Marx

[Anonymous No.10196880]

Can Marx even be refuted properly? It seems that he was the most perceptive economist of all time.

[Anonymous No.10196891]

>>10196880
saged and caged

[Anonymous No.10196944]

>>10196891
Nice rebuttal.

[Anonymous No.10197214]

>>10196880
No, very few people read Hegel.

[Anonymous No.10197226]

>>10196880
>No true refutation

[Anonymous No.10197238]

bump, Marx deserves attention in this context.

[Anonymous No.10197240]

Can Marx even be explained properly? I have never had anyone explain to me how a true communist society is supposed to operate.

[Anonymous No.10197270]

>>10196880
communism doesnt work as the leaders would have to be human and humans are broken greedy fucking assholes. We either need AI /alien overlords to lead or we use capitalism which slowly build up to the greedy fucking humans taking more and more until a revolution and then the cycle continues

[Anonymous No.10197280]

>>10196880
can you /leftypol/ faggot stop shilling your bullshit here

[Anonymous No.10197300]

>thinks effort = value

Undermined everything. One man with a revolutionary idea can hold more value than the combined effort of thousands and that's why hierarchies exist.

[Anonymous No.10197316]

friendly reminder these threads are from a raid group on 8ch /leftypol/ board

[Anonymous No.10197330]

>>10197316
Still not refuting Marx. I seriously think his arguments were airtight. I don't think any economist has ever thoroughly refuted him.

[Anonymous No.10197335]

>>10197316

I don't even care, it's fun to debate Marxists because they're impractical idiots

Marx himself was a soft handed trust fund baby armchair expert with a big bunk postulation

[Anonymous No.10197341]

>>10197330
that's because you're an idiot

[Anonymous No.10197344]

It has been countless times and we even have living proof he was retarded. People are tired of explaining to a bunch of dipshits over and over why his ideas were stupid and the mouth breathers who don't understand take peoples unwillingness to break it down Barney style for the millionth time as them being correct.

[Anonymous No.10197348]

A true utopia can never be achieved, therefore Marxism can never truly be refuted. The mountain of evidence that reveals Marxism to be a failed and murderous ideology can be explained away by Marxists as a system “that’s never truly been tried”, by which of course they mean “if I were the Marxist dictator, the utopia would’ve arrived as promised”.

[Anonymous No.10197387]

>>10196880
he asked the right questions, but came to the wrong concludions

[Anonymous No.10197405]

Look at how he is hiding his hand.

>the hidden hand

[Anonymous No.10197434]

>>10196880

>all return on investment is theft from workers

It's like you're asking me to refute a mentally handicapped child, anon.

[Anonymous No.10197454]

>>10197240
Marx never wrote about communism, well he did, but it was probably 1% of what he wrote about. Probably less. He mostly wrote about how capitalism works as a system.

[Anonymous No.10197465]

>>10197387
>asked the right questions
"why am I weak and how can I bring everyone to my level?"
Remember Marx's was so autistic his condemnation of Max Stirner (which was mostly passive aggressive personal attacks) was hundreds of pages longer than Stirner's complete works

[Anonymous No.10197470]

>>10197335
>armchair expert with a big bunk postulation
So like every economist of note ever?

[Anonymous No.10197547]

>>10197465
you obviously havent read marx if yyoure regurgitating boiler plate meme points like that.

marx looked at the distribution of power in society and tried to figure out what was going on and what role money/capital resources played in that.

but ultimately he just wast clever or smart enough to really drill down into the truth and he ended up going off in the wrong direction. his legacy has been a disaster

[Anonymous No.10197566]

>>10197547
>>but ultimately he just wast clever or smart enough to really drill down into the truth and he ended up going off in the wrong direction
And let me guess, you are?
Enlighten us, wise one.

[Anonymous No.10197573]

Marx knew how capitalism worked better than the capitalists. If they actually stopped being retards and read Marx they could probably run their businesses better.

[Anonymous No.10197587]

>>10197573
Why didn't Marx become rich though?

[Anonymous No.10197605]

>>10197587
He was too busy spending 15 - 20 hour days in the British museum library working on his capital volumes.

[Anonymous No.10197606]

>>10197587
Because he was more interested in writing his autistic books about how it all works, and he was getting handouts from Engels (A capitalist) to do that.

[Anonymous No.10197617]

>>10197606
If Marx didn't become so radical, he could have been a top tier professor.

