Marx was right about everything

If so, he would have been the only human being in history who was

>>24522171
tits probably hyperbole

people who say this would literally kill a person before living in a socialist country

>>24522166 (OP)
no he wasn't

>>24522196
How would me living in a socialist country benefit the cause. I would be of more value in a non-socialist country. It isn't about me, it's about the people.

>>24522196
I was born in one lol and even the rotting nihilistic corpse of it was a million times better than what came afterwards.

"JohnWinthrop9 was right about everything"

>>24522166 (OP)
Y'know if he chose the elites instead of the proletariat as his team, he could have already gotten what he wanted. He should have gone full Ortega, the American revolutionaries understood this. He clearly understood how ridiculously rigged the game is, the point should have been to wake up the ruling class, transform elites/elitism forever, rather than try to get human emancipation through the proletariat.

>>24522313
I'm not even advocating for class collaborationism or anything like that, the chosen historical actor should have been the class that actually owns the game instead of the pawns of the game. Vanguard theory on crack basically, get the rich to realize how retarded it all is and build all praxis on that.

>>24522313
I'm not even advocating for class collaborationism or anything like that, all I'm saying is that the chosen historical actor should have been the class that actually owns the game instead of the pawns of the game. Vanguard theory on crack basically, get the rich to realize how retarded it all is and build all praxis on that.

>>24522319
So retard
>let's wait for the people winning the game they have rigged to change the rules so they'll lose out
Or your just talking about Guenon and Ebola. The problem is humanity has no humanity anymore so it's better to just hope that the singularity will sort us out.

>>24522216
Then that means you were born anywhere in Europe outside of Germany because reuniting with the BDR increased the quality of life in the eastern half like a thousandfold.

>>24522166 (OP)
Lefties are losing and will stay losing.
They're losing the culture war today for the same reasons they lost the cold war in 1989.
Bottom up beats top down.

A distributed network of millions of regular joes given free reign beats a few big brains on top, always.

A few lefty pundits and institutions (colbert, oliver, snl, Hassan, et) will always be slower, worse at being relatable and less able to exploit cultural trends in a relevant way than millions of anonymous basement dwelling NEETs. Just as millions of 105 IQs managed the economy better than 200 150+ IQs at the politburo.

Speed + immediacy > IQ
Millions of shitty GPUs > A few amazing CPUs

>>24523141
the US is being curbstomped by china

>>24523141
>Millions of shitty GPUs > A few amazing CPUs
Based 97 IQ Metaphor

>>24522313
Isn't that Blanquism? And Marxism had and has many fans among the bourgeoisie.

>>24522209
lol.

>>24522216
this doesn't address what I said though.

>>24522166 (OP)
Debunked by the 80/20 rule. As with all societal things, 80% of the labour is performed by 20% of the people. Marxists will spout bullshit about the working class, everyone who ever did a group project knows that the majority is lazy and doesn't want to do anything. They require supervision and drill by their natural superiors. Hierarchal societies are neither fair nor equal, they are the only ones that work.

>>24523123
He's obviously referring to USSR

>>24523239
Those 20% sure as fuck aren't CEOs

>>24523252
Nope, but the policemen, the soldiers, the construction workers, the oilpipe workers, the farmers and so on.

>>24523267
So construction workers should be paid more right?

>>24523271
You need to have at least somewhat predisposed to sacrifice something for society (or your family) in order to work taff and dangerous construction jobs.
Put on a pedestal, the firemen, the policemen, the soldiers and the paramedics should be paid the most, because they literally put their life to risk for society to remain standing.

>>24523285
Lol faggot police bootlicker

>>24523288
Lol faggot third sector worker thinking he ain't getting paid enough for getting up early every single day for sitting on a chair all day like a fat pig

>>24523148
>the US is being curbstomped by china
>China population: 1.41 billion
>United States population: 334 million
Here's your L anon
Nbd

>>24523148
Oops
>the US is being curbstomped by china
xD

>>24523239
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_communism
+
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1920/military/
i can't say for sure but something is itchy about communist anti-hierarchism

>>24523313
>China will collapse in 10 days!!!
>China is dying
>Xi will flee China!
>The fall of China-2 days
>China's economy is on its last legs
>China will collapse tomorrow!
>China has fell!!!
>China will collapse in 10 days

>>24522166 (OP)
He was defeated by the very simple act of lobotomization. As seen in America.

>>24523313
Half of it is financial fuckery lol China has already surpassed the US. Not that China is a Marxist-Leninist country anymore (there is a reason Schmitt of all people is so popular there) but it shows that blind market fetishism is a dead end. Which ironically the Americans used to understand quite well.

>>24523380
Another forever war in Iran will surely save the US. Americans are cattle, democracy unironically takes away the people's will out of politics. It sublimates discontent in meaningless elections. Sovereign Monarchy or sovereign dictatorship is the opposite, the monarch/dictator is forced to take responsibility (the whole despot vs dictator thing), Israel fuckery wouldn't work in any system but democracy. And for all the shithole countries, even with democracy retarded people have never elected non-retarded leaders. Democracy is a complete scam and pretty much the worst system out there.

>>24523380
Another forever war in Iran will surely save the US lol. And I honestly think the main culprit of it all is democracy. Americans have been reduced to the status of cattle, because democracy unironically takes away the people's will out of politics. It sublimates discontent in meaningless elections. Sovereign Monarchy or sovereign dictatorship is the opposite, the monarch/dictator is forced to take responsibility (the whole despot vs dictator thing), Israel fuckery wouldn't work in any system but democracy. And for all the shithole countries, even with democracy retarded people have never elected non-retarded leaders. Democracy is a complete scam and pretty much the worst system out there.

