/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.17473794]

how can an economic system whose success is predicated on thousands of investors' expectation aligning just right with consumers' demand and whose heart is basically a giant casino with people's lives and jobs being at stake instead of plastic coins, may be regarded as """efficient""" or """rational""" by any sane human being? just fucking swallow the Marxpill, follow up with a Cockshottpill and embrace global communism?

[Anonymous No.17473801]

>>17473794
Marx was wrong

[Anonymous No.17473817]

>>17473794
Collective ownership is bad.

[Anonymous No.17473828]

>>17473801
>>17473817
cope

[Anonymous No.17473843]

>>17473817
not an argument
>>17473801
how? we're probably in for a recession that will make 2008 seem like a fucking fart in comparison and that's all because some rich faggots had a sudden moodswing in the wrong direction

[Anonymous No.17473875]

>Why, yes, I do believe in the immortal ideology of Marxism Leninism, how could you tell?

[Anonymous No.17473923]

>m-muh markets are efficient, all available information about future event is already contained in forward prices
>>17473875
based

[Anonymous No.17474003]

>>17473794
Kys comunist fg

[Anonymous No.17474019]

>>17473843
https://cdn.mises.org/Economic%20Calculation%20in%20the%20Socialist%20Commonwealth_Vol_2_3.pdf

[Anonymous No.17474034]

ah, yes, because centralizing an entire economy worked out so well each time it's been tried so far

[Anonymous No.17474043]

>>17474034
We didn't kill enough people last time so the capitalists took over.

[Anonymous No.17474064]

>>17473923
>the stock market is a free market

[Anonymous No.17474148]

[Anonymous No.17474352]

>>17474019
yeah and? European companies finance most of their investment projects with bank loans rather than money incurred from share sell-outs and they're only slightly behind muh Amurica economically. All that not withstanding their wealth is much more evenly distributed and they have less problems with fags pretending they're predicting the future on the asset market. Of course Marx predicted that as industrial rates of profit decline inevitably due to automatization, capital will have no further inhibitions and will seek only the most risky investments. Also your pdf was refuted by Oskar Lange and Paul Cockshott.
>>17474034
USSR was once second only to the USA in total GDP measures in the 80s. If you can't see the unnececessary suffering in a system where there's abundance of goods but people are dying of hunger because they don't have enough green paper cards then I can't help you.
>>17474064
It's significantly more free than it used to be before the neolibs took over.

[Anonymous No.17474416]

>>17473794
PSA: If you haven't read Das Kapital, you're nothing but a useful idiot to the capitalist system.

[Anonymous No.17474476]

>>17473794
because I would rather kill you and then myself before having my life governed by somebody who thinks Marx is right.
Because I know exactly how fucking dumb the average person is and I refuse to be their "equal".

[Anonymous No.17474512]

>>17474352
And then it collapsed

[Anonymous No.17474553]

>>17474476
noone said anything about equality, anon. I used to be like you, I was bullied in school and refused to entertain any political philosophy that appealed to the popular masses - that is any form of collectivism or socialism. but you can still have a good job as a programmer and earn more than your average janitor, noone wants you to become equal to this person, just accept the fact that other people have their needs and desires that should be fulfilled and given that our current system doesn't deliver the goods we need to overthrow it.

[Anonymous No.17474578]

>>17474512
>it collapsed
But political not economicaly, is funny when liberals separe the economic and politics but merge both when those are about one socialist country.

[Anonymous No.17474599]

>>17474512
yeah and all the former republics entered a lengthy recession period, that's how """efficient""" capitalism is. also it collapsed out of political reasons not economic ones

[Anonymous No.17474616]

>gommunism stronk
>economy stagnates for decades before everyone just decides to give it up without a fight
kek

[Anonymous No.17474637]

>>17474512
>>17474578

[Anonymous No.17474675]

>>17474616
>without a fight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcd4EFRKSy8

[Anonymous No.17474681]

>>17474637
>he believes the economic figures put out by the communist party of the soviet union
Is anyone this retarded or are you joking?

[Anonymous No.17474694]

>>17474616
t. Cringe zoomer which dosen't live the cold war.

[Anonymous No.17474735]

>>17474681
>the statistics are clearly wrong because it fits my agenda well
you can check them out for yourself, Angus Maddison did a great job of converting Soviet data aggregated according to the rules of MPS standard into SNA standard and he used mostly CIA statistics. that's not an organization that would want to overestimate Soviet production, agreed?

[Anonymous No.17474741]

>(You)
>Belive in world bank
>not arguments
You even tried it.

[Anonymous No.17474802]

>>17473875
is is face photoshopped on them?

[Anonymous No.17474842]

>>17473923
>Muh centrally managed economy is more efficient!

[Anonymous No.17474855]

>>17473794
I think socialism would be good for the worker, however I'm a NEET cryptofag and will do all I can to stop socialism.

[Anonymous No.17474908]

>>17473801
That's what people who didn't read him say. Those who read him and still say this, didn't understand him.

[Anonymous No.17474921]

>>17474855
The prince of miner is socialism the code, and the time to work in miner. Could bot been crypto currency without theory of labor.

[Anonymous No.17475003]

>>17473794
Socialism will only work if you have whites in charge and not allow Jews into the power structures. Socialism now is just a ploy to kill white people.

[Anonymous No.17475006]

>>17474908
Communist Manifesto laid it out in plain words of his philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17475029]

>>17475006
Communist Manifesto is insignificant, it's a political brochure. Read Das Capital for enlightenment

[Anonymous No.17475056]

>>17475003
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.17475058]

>>17473794
Because your economic system and based on murder, covetousness, and banditry. That is literally the core of communism: "Murder the productive and take their shit." Then it turns out nothing gets produced anymore.

[Anonymous No.17475110]

>>17475029
It's very significant because it's more widely read than Das Kapital. You don't get to cherry pick because the content in it is embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.17475164]

The real redpill is that the goal of communism and capitalism are the same: maximizing market efficiency.

[Anonymous No.17475242]

Marxism does make sense to me, the big sticking point though is that it's gay and I don't play that gay shit

[Anonymous No.17475302]

why the fuck everyone thinks by going with communism YOU have to to have a central economy? you can still create a decentralized economy and even a decentralized working places. in fact it's more democratic to allow workers have control over companies rather than bunch of bosses.

t. libertarian socialist

[Anonymous No.17475313]

>>17473794
rothschild agent

[Anonymous No.17475341]

>>17475110
There's nothing embarassing in the Manifesto, it's just that you don't get to call yourself knowledgeable about Marx's outlook after reading a political pamphlet. Remember - Marx and Engels wrote the Manifesto in 1848, that's just 4 years after the embarassingly bluepilled Economic-Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 where Marx is almost your average 19th century European republican like Manzini. It's only in Das Kapital and Theories of Surplus Value where his economic thought presents itself to us in its mature form.

[Anonymous No.17475393]

>>17475302
how the fuck are you going to coordinate decision making in all these decentralized workplaces? it's literally impossible without making all industries subordinate to a central planning board which attempts to direct scarce resources in a way that will achieve Pareto efficient outcome

[Anonymous No.17475395]

>>17475341
Murder. Banditry. Everything you just cited is an elaborate justification for murder and banditry.