[Anonymous No.10197641]

>>10197573
>>10197617
He didn't say a single thing worth a damn.

[Anonymous No.10197645]

The austrians wrote whole books on how socialist economy cant work.

Stop talking shit on the internet and educate yourself.

https://mises.org/sites/default/files/Socialism%20An%20Economic%20and%20Sociological%20Analysis_3.pdf

[Anonymous No.10197656]

>>10197566
>And let me guess, you are?
not at all. remember, we take for granted thses days that capital resources = power, but marx was asking what was that so. it wasnt always like that. medieval monarchs had power but we're often poor in a resources sense, and it wasnt a given that those who did control the resources had power (for an example of that, look at why resource rich parts of africa didnt always dominate)

[Anonymous No.10197665]

>>10197641
>says the loser on 4chan
He said enough that the entire history of the world was transformed, including in countries where communism didn't occur. Where do you think ideas like the welfare state and education for all came from? A lot of it from Marx's critique of capital. He forced the capitalist class to reevaluate their relationship to society (in case the masses overthrew them and took all their shit).

[Anonymous No.10197666]

>>10197606
>Guy who wrote about communism is a NEET who lives on handouts

You can't make this shit up.

[Anonymous No.10197673]

>>10197454
Reading is not common on here. Are you from the past or THE FUTURE?

[Anonymous No.10197674]

>>10197666
He wasn't a NEET, he was a theorist, like any other at the time working in top universities, the only difference is that his work was too radical.

[Anonymous No.10197682]

>>10197665
>Where do you think ideas like the welfare state and education for all came from?
Ancient Rome was a welfare state.

[Anonymous No.10197684]

>>10196880
you can't refute circular logic, that's why it's a fallacy in the first place

[Anonymous No.10197685]

bitch ass comes from a bloodline of rabbis. someone on the chan's must have the file on their hard drive. communism is a jewish invention to take over the world.

[Anonymous No.10197697]

>>10197682
Not in the same vain that was born in the early 20th century. The fact you'd even make this argument tells me you're retarded, ignorant of history, and not worth anymore of my time.

[Anonymous No.10197708]

>>10197682
Funnily enough, Rome collapsed because there were more people living on handouts than there were people working.

[Anonymous No.10197720]

>>10197685
Marx very much disliked Jews, despite coming from a Jewish family, and wrote a pamphlet called "on the Jewish question". In which he argued Jews are parasitical money grubbers, some of the worst representatives of the capitalist class, and that the Jewish people should be extinguished as a people (not physically, but as a cultural identity).

The first idea of a "communist" type society goes back to ancient Greece. The more recent iterations were born a few decades before Marx wrote, by men like Saint Simon and Robert Owen.

[Anonymous No.10197722]

>>10197697
>It's not the same if it hurts my argument
Typical commie scum.

[Anonymous No.10197723]

>>10197697
>same vain
lol.
The purpose of welfare is to keep the masses from revolting.

[Anonymous No.10197731]

>>10197697
there've been "socialist" forces all throughout history. the Church ran free healthcare and schooling in the 9th century and before in england, just to give one example.

[Anonymous No.10197755]

>>10197731
...and the proto-marxist peasant's revolt in 14th centrury england. you kids are so ignorant of histiry

[Anonymous No.10197756]

>>10197708
Feed a man a fish he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for life. Giving handouts only makes people want more handouts.

[Anonymous No.10197779]

>>10197722
>>10197723
>>10197731
Socialism isn't just a redistribution of wealth, you morons. And the capitalist class and working class didn't exist until basically the industrial revolution. Class relations were entirely different before that. Actually know a little bit about what you're talking about before you critique it otherwise you look stupid.

[Anonymous No.10197795]

Look at his mongoloid hair. How anyone could respect a literal caveman blows my mind.

[Anonymous No.10197799]

The only point where I feel close to him is on his views on the lumpen but I feel marxists have always tried to play that in the completely opposite direction. Maybe it feels cruel or something, don't ask me.

[Anonymous No.10197802]

>>10197722
Also, I'm not a communist or a marxist.

[Anonymous No.10197826]

>>10197779
>capitalist class and working class didn't exist until basically the industrial revolution.
you are using intentionally vague abstractions to make your argument impossible to argue against
How is it different than Athenian democracy?