>>24522166 (OP)
>while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the
evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.

this could only have been written by a man who never did a productive day's job in his life. It's funny that the fundamental psychological makeup of the average leftist hasn't changed since. Somehow, if we just crush le system, the world will turn into a place where you can do anything you like and things will work out by magic. Imagine taking the retard who writes this seriously on anything.

>>24523470
what's wrong with this quote

>>24522209
>>the cause
you sound gay, this is how gay men who give good head talk

>>24523148
Where do people get this idea?

China's gdp per capita is 13k, lower than Serbia, Romania, Chile, Argentina

Can you guess what America's is? NINETY THOUSAND

China's per capita disposable income per household is 5k dollars

In the US it's fucking 60k.


>but they have the manufacturing!
Dude, that's like saying a gardener is doing better than his boss because he is doing the real work while his boss just sits around. Yeah. The Chinese work for us in factories with suicide nets so we can have cheap goods. Does that sound like a good deal to you? Would you want to do that?

>>24523570
gdp is a retarded metric

>>24523578
Uh huh.

Number of Chinese living in the US: over 5 million

Number of Americans living in china: 20,000

Lmfao

>>24523581
number of communists in china 100 million
number of communists in the us 160 million

Marx threads never fail to bring out the most unread. American education brainwashed lumpenprole retards. Special retard points for >>24523141, a fine example of what culture war mind rot does to the mentally vulnerable and handicapped.

>>24523605
>The Foxconn suicides were a spate of suicides linked to low pay and brutal working conditions at the Foxconn City industrial park in Shenzhen, China, that occurred alongside several additional suicides at various other Foxconn-owned locations and facilities in mainland China.[1] The series of suicides drew media attention, and employment practices at Foxconn—one of the world's largest contract electronics manufacturers—were investigated by several of its customers, including Apple and Hewlett-Packard (HP). By the end of May, CEO Terry Gou brought in psychiatrists to offer advice to depressed workers over phone and installed "safety nets" to deter employees from jumping off a building.
At least they have the manufacturing so they can essentially be our slaves and work to make our cheap goods! So powerfur so stwong!

>>24522166 (OP)
Stirner was right about everything.

>>24522166 (OP)

Historical materialism and alienation are profound ideas. It's insane to me that a man was able to think this up without turning to pure pseudery. Clearly he was a towering intellect

>>24523630
yeah that's normal under crapitalism

>>24523662
My point is that "having the manufacturing" is a sign of servility not strength. Who actually wants to sit in a factory all day doing gruelling labour for cheap? Wouldn't anyone rather have an economy based on services and finance - where you sit in an air conditioned office, go on a zoom call occasionally, and get paid well? The Chinese are our slaves and literally the only concern about this arrangement is if we can't produce strategic goods for the military etc. These protectionist types talking about bringing back manufacturing are fucking loopy, it's like talking about bringing back aids. Have any of them actually had a traditional working class job and seen how shit it is?

>>24523695
>Have any of them
no

>>24523313
>>24523387
>Stating that the Chinese economy is pathetically small next to the US economy = I'm predicting Communist China is going to fall in two more weeks
>China isn't really Communist
>Has already surpassed the US
>Source = Trust me bro!

>>24523621
This

>>24522166 (OP)
I genuinely despise communists. How often do you need to see it's disastrous consequences for you to get it through your head that it doesn't work? A dozen times apparently isn't enough. Communists have Jonestown-esque devotion, the only thing they're good at is killing other communists

>Marx was right about everything

>>24523621
Dude Marxism will never work because:
1. The vast majority of socially necessary jobs are shit, so marxs idea of waking up and just deciding to do whatever you want will just lead to everyone wanting to be video game streamers and shit, so everyone would starve unless forced by the threat of hunger or pain or death to work
2. Some jobs require expertise and years of experience to do well. You can't just wake up and say I wanna be a nuclear engineer today, and a fisherman tomorrow.
3. Humans vary greatly in ability. The vast majority are only suited for menial labour. Those who excel will want to be paid more.
4. Growth seeking will never slow down because countries are in competition with each other and military power is directly correlated with economic power. If country A and country B are roughly the same in terms of IQ, resources, etc. but country A adopts a law where you work max 4 hours a day and country B forces everyone to work 8 hours, country B will eventually be much more powerful and could invade country A easily.

>>24523809
Woah niggles, I don't remember asking.

>>24523809
God, you don't understand anything about what you're critiquing, that's the issue. Marxism can be critiqued, I'm not even a Marxist myself anymore and I'd be more than glad to shit on the variety of issues the tradition has, but not this retarded shit. It's not even straw man (for which you would need atleast a bastardized understanding of the subject) you simply have no understanding of what you're talking about, it's embarassing.

>>24523822
Fuck off

>>24522166 (OP)
You misspelled Plato and your pic isn't a pic of The Republic

>>24523831
Oh yeah he totally never said that war would disappear or that you would wake up one day and decide to be a fisherman and the next day decide to be a writer

>>24523849
*a critical critic

>>24522166 (OP)
I've been meaning to read more Marx, class struggles in france and his other historical stuff seems more interesting to me tho personally

>>24523792
You'd understand if you'd read Marx, his work is simply irrefutable

>>24524391
It's not irrefutable because there are two iron laws of human history:
1. Nobody wants to work
2. Work has to be done

These two laws produce hierarchy, war, slavery, capitalism, and class. As long as point 2 remains and jobs aren't automated you will always have this.

