My whole point is that the theory directly leads to the abuse. It has always done in practice, be it by genocide or personal abuse.
Ive given you the logic, the way abuse, rape, annihilation usually by gangs of entitled persons is always going to be the result of following the marxist revolutionary protocol, precisely because of how it disregards value, and replaces the concept of valuing (which Ive been the first to successfully formalize) with a prerogative to destroy people who own material value.
Marxists are, in my 4 decades of experience, most often deeply malicious in the patters of their behaviour, and invariably they’re thinking that they’re doing good when they drive people into ruin.
Im sure I now many more and more active Marxists than you, being the grandson of one of Europe’s most influential Communist leaders.
Note that I do not equate Communism with Marxism - Communism is simpler and older, it has goodness in it. My grandfather never wanted anything to do with Marx.
I do think you must now attempt to discern what im saying to you in logical terms.
Marxisms only conception of value is that it is in the wrong hands, and must be taken.
It does not say what value is. It does not express valuation standards at all. It is barren of love, care, empathy, solidarity except in this flimsy rhetoric of “unite, destroy, and take”. I know Marx way too well, half of our basement was filled with bookshelves of works of Marx himself and endless numbers of Marxists. Lenin too, of course, Trotsky, very much naturally, but also all kinds of theoreticians.
I am the Antimarxist because perhaps no one knows Marx better than I do. A great part of the cause of my knowledge is that I truly loved the ideal of solidarity among workers, had a portrait of the man on my mantle even for a while, one I found lying on the street once.
Anyway im kind of helpless here - you having disregarded my logical argument three times now. That is, im sorry to say, a thing very typical of Marxists! How often have I sat at the table with the leading ones, trying to get them to take points of reason into consideration, but always in vain and always at the cost of more humiliation by the group. You aren’t abusieve but you are still completely disregarding the logical red thread here, focussing purely on extraneous elements.
That is what Marxists always do! And it is logical because the semantic methods of Marx are entirely anti-logical. As I demonstrated!!!
Please do not ask me to repeat it all for a fourth time this week. If you truly do want to understand, reread my posts here and in “what marxism really is”.
Please, do me this favour - read my points carefully and not with the pre-established knowledge that you will disagree. That pre-established knowledge always makes people read badly.
Please do not hold on to Marxism as infallible when you read me. Give my arguments a fair chance.
(By the way, it wasn’t my parents doing the abusing. I need to get that clear. We had a fucking weird tightly nit humongous group of people which I stupidly grew up giving my love and trust. Whoever was, is still a Marxist among these people is just a disastrous human being - indeed one has no choice, as a Marxist - the only thing to do as a Marxist is to destroy people who have things that you want, with the abstract idea that you’re doing it for the greater good. Where in fact it is just a placeholder for envy and hatred; envy and hatred are, if they are in name of the Proletariat, virtues for the Marxist. So much malice has crept in them and they actually think they’re protectors. Even with the massive bodycount they already stacked up, they keep believing.)