Most of the time, you don't even end up murdering the rich. You murder those who simply live and produce self-sufficiently; the shopkeepers who sell you your groceries, the kulaks who own more than 8 acres of land.
Or you just end up destroying generations worth of art and tradition, a la the Chinese under Mao. No economic parity to be gained, just pure malice and envy to be indulged.

[Anonymous No.17475452]

>metaphorize labor as commodity necessary to create a product
>argues profits generated by selling the product exceeds cost of commodity (labor, materials) and therefore all profits are unnecessary work

if he's allowed to metaphorize labor as commodity then so should risk also be a form of commodity.

There is no surplus as they simply are the cost of risk (as a commodity)

[Anonymous No.17475487]

Marxism is just perfect capitalism and the hypercapitalism of today aligns perfectly with Marx's goals, prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.17475519]

>>17473794
actual capitalism is not necessarily predicated on anything
it's a system of individualism, wherein you recognize your natural right to disassociate from others' ideas and pursue your own destiny
your statements to the contrary are merely a long-winded strawman attack
you try to tell me that disassociating from you will lead to my misery—all the while the people who abide by your principles make endless poor economic decisions that clearly would doom them to financial and societal ruin if they didn't have a tax base to pay for their bullshit

>>17473843
>not an argument
collectivism is, in and of itself, one big non-argument
>voluntary employment is slavery!
>voluntary commerce is immoral!
>life is a zero-sum game!
>corporations can be corrupt—so reroute spending power from people who earn it to the government to prevent corruption!
>government can be corrupt—so give more power to the government to prevent government corruption!
YOU are, by default, the one who is not only advocating for the encroachment on other people's natural rights, but is in favor of collectivizing society under one government—thereby preventing anyone from freely exercising their natural right to disassociate, physically, socially, and economically, from you and your system of central planning. i would say that it is YOU who is the one who the burden of presenting an argument for disrupting other people's lives lies on—but the truth is, there is no argument that you could possibly make to justify this behavior. you are a goddamned monster who targets society's brightest and most productive people and destroys their genetic material forever, dooming the human race down the path of first enslaving its most enlightened members to satiate the overwhelming ENDLESS DEMANDS of the unsophisticated, addiction-prone, violent "proletariat", and then fading back to the meaningless and ugly noise of the universe. you are literally mankind's cancer. fuck you into oblivion.

[Anonymous No.17475527]

>>17474735
>that's not an organization that would want to overestimate Soviet production, agreed?
No they'd obviously overestimate it to secure funding.

[Anonymous No.17475587]

>>17475341
look here rube you're coming to a board where people have a good enough understanding of economics to venture into the market. You're not going to convince anyone to take up you're proven failure 19th century idiocy

[Anonymous No.17475614]

One has to wonder why socialists continuously spam this board with their shit when it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Can't wait until the election is over so they fuck off

[Anonymous No.17475630]

>>17475341
When you advocate open violence as a necessity, it pretty much eliminates all discussion. Marx was extremely cynical about humanity yet idealistic about communism working perfectly, which is extremely ironic. When you know you're going to be killed because you're labeled as a "bourgeoisie capitalist", why the fuck does it matter whether or not you understand Marx's views "fully"?

[Anonymous No.17475634]

>>17473794
>the marxists are here
Looks like we’ve hit the bottom

[Anonymous No.17475640]

>>17475614
Might as well go back to /pol/, I guess they're trying to spread the revolutionary energy here lol.
I'm an ex-communist and I know the zealous feeling to proselytize.

[Anonymous No.17475674]

>>17475614
They're trying to take advantage of people's emotions. They always make these threads after the market dumps.

[Anonymous No.17475778]

>>17475587
lol you retards clearly have nothing to show for it then because noone presented me with an actual argument beyond "muh murders think about the poor kulaks :( " and confusing a politically motivated collapse of the USSR for a proof of a disadvantage of socialism as an economic system. modern bourgeois economics is just mathematical esotericism, bragging about being familiar with it won't get you to far as this knowledge is of no value in the market, I know that from statements of actual Econ graduates
>>17475630
because you can realize your wrong ways, join the proletariat and save yourself from being labeled a "bourgeoisie capitalist" on the day of revolution
>>17475634
are you a newfag? Marxists are here everytime global asset prices plummet

[Anonymous No.17475782]

>>17473794
>aligning just right
Marxists always forget that investors frequently lose money. Investors either pick low risk investments that are almost certainly aligned with demand, or they pick high risk investments that might not align and thus demand a higher return.
>heart is a giant casino
You're mistaking /biz/ for real capitalists. Of course idiots who want to gamble are going to gamble. Real investment isn't gambling - its making intelligent decisions based on the best information available.
>lives and jobs being at stake
If your job doesn't generate value, you indeed should be afraid. That fear prevents people from taking useless jobs and incentivizes them to gain skills that are useful as the economy evolves.
>efficient or rational
It's not perfectly efficient or rational. It's just a system for rewarding efficiency and rationality and punishing wastefullness and stupidity. You can be stupid in capitalism and gamble your capital, or you can be wise and rational and make efficient investments that grow your wealth over time.
>Marxpill
Marx didn't hate Capitalism - he viewed it as an advancement. You never read Das Kapital, or have a 20IQ and didn't understand it.
Marx's mistake was viewing history as following an inevitable path of dialectical progress. No one believes that anymore in the postmodern period - and the people who do believe in progress are reactionaries who view the latest advancements of postmodernism as a failure.

You cannot escape postmodernism, Commie.

[Anonymous No.17475822]

>>17473794
it can, when the price mechanism is actually allowed to work properly
when you do central planning, which is what the entire "civilized" world does today, you run into the economic calculation problem, and cannot possibly allocate resources in any rational way
just read Human Action and Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth, both by Mises, and it'll all be quite clear
menos Marx, mais Mises

[Anonymous No.17475841]

>>17475778
>Marxists are here everytime global asset prices plummet
Exactly, if you retards have caught on it must already be over

[Anonymous No.17475846]

>>17475778
>because you can realize your wrong ways, join the proletariat and save yourself from being labeled a "bourgeoisie capitalist" on the day of revolution

Funny joke. You read the shit that's happening on social media these days where people will cherry pick your statements and try to get you fired from your job for hurting their feelings? You think these people give a fuck about anything other than their feelings getting hurt? Imagine if they get the option to kill you.

