Why are so many sociologists marxists...

since when did Veeky Forums become a Continentalist board?

Because Marx is, ironically, one of the founding fathers of modern sociology, although he never termed himself as such. Marx sought to analyze industrial society scientifically, so in that sense, he was doing sociology. However, as is typical of the mid-late 19th century and most of the 20th century, his theory is particularly preoccupied with economic relations, as many later famous sociologists like Emile Durkheim and Max Weber would be.

There are other frameworks of sociology, but the focus on economic relations remains the dominant paradigm. In that sense, and given that academia is at least somewhat left-leaning, it attracts people sympathetic to Marxism.

Since reddit moved out

Now this is some spicy b8

Why does he have a Stalin poster? I thought he didn't like him

There's a slightly different phrasing to it in sociology than in the political sphere.

Literally untrue, and Einstein was a socialist.

IRL shitposting
youtube.com/watch?v=JA60L_NQYm0

but Op communism has never been tried.

But alexander solzhenitsyn in the Gulag Archipelago pretty much showed how communism is not a bastardisation of marxism and violence is at the base of this philosophy.

Carl Popper also wrote extensively about wrong marxist views are, and how none of his predictions materialised. How can presumably educated people still eat this shit?

>, and how none of his predictions materialized
the rise of the automation of labor, lowering of wages, falling rate of profit, commodity fetishism are all real things that have materialized.

>Karl Popper
>Solzhenitsyn
>presumes he's educated

Violence is at the base of any ideology related to power relations. Karl Popper's liberalism is possibly the most violent iteration promient today; see George Soros

Solzhenitsyn was anti-totalitarian, but his Russian nationalism was strongly authoritarian as evidence by his support for Putin near his end

>the rise of the automation of labor, lowering of wages, falling rate of profit, commodity fetishism are all real things that have materialized.

All of that existed when Marx originally wrote Capital. So they are simply observations and don't necessarily give any credence to his theories.

Watch the documentary 'the trap' by Adam Curtis. Liberalism is a paradoxical self defeating ideology precisely because it presents itself as the absence of ideology. Look at what happened in Iraq, Lybia, Ukraine, that's revolutionary Liberalism and it never ends well

>There are people right now who arn't nationalist

t, never read marx

Which nationalism?

Haha I'm so intelligent for reducing everything to people fighting about gender and monies!!!!!

The one that is about your own nation

Not even wrong

So you're telling people to support the supremacy of mutually exlusive nations?

I seriously can't understand why would any self respecting white would become a Marxist. Specially here on Veeky Forums, you are basically saying fuck western civilization, I prefer an eternity of novels about obese neon haired multiracial postgender narcissists 'finding their own identity' and fighting 'white cisdude oppression'. how can you stand hating yourself so much? why not just pull the trigger? Why ruin it for the rest of us?

Everything is really about the money is legit pretty woke to me tbqh. Also the more you think about it the more there seems to be something to the idea.

Like the Crusades was seemingly one of the most ideologically motivated anti-material interest events in Western history. But how did the first one get started? Land disputes among aristocrats between Byzantines and Seljuk Turks. And in those days more land = more income.

Then you read a critical history summation of the papacy and realize the "Pontifex Maximus" has been in low key cold war with secular authority pretty much since the papacy began as a power position separate from any acting Roman emperor. And one of their favorite tactics was symbolic acts that put them above secular kings even if they didn't have an army to match, i.e. the Pope crowning Charlemagne via god decree that of course only the Pope can truly do rather than letting him crown himself.

Gender was Engels's obsession.

Marxism is a product of Western Civilization you idiot

If Marxists are so smart why do the country ruled by them end up so bad?

>Like the Crusades was seemingly one of the most ideologically motivated anti-material interest events in Western history. But how did the first one get started? Land disputes among aristocrats between Byzantines and Seljuk Turks. And in those days more land = more income.

lies. mudslime pirates were preying on christian pilgrims. The Pope had to do something. Remember, Islam has always been a genocidal death cult. the ottomans where at the gates of vienna fucking twice, but keep repeating what your teacher told you.

Americlap interference + failure to equally distribute power along with wealth

>academia

There's your answer. They're more detached from reality than any other segment of reality.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise that they flock to an ideology whose theory is by far the most divorced from its reality.

*any other segment of society

then you can at least say that marxists fail to predict factors that stop them from accomplishing their utopia.

this is completely absent in among natural scientists

>Americlap interference

But American interference clearly failed and declined in Venezuela after the 2002 coup d'etat attempt.

>failure to equally distribute power along with wealth

Here it shows that you have no idea what you are talking about, and is just talking cliches. One of the most controversial aspects of the Bolivarian Revolution has been the distribution of power by the state to worker's councils and neighborhood associations.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivarian_Circles

They did end up becoming criminal gangs, though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colectivo_(Venezuela)

marxism and leftism are the establishment and have been so for over 50 years. The left is controlled opposition, it is an useful tool the elites use to carry out their agenda. But look what happens once talking about nationalism or human biodiversity, oy vey shuttidown! The USSR lost the cold war, but Marxism won the culture war. you are just parroting establishment talking points while trying to look edgy AF. but it ain't working. Face it, Nationalism is the New Punk rock

>this is completely absent in among natural scientists

They're barely academia nowadays. Most of them are actually out in the world doing shit, or else working in labs.

By 'academia' I mean crusty old fucks who spend their days proclaiming their opinions as fact to their plebeian Humanities students in lecture halls/theatres and seminar classes.

>They're more detached from reality than any other segment of reality.

So much ideology in one sentence

Not Real Marxism shitlord!

>fascism
>heinous

Kek, killing degenerates is the most moral path a man can take

>Jew socialist

really made me think

pic related

>failure to equally distribute powe
If you expect biological organisms to equally distribute power you are a fucking idiot who must not understand evolution and sexual selection

Yeah we get it Zizek. You saw that one 80s movie with the glasses.

>simpsons posters
Not in my country

Your strawman has nothing to do with Karen Marx.

this is jordan b peterson talking here, BTW

Hmm

Socialism ≠ Marxism

It basically does

There is too much pain in the world.

It's the same shit libtard