/lit/ - Literature

>>11862782
He was a member of long nose tribe

>>11862782
The bourgeoisie primarily.

>>11862782
*rubs hands*

One of his children died because he couldn't afford medical treatment. This was after he started writing however.

He predicted the awful trend of Bowsette

He was too based and too redpilled for his time

He was a failure at even being a socialist or communist, proudhon rejected his work, and a descriptivist philosophy is just pretension to a lack of actual political philosophy.

>>11862782
He just wrote what people wanted to hear and made up a science fiction story about the future of mankind.

All he did was be himself.

>>11863252
>End the indefinition of the left by creating the most accurate analysis of Western history and basing a system on it
>Spend rest of your analysing in extreme depth all the economic relations and how they impact every aspect of human condition in an obscure book no one gas ever read

>>11863242
>proudhon rejected his work
this is a good thing

>>11863242
Muh The left is bad cuz its an ideology that criticizes itself instead of enforcing the current hegemonic power structure or criticize it with conspiracy theories that not even I believe ahahah please gimme stepsis porn long live anglerica

>>11863235
Kill yourself. This doesn't belong on /lit/.

>>11863279
Are you gonna cry?

>>11863295
He's not wrong, you know.

>>11863279
>current hegemonic power
So you're a student of tumblr I see.

>>11863314
You're an anglo that thinks liberals are leftists, I see

>>11862782
For your Viewing Pleasure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECxxRofU-I

Materialism

>>11862782
the abominable treatment of his fellow man, the proletariat

>>11863416
>critiquing a man's treatise based on said man's character
How to spot a conservacuck: 101

>>11862782
too much free time
and boils, so many boils

>>11862782
thought other people could live up to the intellectual requirements of his ideas. Everything Marx was correct about is something subsequent communists got wrong.

if anyone actually bothered to do a muhh post modern muhhh deconstruction of his ultimate victory of communism narrative then you could figure out what his deal was

muhhh worker drone take over

>>11863235
redpilled

>>11863279
>>11863273
Imagine admitting that your entire ideology is based on a false premise in one sentence and then still saying u agree with it lmao

>>11863550
>taking one leftist's criticism of another as gospel without adopting the former's stances and ideology

>>11863567
It's funny because this is exactly what proudhon criticized in marx and not the other way around lol

>>11863567
https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/letters/46_05_17.htm

maybe marx should've taken that advice huh?

>>11863579
CAn you even read greentext? I am saying unless you are mutualist (doesn't seem like you are) you can't really use Proudhon words/rejection against Marx

>>11863592
Oh so you’re telling me there’s an equality in Marx and Proudhon’s words even though you’ve also admitted that Marx is based on Proudhon? Jesus lol you’re pathetic for not hating mutualists even more than right wingers if u really sincerely think that’s the case, but I’ll just be kind and pretend you’re illiterate instead.

>>11863645
>even though you’ve also admitted that Marx is based on Proudhon?
Not only did I not said that, I don't think anyone else ITT said that

>>11863653
Well guess what, Marx’s original letter to Proudhon was Marx admitting not only that fact but the response from Proudhon was him disinheriting him in a much too polite way. So yes, the assumption I’ve made about you being illiterate is right.

>>11863653
>>11863670
And don’t worry,even though leftists like to pretend, most of them are illiterate of even their own theory

>>11863670
>>11863677
But the letter you are referring was Marx offering Proudhon correspondence to keep the socialists and communists in Germany to keep in touch with others aboard. And Proudhon agreeing to the proposal but disagreeing with him on certain issues. Nowhere does Marx say that he owes Proudhon his entire philosophy though.

Double digit IQ.

Intellectual isolation and philosophy borne out of a substantially imperfect man.

>>11863747
Literally if you read the letter marx sent to proudhon you'd already know that marx was asking for proudhon to disown certain socialists and proudhon responded to marx saying he wouldn't and rather that he disowned marx on his portrayal of socialism as a system and not something that existed as a living entity like the french revolution

>>11863747
It wasn't about correspondence, if you saw both the opening of proudhon's letter where he says basically "I don't really have any good reason to correspond to you" I say this and am paraphrasing quite obviously for the purpose of exaggeration, and know the very basics of 19th century politeness in letters that, they always sign " You're humble and dear servant" Whether or not they actually hate the guts of the person they are writing to, you could actually call yourself well read. But you clearly are not and are not able to grasp any clear train of thought or nuance.