[Anonymous No.17475863]

>>17475782
>Of course idiots who want to gamble are going to gamble. Real investment isn't gambling - its making intelligent decisions based on the best information available.
pretty much this, this is why Craig always refers to exchanges as bucket shops, the trading of all those worthless shitcoins basically amounts to gambling in a Keynesian beauty contest, ridiculous and absurd to involve yourself in for 99.99% of people

[Anonymous No.17475890]

>>17474578
>But political not economicaly
It did collapse economically. In fact it was thanks to the economical stagnation that political and economical reforms were made, and those then finished off the soviet union. There were obvious problems with USSR economy. Machinery was getting outdated. Not enough resources dedicated to consumer goods, too big defence budget etc

[Anonymous No.17476002]

>>17475782
low IQ post
>nvestors either pick low risk investments that are almost certainly aligned with demand, or they pick high risk investments that might not align and thus demand a higher return.
irrelevant given that Marx predicted industrial profit rates would sink due to an increase in organic composition of capital with surplus value rate stable/decreasing. this inevitably forces capital to seek riskier investment opportunities.
>If your job doesn't generate value, you indeed should be afraid. That fear prevents people from taking useless jobs and incentivizes them to gain skills that are useful as the economy evolves.
do you seriously think you can explain over 30% unemployment rates during the Great Depression by saying that "well, they were doing useless jobs"?
>It's not perfectly efficient or rational. It's just a system for rewarding efficiency and rationality and punishing wastefullness and stupidity. You can be stupid in capitalism and gamble your capital, or you can be wise and rational and make efficient investments that grow your wealth over time.
rationality loses all its meaning when you're trying to predict the behavior of other agents more than market conditions. how "rational" is it when speculators push prices to infinity during a bubble?
>Marx didn't hate Capitalism - he viewed it as an advancement. You never read Das Kapital, or have a 20IQ and didn't understand it.
you're probably someone who's read a wikipedia entry on Marx and thinks he's a fucking expert on the subject so let me explain slowly - MARX WAS AN ANTI-CAPITALIST. your revisionism is counter-productive and intentionally obfuscating. Marx thought that capitalism advanced material production forces of mankind but viewed it as an unviable system in the long run because of its internal contradictions. this is already a 100th time I encounter this reactionary talking point "b-but Marx liked capitalism" and it's so fucking tiring I cannot tell

[Anonymous No.17476082]

>>17475822
You do realize Lange mathematically solved the socialist calculation debate almost 100 years ago, disproving the economists that argued a socialist economy or a central planning wasn feasible right?
Not only that, but with modern computation this is easier than ever. Thanks to technology we could right now directly jump to a moneyless system, based on labour vouchers (labour-time as "money"). Read Paul Cockshott.

[Anonymous No.17476086]

>>17474034
Unironically this

[Anonymous No.17476106]

>>17475778
>Join the proletariat under threat of murder, comrade!

[Anonymous No.17476156]

>>17475782
Man it's pretty obvious that you haven't read Das Kapital, i don't know why you fool yourself, you dont gain anything by lying.
Here king https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/

[Anonymous No.17476213]

>>17476082
Dude, labor vouchers were tried before in communist countries. The problem was determining how much labor vouchers you get depended entirely on the whim of the overseer. Now, the power over your life is dependent entirely on this one person.

[Anonymous No.17476217]

>Even before computers, the USSR had complete control over roughly 3 thousand industries
>Currently, there are algorthims capable of planning 5 years of production for 500 thousand industries in just a few minutes, even in a small computer
youtu.be/rtZQtEnGtLc
youtu.be/Pqzj5hrnDCk
youtu.be/czcnmQ3ua0Y
>Empirical proof for marxist theory: Wages
youtu.be/85tYfXYmzJY
>Empirical proof for marxist theory: falling rate of profit
youtu.be/ypJ_tcnfaWA
>Empirical proof for marxist theory: labour theory of value
youtu.be/emnYMfjYh1Q
>Empirical proof for marxist theory: accumulation cycles
youtu.be/rp9ClsIywdo
>Lenin on markets and crisis
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1893/market/index.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1898/dec/market.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1899/dcr8i/i8vi.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1897/econroman/i8vii.htm

[Anonymous No.17476233]

>Marx's mistake was viewing history as following an inevitable path of dialectical progress. No one believes that anymore in the postmodern period
this
Marxists can't into libidinal economy, tantalizing views of any economic system is brainlet tier, especially after what happened in the 20th century

[Anonymous No.17476241]

>>17476002
Notice how OP views Marx as a deity who's work is the eternal truth on the history of capitalism. Yes, Marx had some important insights for the period of industrial capitalism he lived in. No, these insights are not relevant to financial capitalism or the new types of distributed economics systems being developed.

>irrelvent given that Marx [blahblahblah]
Marx isnt my God, he's yours. I have no god.
>30% unemployment rates during great depression
Cherry pick one extreme example and you don't prove anything. Since you did though, notice that most of the modern financial regulatory agencies in the USA were born out of the great depression to limit the effects of speculation on the real economy. Notice that it hasn't happened in 100 years. The 'financial crisis' was a tiny blip in comparison.
>rationality loses all its meaning in speculation
Gamblers going to gamble. If you work for a firm thats supported by gamblers, be afraid. I would never work for TSLA. Idiots should lose their money. The best world is where the idiots have nothing and the intelligent profit. Speculators may temporarily look wise, but in the long term they lose everything. This is good.

You sound like an economic loser who either (a) inherited wealth from someone who worked hard or (b) made dumb decisions and can't save an invest.

Communism is the ideology of slaves.

>wikipedia entry reader
That's you. I studied under several top post Marxists at the graduate level. None of them would make the type of retarded arguments you're making, although I do have strong disagreements with them.

[Anonymous No.17476252]

>>17476233
meant for
>>17475782

[Anonymous No.17476274]

>>17475782
>Marx's mistake was viewing history as following an inevitable path of dialectical progress. No one believes that anymore in the postmodern period
this
Marxists can't into libidinal economy, totalizing views of any economic system is brainlet tier, especially after what happened in the 20th century

[Anonymous No.17476345]

>>17476241
>That's you. I studied under several top post Marxists at the graduate level. None of them would make the type of retarded arguments you're making, although I do have strong disagreements with them.
good joke, your statement that Marx didn't hate capitalism would prove otherwise. your familiarity with Marxism is embarrasingly low.
>Gamblers going to gamble. If you work for a firm thats supported by gamblers, be afraid. I would never work for TSLA. Idiots should lose their money. The best world is where the idiots have nothing and the intelligent profit. Speculators may temporarily look wise, but in the long term they lose everything. This is good.
how is it the that these crises keep reoccuring? could it be that, like Marx stated, capitalism contains some inherent internal contradictions?
>irrelvent given that Marx [blahblahblah]
>Marx isnt my God, he's yours. I have no god.
let's just forget the fact that you handwaved a good part of my argument into non-existence because that's what reactionaries do invariably. stop kidding yourself - you haven't read Mart.
>Communism is the ideology of slaves.
you sound like a cringy Nietzschean elitist, grow the fuck up manchild.

[Anonymous No.17476446]

>>17475778
>noone presented me with an actual argument beyond "muh murders think about the poor kulaks :("
read >>17475519
people who want nothing to do with you and who operate on principles of non-aggression do not have to justify or argue their positions, because they have no obligations to you
you are not entitled to the existence, and thus the earnings or welfare, of ANYONE
you have not even the remotest iota of a goddamned idea of what you are advocating for you mid-witted, entitled, memetic virus-suffering manchild

[Anonymous No.17476462]

>>17476233
KEK, exactly. Without viewing capitalism as driven by flows and networks, the $1T+ valuation of modern tech companies makes no sense. Probably while our stalinist buddy is convinced it can only be due to speculation.

