/lit/ - Literature

>Marxist
>Foucaultian
>Lacanian
>Chompkin
>Nabokovian
>Joycean
>Homeric
>Dostoevskian
>Aquanian
>Platonic
>Wallacian

Read more books this year than any other in my entire life

>>6591668
>Doesn't read the OP "Pls no anti-marxist shitposting"
>posts on a Lithuanian Shadow Puppet Theatre Guild and is shocked to see a Lituanian Shadow Puppet

If you have a real critique of Marxism please share it.

Not even excepting our philosopher, Christian Wolff, in no time and in no country has the most homespun commonplace ever strutted about in so self-satisfied a way. The principle of utility was no discovery of Bentham. He simply reproduced in his dull way what Helvétius and other Frenchmen had said with esprit in the 18th century. To know what is useful for a dog, one must study dog-nature. This nature itself is not to be deduced from the principle of utility. Applying this to man, he who would criticize all human acts, movements, relations, etc., by the principle of utility, must first deal with human nature in general, and then with human nature as modified in each historical epoch. Bentham makes short work of it. With the driest naivete he takes the modern shopkeeper, especially the English shopkeeper, as the normal man. Whatever is useful to this queer normal man, and to his world, is absolutely useful. This yard-measure, then, he applies to past, present, and future. The Christian religion, e.g., is "useful," "because it forbids in the name of religion the same faults that the penal code condemns in the name of the law." Artistic criticism is "harmful," because it disturbs worthy people in their enjoyment of Martin Tupper, etc. With such rubbish has the brave fellow, with his motto, "null a dies sine linea", piled up mountains of books.

-Karl

Karl Marx <3

Depends how far down the Marxist road you are.

Eventually society wouldn't need religion because the people no longer need a release for their alienation and oppression.