>>11863935
>>11863951
I am not even denying or questioning that Proudhon snubbed him but I just don't see how Marx claimed that he was based on Proudhon.

And seeing how you shifted the topic to be about Marx being based on Proudhon to Proudhon disowning him. At best there are disargeements but none of what you said earlier

>>11863972

>P.S. I must now denounce to you Mr Grün of Paris. The man is nothing more than a literary swindler, a species of charlatan, who seeks to traffic in modern ideas. He tries to conceal his ignorance with pompous and arrogant phrases but all he does is make himself ridiculous with his gibberish. Moreover this man is dangerous. He abuses the connection he has built up, thanks to his impertinence, with authors of renown in order to create a pedestal for himself and compromise them in the eyes of the German public. In his book on French socialists [Grün, Die soziale Bewegung in Frankreich und Belgien], has the audacity to describe himself as tutor (Privatdozent, a German academic title) to Proudhon, claims to have revealed to him the important axioms of German science and makes fun of his writings. Beware of this parasite. Later on I may perhaps have something more to say about this individual.

literally making the intention of his letter to talk about the legacy and ideas/words of proudhon really makes one think

>>11864035
>Later on I may perhaps have something more to say about this individual.
Dumbass, he wants to shit on this " Mr Grün" in the future

>>11863935
>he disowned marx on his portrayal of socialism as a system and not something that existed as a living entity
Literally the opposite of what Marx said, even before 1846
>Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
-The German Ideology, 1845

If you actually read Proudhon's letter, his first paragraph is a platitude which M&E agreed with for their whole careers anyway, and the second paragraph is blatant sophistry. "turn property against property by means of political economy"? What the fuck is he talking about? This is why people call Proudhon an utopian socialist. Not to mention, like most utopians, he was an anti-semite who thought problems would be solved by destroying "usurers" ie jews

Proudhon is nothing more than an anecdote in leftism's history. Marx is the bedrock, so strong is his method and approach that even bourgie academics have adopted it (or parts of it) for their preoccupations.

He realized that the same commodity was sold for a higher price then the collected wages of it's creators, which confused him. This confusion sent him into a lifelong rage.

Internet flattens and decontextualizes history for you and enables you to pick out your ideological favorites before you actually have a working knowledge of the context of their ideas & actions and their historical significance.

Like it's so absurd that some kid in America with no connection to working-class politics at all, or any skin-in-the-game engagement with philosophy and theory somehow "picks" between the Marx and Proudhon.

This is the entire basis of why Stirner is popular. You just want to impress your leftist friends.

Seriously there's a reason Marx is so prevalent and it's definitely not that he's simple. You have not transcended him, go back and read more. And make sure you actually study history.

>>11865400
There are people who actually believe this. It's extrenely funny because all Marx did was pretty much scream at other leftists that this is normal and what constitutes capitalism.

>>11865430
he's pretty darn angry at capitalism in das Kapital

>>11863235
>can't stop thinking about videogames and the internet for one second
get a grip man

I don't know but I'll tell you what my problem is: brainlets discussing Marx and Marxism without knowing jack shit about it.

>>11862782
1. classical political economy
2. French socialism
3. German idealism

/thread

>>11862782
He got BTFO'd by Stirner

>>11865965
lol no he didn't. There's a reason no-one cared about Stirner for 150 years and still don't.

>>11865384
>he was an anti-semite who thought problems would be solved by destroying "usurers" ie jews

how unusual for his time

>>11865422
>some kid in America with no connection to working-class politics at all, or any skin-in-the-game engagement with philosophy and theory
so basically marx but american

>>11863314
>he thinks hegemonic is a tumblr word
so you're a student of pol I see.

>>11862790
good trip

>>11862782
Modern society
The Industrial Revolution
The implications of the bourgeoisie taking power
Capitalism

>>11862782
He Never had a real job.

>>11866853

Stirner BTFO marx back in the day

Marx's critique of capitalism is pretty good. Any real conservative/reactionary pretty much has to agree with him on that; obviously where one differs is his solutions. By reading Marx one also realizes how closely his system intertwined with capitalism, they are really just the flip sides of each other.