>>17476345
>crises keep reoccuring
Can you even read? The Great Depressions hasn't happened. Hey here's a real mind blower for you commie - One of Capitalism's source of power is its ability to internalize critique of itself. Capitalists read Marx's Das Kapital and incoporated information from it to improve the function of Capitalism while discarding the wrong bits. A process that continues to this day, which is why some post marxists no longer formulate critiques of capitalism in order to advance its demise. I view such actions as futile but understandable. Unlike your position, which is just uneducated.

>Nietzschean elitist
whooooooosshhhhhhh -> That's one of the most complex philosopher's ideas traveling at light speed past your slow moving mind.

Nietzsche's point wasn't that master morality was actually superior to slave morality - it was that the entire premise of morality itself was flawed.

[Anonymous No.17476532]

>>17476233
>libidinal economy
Interesting, just looked this up. Thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.17476579]

>>17474553
>bullied in school
>grows up to be a Marxist
Typical simp lmao

[Anonymous No.17476616]

>>17474578
>famines
>dirt poor population
>terrible living standards
I mean I knew a Marxist and a few socialists in uni (most of them changed their tune to be more a bit more centrist though still big government supporting by the time we were done with our econ degree) but at least they were smart enough to know never to use the USSR as an example of working socialism or communism. You however seem to be too misinformed to even bother arguing with too much.

[Anonymous No.17476631]

>>17476462
>One of Capitalism's source of power is its ability to internalize critique of itself. Capitalists read Marx's Das Kapital and incoporated information from it to improve the function of Capitalism while discarding the wrong bits.
they must've read some different translation then, the only way to move beyond failures of capitalism is to do away with private ownership of means of production and since I didn't see that occur in any developed industrialized country the capitalists must've been very stealthy with their "internalization of critique of capitalism".
>Can you even read? The Great Depressions hasn't happened.
at this point I don't even have doubts that you haven't read Das Capital. it is often assumed by midwits and wikipedia reader that according to Marx crises would get much stronger and would therefore inspire a strong anti-capitalist movement. that is incorrect, according to Marx it's only required that the period inbetween booms and busts gets shorter. what's more - a certain level of satisfaction of human wants is necessary for the revolutionary movement to thrive therefore it is unnecessary for the amplitudes of changes in production to become increasingly higher.
>whooooooosshhhhhhh -> That's one of the most complex philosopher's ideas traveling at light speed past your slow moving mind.
still not as embarassing as your claim that Marx didn't hate capitalism lol kys

[Anonymous No.17476791]

>>17476631
>the only way to move beyond failures of capitalism
If Marx was right, but he's not right. What part did you not understand of "use the useful parts, throwaway the useless parts." Marx was a complex thinker who had a huge impact on the development of economics, sociology, philosophy, and (commie mind blown) capitalism. That doesn't mean that all those fields follow Marx like he's the second coming of Jesus Christ. Das Kapital isn't divinely inspired. It's written by humans, just like the bible. Anyone can take ideas from Das Kapital without believing in communism, just like they can take ideas from the Bible without believing that wizards can turn sticks into snakes with the power of Satan.

>Crisis getting stronger
Opposite has happened. There hasn't been a second great depression. Marx's predicitons was wrong, get over it. As economic management of the economy has improved, the depth of crisises has become more shallow and the distance between them longer. You have no historical knowledge of the 20th century. Just another scarred millenial who believed the world was perfect then the financial crisis hit. Guess what, 2007-2008 was nothing as bad as the Great Depression or the multiple other Depressions that happened in Marx's era. Marx was writing from a historical perspective that may have made sense at that time but simply didn't hold through the 20th century, not to mention 2020.
>Marx didn't hate capitalism
Apparently you are unable to consider context. Marx viewed capitalism as an advancement. He viewed it as an intermediate stage to a better system. Not as some ultimate evil.

[Anonymous No.17476828]

>>17475395
>Murder. Banditry.
Primitive accumulation of Capitalism.
>>17475630
Bouh Ouh you bourgeois is going to be killed by villain reds!
That is the stupidest fear i know about.
>>17476446
So much bullshit in your post i won't even answer. Quickly.
>collectivizing society under one government
Marx is anti-State
>ENDLESS DEMANDS of the unsophisticated, addiction-prone, violent "proletariat"
The elite is a bunch of pedo satanist. I would way more thrust the proletariat.
>your system of central planning.
Marxism is actually about the free association of workers, owning their own means of production.
Let me guess, you didn't read Das Kapital. Yet you talk about it. You talk. Why do you even?

[Anonymous No.17476888]

>>17476828
>>17476631
your attitude reminds me of something

[Anonymous No.17476920]

>>17476791
>Apparently you are unable to consider context.
you literally wrote "Marx didn't hate capitalism" >>17475782 you midwit. in what context is that the same as "viewing capitalism as an advancement"? it's just damage control on your side because you've been exposed for not having read Capital
>Opposite has happened. There hasn't been a second great depression.
that's literally what I've explained in >>17476631. if you think Marx insisted they would get stronger - and you clearly think so because you've stated it as his "prediction" - then you haven't read Marx. period. he did think they'd become much more often and that agrees with the evidence, as does the Law of Falling Rate of Profit.
>Marx was a complex thinker who had a huge impact on the development of economics, sociology, philosophy, and (commie mind blown) capitalism
lmao name one specific reform implemented in the 20th or 21st century that has been inspired by Marx's writings. just so you don't embarass yourself - "welfare state" is not a correct answer to that question as Marx opposed all reformism

[Anonymous No.17476985]

why dont you guys just accept that anywhere except in modern democratic capitalist countries with a strong constitution there is alot of difficulty mowing over the populace. there are just too many obstacles to totalitarian behaviour.

for example take railroad building. in china it costs 4 times less to construct a railway than in say usa. why is that? cheap labor? that is a part of it but not all. the real reason is that in US you have private property so you have to pay off all the people involved like land owners, communities and they EVEN have the right not to agree while in states like china you just shut your mouth and accept it or else you get fucked anyway.

what is wrong with you people? you want to live in a beehive? you are not bees. you are fucking people!

[Anonymous No.17477007]

>>17476985
i meant only in modern democratic capitalist countries do you get any consideration obviously.

[Anonymous No.17477014]

>>17473794
You had 2 years. Cope harder faggot

[Anonymous No.17477035]

i am not saying everything is dandy in the west but at least:
you get separation of power,
you get private property,
and you get plenty of other rights.

[Anonymous No.17477044]

>>17476920
>literally wrote [x]
I made two flawed assumptions:
(1) You have basic knowledge of Marxism
(2) You are able to consider abstract thoughts within context.
Sadly, you're pretty uneducated. You need to educate yourself on post ww2 theory before you'll be able to communicate effectively.
>shorter distance between booms and busts
Opposite has happened.
>Falling rate of profit
Again, opposite.
>Marx opposed [x]
And? Marx isn't an eternal being. People did whatever they wanted with Marx's ideas, not what he wanted. Not even Stalin, Mao, Trotsky, or Lenin. All had their own interpretations. Not to mention capitalists who feel even less bound to ignore reformism.

[Anonymous No.17477056]

>>17473794
>giant casino with people's lives and jobs being at stake
Literally what the fuck are you even referring to? retard?

