ideas or class struggle?

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Up to around 100 years ago it was sharply a class divide. The changing economic landscape after WW1 muddied the waters. Now there are wealthy, upper class left wingers as well as poor, lower class right wingers.

ChristineM said:

Up to around 100 years ago it was sharply a class divide. The changing economic landscape after WW1 muddied the waters. Now there are wealthy, upper class left wingers as well as poor, lower class right wingers.

Click to expand...

I agree.

The ruling class, right and left, are united in their desire to keep and expand their wealth, mostly regardless of any consideration of the general welfare.

Orbit said:

The ruling class, right and left, are united in their desire to keep and expand their wealth, mostly regardless of any consideration of the general welfare.

Click to expand...

Yes, I too believe there is such a thing as a general good

Eg. the environment should unite both the masses and the ruling class

But I think it gets neglected in favour of more immediate interests

It can be about both or about either ---- but it is most often about class struggle. At least, for the past 5,500 years (since the first kings) it has been mostly about class struggle.

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

Perhaps in class self interest.

The poor want security.
The middle class want security.
The wealthy want security.

Maybe the difference is how they go about trying to get/keep that security.

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

How about this: It's all about the struggle for POWER. People form classes because numbers create more power. People attempt to acquire large sums of money simply because that is power when so many people will do anything for it.

Everybody wants to rule the world. On the other hand, where does it really get one? This is a hard lesson many must learn.

That's what I am seeing. When I look at American politics, I know some 3 year old kids that act better. On the other hand, even most 3 year olds want to rule their world as they want. Can we really eat ice cream and candy for every meal? Now that would be a lesson to learn.

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

Both and neither. Politics is about trying to convince people of what is the best way to run a society for the benefit of its members. Plenty of politics is pragmatic and based on neither class struggle nor ideology.

But in fact the very concept of class struggle betrays an ideological approach to the subject. Who defines "class"? And who says they are "struggling" against one another?

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

No. Marxism is a failed theory.

Saint Frankenstein said:

No. Marxism is a failed theory.

Click to expand...

So if politics isn't ultimately about class struggle what is it all about?

Eddi said:

So if politics isn't ultimately about class struggle what is it all about?

Click to expand...

Human needs and desires. It can't be reduced to just one thing.

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

If it's a class struggle, it is the struggle between the Haves, and Have-a-little-and-want-mores...maybe 10 or 15 percent of the population between those two groups. Everyone else is cannon fodder. And are manipulated by the factions.

The ideologies apply to the various factions within the two competing groups, as they try to win followers among the top two groups, as well as the masses.

Saint Frankenstein said:

No. Marxism is a failed theory.

Click to expand...

the existence of social, economic or other classes is not dependent on Marxism. Marxism is a specific construction of the idea of classes.

beenherebeforeagain said:

the existence of social, economic or other classes is not dependent on Marxism. Marxism is a specific construction of the idea of classes.

Click to expand...

I know but the belief that history can be reduced to class struggle is a foundation of Marxism.

Eddi said:

Here’s a question:

Is politics about the clash of ideologies or is it all ultimately about class struggle?

I think it’s ultimately about class struggle

And that the struggle between the interests of competing classes manifests itself in terms of competing ideologies

But what do other people think about this whole issue?

Click to expand...

The politics of today is clearly about money and how to make as much money as possible. Ideology is used to get the support of the masses but there is no will to actually succeed with the ideology's. Play it up the ideology until its time to switch money making policies. It does seem the masses are starting to tire of it but now we have Trump. Trump plays up to the most disgruntled of the Republican party while enriching the party to be over thrown by the Democrats whose base will be satisfied with Trump gone so the Democrats can now enrich themselves. The public continues to play their game always losing.

The Democrats have been trying to overthrow a duly elected president using gossip and intrigue, since Trump took office. Trump threatens their money making scams, that allows the Swam to steal from the tax payer, without them even knowing about it. Trump knows how the swamp works, and the swamp is trying retain its ill gotten gain, even if this involves criminal activity. .

Former Vice President Biden is a good case study of how the tax payer is being ripped off by the left. The US gives foreign aid to countries like Ukraine. This seems fine. But the money is being given to a corrupt government, so the money can be skimmed. Biden through his son, got some of this tax payer money, through a large third party business, who received US tax payer money from the Ukraine government. It is a tax payer money laundering scam via foreign aid.

Global warming and climate change was supposed to involve $trillions of tax payer money, given all over the world, even to third world dictators known for corruption. This flow of money was supposed to create a huge slush fund. It was basically a money laundering scam for Democrat middle men, to skim. Trump messed-up that scam, and now they are out to get him, so they can restore this huge tax payer funded slush fund.

All the cash given to Iran, had an attached processing fee for a slush fund. Iran will launder this money and some will be transferred later so it looks legitimate. Trump is being threatened with impeachment because he was trying to expose the scam in Ukraine.

ChristineM said:

Up to around 100 years ago it was sharply a class divide. The changing economic landscape after WW1 muddied the waters. Now there are wealthy, upper class left wingers as well as poor, lower class right wingers.

Click to expand...

Difference in class Ideologies tends to be a direct link to education versus comfort. In the end, the poor lower class right wingers tend to choose comfort (by comfort in this situation I am obviously referring to how Republicans cater to the poor via religious belief) over understanding that they are always voting against their best interest. And, of course, the circus that politics has become ensures that they view Republicans as helping them when in reality it only helps the rich one percent.

Saint Frankenstein said:

I know but the belief that history can be reduced to class struggle is a foundation of Marxism.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but viewing history as struggles between various classes is a legitimate school of thought. Marx was rooted in a specific philosophical tradition (most notably influenced by Hegel) that focused on 'progress' toward an egalitarian utopia as the end goal of society, rather than on simple survival of groups--which happens to be the view I prefer. There are of course other ideas out there being pursued by scholars.

The idea that there was a specific end goal of society's development doesn't seem to match any facts known today...Marxism ended up being the excuse for a different group in society seizing the wealth and power for themselves from the previous entrenched elites. Regardless of their quotations and veneration of Marx, they were not really attempting to advance anything but themselves.

beenherebeforeagain said:

Yeah, but viewing history as struggles between various classes is a legitimate school of thought. Marx was rooted in a specific philosophical tradition (most notably influenced by Hegel) that focused on 'progress' toward an egalitarian utopia as the end goal of society, rather than on simple survival of groups--which happens to be the view I prefer. There are of course other ideas out there being pursued by scholars.

The idea that there was a specific end goal of society's development doesn't seem to match any facts known today...Marxism ended up being the excuse for a different group in society seizing the wealth and power for themselves from the previous entrenched elites. Regardless of their quotations and veneration of Marx, they were not really attempting to advance anything but themselves.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know that educated idiots in academia still take it seriously for whatever reason. You're not telling me anything new.