>>11865384
Epic, that's funny because this is an actual quote from marx on whether or not proudhon's a 'utopian socialist': Marx said, "Not only does Proudhon write in the interest of the proletarians, he is himself a proletarian, an ouvrier. His work is a scientific manifesto of the French proletariat."

>>11863271
You forgot:

>Helps civilizations go to shit,indirectly causes the deaths of millions of people all over the world by coming up with feelgood ideas that don't have any basis on how the real world works.

>>11865384
>le let me appropriate a more obscure term than socialism so I can say I have ownership of it

communism is an epic meme

>>11866898
you mean marx btfo stirner for being the young hegelian brainlet he was

>>11867252
communism and socialism were used as synonymous in marx's time. the point is that m&e were not "trying to portray a system" but quite literally doing the same critical apprehension of current society that anon says proudhon reproached marx for not doing (when really proudhon was just doing a "we agree on this amirite?? :)" dance in that paragraph)

>>11866898
So hard that Karl "I let my children starve to death" Marx wrote an entire book out of pure butthurt trying to refute Stirner's ideas and still failed miserably.Pathetic.

>>11867035
idk about reactionaries (that can mean a lot of things,) but any real conservative I think has to recognise the potential destructive power of capitalism. socialists should have more respect for thinkers like Burke and Hume (and contemporary communitarians,) they have a lot of important insights which aren't *necessarily* incompatible with left wing traditions.
>>11867280
he was a disagreeable bitter personality and also an obsessive writer, that's pretty well known.

>>11863425
based and redpilled

>>11867276
lol you're retarded if you think that proudhon didn't snub marx even though you previously admitted it

He was one of millions of Jews who could not occupy one of their traditional ethnic niches such as banking due to recent population growth. Most towns can only support so many usurers, swindlers and merchant middlemen. Faced with getting honest work or becoming a rabbi and living off of community handouts in exchange for actual mental labour: he devised a new strategy entirely. And the rest is as they say history.

>>11867530
that paragraph about dogma and luther was not "snubbing marx", he was just making stuff clear; stuff that's almost word for word the same kind of thing marx already thought before that letter. so either proudhon didn't know what marx thought, or that paragraph isn't "a snub".

>>11867244
Just change millions to billions and you have an accurate description of capitalism

>>11868134
Name one authoritarian dictator who killed in the name of capitalism.

>>11868155
Pinochet, but that's beside the point. mass death only counts if you can blame it on a dictator? you can't possibly believe that.

>>11868196
I mean, there are a number of guys who killed shit tons of people in order to achieve a communist state. Sure, people die under capitalism. People will die under any economic or political system because none of them are perfect, but if your only argument is Pinochet vs Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and others then you sound like your grasping at straws.

>>11867731
Retarded, but funny.

>>11862782
comunism

>>11868225
that's not my argument, it's yours: you asked me to name one capitalist dictator and I did. my argument is that really-existing Capitalism obviously does not distribute resources effectively, it generates enormous economic and political inequality, and it is hugely destructive of both life and the environment. you can explain this away in a lot of ways (none of which ultimately work imo,) but if your metric is lives lost then Capitalism is much more culpable than 20th ct Communism.

>>11862782
Overreacting to Stirner and being taught by Hegel

>>11862790
>Stop Watching !porn
What about solo still images?

>>11868255
>it generates enormous economic and political inequality
Yes and I think that's one valid critique of capitalism. But because it has a couple flaws does not mean we need to do away with the system all together. What makes you think communism is the answer? Can you honestly look at the 20th century and say that capitalism cost more lives than communism did? Because I'd say you're pretty fucked in the head if you honestly think that.

>>11862782
Small penis. Unironically. It's mentioned somewhere, I can't remember where.

>>11868134
Capitalism is just the natural order of the world manifested in human affairs.The strong ,ambitious,intelligent,hard-working and amoral succeed in various hierarchies, the others eat what they can get, as it should be. No amount of REEEing will make you have your little fantasy utopia in this reality, commie scum.

>>11868308
https://youtu.be/QnIsdVaCnUE
it's just a math question, and you're wrong.