[Anonymous No.17477082]

>>17474908
>That's what people who didn't read him say. Those who read him and still say this, didn't understand him.
Bohm Bawerk and Wicksteed refuted Marx.

Sorry kid.

[Anonymous No.17477087]

[Anonymous No.17477108]

>>17474148
Cringe,
kill yourself bootlicker

>>17474352
Central banking fuckery is not a free market you gigantic bootlicking retard

[Anonymous No.17477121]

>>17474735
>>17475527
Actually the soviet union made a bunch of bullshit up and those CIA figures were simply incorrect.
https://nintil.com/categories/soviet-union-series/
https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/

[Anonymous No.17477130]

>>17476828
>Marx is anti-State
No, no he's not.
He wanted a massive authoritarian state that would somehow magically socially engineer people to be communists and then somehow magically "wither away".

Communism is a delusional religion.

[Anonymous No.17477134]

Da! Comrade! It's much better to live in government assigned housing, with government assigned job and entertained with party approved family friendly entertainment that promotes self service to the community! Who needs to take risks and have more than others. Remember comrade that capitalism is an evil imperialistic ideology that seeks to exploit others and there is no to improve your condition or increase socioeconomic mobility when everyone is the same!

[Anonymous No.17477141]

>>17477087
Burn it all down, kill the commies.

[Anonymous No.17477172]

>>17477134
holy shit those commiblocks are atrocious

[Anonymous No.17477183]

>>17477130
Marx was most definitely anti state. He viewed the state as a necessary enforcer of class distinctions. The dictatorship of the proletariat is just a way to level everyone out so that no class distinctions exist. At that point, the state won't even need to be removed as it would disappear on its own.

Of course that idea didn't work, but to say Marx was anti-state is not in line with what he wrote.

[Anonymous No.17477193]

>>17473875
>>17473923
Communists would rather be total slaves and starve to death rather than have someone have more money than them.
It's insane.

[Anonymous No.17477224]

>>17477183
>Marx was most definitely anti state.
No he wasn't. He thought the end result of his system would be anarchism, which makes absolutely no sense.
You don't create the most authoritarian state in existence by creating a massive totalitarian state with no democracy.
Marxism is a religion, it's incredible so many people fall for it, it doesn't even make logical sense.
>At that point, the state won't even need to be removed as it would disappear on its own.
Yes and this is fucking delusional. People would still want to trade with each other, you can't get rid of commodity production.
Also what happens to murders and rapists?
I mean what the fuck?

[Anonymous No.17477245]

Throw communists from helicopters, desu.

[Anonymous No.17477316]

>>17477224
>marx was anti state
>end resuls was anarchism
?
Yes he was wrong, but anarchism is pretty anti state.
Also, the huge authoritarian states we think of as Marxism is actually Marxism-Leninism, its own distinct branch of Marxist thought. Yes it is Marxist, no it is not the same as Karl Marx's thought.
>what happens to murderers and rapists
In Marxist thought, most violence occurs because of class distinctions. Notice that most murderers and rapists tend to be from the lower classes. Nothing prevents a local anarchist community from taking action as they see fit against individuals who break norms.

That said, I do think Marx was wrong. But I also think you should be more careful criticizing something you know nothing about, as your arguments are easily refuted by a real Marxist.

[Anonymous No.17477376]

>>17477316
>>marx was anti state
>>end resuls was anarchism
>?
If he was actually anti-state, he wouldn't have supported a massive authoritarian state to run everyone's lives. He would just supported anarchism.
He knew what he was doing, he knew what suffering his ideology would bring.
>Also, the huge authoritarian states we think of as Marxism is actually Marxism-Leninism
Classical marxism asks for a massive state, see the communist manifesto.
>In Marxist thought, most violence occurs because of class distinctions.
Wow this ideology is even dumber than I thought.
Do marxists ACTUALLY believe this?
>Notice that most murderers and rapists tend to be from the lower classes.
So? Murdering and raping is part of human nature, some people will still do it even if they don't live in poverty.
>Nothing prevents a local anarchist community from taking action
You mean like police?
LOL

>But I also think you should be more careful criticizing something you know nothing about, as your arguments are easily refuted by a real Marxist.
I've been debating marxists online since when you were a kid.

[Anonymous No.17477580]

>>17477376
>he knew what suffering his ideology would bring
That's simultaneously very true and very false. Marxists believe ideology follows material conditions. So Marx did recognize the suffering the transition to Communism would cause, but viewed it as historically inevitable and thus not anyone's personal responsibility. Note that you can disagree with Marx, but then you have to give up materialism or embrace hyperstition.

>communist manifesto massive state
If you mean an abolishment of the bougie state and the centralization of production in a dictatorship of the proletariate, sure. But not the kind of authoritarian state of Marxist-Leninists. I'd agree that the roots of the USSR's authoritarianism are in Marxism.But to say that all Marxists supported that particular method is flat out wrong.

>ive been debating marxists for 50 years
No wonder there are still so many. If this is the level of argument you've been bringing, you've probably been reinforcing Marxist's beliefs with your ignorance.

[Anonymous No.17477629]

>>17477580
based

[Anonymous No.17477632]

>>17476828
>marx is anti-state
implying that just because marx states that there is no state in the end phase of his ideology that this end phase is even attainable or that his argument even makes sense
your statement's ultimate argument is "communism/marxism/whateverthefuck brand of collectivism has never been tried", which then develops into "it only works if everyone does it", which is utterly illogical
>the elites are pedo satanists, would way more trust the proletariat
implying that the elites are not the most strong supporters of the collectivist policies that marxist doctrine advocates for in that they use taxation and wealth redistribution to grow the power of the state and of corporate entities that have cronyist relations to the state
implying that the proletariat—who, in free market societies, are typically people who are perpetually poor for one or many of a number of reasons (extremely shoddy financial management skills, addictions, unstable/extremely impulsive personalities, low-iq, bad social reputation (known for committing crimes, violence), low expression of desirable or marketable skills, RARELY disability or misfortune)—is a trustworthy group of people
i immediately know that you either have next to no experience in a workplace or experience socializing with others, or that you ARE a low-iq individual who is incapable of recognizing the undesirable traits of others
>marxism is about the free association of workers, owning their own means of production
if marxism is about the "free association of workers", then what if you don't want to be associated with someone else
maybe someone who has a tendency to break equipment, or constantly fuck up their job
what if you want to "freely associate" with JUST one other individual, and "freely associate" with equipment that nobody else may "freely associate" with
and how can a worker own the means of production if someone else can just take it

[Anonymous No.17477649]

>>17476828
>>17477632
how would the "means of production" get made; you would need raw materials to make the "means of production", and in the case of collecting metal, that usually involves the kind of hard grueling labour that shortens your lifespan
who would build equipment just so that someone else can take it
who would build the equipment that is used to build the "means of production"
why risk life and limb erecting enormous columns of metal when you are the sole provider for your family, and losing your right arm would probably lead them down the path of some very hard times
"for fun"?
"because it's what they want to do"?
just so that someone else can come along afterwards and use their means of production?
in my opinion, this is by far one of the most scatterbrained and nonsensical takes on how things should work ever; it doesn't even begin to make logical sense. what if i could just use your fucking computer? what if i could just come into your house, and dump my ass in your toilet? i know it's a vile example—but, how in god's name would you feel if some trapezoid-headed troglodyte with 79 iq were, by the rules of society, just allowed to use your toilet—your "means of producing the desired effect of evacuating waste from our premises", and walk the fuck off? you absolutely do NOT realize that you're advocating for this—but, so blindly, you are.

