How does this make you feel leftypol? According to the NYT it looks like Marxism is back in fashion in a grand way!

How does this make you feel leftypol? According to the NYT it looks like Marxism is back in fashion in a grand way!

Attached: Marx.png (722x779, 744.6K)

Other urls found in this thread:

ft.com/content/36a7ba7a-a05f-11e6-891e-abe238dee8e2)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I don't pay much attention to those.
People say all kinds of things in them.

also
Yeah, this is more of smear than anything, to me.

Attached: Screenshot_20180430-173000.png (1080x1920, 367.56K)

pure spectacle

I know I'll be depressed if I get to see the comment section under that article

oops, marx birthday is may 5th

When you hear this from liberals its almost always some stupid obvious cosmetic thing. For instance ever since Piketty published his book on inequality there have been liberals crowing "Wow, Marx was right! capitalism leads to inequality!"

Which is not only completely fucking obvious when one looks at wealth inequality instead of income inequality (ft.com/content/36a7ba7a-a05f-11e6-891e-abe238dee8e2) but actually a little bit inane. Bourgeois economists like Kuznets who predicted greater equality as capitalism develops failed to incorporate hidden income/assets, capital shocks etc. into his model, so this should have been obvious from the beginning.

But the reason I said this type of discussion is inane is because while inequality is a problem it isn't necessarily the problem. It should be pretty obvious that even in the most egalitarian capitalist countries hat the proletariat is an oppressed class and so the problem isn't one of distribution but ownership. Capitalism's goof-up periods are structural and not a result of the bourgs getting too many of the toys as liberals present the picture.

I'm already depressed reading the text under the image of the Marx head which the New York Times have no right to be posting with

Nothing new under the sun. Bourgeois ideologues embrace radical ideas, in order to subvert them and render them useless to the opressed.

Attached: jeffrey-henning-festival-of-new-mr-2014-23-638.jpg (638x479, 40.86K)

Attached: 453bbd3d1910b0610ee6a807a284920eb3f837a0f6da5a651fddb7c593ddf15e.jpg (550x394, 231.25K)

And commies say they are oppressed by the media.

Jesus, seeing that just now

It's not like NYT would have the balls to actually publicize his particular views and proposed tactics. Their idea of Marx is the same as the one Ubisoft put in Assassin's creed, ie a contemporary socdem. Come back when NYT calls for a violent revolution.


That bust makes him look like a dwarf.

wow so much for journalism

Doesnt matter how much, but who.
With the invention of automatic weapons and missiles and shit that flies around and whatnot, the masses are irrelevant, prove me wrong.

tfw the NYT is cucking us out of our own ideology

Read the line right under his fucking head, revisionist bullshit. NYT does not host any marxists on their opinion column or anyone to the left of Elizabeth Warren, and they never will. This applies to all "papers of record" in the US. They're bourgeois publications, so naturally they will only host bourgeois viewpoints. Hence why they've cultivated an opinion column consisting of milquetoast liberals and anti-trump conservatives. The latter group being especially egregious considering that anti-trump conservatives basically only exist among the bourgeois.

...

Vietnam.

IRA, Vietnam, DPRK

Okay how has no one noticed this is either obvious bait by the NYT itself or some right winger who hijacked an opinion piece and wanted to make Marx look bad in front of the entire media?

Attached: turing.png (449x614, 352.89K)

Just respond to it with marx's letter to engels regarding the jewish nigger ferdinand Lassalle

the IRA failed tho

...

Attached: avv.jpg (150x150, 10.96K)

they brought the Brits to stalemate twice, gaining tons of concessions on both occasions

I just threw up in my mouth.