>>24524406
That's your own thesis, and a very incorrect one that you made based on vibes.
That's why Marx is one of the most cited economist and you're not.

>>24524417
It's a fact. Work is a curse and this is even written in the Bible. Nobody wants to work in a factory, nobody wants to deliver amazon parcels, nobody wants to cook and clean really. Why do you think slavery exists? It's not because slavemasters even want slaves, you can imagine they feel quite awkward and bad about it, plus there's always the threat that they will cut your throat, but they just really really don't want to do all that fucking work so they risk it.

>>24524423
I won't even bother going back and forth with an illiterate fuck like you. Over and out

>>24523380
>China will surpass the US in everyway, just two more weeks!!!?!!

>>24524430
Lmfao why? I'm laying out arguments and you're mad

>>24522313
The whole point of communism is that elites shouldn’t exist you fucking blubbering idiot. It’s a fucking oxymoron

>>24524446
Yes but the historical actor to achieve this should have been the elites themselves

>>24524391
>his work is simply irrefutable
it's irrefutable because it's circular and tautological. Surplus value is created by unpaid labor, but the value is invisible until realized as profit on the market. If it fails to sell at profit, the value wasn't there, if it sells, the worker got exploited for it unfairly. It's Schrödinger's value, except the measurement is whatever Marx wants/needs it to be in hindsight to make his theory make sense.
All this LTV nonsense is easily obviated by sticking to price, risk, and market dynamics instead of trying to get at some objective concept of value and building epicycles on top of epicycles to defend it.

>>24523559
what do you imagine this magic "regulation" of "general production" to look like, and by whom, such that suddenly all known experience about how much time and effort it takes to acquire the necessary skills to be productive in any one of those fields is blown out of the window and everyone can just do a bit of everything everyday?
The problem with Marxist utopia is the problem with Marx's very own life: entitlement to the work of others without the willingness to do any in-demand work in return, only whatever strikes your fancy. Great if you have a rich friend you can mooch off.

>>24524759
>by whom
the totalitarian vanguard party ofc

Marx was wrong because he fatally misunderstood Hegel.

>>24522166 (OP)
he was smart insightful & observant. That doesnt mean hes right about *everything*; but compared to modern thinkers close enough

>>24523313
Cool.
Now calculate the GDP by purchasing power parity prices (aka real GDP).
Better yet, break down the GDP (PPP) by sectoral composition of the economy, which separates industrial economic activity from service sector (make-work "bullshit jobs") activity.

Here, why don't I do it for you myself.

Note that the data is from 2017; so that it is certainly higher now than back then.

>>24522166 (OP)
>S P O O K E D
>P
>O
>O
>K
>E
>D

>>24525430
LMFAO YOU IDIOT CHINA HAS OVER 1 BILLION PEOPLE LOOK AT THEIR GDP PER CAPITA ITS LOWER THAN FUCKING SERBIA

>>24523695
trvke

>>24525509
and white people dont have kids so china is gonna dominate when demographic reckoning comes

>>24523695
The office environment is the root of all modern ills.

>>24524406
this is false, you are just lazy. i like to work. most people i know do actually

>>24525533
Then explain slavery.
Do you think slavemasters actually want slaves?
1. You feel awkward about it because after all they're human beings who want to be free also
2. You have to watch your back constantly because they could cut your throat at any time
But slavery still existed because fuck doing all that work. Fuck picking cotton, fuck cooking, fuck cleaning. People would rather risk getting their throat cut than do it.
Same with war. People literally risk their lives to go and loot and tax and enslave foreign nations because they can't be bothered working on a farm to survive. Many Spanish conquistadors went to their deaths hoping to find gold or enslave native Americans.
Same with finance, moneylending, capitalism etc. It's just basically a way to avoid work, you get paid dividends produced by the work of others.
So it's pretty obvious that nobody wants to work. And yet work has to be done because there's no automation. So people will always be looking for a way to become slavemasters so they don't have to do the work themselves. And people are literally willing to die for this as history teaches.
So how is Marxism supposed to work?

>>24525513
Neither do chinese moron

>>24522166 (OP)
So where do I start with this guy?

>>24525516
I'm able to live in a van and travel because I work remotely while blue collar cucks and Chinese factory slaves are sweating profusely to assemble my new headphones.

>>24525746
Yeah, this is true, too bad you can't make an economy out of Zoom calls and sending e-mails.

>>24525754
You can if you enslave the Chinese and Indians and chavs to do all the shit jobs like we've done. This is why I'm also pro immigration because we need Indian slavecucks to deliver our uber eats and amazon parcels

>>24525760
Not for all eternity. The crakkka unproductive tertiarism, it was just a short trend.

How do you efficiently allocate resources without price?
>vibes

>>24525773
Lmao does price efficiently allocate resources when a working family competes with a billionaire financier for ownership of a house and the billionaire gets to have it because he can pay more even though he's not going to use it and will just keep it for his investment portfolio

>>24523148
China is Capitalist, and is run by one of the most staunch anti-communists in the world. Xi's father was sent to prison camp, he was beaten repeatedly, and his sister was raped and then killed herself at communist hands durring the cultural revolution.
Anyone who actually tries to be communist in "communist" China quickly finds themselves facing a life sentence for corruption.
>>24523163
Thank you :)
>>24523621
>t. posted from the Starbucks I shift manage with my Columbia Russian Lit degree
I am correct, and this upsets you and wounds your fragile intellectually insecure ego.
Time and time again, history has shown that based retards who are close to the relevant issue in time and space make better decisions than distant highly educated/IQed intellectuals.

