I don't expect you to agree since you are not a Marxist thinker. We will have to agree to disagree.

Nobody should be force to assimilate to anybody else. Chinese Indonesian should not have been forced to assimilate either. If someone don't want to join the party, leave him alone.

I agree that "race play a big part in social relationship even though it may have nothing to do with racism". It is a fact that nobody should deny but it isn't what my post was about to be clear. My post was that "letting racial perspective occupy a prominant position in thinking is counter productive" in my Marxist thinking, and I ackownledge that you disagree.

I am very much Marxist in my thinking, and that is why I acknowledge race is a political construct holding humans back. That is why at the same time we must recognize the Jewish solution of forming a stronger identity to the exclusion of people around them is destined to fail, just like Marx predicted. Neither Marx nor Communist of China will approve this.

Now on the topic of assimilation, that is a loaded word. China recognize its minority and let them keep the identity, they do not force them to change. The key is putting down the identity difference. CPC will not allow any ethnicity to weaponize it and profit to the detriment of others. The same way terrorism, separatism is not allowed. This is not how Zionists operates. Zionists seek to use their identity to oppress others. They have no intention of evolving beyond religion as the central identity. As a result, these people are decisively unmarxist.

Now on the last point. I very much agree that race should not occupy a prominent position, but only ideally. The reality is one must be race savvy in this world to thrive. Until people like us are in a dominant position to shape the world, we must keep vigilant on race, because it is the dominant identity force today.

taxiya · Oct 20, 2023

TK3600 said:
There is a realist element in our mind and an idealist. The idealist element say all race are political constructs that should have no basis to judge fellow human beings. The realist element say racism is rampant and that is how the world operates. You could try not perpetuate this vicious cycle, but you cannot escape living in it. The material condition has no regard to our ideology.

The Jewish Question basically stated Jewish will never be freed until it give up being Jewish. The dominant society is not Jewish, therefore can only tolerate it. If that is not sufficient, then society can only give prevliges to the Jewish at cost of itself. Why should that happen? It is not as if Jewish people are fighting to end the plight of commoners around them? They only fight for themselves. Why would others fight for their prevliges? This is an impossible contradiction. The only solution is if both Christians and Jewish end their religion as their central identity. In other words, it is not enough for the broad society to end its difference to Jews, Jews also must end its difference to the broad society. Otherwise it is a zero sum relationship.

In our modern context, the contradiction still exists but in a different form than Christian vs Jewish. It is their identity. These Jewish community must end their ethnic centrism and recognize it is silly. This is just as important as world need to end its discrimination against Jewish people. If these Jewish people keep fighting for their own interest only and refuse to integrate with the broader society, the contradiction remains, only this time they are the oppressors.

I agree that things eventually boils down to the realist element and idealist element in our mind. A quick thought of it is that realism is a tool, idealism is our soul. Our soul determine how we want to shape our world, the tool helps us to realize that purpose. We can not let the tool to take control of our soul, otherwise we will loose what we want and drift like a pebble in the river.

taxiya · Oct 20, 2023

TK3600 said:
I am very much Marxist in my thinking, and that is why I acknowledge race is a political construct holding humans back. That is why at the same time we must recognize the Jewish solution of forming a stronger identity to the exclusion of people around them is destined to fail, just like Marx predicted. Neither Marx nor Communist of China will approve this.

I believe that Marx would disapprove what Israel and its lobbists in the US are doing.

martinwagner · Oct 20, 2023

Sardaukar20 said:
I never really had a Road to Damascus journey. During my childhood, my family had always reminded me to be proud of being a Chinese. This was mainly due to the resistance fervor against the state-instituted racism against the ethnic Chinese by the Malaysian government. But at that time, we looked up mostly to the Chinese people in HK and Taiwan, and not yet the Mainland. But when mainland China started to arrive, many of us (but not all) started appreciating the rise of the PRC more. That is the short story.

The long story is me appreciating communism and the CPC after learning more about the history and the struggles of the Chinese people and communism in Malaysia. In school, all Malaysians are taught that the communists are the ultimate evil. Because of the legacy of the communist insurgency, and with Malaysia being part of the pro-West Commonwealth. The communists in Malaysia were often portrayed as an even worse evil than the Imperial Japanese Army. It also doesn't help their reputation, that most of them were ethnic Chinese, bringing Sinophobia into the mix. However, I was told by my elders that the communists in Malaysia were the actual heroes in WWII, but they were ultimately betrayed by the British and the local majority Malay population. The Malay population had a unenviable reputation for being willing subjects of any invading foreign power. When the Japanese invaded Malaya, and the British colonial administration surrendered, the Malays greeted them with opened arms and switched loyalties to their new overlords. They cooperated with the IJA to hunt down Malaysian Chinese. The Malayan Communist Party (MCP), along with some smaller allies were the only force who were seriously resisting the Japanese, aided by the British. When the Japanese surrendered, and the British returned, the Malays then switched their loyalties back to the British once more. But then the British betrayed the MCP and kicked off the communist insurgency. Now, those Malays who used to serve the Japanese as enforcers were tasked by the British to fight the communists and suppress the Malaysian Chinese population. Some of these Malays were lionized as Malay Muslim 'heroes' in history textbooks. It is this disgusting history that made me see the communism in general in a different light. It also got me curious about communism in general, and the more I learned about them, the more I like them. Eventually, I learned about the USSR and the CPC and I liked them even more.