[Anonymous No.10197832]

>>10197779
>Socialism isn't just a redistribution of wealth, you morons.
nobody said it was, except you.
also, marxism isnt about redistribution of wealth - it is about state control of the means of production. there doesnt have to be - in fact, there rearely is - any redistricution of wealth in functioning communist countries. the social castes remain as stratified as ever. and this is the critical flaw of marxism - it assumes that there isnt some natural state or condition of man, that man can be molded into some thing he is not and never can be be.

marxism is anti-nature, despite its lofty aspirations.

[Anonymous No.10197845]

>>10197405
this

[Anonymous No.10197895]

>>10197802
Shut up you socialist faggot.

[Anonymous No.10197899]

>>10196880
100+ million dead russians
venezuela

[Anonymous No.10197916]

>>10196880
>communism is better than capitalism
>every time communism fails, blame it on capitalism and say it wasn't real communism anyway
this is why I don't believe in communism

[Anonymous No.10197921]

>>10197587
He couldn't stop drinking and banging, read his letters.

[Anonymous No.10197987]

>>10197270
Communusm wirh checks and balances to keep the leaders from destroying the country

[Anonymous No.10198382]

>>10197987
Anyone without a say in the check and balance system will become the lower class. And a democratic vote would work for preventing the corruption because the government could just threaten their people with military action.

[Anonymous No.10198675]

>>10197240
He didn't write much about communism. Most of his work was concerned with theories of prices, production and profit, often called "theories of value" etc.

He can't be condensed because he wrote about many aspects of the economy and had many extant notes that got formed into the later volumes of Capital, but fundamentally I think you can understand his theory of price formation as a cost of production theory. Money "masks" real material relationships between people and production of goods. He focused on labor because he considered it a unique kind of commodity that could reproduce itself as well as a surplus. The cost of reproduction of labor was the most basic cost of a growing or sustainable economy, because you need the laborers to survive and likely grow as a group in order to continue creating a surplus. All goods and services have a price that oscillates around their costs of production. The market always attempts to push this down, either by undercutting labor or new developments in machinery/process which can make production more efficient. It's a simple enough observation, the reason why a car is always going to have a higher price than an apple is because the resources deployed in making the car (fundamentally labor) are higher than in making the apple.

Where he is most contentious is his theories of crisis, of course. Many heterodox economists look to Marx as still having said a lot of value, but generally think his theories of crisis like the tendency of the falling rate of profit are not accurate.

[Anonymous No.10198723]

>thinking there's a choice between capitalism and communism
You didn't get the concepts he was at at all.

[Anonymous No.10198753]

>>10196880
property is a basic human right

[Anonymous No.10198872]

Read Basis economics by sowell

[Anonymous No.10199026]

>>10197300
>thinks effort = value
That isn't Marx's theory of value.

[Anonymous No.10199048]

His critiques of capitaism were good. His solution is bad.

[Anonymous No.10199069]

>>10199048
what is his solution to capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10199448]

>>10197270

>Communism doesnt work as the leaders would have to be human and humans are broken greedy fucking assholes. We need AI

end of thread

humans are vermin. communism is an ideal, and like all ideals it relies on unrealistic virtues (generosity, kindness, compassion) of which the overwhelming majority of human beings are not capable

[Anonymous No.10199484]

>>10199448
>humans are vermin.
Then why do you want to give them an equal share of anything?

[Anonymous No.10199504]

Go earn your own shit, cuck.

[Anonymous No.10199540]

>>10199484

>Then why do you want

I don't, in fact I am happy when people lose things and suffer

I was agreeing with >>10199484 's explanation of why communism can't work

[Anonymous No.10199679]

>>10199448
Thats like saying common law and contractual property relations rely on unrealistic virtues like honesty, honor, empathy etc. it's more that actually existing communism was disconnected from most precedent, and therefore corrupt and lacking in certain objective standards of economic measurement and civil justice. EVERYTHING was decided by the party. In the western tradition there is a long history of competing interests balancing through traditions of federal/local bodies, laws and courts. The traditions of the court system literally go all the way back to the Norman conquest. The traditions of the applied soviet system went to Lenin's office.

[Anonymous No.10199738]

>>10199069
There is no solution to something that doesn't need solving.

[Anonymous No.10199771]

>>10196880
Majority of people are inherently lazy. The ones that aren't will not put extra effort in to innovate and manage industry for the same base living standard of their lazy peers.

