/lit/ - Literature

nice argument

>he believes capitalism is working
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>11991545
Why's there have to be an argument, anonymous friend?

>>11991562
>disliking one means you like the other

>>11991562
it isn't?

>>11991606
Not for 99% of the planet. It's working extremly well for the elite.

>>11991636
what the fuck are you talking about

>he's taken the MBTI
>he listens to podcasts
>he believes in God

>he believes history has ended
Right back at you OP

>>11991642
Capitalism isn't working for the majority of people on the planet. It's working really well for the elite (which, by the way, is by it's nature).

>>11991636

take this one to the judge anon ahahahh

>>11991649
I'd argue it works well for all the hedonistic consumerist pieces of shit that is the majority of the Western World

>>11991562
Capitalism is working pretty well desu, the debate is on whether that’s good or not

>>11991655
>sent from iPhone X

>>11991649
>is by it is nature
You’re grammar sucks

I know it doesn't work by looking at China, Soviet Union, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba. All oppressive, dystopian to the people.

>>11991659
Neck yourself, this argument is always terrible

I used to be somewhat a communist but in my old young age I’m starting to think Huey Long was the only one to ever have the right idea

>>11991666
>Steve Jobs took over Satan's trips

>>11991659
>Almost everyone has a mini super computer in their pocket
>Capitalism isnt working

i get it, OP. the burden of proof is on we communists. it's very clear to me

but all marx did was create a model in which forces that were beyond his or anyone's control would subsume civilization as we know it. he had no prescriptions whatsoever about anything.

to blame marx for the failures of every successive instantiation of communism in history is like blaming Hitler for the atrocities of the Third Reich

>He doesn't believe early apostolic Christians were the first universally revolutionary commune

>>11991661
>you're grammar sucks
>you're
Kek

>>11991685
>to blame marx for the failures of every successive instantiation of communism in history is like blaming Hitler for the atrocities of the Third Reich
Except it's not. Marx never took part in any state, Hitler was the linchpin of the third reich.

>>11991696
woooooosh

>>11991681
courtesy of chinese slave labor

Politician systems are like Lakatos research programs in that those that work and are popular have a shit tone of contentions and deficiencies that everyone notices, but are still unable to propose a system that could meet all the gains of the current system.

Everyone is aware that capitalism is not great, because we are living through it. Socialism and communism are so terrible they can't even get off the ground. Maybe Socialism V.1,456,000 will work but obviously the proposals have yet to yield much acceptance expect by the people that thought them up.

>>11991681
>we have faster access to hedonism and can no longer effectively formulate a meaning in life that isn't a mere relationship to commodities!
wow, really glad for that

>>11991706
Georgism would be incredibly based and flawless

>>11991562
>>11991636
>Ignores the fact that over 1.1 billion people have been lifted out of extreme poverty since 1990 under capitalism
>ignores that less than 10% of the population live in abject poverty and hundreds of millions are lifted out if extreme poverty annually
>ignores the modernisation of China, Korea, Japan in a matter of decades under fairly free market economies
>ignores the fact that living standards are overall better than any other point in human history and continue to rise rapidly as productivity increases

You have to be willfully ignorant to think that capitalism is not the best system we can currently come up with.

>>11991636
>capitalism isnt working duuuuuur
>99% arent benefitting off of this

Marxists are so fucking delusional it's not even funny. If religion is the opium of the massses then marxism is the opium of the upperclass brats

>>11991730
t. materialistcuck

>>11991730
All for the benefit of the top.
Now look at how much the top benefited in that same period. You're defending a 1000% gain at the top by pointing to a 10% gain at the bottom.

>>11991733
t. class cuck defending his masters throwing scraps to the bottom.

>record number of people living under an arbitrary poverty line
>change this line every few years to have a lower value
>et voila, you have now lifted 50 trillion people out of poverty

>>11991736
>>11991746
tough argument

>>11991713
what's so great about gayorgasm?

>>11991694
That was the point

>>11991746
yeah because starvation and gulags is so superior. just get over it, people will be richer than you, christ most people learn to deal with this at around age 5

>>11991783
gulags had swimming pools

>>11991762
>coping this hard

>>11991736
do you shit into buckets also?

>>11991708
So you'd rather be slaving away on fields or in factories from dawn to dusk every day until you die, unable to pursue your self interest in accordance to your unique abilities?

Nobody is forcing you to live a hedonistic life. It's necessary to occasionally take a step back and realise the amazing freedom you have in our society. You are free to choose the path of your career, free to forge a self, free to to think, free to speak; you have more free time than people have ever had historically, and more freedom to live a satisfying life however you may please. You are the only one that binds your mind's freedom.

