/lit/ - Literature

>>17894737
More people smoke crack per year than go bankrupt in America. In fact SIGNIFICANTLY more people in America have sub 90 IQs, almost 25% of the population, than the amount that go bankrupt this year. America literally has more legally retarded people than people who file bankruptcy. 750,000 is not a lot relative to the total population, fucking liberal idiots don't understand math or something, maybe that's the key to being a dumb fuck socialist, certainly was the case for Marx, pic very fucking related.
Leave the counting to people who count.

>>17353374
There are plenty more modern, easily accessible and understandable ways to learn about socialism, the reason people read theory is to get a richer, more complex understanding of the subject and its justifications. I'm pretty sure most marxists could point you out to some youtube videos that explains marxism and socialism in a format that the working class can understand. Of course capital wouldn't make sense to the average modern worker in a vacuum, as it was intended for 19th century economists, or perhaps the more well off or curious people who had read some of marx' other works and wanted a more in depth understanding of why he thought capitalism was unjust. No it's not necessary to read for hours upon hours to get a basic understanding of marxism or socialism, but for those people who want to understand those ideas from their base presumptions and more complex extrapolations (whether it be to refute them or justify your position), then sure, you would probably need to do all that reading.

As to recommending reading capital to people who are arguing with you about socialism or who have a cursory understanding and interest in it, it's a lot of information, but also covers a lot of ground in its evidence and theory of value and exploitation, so you're likely to find SOME part of it that addresses what you want to know. Modern printings can have plenty of footnotes that supplement the historical knowledge you would need reading it. I don't think it's so unreasonable to try to direct people's questions to the capital series if you're not adept at explaining it properly.

>If only Karl had made Capital, instead of just writing about it
> t. Marx's mum