It has been proven true when Participation Award U. educated junior managers are given more autonomy as opposed to Ivy C-levels back at HQ, when HS educated NCOs are given authority to act in the moment instead of West Point brass, and in many other cases.

And it is why you have lost, are losing, and will continue to lose as hierarchal top down lefty swine.

>>24525775
Billionaires aren't buying houses lol. Houses are a middle class normie investment. The vast majority of landlords are modestly wealthy boomers with a tiny portfolio. Houses have become more expensive relative to income because they're bigger, more luxurious, more expensive to make and the average buyer is now a dual-income couple instead of a breadwinner and housewife. Not because of the billionaire bogeyman.

>>24523621

>>24525785
>can't follow basic argument
You said price efficiently allocates resources. I gave you an example in which it doesn't. Billionaires (who, by the way, do often have huge land holdings) are able to outcompete working families for land and homes. Even when the working families need them more.

>>24525791
>gave an example of something that isn't happening
a billionaire owning a mansion in Beverly Hills isn't the reason tammy the single mom can't afford rent, retard-kun, the economy is not zero-sum

>>24525795
Oh my God
That's debatable but it doesn't matter
If you say price is efficient for allocating resources then it should work even in a hypothetical scenario
Let's say you lived in a village where the billionaire hated you and every time you tried to buy a house he would outbid you and buy it himself. You wouldn't be able to buy a fucking house in the village because the billionaire can pay more to outbid you almost infinitely. Yet you need the house more than him because he already lives in one, now you're homeless, clearly price didn't efficiently allocate resources. QED.
Please try to follow

>>24525731
explain slavery? simple, it’s cheaper to have slaves/makes your life easier, and that affords you more luxury. and why don’t the slaves just want to work? because there’s a difference between the human need for work and only working. just because people like to work doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy luxury. also, i’m not saying marxism works, i’m just pointing out that you specifically are a lazy person

>>24525773
You investigate the needs of society and then delegate work accordingly. A thousand families needs a thousand homes so you need x hours of construction to fulfill this need, they consume a million gallons of milk a year so you need y hours of dairy work and so on.

The funniest thing about Marx threads is that they not only reveal that right-wingers have never read Marx, but that so-called Marxists *also* haven't read Marx.

The funniest thing about Marx threads is that they not only reveal that right-wingers have of course never read Marx, but that so-called Marxists *also* haven't read Marx.

Marx is BTFO'd by his own pitiful existence
I'm no Stirnerite but Stirner won.

>>24529320
Winning is a spook.

>>24523621
So since you're so read, who of Marx's intellectual descendants was more or less correct of these three: Lukacs, Althusser or Marcuse?

>>24523141
>Bottom up beats top down.
>A distributed network of millions of regular joes
is this a joke? peter thiel, weev &c are the ones that have been using bots for at least a decade to manipulate people as a reaction to (american) "leftist" policies

>Speed + immediacy
>Millions of shitty GPUs > A few amazing CPUs
yeah, this must be satire kek

>>24524759
the workers themselves, dumbass. we have computers and computer networks that allow people to talk instantly. you can buy stuff from china and have it delivered in days to your door. what difference would it make if there were no CEOs and board of directors telling workers to produce more or less?

>>24529320
Saint Max has long been destroyed by Marx

>>24522166 (OP)
I want to read Marx and contemporary/relevant philosophers, but I want to learn more about their social/economic contexts, to understand their motivations. I have no idea abou the history of Europe in the 18th/19th century. where/how do I start? any suggestions? I'm open to watching videos and stuff, not just reading

>>24522166 (OP)
No. He oversimplified history. And created a system that can't work in a non-idealized world.
Stalin's Socialism in one country doesn't work either.
Trotsky was right about the only way of it working being permanent revolution and international revolution. And that's exactly why it can't work.

Marx failed in his prediction of the fall of capitalism. Private property is a necessity for social life. Collectivism is retarded and more oppressive to the members of the collective than to other collectives.
Freedom and collectivism are completely incompatible, and thus his entire ideology requires man to give up his own freedom.

>>24530868
>No. He oversimplified history. And created a system that can't work in a non-idealized world.
Which works of his have you read?
Marx's conception of history is an explict rejection of Idealism. His approach is just as empirical as it is philosophical. It is very flawed of course but remember the fact that Marx was one of the earliest social scientists.

>Stalin's Socialism in one country doesn't work either
Most people agree would with this. Where are these legitimate contemporary Stalinists?

>Trotsky was right about the only way of it working being permanent revolution and international revolution. And that's exactly why it can't work.
Yes, I agree somwhat.
But how so? Elaborate.

>Marx failed in his prediction of the fall of capitalism.
Marx's predictions were historically contingent. He did not predict a specific timeline or that capitalism would fall either universally or uniformly.

>Private property is a necessity for social life.
Private propery as Marx defines it or Personal Property? He makes a very clear distinction between the two in his work.
That is also untrue for the most part. There is quite a bit of anthropological work that proves otherwise

>Collectivism is retarded and more oppressive to the members of the collective than to other collectives.
That's a dumb sweeping claim for the most part.
There have been oppressive Liberal societies just as well as collectivist ones and with the inverse being just as true throughout history.