>>11991762
What do you want? There's more people than ever living on the earth. No shit there's gonna be more under the line. Maybe those third world shitholes should educate themselves and stop having so many kids
Poverty existed in communist nations too, the elite existed in communist nations too
There will always be someone at the top and always someone at the bottom

>>11991742
if the rich are having it so great and becoming richer takes no effort or risk, why aren't you starting your own business?
let's be honest, you're just sour grapes that other people have superior intellect and work ethic.

>he's a politicized manchild
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>11991775
That’s it’s not socialism, just an efficient way to get rid of a lot of surplus nonproductive labor while not creating large amounts of inflation

>>11991746
You dont give a fuck about the "99%". You only care about being edgy and feeling bad for yourself. It's a wonder we haven't classified marxism as a mental illness yet.

>>11991713
this

>>11991537
bruh, look at this dude
wait till you see the ph- uhuhuhuUHUHU OH NO NO NO OH OOOOUHUHUH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH LOOK AT THE HIPSTER HAIRCUT

>>11991742
Where the hell did you get those numbers? I never said the bottom had a 10% gain. What do you suggest as an alternative? And why should entrepreneurs, who honestly rise to the top, be punished for their contributions to society that got them there in the first place? The people who manipulate the political system for the attainment for wealth should be punished, no question, but the entrepreneurs who create products and services that improve millions of lives deserve to rise to the top.

You also ignore that almost all of the wealth someone attains in a lifetime dissipates within two generations of it is not actively and successfully maintained by investing back into the economy, further improving the lives of the masses through job creation and production of products and services. "The rich" are not a monolith. People constantly rise and fall out of the top. I think around 2/3 of billionaires came from humble backgrounds by working their asses off.

>>11991814
>small business meme in the era of our lord and savior jeff bezos hallowed be thy name and peace be upon him

>>11991810
You are not describing freedom, you are merely re-articulating the very limited choices were are allotted as a veil of freedom: I am allowed to slave under some boss of my choosing, to define myself as having some identity (usually primarily in relation to material goods), to think (only certain things allowed by the State), to speak (only certain things). "Free time" is not "freedom", and out current economic system deprives free-time of any meaning precisely because it lacks the narrative tension (being empty) that would give meaning. The opportunity to have a "satisfying life" is dwindling.
People always pull the "b-but you wouldn't want to farm! We love our iphones!" argument, if you can call that one. I have no qualms in a truly subsistence case, because you are directly produced the means of your livelihood. However, the system necessitates the formation of commodity-exchange relationships to even get to that point, so that is a futural.
People always talk about the "opportunities" we have, but they are no different than they have always been. In reality, we only have more "potentialities", which are ultimately imaginary.

>>11991813
>Maybe those third world shitholes should educate themselves and stop having so many kids

>exploit undeveloped nations for resources
>later force these nations into a centralized global economy
>poach any and all decent labor
>leave behind a stripped, hollow shithole incapable of competing with the very market powers forced upon them
>"lol bootstraps tho, stupid niggers lmao"

>>11991924
You enslave yourself with victimhood.

>>11991965
no, I seek a solution to problems I see rather than twaddle my dick around saying this is as good as it gets

Why exactly are proles going to like their jobs when in communism? A shit shoveler is a shit shoveler no matter the economic model.

>>11991979
>I seek a solution to problems
you destroy shit and build nothing, history is 100% clear on this

and it is also clear as day that your animosity is derived entirely from envy

>>11991989
in a purely hypothetical scenario, a worker would get paid equal to the amount of labor he put in, rather than have some spic swooce in willingly to work for a quarter thus driving the wages down.

>>11992001
I see you ran out of arguments

>>11991663
Vietnam isn’t that bad? Lots of «liberal democrazies» like Russia are worse, no?

>>11992008
go build just one(1(singular(a real instance that acutally occurs in history))) example of something instead of tearing shit down in violent revolution

>>11992029
yes, I personally am a communist and have participated in every revolution in history (except for the """good ones""")

This was enjoyable but it's going nowhere. Thanks. I'd rather be in a capitalist country than a communist country.

>>11991814
>>11991895
I obviously didn't mean the numbers literally, you autists. Wages in the West haven't increases in real terms since the 1980s AT LEAST, meanwhile the richest have only become richer. It's even worse in the third world, where the majority are exploited by a parasitic elite class propped up by the West.
I'm not even a communist, I don't even believe the system can be changed, but this is the fact of it. Your views are just as delusional as the views of hardcore communists.

>>11992038
there are no good revolutions, revolutions are criminal

did DFW kill himself because bloom said he was shit?

>>11991851
>>11991783
>>11991772
>>11991810
>>11991965
>>11992001
Just admit you're a sociopathic obese autistic incel and believe that some people should be abused and used by an elite. Stop with this fake bullshit.

