Freudo-Marxism

Add Jodi Dean and Adrian Johnston to that list.

Freud's research into how a certain drug affects muscle strength and reflexes:
>>I repeatedly carried out on myself, or had carried out [on me], these two series of experiments. I realize that such self-researches have the shortcoming, for the person who conducts them, of claiming two kinds of believability in the same matter. But I had to proceed in this way for external reasons [aus äußeren Gründen] and because none of the individuals at my disposal showed such a regular reaction to cocaine [as my own]. The results of the investigation were, however, also confirmed through my testing of other persons, mostly colleagues.20
15  Freud 1885a.
20  Cocaine Papers, pp. 98–99; SK, p. 91; translation modified.

but wait, there is more:
22  Cocaine Papers, p. 101; SK, p. 94; translation modified.

thf most of the "disgusting personal habits" of Mao are made up. Like the myth that he had 15 year old concubines.

That's literally how "ad hominem" was defined in Ancient Rome: If a smoker tells you that smoking is bad he's wrong. Plus, how is this a refutation of "you would take advice from Marx with a grain of salt considering he cared about workers but never worked a day in his life".

Tomorrow I'll stop listening to Burzum because Varg is a Nazi.

Marx worked as a journalist and author. He got paid writing for the New York Daily Tribune, he also got paid for writing Capital.

It's absurd to have a general taboo about criticizing people. Crews doesn't criticize Freud for being a brony or whatever, the criticism is directly related to Freud's pretensions of doing scientific work. Just RTFB already.

Freud was actually exceptional, and in ways a more genuine researcher than a lot of modern psychologists. I mean he got a lot of stuff wrong, but he also had a good intuitive sense of human behavior and a genuine curiosity to build it around.

That's how they would put it on Kiwifarms.
Oh wait, you are serious. Freud tried to cure morphine addiction with cocaine (that's not the bad part) and it didn't work (also not the really bad part) and then the patient got addicted to both morphine and cocaine (that's bad, but it gets worse), Freud then still shilled for curing morphine addiction with cocaine, claiming that it worked on his patient.

Is there a way to fit Lacan into a Spinoza-Marxist framework or is Deleuze's interpretations the only existing "Spinozist reading" of Lacan

Imagine being this guy.