I haven't argued for communism. if you want my personal opinion, I do think a socialist-anarchist society would be much better than what we have now and probably the best we could hope for overall. I could very well be wrong: maybe social democracy is the real end game, maybe the mutualists are on to something, idk the world is a complicated place and I don't have all the data. what I do know is that "capitalism GOOD communism BAD BAD BAD" is obviously not a serious answer to any question, and by your own standards it shouldn't satisfy you.

>>11868276
Still makes your brain produce dopamine making you a slave to your desires,Nofap and Noporn are the only way to not be a low test betacuck(well, there's been a drastic decline of test production in men over the last decades due to various factors in our environment,TRT is the only way technically).

>>11868355
About four minutes into this vid and the guy is just talking about power and greed. It's a problem of human nature. There's always going to be power hungry fucks out there who are going to do whatever they can to be on top of the system. Any other system would be just as liable to it.

Plus places like africa and china have always been shit so to act like they're only shit now because of capitalism is really disingenuous.

>>11868431
>human nature
I don't agree with that characterization, but let's grant it: your solution is to advocate a system where those people with anti-social tendencies are rewarded with money and power?

>Plus places like africa and china have always been shit
that's just silly, especially w/r/t China.

>to act like they're only shit now because of capitalism is really disingenuous
you strike me as an honest actor, so idk why you keep attributing these ideas to me that I've never suggested.

Jewish and German. a combination that should be illegal.

spooks, he was the nerd of the class that took school too seriously.

>>11868472
>idk why you keep attributing these ideas to me that I've never suggested.
I was talking about the guy on the vid not you.

>your solution is to advocate a system where those people with anti-social tendencies are rewarded with money and power?
My argument is that those with anti-social tendencies are going to come out on top in any system because those are the kinds of people who are willing to do anything to come out on top. Like I said there are some valid critiques of capitalism but in my mind it's done a far better job of bringing more people into a comfortable standard of living than anything else we've tried thus far.

>>11868510
my b, I haven't watched that video in a while.

I'll drop the human nature thing, just bc it's a messy discussion and it would drag us into real philosophical finery.

>[capitalism has] done a far better job of bringing more people into a comfortable standard of living than anything else we've tried thus far.
Marx and Engels would emphatically agree, as would most sensible people. so did feudalism and slave societies, but we don't regard them as justified for that reason. just bc capitalism has done good things and advanced our material well being doesn't mean it's necessarily the end of the line or that it's beyond reproach.

>>11868477
That’s an insanely high amount of people, just saying.

>>11868560
What?

>>11868613
you heard the man

>>11868733
Is he suggesting that german jews are all stoned all the time or that an insanely high amount of people are both german and jewish. I don't think the latter is possible but I can see the former.

>>11868799
both

>>11862782
hemorrhoids

>>11865972
You can't let the goy know about Stirner

>>11867273
Literally none of his criticisms btfo'd Stirner's ideas. His entire point was basically it's wrong because it opposes Marxism.

>>11868353
>my brain is as soft and malleable as an animal's, anyways, here are my thoughts on the immutable nature of man and and the limits of reality.

>>11866853
u haven't read either of those books

>>11865659
People who obsess about video games and waifus are less mentally broken than people who obsess about politics

>>11869762

>>11870679
that's quite obvious since caring about politics just makes you see the shitshow that is the world, even if your "caring" is pure ideology (they always tell you what a shitshow the world is, no matter what ideology).

escaping into entertainment and hedonism will let you feel less "broken" for a while but if the predisposition is there it'll end up being a futile affair

>>11862782

I'm not a communist, but I think a lot of people who criticise him forget that he was a product of his time.

This man was living in a time period where children were being worked to the bone in massive factories, working and being maimed horribly, for pittances. For the benefit of a few powerful rich men. Few of whom would have done a serious bit of work in their lives.

Spend any amount of time looking into that, and remember that at the time there was no real reason to believe it would get better rather than worse.

Pure evil, in the name of profit.

Kinda not surprising he went a bit weird.

>>11870736
his arguments are not based on the severity of the exploitation though. and it hasn't gotten better in many parts of the world, unlike what you as probably a western first-worlder may see.

>>11870736
>This man was living in a time period where children were being worked to the bone in massive factories, working and being maimed horribly, for pittances. For the benefit of a few powerful rich men. Few of whom would have done a serious bit of work in their lives.