>haven't read das kapital
i haven't, i never will, and i despise anyone who tells me to
"you have to read x book to understand it" is a terrible logical fallacy
if marx' goddamned arguments are so convoluted that they don't make sense when broken down into their essential ideas, then plain and simple, you have the doctrine of a cult

>calls my post bullshit
stupid motherfucking goddamned peameal-brained kid

[Anonymous No.17477680]

>>17477376
>he wouldn't have supported a massive authoritarian state to run everyone's lives.
What the fuck am i reading?
>Classical marxism asks for a massive state, see the communist manifesto.
Yes, Great. You have read the Manifesto. You know about Marx ideas. By the way, i know about Nietsche, Kant, Schopenhauer, the Greeks. You know why? We studied them in high school. You fucking idiot.
>human nature is everything, the mode of production doesn't have much influence.
...

>I've been debating marxists online since when you were a kid.
Yet you still haven't read Das Kapital vol. 1, and Critique of the Gotha programm. Otherwise you wouldn't make a fool of yourself. Listen; I never talk about soccer. You know what? Because i don't know shit about soccer.

[Anonymous No.17477690]

>>17477580
>material conditions.
yet they ignore biology and instincts
>So Marx did recognize the suffering the transition to Communism would cause
No lol, he could have came up with anything but he advocated for totalitarianism.
There's no excuse, he was a sociopath.
>historically inevitable
Good thing he was wrong.
>Note that you can disagree with Marx, but then you have to give up materialism
LMAO Are all marxists this retarded.
I am a materialist. It's marxists who deny materialism.
They deny the material in the human brain and it's complexity. They think you can magically socially engineer people to become communists. It's delusional and nonsensical.

>If you mean an abolishment of the bougie state and the centralization of production in a dictatorship of the proletariate, sure.
These are just marxoid terms nobody cares about, they have nothing to do with reality.
But yes, marx advocated for a massive OPPRESSIVE totalitarian state that would enslave workers and force them to become communists.
Just because you claim the state a "prole" state doesn't magically make it so.
>If this is the level of argument you've been bringing
You're just coping. You couldn't refute my other arguments about violence in a theoretical anarcho-communist society.
How the fuck are members of the commune "taking action" not the police?

[Anonymous No.17477704]

>>17477629
>Nick Land
What's it like to have schizophrenia?

[Anonymous No.17477715]

>>17477649
>how would the "means of production" get made; you would need raw materials to make the "means of production",
Marxists have no concept of investment or risk.

[Anonymous No.17477730]

>>17476985
>you are fucking people!
communists are not people
communists are soulless slaves of big banks

[Anonymous No.17477731]

>>17477632
>if marxism is about the "free association of workers", then what if you don't want to be associated with someone else
>maybe someone who has a tendency to break equipment, or constantly fuck up their job
>what if you want to "freely associate" with JUST one other individual, and "freely associate" with equipment that nobody else may "freely associate" with
You mix up Karl Marx and Stalin. Read more. Post less.

[Anonymous No.17477732]

>>17477580
Anon, what do you recommend me reading, so I become as knowledgeable at debating commies as you?

[Anonymous No.17477737]

>>17477680
>What the fuck am i reading?
Reality, because that's what marx supported.
The communist manifesto.
>You have read the Manifesto. You know about Marx ideas.
I also know about das kapital and his other gay books
None of this refutes the reality that he supported an authoritarian state.

>Yet you still haven't read Das Kapital vol. 1
Neither have 99% of all marxists lol

[Anonymous No.17477767]

>>17477704
Fun, join me, and together we can recede into the machine like a loathsome dream.

[Anonymous No.17477787]

>>17477732
Not him, but Mises, Rothbard, Bohm Bawerk

[Anonymous No.17477797]

>>17473794
Everyone ITT is a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.

[Anonymous No.17477838]

>>17477690
>yet they ignore biology and instincts
No, i think you do.
>They deny the material in the human brain and it's complexity. They think you can magically socially engineer people to become communists. It's delusional and nonsensical.
Again, read Marx.
>How the fuck are members of the commune "taking action" not the police?
What is Huterrian Brethen. What is Israeli Kibbutz.
>OPPRESSIVE totalitarian state that would enslave workers
Dictatoship of the working class, that would enslave the working class. LOL.

[Anonymous No.17477853]

>>17476002
>irrelevant given that Marx predicted industrial profit rates would sink due to an increase in organic composition of capital with surplus value rate stable/decreasing. this inevitably forces capital to seek riskier investment opportunities.
lol that's all nice but you people completely ignore central banking and the massive federal reserve created bubble we now live under

>30% unemployment rates during the Great Depression
The great depression was the most interventionist/socialist period in american history. That's why the depression happened.

[Anonymous No.17477865]

>>17477737
For fuck sake, the State is supposed to live during an EXTREMELY brief period, during the dictatorship of the proletariat. Do you understand the meaning of extremely brief period? Do i have to explain it to you? It means, it's supposed to last a few months.

[Anonymous No.17477868]

>>17477853
>irrelevant given that Marx predicted industrial profit rates would sink due to an increase in organic composition of capital with surplus value rate stable/decreasing. this inevitably forces capital to seek riskier investment opportunities.

Profit rates are known to be cyclical. Marx's prediction is incorrect, because demand is fractal.

[Anonymous No.17477870]

>>17476345
>how is it the that these crises keep reoccuring?
Central banking and government interventionism.

>capitalism contains some inherent internal contradictions?
Like what?
and how do these explain the boom and bust cycle exactly?
This should be good.

>you haven't read Mart.
LOL SHART

[Anonymous No.17477901]

>>17477865
>For fuck sake, the State is supposed to live during an EXTREMELY brief period, during the dictatorship of the proletariat. Do you understand the meaning of extremely brief period?
Show me exactly where marx said this.

Every marxist I talk to implies it could last centuries until society is ready for "true communism"

>>17477868
>Profit rates are known to be cyclical. Marx's prediction is incorrect, because demand is fractal.
Interesting, can you explain this more in depth or give me a link?

[Anonymous No.17477902]

>>17477838
>Dictatoship of the working class, that would enslave the working class.
Yeah, wouldn't it be funny if something crazy like that happened, wow
you could write a book about that!

[Anonymous No.17477904]

>>17477853
>lol that's all nice but you people completely ignore central banking and the massive federal reserve created bubble we now live under.
If you remember correctly, Marx talked exactly about this in Das Kapital, vol. 3, don't your remember? Oh wait, you can't remember...

[Anonymous No.17477917]

>>17476082
check yourself for brain damage, you buffoon
the kind of hubris you're speaking of is the reason why socialism always ends with democide

[Anonymous No.17477922]

>>17477868
>Profit rates are known to be cyclical. Marx's prediction is incorrect, because demand is fractal.
What is the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. Why does it fall consistently since the begining of the industrial era.

