2. No it wasn't McCarthy didn't have a portrayal of communism, he didn't Write a book analysing it, he just called People communists .... Capitalism had an actual analytical critique of Capitalism, which didn't bash capitalism (he praised capitalism), but it pointed out internal contradictions in capitalism.
3. They are evident ....
The falling rate of profit has effected both agriculture and manufacturing.
Capitalism is almost entirely dependant on debt and basically run by Finance Capital
The gap between Rich and poor is widening With no end in sight
Capitalism requires compound grown every year to not og into crisis (of about 3%)
And so on and so on.
Marx was assuming a relatively unfettered capitalism.
As far as whether or not there is any Democracy in America, all you need to do is compare Public opinion and Public policy, and then the interests of major Corporations, and the buisiness class and Public policy to see that the US is basically a plutocracy.
The Marxism I CARE about is the study of economics, I want to change the system, but I don't think Marx's solutions (the small amount he wrote on potential solutions) are good ones at all, but that doesn't mean his analysis was wrong.
Any system of any type can become corrupt. Marx was unable to differentiate between elements of a economical system and corruptible forces. Anti-Capitalists are extremely biased and will believe that its the system because they want it to be the system, so they attribute everything that has gone wrong to Captalism rather than where blame should be put, on the people who are ****ing everything up. The reason that Marx engaged in the Communist Manifesto was to offer a solution to the fake circumstances that he created. You cant analyse "Capital" without analyzing why it was written, its purpose. To do so is intellectually dishonest and falls short of rational analysis of the document.
The only assumptions Marx uses is Calssical economics set up by People like Adam Smith and Ricardo.
Capital was written after the communist manifesto.
So far you haven't critiqued ANY of his actual analysis ....
And no, it's not the People, it's the system, different People have been running the system for the last 100 years, but the trends are the same, because the problems are internal to capitalism itself.
It's not that simple. There's usually no complete right or wrong with a person's philosophy or theories. There's some truth there, and some things not true.
Marx preyed on the weak, the poor, the misfits just as any good cultists would. Marx asserted that either you were for his philosophies or you supported those that oppress you. So anything that he happened to be correct about does not matter anymore than what Hitler exploited to get his way.
SO you can keep telling me that Marx was right about Capitalism until you are blue in the face but it doesnt matter what Marx said or did. I am not a Adam Smith and Ricardo fan boy so you trying to use that angle fell flat on its face.
But no you are not going to sucker me into debating the crap philosophies of a babbling idiot.
2. Preyed on them? What are you talking about? '
3. I can tell you that Marx was right, and I can give examples, can you give any examples on Capital or where he was wrong? (I can), or can you show that his overall thesis was wrong? So far you haven't shown anything other than making ad hominum attacks on him.