What does it mean when somebody calls you a cultural Marxist in the meaning of you are an enemy of your people and common good? It is devastating and incorrect. To be leftist is never against people nor common good. If that is what leftists do, they are doing wrong. To be called an enemy is something communists, Marxists and all defined on the left more or less usually encounter. It is no surprise since deep division between political parties and views grows the more unstable world becomes, the more violent the world gets. To set an enemy for yourself, to those whom you represent with your world view and values in real life or only in your imagination seems to be a basic method of choosing sides which method is to create imbalance, argument, reality and more division there already is. Who is against you, against your political views, plans, what there is to get, your values, your safety and position is your enemy in this conversation and game, real and virtual, where winners are the most loudest bullies who have the nerve and attitude to crush anyone who is in their way. To be leftist artist can mean that to work in the industry successfully one has to bend one’s principles and values, professional field which is politically on the right which people working in arts do not like to admit, may even deny any political inclinations and sympathy. It is so that many philosophers discussed within arts heavily question fascist ideas and way of life, what is right and where to stand. You can be in the mist and not know what is what, think and say the other, do completely different. It is confusing, as it seems. Can business ever be leftist? If one is willing to compromise in a field where pretending is a rule and setting the mood and image right are more important than what lies behind, more important than standing behind values such as human rights, worker rights and intellectual progress, intellectual integrity, one can succeed especially financially. To be leftist who stands behind what is right it means one has to be vocal about issues, give straightforward criticism to those who may not want it but desperately need it and object to fascist progress of thinking and rock the fascist state of things which is manipulative, conservative, greedy, hindering progress rather than supporting it, exclusive, arrogant and hierarchical. Left means all what is said and done must stand the light of day and all things said and done are done within the frame of good for all, for all people. Everything is political whether you deny it or not, despite of you.
To me leftist is uncompromising when truth must be found. Left is against fascism. It is never fascist. It is against exploitation, abuse, manipulation, oppression and rule of money. It does not get intoxicated by power. Being visibly leftist on social media has appeared to be similar as being feminist. One is immediately labelled difficult and against something that left is not against in the first place. There are strict pools for right and left and far-right is a clear bully who likes to label those it calls enemies. To be leftist means sticking to one’s ideals and speaking out despite bullies, trolls, haters and gamers who throw dirt, threaten and shame without second thought because there is this enemy side to which all human right activists for some reason belong. There is strict division between those who seek common good and peace and those who look for causing harm and gaining benefit for themselves, self-interest and loathing belong together.
It is a strange battle in which knowing definitions most strongly defend radical change despite the thrashing of the name Marx and all of the left. From where things originate is essential to learn. Names and definitions are the ones that get thrown at you mostly by people who do not know better. Marxist is the swear word to many. Marxism an ideology a curse to be abolished. Maybe it is enough a reason to be a Marxist. Misunderstanding, that happened in the past, still defines Marxism which is as it happened more against the people and justice having created inequality that it was not to do. Was Marxism invented by Marx himself? By the outcome definitely not. What does Marxism mean, when it can be manipulated to be fascist? Merely that there are flaws in the philosophy or how it is understood poorly or not at all, definitely there have been and are flaws in the conventions of governing and implementing ideas as they are without manipulating them. Origins of hate, names, ideas and wars win and spin, what and who wins? When rulers get rich but people do not the state of things is not on the left, maybe looking in the direction of the left as it is deported to concentration camps and prisons silenced and bullied. To be leftist means knowing the roots and meanings of terms and ideas used. Terminology is a battle field, ammunition, accusation and fault as is history. History is a sledgehammer but we do not learn from it. To know who stands on the right and defends right causes one has to listen what people talk, also listen to those with whom you do not agree. Marxism and communism having had the heavy load of atrocities, misuse and abuse, massacres, lies, exploitation of philosophy and ideas invented to make revolution of labor, of working people and human rights does not mean the essential ideas are useless, they have been implemented in wrong ways. Why are thoughts that were made to give power to those who do not have power, to those who are powerless without means to rise up, deemed bad and corrupt?
Crowds will have power when they learn to know how to use power of theirs collectively and correctly for good building peaceful society. What are those teachings and how does learning happen collectively? What is the corrupt part, I wonder. Where does it, a movement, a revolution, go corrupt and why working class should not have similar rights as the bourgeoisie, depending what those rights are? Enemy today is the venomous history remembered as a heavy book, a burden which it is. History which easily repeats the fire and force of Marxism used poorly and violently against those whom it is supposed to help. The heavy book forgotten because it is too long to study. Socialism and communism do appeal to those who are the most oppressed and may look for vengeance seeking their power which has been lost. To be wise with the power of working class can be found, reason is there when one does not give power to hate. Change can be hopelessly total destruction even compared to reality experienced and escaped, complete turnover is lethal when there is lack of compassion and knowledge. Subtle voluntary change exercised by all willingly sounds like a dream. It means there shall not be any politicians who would seek absolute power. Social reform does not happen quickly in places where there is no history of power of the working people used for them and by them.
Where rulers slaughter people of their own and are intoxicated by power philosophers are merely hammers in use to justify deeds done in the name of working people and freedom. It is a complicated question what left is today because it is without teeth in front of unemployment, corruption, chaos in the Middle East and future looking somewhat threatening.
Political left is seeking profound change in Europe as it is broken and divided instead of being united. Prejudice and stigma that there hovers above seems propaganda and something people who still think like it is the 1990s like to keep alive. The very basis of left still remains for those who stand on the side of protecting instead of destroying: human value exists without ownership, without money, money is not the ultimate measure of life, possession does not tell of human value, people live and must be allowed to live free and in peace regardless of the circumstances they come from and their background, regardless of status, wealth, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, political views and occupation. It is at its core an aim to provide good living for all, a political ideology about sharing wealth in a way that there would not be handful of people who are enormously rich and there would not be a mass of poor people who cannot rise up because they are so poor and would be slaves to those who own the most of wealth and means to produce basic products, means to provide work, means to influence in politics and have power in decision-making. That there would not be poverty where there are no means to help oneself to rise up the ladder. Society cannot be set sustainably in a way that those who are the most well-off will survive and flourish because of their gained wealth and only those would prosper. If to make it would be and is so difficult in most of the world leftism has got work to do. When the only way to get ahead is that one should be equipped to fit and have wealth world will not be stable, people will not have stable healthy views on society and what being a human today is. Society that expects certain things of success, those who succeed have succeeded in advance, loses something important something that we cannot anticipate but will regret. It is variety, surprise and innovation that does not appear because of wealth but despite it. For all there must be tools to reach out for their dreams and succeed in life.
The postmodern left and the success of neoliberalism
Canadian university partners with foreign mining firm and its checkered, colonialist legacy