>Freedom and collectivism are completely incompatible, and thus his entire ideology requires man to give up his own freedom.
To quote Marx himself: "The realm of freedom actually begins only where labour which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases."
That being said I don't entirely disagree with you. There is a lot to be said about the concepts of Negative and Positive freedom as a critique to the classical Marxist conception of freedom. That does not become mutually exclusive to Marx's ideas and nor does it invalidate his arguments.

>>24531129
>There have been oppressive Liberal societies just as well as collectivist ones and with the inverse being just as true throughout history
A collective usually seeks contracts with other collectives, for the alternative is war. On the other hand, the collective does not allow it's members to seek expressions of freedom that are prohibited by the group. Therefore, the collective requires more submission from it's members than from it's enemies. Thus the collective, by definition, necessitates the renouncement of personal freedom by each individual.
>oppressive liberals
No. If the description above applies to the regime, then it wasn't liberal. No matter how much it's economics furthered liberal policies.
>contemporary Stalinists
This was merely a part of the point. Neither isolated socialism nor international socialism work.
>Elaborate
Communism requires simultaneous control of every single aspect of the production process in order to ensure said production, for the alternative leads conflict of interests that halt the production process, leading to stagnation or impoverishment. In a globalized world, in which the production process is divided among different countries, you require simultaneous revolution in all of these countries to make it work, which is virtually impossible. Furthermore, power structures will be developed after the revolution is ended, necessitating another revolution. It is impossible to drive humans, who are free as their natural state, to maintain this indefinitely amkng every single society.
>empiricism
His analysis was empirical, although lacking in nuance, as it was only concerned with 1 kind of group struggle. However, his conclusions were completely idealistic. His analysis was materialistic, but his idealized, enlightened man was the farthest possible thing from empiricism.
>predictions
His predictions relied on a crisis that hasn't happened. In fact, it's been quite the opposite.
>quote
What am I supposed to do with this? Refute it? But you say you don't entirely disagree with me.
Marx is assuming that this is a self-evident truth, which is, again, idealism.

>>24530765
>I want
no you don't

>>24531232
>>oppressive liberals
>No. If the description above applies to the regime, then it wasn't liberal. No matter how much it's economics furthered liberal policies.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
this is how liberals manipulate people into thinking liberalism is about freedom of individuals. we've seen it MANY times: american and european powers installing "friendly" oppresive governments accross the world to make sure cheap workers overseas keep working instead of revolting.
western people believe this bullshit. no wonder liberals never lose.

>Communism requires simultaneous control of every single aspect of the production process in order to ensure said production, for the alternative leads conflict of interests
you could say exactly the same thing about capitalism. except, the control is in the hands not of workers or governments (to a degree...), but of capitalists

>>24531486
>liberalism is about freedom of individuals.
it literally is

>>24531540
yeah, it's always been about the freedom of the ones that have money. the rest can get fucked :^)

>>24522166 (OP)
Not everything. He predicted Communism could only arise from the most complex and powerful nations, like England or the USA. That it would take hold in Eurasian and Asian countries that were barely or not at all modern was counter to his theories.

>>24531631
Not necessarily

>>24531825
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/zasulich/reply.htm

>>24531486
Holy melty...

>>24531900
sure, but not because liberalism exists for the good and freedom of people, but to protect the interests of certain people, classes, even nations...
so it will protect freedom of other parties for as long as it's convenient for the ones that have money. it doesn't even deny that some other groups might be unfree(d) out of convenience.
liberalism is the pretension of freedom and the imposition of a managed democracy.

I challenge anyone in this thread to refute any of this statements:

-Surplus is not theft
-interest rates are not theft
-commodity fetishim is good because civilizations with incompatible cultures and values can collaborate more impersonally through commodities
-for this reason, and due to the fact that interdependencies are created, free markets help to avoid wars
-socialism is impossible because it destroys the necessary information to distribute resources via economic calculation
-money and prices are necessary for this reason, and the information contained in prices is more significant the freer the market.
-Marx's concept of freedom (positive and collective freedom) is an inherently oppressive and soul crushing hivemind.
-communism is bound to devolve into an oppressive state, so Marx was wrong when he said that communism would achieve a stateless society

>>24532188
they're all true so i cannot

>>24523831
Leftists don't even know what they believe 90% of the time. Half the time irony leftists pretend like their egalitarian slop ideology doesn't inevitably lead to wokeism, so people like >>24523621 cope and call any attention given to the dissolution of our people's cultural bonds a distraction by the bourgeoisie.
Marx coaxed himself into a mindless ideology and then twisted himself into a pretzel to try and make it work, which led to retarded statements like the one the other anon correctly called out.
The uneducated, boomer critique of communism is correct. No amount of wordplay has ever changed that.

>>24532440
kid, chill out, that pic rel of yours? it's called 'division of labour' and it will be abolished

>>24522166 (OP)
You know what the ultimate lesson of Marx is?

You know what the ultimate lesson of ALL the German philosophers is?

It's that a united Germany was a mistake.

Every SINGLE time the German-speaking peoples have gotten together in a single nation-state it's been a disaster for Europe and the world. Over and over and over we let the Germans fuck shit up, and we seemingly are incapable of learning our lesson permanently.

The answer to Marxism and everything else is simple: break up Germany. For good. No more united Germany. The Bavarians can do their thing, the Saxons can do their thing, we might allow the Prussians to come back, we can give part of the country back to Austria. But NO MORE GERMANY. Period. World War 2 should have been the last straw, but we stupidly let them come back together again.