This is still true now it's just hidden slightly better.

>everything wrong with the world is bc of a 19th century German economist!

people actually believe this

>>11870779
he would be quite the man if he was able to generate all that is wrong with the world as a single 19th century German economist

He’s quite the man.

He generated single-handedly all that is wrong with the world as a 19th century German Economist

>>11868308
>a couple flaws
That's like saying that making a car that breaks down before you get to the destination is just "flawed." Capitalism isn't flawed, it's inherently unstable, which is why it nearly went out of existence several times. Capitalism without an insane amount of regulations is basically untenable, not to mention undesirable.
>What makes you think communism is the answer?
Why do right-wing retards always assume that people are communists? You can't honestly be so stupid as to believe that all people that dislike capitalism are commies, can you?
>Can you honestly look at the 20th century and say that capitalism cost more lives than communism did.
You absolutely can, and you can look at the 19th century famines as well caused directly by capitalism. Though, of course, judging only deaths and putting aside quality of life, future problems, and systemic failures just speaks volumes about the kind of dumbass you are. You don't understand capitalism, you don't want to understand it, and your only real way of looking at it is to compare it with... Soviet Russia? And then judge only by death tolls. Incredibly thorough work there, bud.
I don't want to continue this conversation, but assuming you aren't a hopeless moron and you'd like to learn more, here's some material for you to read through:
>Late Victorian Holocausts by Mike Davis
>Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty
If you are going to keep talking like you're on the fucking Rubin Report or some other echo chamber, don't expect people to take you seriously.

>>11870799
>all people that dislike capitalism are commies
if you are for the abolition of capitalism you are either a commie or a reactionary, there's no third position.

capitalism was really bad at that time, working in squaller for pennies a day. Now we just have foreign people doing it

>>11870810
>>11870810
Quality reply. You really got him, Anon. MAGA on, my fellow Boomer.

>>11870810
Reactionaries love capitalism.
You seriously can't imagine a world without capitalism?
Wtf was Zizek actually right???

>>11870830
i'm a commie, i'm just saying you can't say "capitalism needs to go" and then turn around and go "oh no i'm not a commie, those savages..." unless you're unironically advocating for the return of feudal relations

>>11870836
you do know that communists aren't the only ones against capitalism right?

>>11870799

>>11870812
Except that plenty of the people in the """developed""" world live in squalor as well. Ever seen a fucking ghetto? Or just a poor neighborhood? Working-class Americans earn less now than they did in the fucking '80s. The minimum wage in America is a fucking joke. If that's not at all, many of those people supposed to be earning minimum wage don't even do that. Since the USG subsidizes companies like Amazon with taxpayer money and fills up the remainder of the paycheck with food stamps because "Amazon is good for the economy."
If you honestly haven't realized by now that America is a 2nd world country at best for huge chunks of the population, you haven't been paying attention at all.

>>11870836
>>11870846
Don't even bother with this guy, dude. He's literally brainwashed. He has been told by propagandists that commie is a bad word, so now his entire way of arguing comes down to, "AHA, SO YOU ARE A COMMIE! SEE, I PINNED YOU!" even though there's barely any communists and the Left is further right nowadays than it has been in decades.

>>11868012
ok so you read the letter, and you’ve admitted to flamboyantly ignoring the subject matter of the letter, and saying “le it was surely only a talk between friends” when literally every one of Proudhon’s letters was on political subject matter if you knew anything and if you did you’d know that Marx was seeking endorsement

>>11868012
I don’t think you know why Marx was so controversial, or if you even think you know what Marx thought. The early scientific socialists are still nothing in comparison to Marx.

>>11870846
what, are you literally gonna tell me you're an "anarchist" now? anarchists are essentially the same as commies, their differences are sectarian and would only matter if there was actually a concrete chance of an anti-system uprising happening.

maybe when you hear commie you think of the "communist system" but i already provided a better definition of communism here >>11865384

>inb4 i'm a primitivist
that falls into the 'reactionary' box

>>11870874
i never said it was a talk between friends. proudhon's issue with marx comes up in the second paragraph, where he talks about revolution. the paragraph where he talks about anti-dogmatism can't be a snub of marx there's only 1 of 2 possibilities:
>proudhon didn't know what marx actually thought and was literally lying, hence it would be a self-own
>proudhon did know what marx thought and was just re-checking it (or as i called it, giving a platitude)

