I think your reply proves my point that it's not really about democracy at all. It's just about a fervent defense of the current undemocratic and unjust private property relations.
What do you expect to find in constitutions written by free market economies?
> The concept is likewise enshrined in Article 17 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights
False, it was left intentionally vague to not explicitly endorse private property in the capitalist sense.
> The "overhaul" you're talking about is in and of itself a totalitarian violation of human rights.
That's also on point for Propertarianism. Where private property has been sacralized and to argue against it is against the law of nature, even if it's wrong and unjust. "The King declared that absolute monarchy is a divine right and any resistance is thus blasphemy and shall be dealt with accordingly".
> I think your reply proves my point that it's not really about democracy at all.
I never said it was about democracy!
> It's just about a fervent defense of the current undemocratic and unjust private property relations.
I would characterize it as a fervent defense of British constitutionalism, tracing back to the Magna Carta, but yes, the current system of property relations is a part of that.
But it seems like we're not in any disagreement about my original post: I expressed worry that Marxist ideas were resurgent. We seem to be on the same page about what I mean by "Marxism." And you don't appear to disagree that those ideas are resurgent--and therefore my originally stated worry was not baseless after all.
Well, I certainly hope they are, but I doubt that they are as institutionalized as you seem to suggest.
I also think that using "Marxism" for a democratic movement and ideas is done to intentionally associate them with the authoritarian regimes of the 20th century.
What do you expect to find in constitutions written by free market economies?
> The concept is likewise enshrined in Article 17 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights
False, it was left intentionally vague to not explicitly endorse private property in the capitalist sense.
> The "overhaul" you're talking about is in and of itself a totalitarian violation of human rights.
That's also on point for Propertarianism. Where private property has been sacralized and to argue against it is against the law of nature, even if it's wrong and unjust. "The King declared that absolute monarchy is a divine right and any resistance is thus blasphemy and shall be dealt with accordingly".