>>24532471
I am theorizing that the genuine lesson to learn from Marx is how Plato was a retard and wrong.
That idealism is wrong, and that it's caused a fundamental error to be at the base of western thought.
That collectivism is natural to the human being, however it is a remnant from it's primitive self, the same way idealism is.
That, maybe, this is why western thought has brought on so much conflict.

>>24532565
>>24532471
I say this because idealist collectivism seems to be at the center of germanic philosophy. Every single time.

>>24532440
>The uneducated, boomer critique of communism is correct.
I came here to say this
Water carriers for Karl Marx argue that his call to abolish private property would not involve confiscation of private property
Absolute fucking insanity

>>24532188
>-Surplus is not theft
>-interest rates are not theft
These are claims of Proudhon which Marx refutes. Surplus value legitimately belongs to the capitalist.

>-commodity fetishim is good because civilizations with incompatible cultures and values can collaborate more impersonally through commodities
>-for this reason, and due to the fact that interdependencies are created, free markets help to avoid wars
Finance capital must by necessity expand beyond their national markets to exploit resources, labor, and markets globally, where they conflict with their rivals seeking the same thing. This is the fundamental cause of war under capitalism. Markets create war, not peace.

>>24532471
Except for one problem. Frenchies for some reason love to invade Germany

>>24525784
sorry but I haven't spent enough time reading gamergate political theory to be retarded enough to understand what you are saying. may god have mercy upon your soul

>>24532188
all correct

>>24529415
he is clearly clinically profoundly retarded, nobody with an IQ above room temperature doesnt realize how much mass society is being psyop'd and socially engineered by mass media and social media algorithms.
>A distributed network of millions of regular joes given free reign beats a few big brains on top... less able to exploit cultural trends in a relevant way than millions of anonymous basement dwelling NEETs. Just as millions of 105 IQs managed the economy better than 200 150+ IQs at the politburo.
like, imagine thinking this when Cambridge Analytica and reddit AI+Air force base shilling is clear as day public knowledge. Bitching about whatever leftists "colbert, oliver, snl, Hassan" while entirely missing out on the governmental and corporate rigging of culture and society is pants on heads retarded. So more to >>24525784 on a serious level, you are a fucking nigger retard, and I hope you have a bad day.

>>24532597

>These are claims of Proudhon which Marx refutes.

I have to confess that I haven't read Marx (yet), but I have heard in left leaning philosophy lectures that Marx didn't exactly base his theories on a theory of justice and how he deemed capitalism just (which is aligned to your assertion), and that his theory is more about how the abolition of capitalism is unavoidable due to the decreasing profit rates and subsequent increasing exploitation rate. But I don't see how he can label surplus appropriation as exploitation and the root cause of proletarian uprising without the implicit idea that it is not fair, at least in the minds of the proletarians revolting.

>This is the fundamental cause of war under capitalism. Markets create war, not peace.

First, companies established in foreign countries do not exploit those foreign countries. If surplus is not theft nor exploitation (as for now, before you answer to the previous point in this post, I assume that no theft implies no exploitation), then surplus appropriation in a foreign country is not exploitation either, unless the company has got the contract abroad with the help of statal blackmailing, and that would be far beyond the free market logic. I can concede that concurrent statal interests of several states (some of which may have a capitalist mode of production), each one with their own business projects in a single foreign state may promote conflicts (for example, what happens in Taiwan), but this is more due to the imperialistic purposes of the interested states than due to capitalism itself. Those projects should be completely private inititiatives in dialog with the receiving state, not statally directed projects for the sake of geopolitical strategy.

That being settled. Let's see the extreme case: An empire without free markets both within the territory and with other countries is more prone to conquest, because autarchy hinders division of labour and productivity, so they will be pressed to conquer other countries to compensate for that lack of division of labour. So, if we can intuitively see that the total lack of markets fosters conquest the most, a partial lack of markets probably fosters conquest as well. In general, your post seems more concerned about the incipient conflicts when negotiations with the receiving country are starting (and there are other interested states with the same will to expand) than about how well established businesses (when the negotiations with the foreign country have ended) affect to international relations. It's obvious that if a country is provided with a key resource by another country (like energy), that country is not interested in starting a war with the provider, and it will probably be motivated to develop a key industry to sell key resources to the provider country, so that there is a mutual interdependency that serves as an equilibrium to avoid war between them.

>>24522166 (OP)
yes and I don't really understand why some leftists or left-liberals have abandoned socialism and class struggle after the USSR failed
it was just the first longer attempt at realizing a socialist society, it quickly failed but so did early bourgeois uprisings
throughout history there were many many peasant and third estate (in general) uprisings that lost time and time again and the aristocracy lost in the end

>>24531232
There are so many contradictions, factual errors, and argumentative fallacies in your reply that I am not even going to bother directly responding to each individual line again.

Instead i'll just point out the fact that it is in fact fairly easy to refute you with a simple bit of research as well as the fact that for the most part you refute your own arguments.

>>24532707
>I have to confess that I haven't read Marx (yet),
And there it is!
You people are fucking ridiculous.

>>24533249
You are boring.
I bet that your objections to my arguments are nothing more than sophistry.

>>24529434
if CEO-less companies were more competitive they would dominate.

>>24533892
but, what if we lived in a more cooperative society?

>>24534096
A corporation is a cooperative effort. Just like a sports team cooperates in order to compete with others. Why do Marxists, of all people, have a hard time grasping that cooperation vs competition is not a spectrum but a dialectic?