>>11870859
Well of course there's going to be impoverished in almost every country, a good example is the rust belt. but to contrast the rust belt there is the lower part of california. For someone to win, someone's gotta lose
However, saying america s 2nd world is dumb, we practically own it. Our military is our greatest strength, because it's almost impossible to attack us on our own territory and unimaginable to cause serious damage to it. We have so much influence that when times get tough the E:U comes to us first. we are a superpower that has never been seen before, and while capitalism has caused alot of suffering it also brought us to complete global control and partial space control. It's not perfect but it's damn good so far
>>11870897
I wasn't even that guy, i'm just saying alot of people hate capitalism

>>11870711
Woah guys he made a zizek reference now he’s not just a Marxist, but AN “educated” Marxist

>>11870909
what do you mean by "hating capitalism" if not being in favour of its abolition? is it just some random abstract twitter idpol memeshit where the only thing you do is signal your "anti-capitalist hate" online with no prospect or vision or critique?

this is why i claim that the only real way to be against capitalism is to be a commie (or a reactionary)

>>11870907
You’re literally just presupposing Marx is right in saying that and not actually analyzing the possible criticism that Proudhon gives, you’re worse than an evangelical

>>11870897
Lol buddy
State collectivization /=/ communism
You’re literally a brainlet if you think so

>>11870918
can you actually cite anything instead of repeating the same stupid shit over and over again? i don't even know what part you're referring to when you talk about the possible criticism. if you're talking about the anti-dogmatism, it's not something to be 'right' or 'wrong' about it's an attitude taken up by the social criticizer and their programme. if you're talking about proudhon being right that a social revolution was not necessary to supersede capitalism, well, i refer you to the historical record.

>>11870897
What a dumb, dumb nigger you are. You keep replying to everyone in this thread, yet not a single time have you actually made a serious contribution. Again and again, as I stated above, your only real goal here is to make ad hominems and strawman people into admitting they're something they're not so you can classify them into your untermensch binary worldview.
You have not responded to a single criticism made in this thread towards capitalism, and all you're doing is trying to trap people into your little sophist game and getting annoyed that it's not working.
Fucking pathetic.

>>11870907
I bet this nigga think dialectical materialism is as shallow as meaning a denial of historicism. A nigga needs to read georges sorel

>>11870923
and what would be the character of the 'state' that collectivizes? because if it's anything like the """collectivization""" in the USSR then it's quite simply a capitalist state... therefore meaning you aren't actually against capitalism, only laissez-faire economy... therefore meaning your original post was confused

>>11870933
why would i reply to criticisms of capitalism if i am the one making them? i think you've got me confused with someone else.

i AM a communist. i am simply telling people who want to have their cake and eat it, by going "ugh capitalism" yet not taking their position seriously, to get real.

>>11870934
But my work friends on slack told me George Soros is a pedophile

>>11870927
LOL, I did cite something, a letter of criticism on Marx, now the burden of proof lies on you if you want to find some suprahistorical commentary on WHY it’s NOT a criticism of Marx. When I’ve given you a primary source you dumb nigger.

>>11870917
well you go the obvious ted kaczynski example, a man who is not a communist but is against capitalism, You have some monarchist (yeah they exist) who want to return power to kings and queens, and of course the anarchists who range from many different branches. I'm unsure if fascists are anti-capitalist but i'm guessing no

>>11870944
you did't cite it, you linked it. citing here means actually referring to any of the contents of the letter, as i did, not simply dumping it without comment and going "ha! gotcha marxoids!"

>>11870936
LOL, this nigga thinks the ussr was state capitalist after Stalin took the reigns, you’re literally a brainlet bro, not even real marxists respect you

>>11870955
it was already so before stalin took the reins, and even lenin would admit it if pressed. he was already calling the state they were using after overtaking it a capitalist remnant state and admitted they were far away from any sort of socialism. only stalinists believe stalin actually underwent a process of socialization, mostly because they think of it on static terms and haven't ever heard of workplace democracy or anything of the sort (hint: it's what the soviets were doing before 1918)

>>11870950
>ted k
i fucking knew someone would bring up primitivism
>monarchists
as i said, reactionaries
>fascists
you're correct in your hunch that fascists are not against capitalism

>>11870969
wait, reactionaries are monarchists?
i thought reactionaries were like traditionalists and pagans.