[Anonymous No.17477949]

>>17477082
didn't expect anyone else to have knowledge of Böhm-Bawerk
based af

[Anonymous No.17477950]

>>17477690
After this spergout I feel bad for calling Marxists stupid. Definitely would prefer to spend a day with a Marxist than with this level of splooge. This isn't even a poor misunderstanding of Marx. It's a complete inability to reason.

You don't need to read Marx. You need to read Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.17477965]

>>17477901
>Show me exactly where marx said this
Chapter about the State in the Critique of the Gotha program. Did you even know he wrote this?
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_du_programme_de_Gotha#L'%C3%89tat

[Anonymous No.17477970]

>>17477922

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0486613412475186

[Anonymous No.17477978]

>>17477838
>No, i think you do.
Really?
I'm not the one that thinks once commodity production is abolished and the state engineers people to be communists it will just wither away.
Human brains don't work like that and marxists have yet to prove they do.

>Again, read Marx.
You people always spew this same line without actually having any real arguments.

>HURRR IM RIGHT
well explain why you're right then retard
>NNUUUUUUUUU, READ THIS GUY THAT EXPLAINS WHY I'M RIGHT

>What is Huterrian Brethen. What is Israeli Kibbutz.
Not an argument, explained how they worked and how exactly they were not police.

>Dictatoship of the working class, that would enslave the working class.
LMAO
Do you actually not see the problem here?
Everything is class to you retards. As if nothing else can enslave people except for classes.
If the working class set up a dictatorship which royally fucked over workers and took their freedom, how is this a good thing at all?

[Anonymous No.17477977]

>>17477902
>Bolsheviks who haven't work a day in their life
>Working class

[Anonymous No.17477989]

>>17477904
>Marx talked exactly about this in Das Kapital, vol. 3
Where exactly, you should be able to show me a passage?
Oh wait, you literally have no idea and marxists NEVER talk about central banking.
You people are totally clueless as to what's going on in the global economy, it's quite pathetic.

[Anonymous No.17478021]

>>17477950
Refute me then. I'll wait.

>>17477965
Literally none of this says it would only last "a few months".
I already knew marxists believe the dictatorship of the proletariat is temporary(even if it's 1000 years)

[Anonymous No.17478037]

>>17473794
yuck

[Anonymous No.17478050]

communism at it's core is based on fear, and it's very similar to the abrahamic religions (no surprise, communist ideology was founded by jews.) like the abrahamic religions, who need there to exist a magical godlike authority to make them feel safe, communists need there to exist a magical governmental authority to make them feel safe. also, two of biggest killers of human life throughout the history of civilization has been the abrahamic religions and communism

[Anonymous No.17478055]

Didnt read any of this thread, but Im a third positionist. They work on both side, so you faggots must reject the dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.17478088]

>>17477732
First make sure you understand Marx. Like deeply understand on a visceral level. As in when you walk around, you can see the solidified labor embedded in everything and the exploitation that's occurring.

To do so you need to understand the basics of Hegelian thought. Marx is also synthesizing Hume. He's essentially applying Hegelian dialectic to empiricism then mixing in some radical politics.

"On the German Ideology" is one of Marx's best essays that clearly points to his precursors.

After you have that basis, read Das Kapital. Unfortunately, its written backwards so you actually need to start with Vol 3.

Second, post marxist thought. Foucault's madness and civilization, Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation, and Deleuze's Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Foucault is very straightforward. Baudrillard is about vertigo (think memes referencing memes). Deleuze's philosophy is the basis for modern tech companies like Facebook and Google and is definitely the most challenging as he makes a lot of very obscure references. Don't rush, especially with Deleuze, and explore rabbit holes.

[Anonymous No.17478119]

>>17477978
>Not an argument, explained how they worked and how exactly they were not police.
Police appears when the primitive gens is fragmented due to division of labor and housing in administrative districts and not housing in communities formed of extended families. The first policement in ancient Athens were slaves. It's common knowledge.
>Human brains don't work like that and marxists have yet to prove they do.
Human brains is literally communist before the neolitic revolution. Reality reversal. Private property of the means of production is artificial. Before the neolitic reovlution, no such thing as private property of the means of production. In the German tribes, communist lasted until arount the 5-6 century CE. But you didn't have a clue about this, did you?
>If the working class set up a dictatorship
If a classless society set up a dictatorship.... You know what, i think your brain is just upside down. Capitalism invert everything, and it did invert your thought process. Reading you unironically gives me a headache. Persist in your stupidity, or evolve. Your choice. I'm out.

[Anonymous No.17478147]

>>17477989
Das Kapital, Vol. 1, Chapter 31. One full page criticizing private central banking.

[Anonymous No.17478165]

>>17478021
For me the term extremely brief means a few months, a few years at most. Certainly not decades.
It's you who won't admit you are wrong.

[Anonymous No.17478174]

>>17478088
Absolutely based.

[Anonymous No.17478230]

>>17478088
>As in when you walk around, you can see the solidified labor embedded in everything and the exploitation that's occurring.
t. retard

[Anonymous No.17478258]

>>17478088
Wouldn't this shit turn you into a commie?

>>17478147
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf
>ctrl-f "central b-"
>zero results

I also skimmed down 5 pages from chapter 31 and saw no mention of anything related to it at all.

>>17478165
>For me
lmao that's YOU you fucking brainlet, holy shit, you aren't marx or 99% of marxists
I'm so glad you authoritarian manchildren will never take over anything.
People like to trade with each other and mutually benefit, you cannot stop this.

[Anonymous No.17478267]

Communism is an ideology based on resentment and a frustrated will to power. Communists exploit the suffering of the masses to install themselves as the new despot. This always occurs because unstable systems always collapse into stable systems, and the most natural and stable system is some form of despotism or oligarchy like what we see in the western world. So why give a shit who your rulers are? There always will be one, and it never will be you. Learn the rules and how to win by applying them. Everything else is as delusional as Q tards thinking trump is fighting an epic battle against the deep state and all they have to do is sit back and trust the plan. Instead of trusting the plan you trust the ideology and you are just as deluded.

[Anonymous No.17478296]

>>17478230
If you want to understand Marxism, you need to be able to think like a Marxist. Doesn't mean you should really believe it, but you need to be able to see it as if you believed it.

As an aside, Marx is the problem with Popper. Sure empirical techniques can be applied to creating tools. But if you can't see that the social organizations around who is allowed to use tools, and who can benefit from them, is just as important - then you might be brainwashed by STEM.

[Anonymous No.17478326]

>>17478258
If you can't leave open the possibility of turning commie, then you can never really understand it.

It won't turn you commie though. Unless you're a social reject with no self esteem who won't take personal responsibility. In that case, you probably should be a commie, KEK.

[Anonymous No.17478328]

>>17478088
thanks fren

[Anonymous No.17478357]

>>17478296
What do you think about Bohm Bawerk's refutation of Marx?

What do you think of Wicksteed's criticism of Marx?
https://mises.org/wire/wicksteed-surplus-value

[Anonymous No.17478406]

>>17478296
>As an aside, Marx is the problem with Popper.
Have you read Vol. 2 of The Open Society and Its Enemies?