>>24534148
Marxists are dogmatic unthinking mongoloids

>>24534148
>A corporation is a cooperative effort
tell me how I know you've never fucking worked in a corporation lmao

See, told you

>>24534170
If you didn't cooperate and rely on anyone in your corporate job, why not just do it on your own, without a boss and mean competitive colleagues?

>>24523291
Policemen and soldiers don't revolt anymore, they became lazy and inefficient, they just want their pensions, they are bought mercenaries.

>>24534190
cooperation in corporations is basically an accident. there is no intent to cooperate. people receive orders and do their jobs, the minimum necessary to get paid. I myself do my work alone, so the only "cooperation" is asking other people to give me whatever data I need to start working and then I give them my report.
meanwhile, some of the ones that want to "advance" in their "careers" are backstabbing fuckers who would sell their own mom for some power. those are the ones driving corporations.

>>24522166 (OP) Marx focused on the problem. He didn't present any good solutions. Einstein wasn't like him.

>>24532936
They abandoned class struggle far earlier than 1992. By the mid 60s they just stopped caring about it and now their continual, endless obsession is skin color and genitals

>>24523563
>>24523563
My favorite thing about this board is its vapidity, the result of a pseudo-intellectual movement born out of anti-intellectualism. This board has reached its own singularity.

>>24534238
t. shelf stacking simian broke boy

>>24522378
>The problem is humanity has no humanity anymore
Are you talking about empathy? Because that's the most fundamental weakness of the west, rockets and tax cuts are where it's at senpai.

>>24534284
I'm a tech guy and wfh. idgaf about other corporate drones, and it's obvious to me that they only pretend to give a fuck about the job and other people, and only because the pay is good. we all know no one would work for these soulless corporations if they didn't pay us so well.

>>24534343
so you don't do any real work or produce anything of value or work for yourself in an industry where capital requirements are basically zero and are confused why all your coworkers are crabs in a bucket just looking for a quick buck hmm what a mystery truly an enigma

>>24534348
anon... most of what corporations do has no value whatsoever.
have you tried taking a look at our society? the ones that actually PRODUCE and DO are the ones that work the most and get paid the less because everything is a fucking scam.
the whole industry I work on is based on spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt. people in my field are supposed to care for the interests of these corporations, yet our "enemies" most probably are people who work in the same industry.
it's all fake. welcome to contemporary capitalism.

>>24534366
your puny narrow mind simply can't grasp the heterogenous nature of modern work so you think everyone else is as useless and expendable as you are honestly it's quite sad

>>24523141
>still falling for the political spectrum meme
Frend, you must transcend

>>24534376
well, they could always fire me and see how "useless and expendable" I am lmao
btw, I wonder now: what do you do? mentally masturbate over new laws? fire people and make up numbers to ensure you don't get fired? buy and resell useless chinese crap? do you bust your ass to make sure your boss gets his yearly bonus and to make someone else richer?

>>24534386
lol you are rattled to the core little codemonkey

>>24534389
I'm not a codemonkey :^)

>>24534244
it's still fascinating how that happened though
lots of trotskyists ended up turning into neocons or neolibs eventually in the US, stalinists in the east turned into "legitimate businessmen" or became schizo Russian agents

>>24522217
Yes

>some discussion about ideas
>every one immediately mans their station shilling for some world power or political program like they are a paid agent
>they aren't
>they just do it for free
The internet was brilliant coup in that it behaviorally sinked people into psyopping themselves into mind broken proxies for shit they have no stake in.

>>24535247
The book op posted is literally about this lol read it it's great, it starts off with Marx talking about all the revolutions, wars, grand moments of heroism that all only happened in the imagination of autistic germans arguing against eachother all of it amounting to basically just hot air. It's a good book even if you don't like Marx, and even his critique of Stirner (that can absolutely be applied to Marxists as well) is solid.

>>24535288
No point in reading the whole thing though desu, the shorter version op posted is good enough

>>24534238
>cooperation in corporations is basically an accident.
No, that's the fucking point, you retard.
A corporation is a collective that approaches a certain goal BY every member of the collective pursuing THEIR OWN goals.
The most optimal outcome is reached when every member prioritizes their own interest.
It's accidental in the sense that nobody is particularly set out to cooperate, however, they end up cooperating because that is how the system is made up.
>>24534170
This is how I know you don't understand what the system is at all.

Marx sees the difference in class morality as an inherent unfairness, without class distinctions everyone would have the same morality.
He sees the fact that, the results of yhe collective efforts benefit a small part of the collective way more than they do the bigger portion. However, this isn't how the system is supposed to work. Because each individual is benefited in accordance to their contribution.
Marx's collectivism is also limited, because his "contribution/benefit" analysis is only concerned with the dynamics within a capitalist enterprise. But the collective results of a company, that is, their product/service is then distributed to society, thus benefiting the wider collective as well.
You can argue that the fruits of this labor is only enjoyed by those who can afford it, but then again, those who can afford it are the individuals who have contributed the most.

Communism seeks to get rid of the natural differences in humans. Capitalism furthers them. There is no moral issue with that. The problem is that there's people who can't access basic standards of living. But the system has proven to be reducing those percentages as time goes on.
Relative differences between quality of goods is not immoral.

>>24534882
It’s not that complicated. Marx and Engels just vastly overstated how much people care about labor and class. Communism is so unfathomable in our current world even leftists barely talk about labor anymore.

>>24522166 (OP)

You literally cannot understand the nature of money/capital without reading Marx

Where do I start with reading marx and communism?

>>24535690
Is there anything you're specifically interested in? I'm asking because a lot of the reading lists you'll get from people miss the forest for the trees.