>>11870978
not all reactionaries are [x brand of reactionarism], most reactionaries in the 21st century are not even strictly speaking anti-capitalists (ie fascists).

but anti-capitalists of the "let's go back to what we had before" and other advocates of pre-modernism are reactionary (in the literal sense of having a reaction against the force of history)

>>11870978
anyone who wants to go back to an older time/social arrangement is a reactionary.

>>11870953
You did dump it without comment when you assumed Marx was seen as a god among his fellow socialists when historically this was not even close to the case. You have no ability to analyze historical context with even a primary source. Dialectical materialism doesn’t mean “ I can jigsaw anything I want into my ideology like a evangelical does with bible verses”. Give me a source where Proudhon agrees with Marx. Also if you want the context lurk more faggot I already posted it earlier in the thread. Also fellow “marxists” earlier agreed that Proudhon snubbed him even though they disagreed with the criticisms. Just goes to show how deluded you are.

>>11870909
>Well of course there's going to be impoverished in almost every country
Not really. There can be people that are living on welfare in civilized, first world countries - which is far better life than what you get in America even once you earn above minimum wage.
>a good example is the rust belt
A good example of what, exactly?
>For someone to win, someone's gotta lose
That's the dumbest thing I've ever fucking heard. Not only is it incredibly stupid, but the very point of capitalism is supposed to be that it's a win-win for everyone, lol. But I guess you've left that behind and now you're just going to say that some people deserve to starve to death, because, hey, that's life under capitalism. Gotcha'.
>2nd world is dumb
How is it dumb? America has some of the worst crime rates, worst healthcare, and some of the lowest wages in the Western world. I'm not even going to talk about infrastructure, because that's a complete disaster altogether.
>we practically own it
We are not discussing geopolitics, we are discussing economy. Nobody said this isn't an American hegemony. In fact, that's exactly why some places are even worse off than America - like Africa, parts of Asia, etc.
What does that have to do with Americans having worse conditions that most of Europe, though? Like, what is your point? Are you so desperate that you have to move goalposts just to defend your basic fucking claims?
> also brought us to complete global control
Again, what does this have to do with the topic? What does this have to do with America being a 2nd world country with shitty living conditions for large numbers of the population? Stick to the topic, or fuck off.

>>11870966
Oh yeah guys collectivization never happened, the Soviet Union just collapsed coincidentally when privatization was reintroduced, nice historical analysis you philistine

>>11870990
>Marx was seen as a god among his fellow socialists
where did i say this? i said marx's thought and method were so potent even bourgies took it up for their studies, i didn't meant to imply he was famous right from the get-go or anything like that. marx's mature work is 20 years after the little proudhon squibbles anyway, so i don't know how you could think anyone was referring to young marx when they talk about the influence of his work.

>>11870966
Imagine being such a pussy that you to take the best example of communism working and just ignore it because western capitalist academia is too mean about it

>>11870997
I wasn’t saying you said anything specific. Lol you’re so hurt you think I’d care to even put fake words in your mouth. I was saying you literally ignored the content of the letter even though it’s context enough as a citation. If you have any sense of socraticism left in you, you would be able to analyze it like a normal person who actually READS books and doesn’t watch zizek videos all day.

>>11870992
>There can be people that are living on welfare in civilized, first world countries - which is far better life than what you get in America even once you earn above minimum wage.
While that is true, there is growing resent for such a practice. In toronto they are testing a universal salary which has caused much debate. This hasn't really improved the conditions of the poor but instead has just raised taxes to the point where the government will take half your paycheck beyond a certain pay level
>A good example of what, exactly?
Impoverished people
>That's the dumbest thing I've ever fucking heard
a lot has changed since capitalism first began, from 2 stock market crashes, 2 world wars, a global depression, the ideology changed overtime. do you really think it's possible for everyone to hold hands and sing kumbaya? it's childish to assume everyone gets to have a slice of cake.
> How is it dumb?
I assumed that america's standing in comparison to the rest of the world would obviously help gauge what sort of rank it deserves. You are comparing only our social programs. While it is true we have lots of problems (god knows this is becoming more clear), we are still in a very good position. We have a lower tax bracket compared to other countries, so this incentivises entrepreneurship. the wealthy most definitely rewarded in america more so than they would be in europe, and this in turn allows them to keep their base of operations in the US. This creates more jobs that pay much higher than the minimum wage and most of these companies have great social plans themselves. We don't have good government healthcare because we privatised it, and our wages are low because it's easy to get promoted. Also crime is a very hard topic to tackle, as it varies from blue or white collar, violent or non-violent, and so on and so forth. you have to be more specific in which crime you are talking about.
>> but yeah our government is in shambles oh god please send help