[Anonymous No.17478507]

>>17477731
>implying ANY AT ALL DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN COLLECTIVIST PHILOSOPHERS MATTERS WHEN THEY ARE ADVOCATING FOR COLLECTIVISM
>IMPLYING THAT ALL BRANDS OF COLLECTIVISM CANNOT BE BOILED DOWN TO THE ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLE OF FORGOING NATURAL RIGHTS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE MERE PROMISE OF SECURITY FROM A CENTRAL AUTHORITY, WITH NO OPTING OUT
it's like telling someone that one sect of magical charlatan healing where someone waves their hands over you to cure you is truly unique and special from another sect of magical charlatan healing where someone does the exact same thing for the exact same stated purpose

>>17477715
i was going to write an actual response here, but i think i'm gonna call it a night
i will say, trying to reason with people who seem not to be able to fundamentally understand how forgoing the recognition of your natural rights in exchange ***for the mere promise*** of goods and services from a central authority is a move so removed from logic if the goal is the maintaining of your well being gets very incredibly tiresome

[Anonymous No.17478535]

>>17478507
I hate communists with a passion, but natural rights don't real.

[Anonymous No.17478560]

>>17478406
What is exactly Popper's refutation of Marx?

fags on /lit/ dont think popper btfo marx at all

[Anonymous No.17478604]

>>17473875
Honestly North Korea is based; They pulled off a First Citizen > Absolute Monarchy situation
They will be spared their worst of Coronavirus due to Kim's actions.

[Anonymous No.17478833]

>>17475058
>capitalists pigs
>productive

[Anonymous No.17479738]

>>17473794
>an economic system whose success
it took you 3 words before outing youself as a brainlet. Crashes are not a failure of the system, they are part of it. Capitalism isn't "malfunctionning" because market crash, it's mitteraly the opposite, same as forest fires and pandemics aren't nature malfunctionning, they're the rest button.
It's efficient because it culls the deadweight, making it a matter of ethics is you mixing up everything. Our problem is not an economic system that produces crises, it's a legal problem, of economical and political collusion that prevents a part of the market from bearing the consequences of a downturn

[Anonymous No.17479763]

>>17474908
>>17477082
BASED AND AUSTRIANPILLED

MARX BTFO

[Anonymous No.17479798]

>>17474352
Because of its POPULATION retard. GDP per capita in the USSR was dogshit.

[Anonymous No.17479815]

idk about you guys but id be happy with a shitty computer, a gauranteed job id half ass for 30 hours a week, an internet connection, some state videogames and some shitty state food.

[Anonymous No.17479913]

>>17473794
>how can an economic system whose success is predicated on thousands of investors' expectation aligning just right with consumers' demand and whose heart is basically a giant casino with people's lives and jobs being at stake instead of plastic coins, may be regarded as """efficient""" or """rational""" by any sane human being? j
Swarm intelligence

Marxists are so fucking stupid. Cockshott is a hack. Go back to /leftypol/

[Anonymous No.17480151]

>>17478357
Just basing off what you posted, seems like BohmBawerk is making the mistake of evaluating LTV within a capitalist framework. I strongly disagree with LTV but it is much more self consistent than some people think. EG from the text you posted:
>Simple labour enters into complex labour in many ways, for example as labour expended in training complex labour-power, and so in the end complex labour can be conceived as the sum of simple labour.
That's exactly the sort of point that people arguing against LTV fail to understand.
The best argument against LTV is the same argument used against Austrian economics. Ordinal utility is measurable while both Cardinal Utiltiy and LTV require assuming some invisible quality (Utils/Labour) to exist within an object. But that's a pretty weak refutation. LTV is much stronger than most give credit to.

>>17478406
Honestly I haven't spent much time reading Popper as he was more of a popularizer than an original thinker. Not saying he isn't good as such, just that its better to go to the source for empiricism if you have the time.

[Anonymous No.17480302]

>>17473794
Cockshott is an idiot, luckily he has no influence

[Anonymous No.17480308]

>>17479815
this is another fault of communism, it promotes and breeds lethargy. the advancement of the human race will slow to a crawl, and likely even tumble backwards, under communism, losing all the gains we've made under the past couple hundred years of laissez-faire economics

[Anonymous No.17480406]

This thread was nice. I learned a lot. Am now even more against communism. Thanks for posting retarded arguments commies.

[Anonymous No.17480407]

>>17473801
>Marx was wrong

[Anonymous No.17480451]

>>17477183
Wrong, brainlet.

Marx wasn't anti-state wholly. He was against the bourgeois state (a state that promoted and defended capitalist class interests and exploitation) and for an administrative state.

[Anonymous No.17480514]

>>17480407
Marx is wrong though

[Anonymous No.17481410]

>>17474908

>how to win an argument 101
>you have two main defensive stances
>you didn't study, therefore don't understand
>you studied, but didn't understand it the way i wanted. therefore you don't understand

nice argumentative Marxism you got there. shame that it's not an argument

[Anonymous No.17481480]

Communism is exactly the same as neoliberal imperialism. It is capitalism running at maximum efficiency.

[Anonymous No.17481505]

>>17481480
Don’t fall into the trap of being pro capitalism just because communism is fucking gay.

[Anonymous No.17481508]

>>17481480
>capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production
>communism is the abolition of private property
>communism is capitalism

[Anonymous No.17481526]

>>17481505
Why would anyone create capital goods when anyone can just take them?

[Anonymous No.17481576]

>>17481508
Marx did not claim communism was the abolition of private property he simply and correctly put together that private property would vanish under a mega efficient capitalist state, we’re not yet there but think about how UBER works and that’s kind of what I’m talking about. Everything will become the “Private property” of some central being and we’ll be debt maxxed rent piggies

[Anonymous No.17481597]

>>17481576
He was trying to say capitalism is the exact process that would convert capitalism into communism. These two forms of governments are not antithetical and the idea that your either a socialist or a communist is a psyop

[Anonymous No.17481603]

>>17481597
I meant socialist or capitalist not communist

[Anonymous No.17481605]

>>17481576
>Everything will become the “Private property” of some central being and we’ll be debt maxxed rent piggies
So basically every socialist state?

[Anonymous No.17481631]

>>17481605
Yes I know I’m not that clear cus phone posting but do you not get what I’m saying

[Anonymous No.17481654]

>>17481605
The people who benefit most from capitalism are the same people behind all of the commie garbage we see today it would only serve them, if it was truly anti capitalist it wouldn’t be so popular. It’s just a more efficient means of vampirism and capitalism will only get more and more efficient till it becomes communism and the people at the top have everything

[Anonymous No.17481689]

>>17481654
The paradigm of capitalism vs communism is a mind prison constructed by the media I hope we don’t have to go through communism but it seems like the most likely outcome for a post democracy America

[Anonymous No.17481709]

>>17473794
this will get lost and I won't read this thread but communism just speeds up the problems of capitalism

[Anonymous No.17481714]

>>17481709
Exactly, communism is ultra capitalism

[Anonymous No.17481750]

The perfection of cybernetics and 100% efficient capitalism (communism) will be the end of humanity

[Anonymous No.17481795]

>>17481750
Can't wait for the machines to wipe us out.