In my younger years, I liked the USSR for being badass, but as I learned more about them, I don't like them as much anymore. However, the CPC was special to me because it was much more personal. It was Chinese, and it had a connection with the struggles of the MCP and the Chinese community in Malaysia. I see the CPC and the PRC as the ultimate force that can bring justice to the Chinese people as a whole. Not only do they actually kick butt, but they have also developed China further than ever before. Imperfect as they are, they are the real deal. They have put substance into the meaning of being proud to be Chinese.

I am disappointed that many Malaysian Chinese still fell for the anti-communist propaganda in school, and definitely in media. They were ready to stand up for Chinese solidarity, but just not for the Chinese on the mainland. These days, these people are infected by Boba Milk Tea mental disease and have strayed away from Chinese solidarity to 'Taiwan and HK solidarity'. The HK riot of 2019 was an eye opener for me. Many friends and family whom I thought had been fervent defenders of Chinese rights in Malaysia became strong PRC haters. Unsurprisingly, these people loved Donald Trump and started loving America all over again, despite originally hating America during its War on Terror era. It is thanks to this madness, that I finally needed to speak out and become a proper Wumao.

Mines was somewhat similar. My family was always proudly Chinese, just very un-political. Growing up in the US, I didn't have strong feelings for either China nor the USA. Things changed during early high school in the 90s when the internet started to become mainstream, and I started seeing all the anti-China MSM articles about the "Tiananmen Massacre", which I knew it was complete BS since I had relatives living close to Tiananmen Square during '89 and all I remember was that it was the crazy libtard students that were killing soldiers that were the terrorists, and definitively not the PLA. I definitively started leaning somewhat anti-USA and pro-China around that time. By early 2000s I was pretty anti-USA due to the Iraq war and Bush Jr. becoming president.

But even then I had no idea just how truly evil the US/West was.

Around 2018 or so, I came across a few Quora posts by ironically enough an American,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, that opened my eyes up further and was shocked again just how insane this regime was. I'm glad there's still some decent Americans like him speaking out. That also kicked off my passion to dive deeply into geopolitics and to catch up with how the world got to this point.

taxiya · Oct 20, 2023

TK3600 said:
So basically Marx himself reject zionism. Making the argument of not whether thinking him as a jew invalid. In fact he is from a capitalist family, but that does not stop his view.

Zhou Enlai and Liu Shaoqi were also from big capitalist and landowner families, but they burried their own birth classes. I think there are also French aristocrates who joined the republic struggles deposing the King. These are true revolutionaries.

Bellum_Romanum · Oct 20, 2023

There's a lot of hand wringing going on social media like on X.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1715345155782517157

TK3600 · Oct 20, 2023

Bellum_Romanum said:
There's a lot of hand wringing going on social media like on X.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1715345155782517157

Like all empires, where it went wrong is not when in terminal decline, but when it is at peak. It is always easier to snowball and get stronger than start weak and become strong. For this reason, the moment empire stop becoming stronger at peak meaning something seriously wrong has happened. Because it should have been the easiest to grow stronger when already strong. 1981-1989 is the strongest period of USA, an that is when Ronald Reagan is in charge. He started the downfall of USA long before it already has fallen.

Ronald Reagan started privatization of state institutions to benefit the capitalists at the cost of the middle class and lower class. The trickle down economy has been a farce. Normally, a single failure would have resulted someone more competent, but the down fall of Soviet Union was credited to him thus making him a legend. American therefore took all the wrong lesson from cold war and doubled down on all the past mistakes.

Now what about the down fall of Soviet Union? Surely Ronald Reagan has some merits? Soviet Union collapsed on its own problem, but it has nothing to do with economy, it is a political problem. Therefore it cannot be credited to Ronald Reagan's arm race. To illustrate my point look at North Korea. They were starving, nevertheless they developed nuclear weapon. There was no arm race induced social collapse. Therefore Ronald Reagan should not be credited for the collapse of Soviet Union.

Because Ronald Reagan was falsely credited to be a legend, this is where the true problem emerges. Americans are taking all the wrong lessons of cold war and proceed to go down a spiral destroying itself. In less than 30 years it has lost the dominant economic position to China. It was a spectacular string of failures unusual to dynasties this powerful. They believed that socialism has no merit evident by collapse of Soviet Union, and therefore China posed no threat, it will convert to a democracy. Privatization is the key to their success, ignoring the legacy of FDR, one of their greatest leader. Public institution is dismantled on purpose. The reality is economy trickles up. Elites come from people, and the quality of common people rising up determines the quality of their leaders. This leads to a vicious cycle.

The human capital of middle class deteriorates, leading to electing poor leaders. Poor leaders are incapable of fixing the national problems. The poor leaders make the middle class quality worse by propaganda and corruption. The cycle will infinitely repeat until collapse, and Americans will be none the wiser.

Miscellaneous News

taxiya

Brigadier

TK3600

Major

taxiya

Brigadier

TK3600

Major

taxiya

Brigadier

taxiya

Brigadier

martinwagner

Junior Member

taxiya

Brigadier

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier

TK3600

Major