[Anonymous No.10199848]

>>10198753
property you can defend yourself. Not defended for you by big daddy government.

[Anonymous No.10199856]

>>10197335
Marx was a retarded poorfag bum, his mother said she wished he would have actually got capital instead of just writing about it. He ended up going broke and evicted with his kids because he spent money he didnt have. He didnt let his daughters go to school, he kept them home to warpaint and learn piano. Marx is a dumb retard.

[Anonymous No.10199862]

>>10199738
nice non-answer. Tell me what was Marx's solution to capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10199873]

>>10197720
its funny how a guy who never worked and created the economically most destructive ideology can call anyone a parasite.

[Anonymous No.10199901]

>>10199862
going broke and dying of starvation

[Anonymous No.10199905]

[Anonymous No.10199918]

fuck everything

crypto is changing all this

and its making people money

[Anonymous No.10199976]

>>10198675
Why is he so ingrained into communism if all he really did was critique capitalism?

[Anonymous No.10200026]

>>10199901
>I know nothing about Marx's theory but love to posture on the internet

[Anonymous No.10200052]

>>10199679

>Thats like saying common law and contractual property relations rely on unrealistic virtues like honesty, honor, empathy etc.

No, it isn't. Common law and contractual obligations are derived from statutory law which is imposed and enforced by force (police and other means of "law" enforcement such as those that occur in fascist states), very often against the will of the implicated parties

The problem with communism is that it presumes that humans arrange themselves into orders of structure (societies) out of a desire for the COMMON benefit rather than their OWN benefit

People are okay with living in groups so long as they perceive themselves as being potential beneficiaries of social stratification. Nobody wants to be "equals" with anyone else. Everyone wants to be on top

[Anonymous No.10200086]

USURY FREE ECONOMIC SYSTEM. NO PARASITIC MONEYLENDERS. Whatever you think about the NS. Their economic system worked. It succeeded wonderfully. And Germany prospered into the greatest nation at the time. That's what happens when you destroy debt slavery. All the money that would be spent paying debts from moneylenders can be freely reinvested into the people and the nation.

https://archive.org/details/GottfriedFederManifestoForTheAbolitionOfInterestSlavery_201707

Adolf Hitler’s economic system – heavily influenced by the genius of Gottfried Feder – was unlike anything the world had ever seen, and it worked better than anyone predicted at the time. National-Socialist economics were of pivotal importance to Hitler’s government, but those policies are sadly very poorly understood today for a variety of reasons, including the aforementioned lack of “excitement” surrounding economic policies of 70+ years ago on the other side of the world. As the reader will soon come to understand, “breaking the bondage of interest slavery” was strongly emphasized, though most Americans have never considered the idea of life without interest on a house or car payment. Gottfried Feder discusses this in his Manifesto, and almost all of what he says in it applies today as it did in 1919. Some authors and Nazi sympathizers have even suggested that if Germany’s brilliant economic ideas had spread to other nations, this would soon lead to the end of endless profits and power for the banksters, and hence the need for the Allied powers to bring Germany to her knees.

[Anonymous No.10200106]

>>10200026
>>I know nothing about Marx's theory
and looking at the success rate of political ideologies inspired by it, i'm absolutely fine with that.

[Anonymous No.10200209]

>>10200086
>Whatever you think about the NS. Their economic system worked. It succeeded wonderfully. And Germany prospered into the greatest nation at the time.
That's not true.

[Anonymous No.10200297]

>>10200052
>No, it isn't. Common law and contractual obligations are derived from statutory law which is imposed and enforced by force (police and other means of "law" enforcement such as those that occur in fascist states), very often against the will of the implicated parties

Exactly, communism would be the same shit. It isn't based on honor or anything, it's organized force and law.

>The problem with communism is that it presumes that humans arrange themselves into orders of structure (societies) out of a desire for the COMMON benefit rather than their OWN benefit

Not necessarily true. Marx theorized the proles would rise up out of their own self-interest, to take political control of the entire political-economic apparatus. It wasn't about "common" benefit anymore than a union says "you should sacrifice for everyone else". They say, "we will get you a better salary and better conditions".

[Anonymous No.10200327]

>>10196880
You don't deserve other peoples money.

[Anonymous No.10200836]

Communism is only possible in rich states. In poor Russia it was failure from start. USA could be a good communist state.

[Anonymous No.10200984]

>>10200836
Parasites need a bigger, healthier host.