Scientific Proof Of God

[superuniverse]

Like the meaning he attributes to Nostradamus' ravings, and any value given depeche mode?

You're just a fool. What have you to offer?

At least I know where I stand and feel no need to lend value to what is worthless.
who's the greater fool?

You stand on sht. Now move along.

[Svartalf]

Nah. You're just a liar and a fool. Tell us what is worthless... your life...

Man, if you're talking about yourself, do it while looking at a mirror, I had no need to read that.

[Hermit]

Well then you would have to point to a revolution in history where these things did not happen.

Actually, I don't. You made the claim that Marcuse advocates a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them. You need to substantiate it by quoting and linking to where he did so.

But here is a list of nonviolent revolutions anyway.

As a public and influential philosopher he had to be very careful what he said, especially concerning violence against the existing system. He always couched things in Marcusean language, I.e., tolerance is actually intolerance and vice versa.

In other words, you can't find evidence for your claim that Marcuse advocates a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them, so you just reinterpret what he wrote in a way that suits you. No, Dennis, that bird flies like a brick.

[Hermit]

His ideas on revolution are found near the end of the interview.

26:32 "Advocacy of violence is under all circumstances in our situation should be taboo. Violence may be considered justified only as counterviolence."

And revolutions are not made with flowers but with guns.

Plenty of them were made without guns. See the list I linked to in my previous post.

[JimC]

The Who said it all:

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they are flown in the last war

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!

I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Oh I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?

There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by the bye
And a parting on the left
Is now a parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

[superuniverse]

His ideas on revolution are found near the end of the interview.

26:32 "Advocacy of violence is under all circumstances in our situation should be taboo. Violence may be considered justified only as counterviolence."

And revolutions are not made with flowers but with guns.

Plenty of them were made without guns. See the list I linked to in my previous post.

As if he would agree with terrorism on a TV show or publicly in his books. But that is neither here nor there.

There will never be a peaceful revolution in the USA.

[Hermit]

His ideas on revolution are found near the end of the interview.

26:32 "Advocacy of violence is under all circumstances in our situation should be taboo. Violence may be considered justified only as counterviolence."

And revolutions are not made with flowers but with guns.

Plenty of them were made without guns. See the list I linked to in my previous post.

As if he would agree with terrorism on a TV show or publicly in his books. But that is neither here nor there. There will be no peaceful revolution in the USA.

You keep insisting that Marcuse holds opinions he never either implied or expressed anywhere at all. He did explicitly reject violence in the video you linked to, and I quoted it. Here it is again:

26:32 "Advocacy of violence is under all circumstances in our situation should be taboo. Violence may be considered justified only as counterviolence."

[superuniverse]

"Present situation"

He considered violence taboo under present social conditions as it would be nothing but suicidal. You really haven't read much by him.

[Hermit]

He considered violence taboo under present social conditions as it would be nothing but suicidal. You really haven't read much by him.

Well, you seem to be of the impression that that you did. You made the claim that Marcuse advocates a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them. Link to the place where he said as much.

[superuniverse]

"Frankfurt School: The Problem of Violence and the Radical Opposition. Herbert Marcuse 1967" https://www.marxists.org/reference/arch ... olence.htm

[superuniverse]

"Confrontations are there. They do not have to be drummed up. Going out of the way to find them would falsify the opposition, for today it is in a defensive, not offensive, position."

[superuniverse]

And as for the situation now:

There is no opposition of any consequence...

[superuniverse]

Not quite Marx with his idea of proletarian revolution.


Marcuse's revolutionaries are of a different sort:


"However, underneath the conservative popular base is the substratum of the outcasts and outsiders, the exploited and persecuted of other races and other colors, the unemployed and the unemployable. They exist outside the democratic process; their life is the most immediate and the most real need for ending intolerable conditions and institutions. Thus their opposition is revolutionary even if their consciousness is not. Their opposition hits the system from without and is therefore not deflected by the system; it is an elementary force which violates the rules of the game and, in doing so, reveals it as a rigged game. When they get together and go out into the streets, without arms, without protection, in order to ask for the most primitive civil rights, they know that they face dogs, stones, and bombs, jail, concentration camps, even death. Their force is behind every political demonstration for the victims of law and order. The fact that they start refusing to play the game may be the fact which marks the beginning of the end of a period.
Nothing indicates that it will be a good end. The economic and technical capabilities of the established societies are sufficiently vast to allow for adjustments and concessions to the underdog, and their armed forces sufficiently trained and equipped to take care of emergency situations. However, the specter is there again, inside and outside the frontiers of the advanced societies. The facile historical parallel with the barbarians threatening the empire of civilization prejudges the issue; the second period of barbarism may well be the continued empire of civilization itself. But the chance is that, in this period, the historical extremes may meet again: the most advanced consciousness of humanity, and its most exploited force. It is nothing but a chance. The critical theory of society possesses no concepts which could bridge the gap between the present and its future; holding no promise and showing no success, it remains negative. Thus it wants to remain loyal to those who, without hope, have given and give their life to the Great Refusal.
At the beginning of the fascist era, Walter Benjamin wrote:
“Nur um der Hoffnungslosen willen ist uns die Hoffnung gegeben.”
It is only for the sake of those without hope that hope is given to us."

[Hermit]

"Frankfurt School: The Problem of Violence and the Radical Opposition. Herbert Marcuse 1967" https://www.marxists.org/reference/arch ... olence.htm

Herbert Marcuse equates violence with civil disobedience once more. Missing: Advocacy of a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them.

the recognition and exercise of a higher right and the duty of resistance, of civil disobedience, is a motive force in the historical development of freedom, a potentially liberating violence.

[superuniverse]

"Q & A Problems of Violence..."

https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/ke ... d1960s.pdf

M: I can answer your questions only in brief. The last contradiction is based on a misunderstanding. I have not asserted that nonviolence should be applied or preached as a principle of strategy. I have in no way equated humanitarianism and nonviolence. To the contrary, I have spoken of situations in which it is precisely the interest of humanitarianism which leads to violence."