What I'd recommend is starting with either:
''The Class Struggles in France, 1848-1850'' or ''The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte'' which will land you directly in the midst of life instead of focusing on what can feel like irrelevant or too theoretical matters. But ofc if you're specifically interested in let's say political economy then I'd say start at A or B instead.

>>24535718
>Is there anything you're specifically interested in?

No, I know nothing about what I am asking about

>>24535718
In total what I'd recommend reading by Marx (before moving anywhere else) would be:
1. 18th Brumaire
2. Class Struggles in France
3. Atleast the first volume of Capital (ideally I'd say read all three but I personally haven't been able to finish the second volume yet lol so who am I to tell you to read a million pages)
4. And finally Grundrisse which is extremely underrated and I think is probably his most relevant work (though once again, very difficult reading)

I haven't read Theories of Surplus Value (the so-called 4th volume of Capital) so I can't comment on it, the rest of Marx's oeuvre, like the german ideology, is all fun stuff but in my view atleast not all that essential. People love the economic & philosophic manuscripts for example but it's not the type of thing I come to Marx for, and he himself wasn't overly fond of it either from what I remember.

>>24535728

>>24535728
I personally quite like Gramsci so I'd recommend moving onto him afterwards.

>>24535755
He could skip class struggles in france desu reading both brumaire and class struggles feels redundant

brumaire is an easier read and its the conclusion of what class struggles set out to do so idk if reading both is necessary

>>24535755
>1. 18th Brumaire
>2. Class Struggles in France
are these good enough to understand the economic/social/historical context of europe in general? what about the status of economic ideas at the time?

>>24535755
>ideally I'd say read all three but I personally haven't been able to finish the second volume yet lol so who am I to tell you to read a million pages
A Guide to Marx's Capital by Anthony Brewer is really good if you or the other anon don't want to read all of it

>>24535998
They're more like a snapshot of Marx's own method of analysis, elucidated through a very specific time in history. Class struggles in France is more difficult because you don't (or atleast I didnt) have a lot of the necessary context while reading, in comparison the 18th Brumaire is an easier read. Both do cover similar ground like the other anon said but I didn't feel like class struggles in france was redundant idk.

>>24535812
>>24535998
They're more like a snapshot of Marx's own method of analysis, elucidated through a very specific time in history. Class struggles in France is more difficult because you don't (or atleast I didnt) have a lot of the necessary context while reading, in comparison the 18th Brumaire is an easier read. Both do cover similar ground like the other anon said but I didn't feel like class struggles in france was redundant idk maybe because I read the two with quite some time inbetween. But yeah try out the 18th Brumaire, banger of a history book too.

+There's a lot of books in Italian I wanna recommend, but I think it helps in general to read your own countries communist authors after Marx (some can be retarded though to be fair). Even the US has some marxist literature

>>24535690

>>24536121
Lol

Marx makes far more sense when you realise he was a German nationalist who was mad bitter about his third rate country being left behind. He's only unusual in that he went and built a cloud castle around his seethery.

>>24536855
Lol, you need to elaborate on that a bit more. But that account of Marx getting really mad at some Brits in some pub after they shit talk Germany and then going out to smash streetlamps (and running from the bong police afterwards) because of it, does add credibility to your claim lol.

>>24532188
>free markets help to avoid wars
literally the only reason us has been in war since 60s is cus its hell of a fucking business

It was the industrialist capitalist period which subjected man to the power of economics and money, and it does not become its adepts to teach communists the evangelical truth that man does not live by bread alone. The question of bread for myself is a material question, but the question of bread for my neighbours, for everybody, is a spiritual and religious question. Man does not live by bread alone, but he does live by bread and there should be bread for all. Society should be so organized that there is bread for all, and then it is that the spiritual question will present itself before men in all its depth. It is not permissible to base a struggle for spiritual interests and for a spiritual renaissance on the fact that for a considerable part of humanity bread will not be guaranteed. Such cynicism as this justly evokes an atheistic reaction and the denial of spirit. Christians ought to be permeated with a sense of the religious importance of the elementary needs of men, the vast masses of men, and not to despise these needs from the point of view of an exalted spirituality.

>>24536121
The Grover Furr of anticommunism

>>24532707
>I have to confess that I haven't read Marx (yet)
Then why the fuck are you making any claims about Marx or Marxism? Fucking shoot yourself

>>24522166 (OP)
>everything... is... ECONOMICS
he was wrong, the problems in human society stem from the innately evil nature of individual humans. This much should be clear by now, in 2025.

>>24538694
cause he's based
>>24538702
this, this is also why only the vanguard party can save the human race. only the chosen ones can lead the revolution that will erase all greed and conflict permanently and stop the climate crisis and make people shorter on average due to less chemicals in food and shrink their penises too

I'm not certain on Marx yet, but Parenti is based. If all commies were like him instead of the degenerate lowlifes that they always are I would actually support communism. You can trust a guy like that, you can't trust the abhorrent freaks that peddle your ideology.

>>24522216
Based

I'm not certain on Marx yet, but Parenti is based. If all commies were like him instead of the degenerate lowlifes that they always are I would actually support communism. You can trust a guy like that. You can't trust the abhorrent freaks that always seem to be the ones peddling your ideology.

>>24539194
yup, parent sets a great example but 99% of all other leftists are the most cringe and insufferable faggots on the face of the planet, there is a reason leftism always implodes into infighting and dis-coordination. would be easier working with and organizing a herd of cats towards the goal of socialist revolution