>>11871014
i already responded to the "content" of the letter and you never followed up. you kept fucking around without actually responding to me or saying anything, so goodbye

>>11871002
>communism
>working
"communism" is not something you plug in and then see how it does. see >>11865384
>Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
even lenin, despite how much he changed of marxist theory, would broad strokes agree with this characterization. it's the stalinists who want to tell you communism is a system ("their system"), that classes are like taxonomies of animals, that dialectics is a logical form, that history moves in "stages" and all the stupid bullshit uneducated people think is what marx thought despite never having read anything he wrote

>>11871073
You convinced me innately of nothing, you provided no citation for your own claim buddy, have u forgotten that?

>>11871072
>there is growing resent for such a practice.
No there isn't. Not in the USA anyway.
>In toronto
Toronto isn't in America.
>the ideology changed overtime
Yes, it changed to deregulation which brought us the 2008 crisis, and more poverty, unemployment, and insecurity than what we had under the Bretton Woods system. Capital for businesses is soaring while the pay for the average worker and his living conditions has decreased, and hasn't seen growth since the deregulation started.
>it's childish to assume everyone gets to have a slice of cake.
Not really, no. If that were the case, social democracies wouldn't fare that much better. Not to mention that you've yet to make an argument as to why not everyone can have a slice of the cake. Care to do that?
>You are comparing only our social programs.
Which is the only thing that matters to a poor person in need that lives in the USA. Stop changing the topic.
>so this incentivises entrepreneurship
More buzzwords. Amazing.
>the wealthy... in the US
Oh, you mean billionaire capitalists choose to live in a corrupt state that's basically an oligarchy and serves their interests by eliminating all competition and supporting their untenable practices with government subsidies paid by American citizens? Who'd've thunk it?
>This creates more jobs that pay much higher than the minimum wage
What does this have to do with the millions in America that live paycheck to paycheck and can't even afford basic necessities?
>We don't have good government healthcare because we privatised it
Which is worse than most places that do offer free healthcare for a sliver of the cost we spend yearly. And this does not address the millions of Americans that are not ensured and have no means to get ensured because they have no way to get employed and earn a living wage.
>and our wages are low because it's easy to get promoted
Dude, you're a fucking joke. You know nothing about the current state of America. There are millions of people that can't even find a full-time job that pays minimum wage, let alone one where it's "easy to get promoted." But I'm sure next you're going to tell me that the same people that built America are now just too stupid and too lazy to work simple jobs, heh. Anything to justify capitalism, right? "America is the greatest nation built by entrepreneurship!... But also we have people too stupid and lazy to hold a normal job :(."
>Also crime is a very hard topic to tackle
Not really, no. Just compare American statistics to those from other countries. But again, I'm prepared for the excuses, like: "Uhhh, America is a melting pot, sweetie, this is as good as it gets, and we need guns to protect ourselves against the criminals we arm and raise ^_^."
>but yeah our government
I never said that. I said America is a 2nd world country that can't offer basic necessities to its citizens, which is true. It's a shithole, and your moving goalposts to geopolitics doesn't help that.

>>11870799
This post reeks of someone who's in antifa.

>>11871255
Powerful argument.

>>11871264
Not an argument. Just an observation.

>>11871302
A deeply incorrect one at that...

>>11871331
you are horribly strident and obnoxious though, comrade. it doesn't help.

>>11871331
That's true. I talk like a little bitch in text. But I'm not really left-wing.

The wasn't enough IR cuckold porn in the 1800s.

>>11865428
I'm stealing this, good man, if I may?

>>11865428
Reading books bad

>>11871193
Fucking based. Some people just cant swallow the redpill.