The vast majority of them, to be honest. He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, has no knowledge of AES, and horrendously distorts Lenin.

He's a liberal that cosplays an Anarchist and pretends to have beyond a Wikipedia understanding of Marxism.

That's, of course, ignoring that he's a chaser, pedophile, sex offender.

[–] deaf_fish@lemm.ee -3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism

Can you list a specific example? I think he has a good understanding of this.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

One of the worst issues is when he depicts AES as "not real Socialism" because they contain contradictions, when Dialectical Materialism shows that all systems contain contradictions and must resolve them, that doesn't mean they aren't that system. Ie, Capitalist states contain public ownership, which is a contradiction but does not define the system.

One of the recent and larger-scale issues was when he tried to explain Lenin advocated voting Socialism into existence.

I don't make it a point to hate-watch sex offenders that do the work of the US state department.

[–] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I am not surprised that you have disagreements behind Lenin and AES. The two are pretty related and hard to pull apart. I was just surprised that you would disagree with any of his Marxist takes. I think you both agree what the problems are from a Marxist perspective.

As for the sex offenders/sex pest stuff. I don't think he is those things, but I understand I am just one person. From the stuff I have seen it is mostly people that disagree with him that label him as such as a way to get around the fact they don't really have a leg to stand on; Fascists and the like. Not saying that is you of course.

Thanks for taking the time to talk this though by the way. I figure you get hit with a lot of stuff.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 12 hours ago

Vaush has to, by virtue of his profession, at least pretend to know what he's talking about with Marxism, so it can seem convincing. The issue is that it is abundantly clear every time he makes a mistake to anyone who takes theory seriously, yet that isn't Vaush's target audience, who are mainly western liberals and occasionally pro-US Anarchists.

That's why I recommend reading theory, the only way to be 100% sure is to go the source.