Jesus was not a Marxist in the traditional sense, as Marxism is a political and economic ideology that emerged much later in history. However, Jesus did advocate for the fair treatment of the poor and marginalized, and he spoke out against the exploitation of the vulnerable by the wealthy and powerful. His teachings about sharing wealth, caring for the less fortunate, and promoting social justice have led some to draw parallels between his teachings and Marxist principles, but it is important to recognize the distinct historical and ideological contexts of Jesus' message and Marxism. **

From a Marxist perspective, the smartphone can be considered a means of production in certain contexts. While smartphones are primarily used for personal communication and entertainment, they also play a crucial role in facilitating work and production in many industries. For example, smartphones are used by workers to communicate with colleagues, access work-related information, and even perform tasks remotely. Therefore, in the context of modern capitalism, smartphones can be seen as a means of production that enables and enhances the productivity of workers. **

From a Marxist perspective, the smartphone can be considered a means of production in the sense that it is a tool used by workers to produce goods and services. The smartphone allows workers to communicate, access information, and perform tasks that contribute to the production process. However, it is important to note that the ownership and control of the means of production, including smartphones, is a key aspect of Marxist analysis. In the case of smartphones, the control and ownership are typically in the hands of capitalist corporations, which can lead to exploitation of workers and unequal distribution of wealth. **

The Marxist doctrine is not a crazy idea, but rather a complex and controversial ideology that has been influential in shaping political and economic thought. It offers a critique of capitalism and advocates for a classless society where the means of production are owned and controlled by the workers. While some may disagree with its principles, it has also inspired social and political movements around the world. Ultimately, whether the Marxist doctrine is considered "crazy" is subjective and depends on one's perspective and beliefs. **

Yes, Lenin can be described as a Marxist. He was a key figure in the Russian Revolution and the founder of the Russian Communist Party. Lenin's ideas and actions were heavily influenced by the writings and theories of Karl Marx, particularly in his belief in the need for a proletarian revolution to overthrow the capitalist system and establish a socialist society. Lenin also sought to apply Marxist principles to the specific conditions of Russia, leading to the development of his own variant of Marxism known as Leninism. **

Being politically Marxist means adhering to the political and economic theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and advocating for the establishment of a classless society where the means of production are owned and controlled by the working class. Politically Marxist individuals seek to address and dismantle the inequalities and injustices inherent in capitalist systems, and work towards a society based on cooperation, equality, and social ownership of resources. This often involves advocating for policies and movements that prioritize the needs and rights of the working class and marginalized communities. **

No, there were no Marxist approaches in the Stone Age. Marxism is a socio-economic theory that emerged in the 19th century, long after the Stone Age. The Stone Age was a prehistoric period characterized by the use of stone tools and the development of early human societies, and there is no evidence to suggest that Marxist ideas or approaches were present during this time. **

Many fascists were previously Marxist-socialists because they shared a dissatisfaction with the existing political and economic systems. Both ideologies sought to address social and economic inequalities, but they diverged in their approaches. Fascists believed in a more authoritarian and nationalistic solution to these issues, which appealed to those who were disillusioned with the perceived failures of socialism. Additionally, some individuals may have been drawn to fascism as a reaction against the perceived weaknesses or shortcomings of socialism in addressing their concerns. **