← Back to context

Comment by barfbagginus

7 months ago

Read some marx. There is a whole analysis and theory behind class traitorship, it's causes and effects. You can't be ignorant of something as fundamental as marxian theory in this context, and then act as if it's the author making the faux pas...

8 comments

barfbagginus

Reply
robertlagrant  7 months ago

Sorry I think you've made a lot of this up. Where did I say I was ignorant of something, and where did I say anything about a faux pas?

  • barfbagginus  7 months ago

    Here is what you said:

    "Anyone who talks about class traitors, or almost any sort of traitor, outside of a real war, is deeply misguided on this point."

    This is where you appear to imply you're ignorant of class traitorship. If you truly knew what it was - which you claim elsewhere to know - then you would know it doesn't require a war. Class traitors are non-capitalists who collaborate with capitalists against workers. They can do that during peace.

    Now forgive me if the following explanation is unnecessary:

    When someone uses a term in a misguided way we can say they made a faux pas. When you claim the author is misguided for talking about class traitors outside of war, you're implying they have made a faux pas.

    But the author is making no mistake. Class traitors exist in peace time as well, as I mentioned.

    So if you know what a class traitor is, then admit the author is not misguided. If you can't make that admission, you have misunderstood the nature of class traitorship.