>>11991941
funny, because the parts of Africa that were uncolonized are some of the poorest.

We haven't tried Communism with a robot overlord like The Zeitgeist Movement shit suggests we should try. Maybe the AI will know what's best for us.

>>11992065
>the parts of Africa that didn't undergo forced industriialization for the benefit of Europeans are some of the poorest, bro
GENIUS

>>11992062
lel, no we just arent brainwashed by a literal fairytale that promises a coming utopia, you fucking child

>>11992045
that's not true. wages are going up.

>>11992062
lel projection much? mad bruh?

>>11992069
Africa sucks with industrialization, and without, but when white men run it it is actually sort of ok. REALLY makes you think

>>11992072
Not when you account for inflation.
>>11992070
You're brainwashed by the current fairytale, that is a bunch of assumptions purely for the benefit of an elite that you will never be a part of.

>>11992070
>>11992072
>>11992074
>>11992079
Admit it, you pathetic cowards.

>>11992093
I am pretty happy wiht the unprecedented luxury i enjoy as a member of the middle class as opposed to living in a starving police state
>there are people much richer than you
HOW will i ever cope

>>11992097
Just go back to re**it or t**blr, or wherever you come from you fucking baby
>hurr le evil racist capitalist man

Youre a blithering retard incapable of thinking critically about anything, literally afraid of certain types of thought you fucking pussy

>>11992102
You are not living in luxury, you deluded poorfag. Your masters shit in bathrooms more expensive than your house.

>>11992107
You're a cuck for your masters, sucking their cocks and enriching them. Literally and metaphorically. Literally a slave praising his masters for the slice of bread thrown his way. Pathetic piece of shit, off yourself.

>>11992110
Compared to all of human history and all non-capitlaist socieites I live in unimaginable luxury

You are once again blinded by your pathological envy of the elite, you would rather tear down our entire civilization than allow people to have more than you, even though you have more than any other people in history have ever had. You are a fucking infant, you have not developed emotinally past the toddler crying that his brother has a toy he doesn't have.

>>11992113
I dont give a shit about the elite, or particularly like them. Theyre irrelevant, youre the one who fixateds on them so intensely you start imagining fellatio when you think about them.

I think about the system we live in and what id oes for me, as opposed to other systems attempted. Stop crying like a 5 year old girl and accept that the world is imperfect instead of turning over the chess board when you think youre losing.

>>11992110
>>11992113
literally nigger-tier logic
>gib moneis for dem programs, white man

>>11992120
You're dumb. We didn't have the material production to give everyone a decent existence until very recently. Your argument is moot and disengenous, heard it before from libertarian cucks.

>>11992120
p.s.
You are still a poorfag, stop looking back in history, that's irrelevant. The tech for material production didn't exist. Instead, be genuine and look at today. You are a delusional poorfag with scraps.

>>11992143
we had it in the 20th century and Mao and Stalin compltely failed to compete with the Western capitalist democracies. Nice try though

>>11992123
Whether you give a shit or not is irrelevant. Your entire life is defined and dictated by them, though you are ignorant of it. You are a cuck.

>>11992148
You have an inferiority complex the size of Saturn, I literally don't care if I have scraps, 99% of us have scraps dude. So there are some kings, would you be king anon? Go ahead, stage a coup, try to win, i dont care.

What will never ever happen, is that we are all King, not matter how much you want that.

Very spicy thread!

>>11992110
desu isn’t this line of thinking inherently materialistic and therefore antithetical to whatever movement you espouse? I’ve never particularly had the passion for an excessively nice house so why should I be mad that elites do?

Pls don’t yell at me with ad homenims I’m just curious

>>11992151
I already told you I'm not a communist you mouth breathing incel.
>>11992156
You have a false superiority complex the size of the current universe. In reality you are slave to your masters.

>>11992154
No it is not dictated by them, they have more influence on the process, which is out of their hands. No oligarch or oligarchy in the world can direct the actual development of world history.

Youre still missing the fucking point. IT's BETTER than the alternative, your attempts at leveling the playing field cause nothing but anarchy, and then guess what, another fucking oligarchy, you retarded fuck

>>11992162
Capitalism is not slavery you absolute inbred. Christ I dont even know what to say to you.

Do you feel this way about models as well, do you seethe relentlessly that peopple are better looking than you?

>>11992162
>mouth breathing incel.
Being as we're not even talking anything remotely to do with women Im going to call this one projection.

Please enlighten me though, youre not a communist, what are you exactly, and does your ideology have even a single example of success?

>>11992159
I'm simply insunuating that the purpose of the middle class is to keep the elite safe. The plebs are given a middle class lifestyle or have it promoted to them so the true masters of the world can keep their power.
>>11992163
You are a slave in denial.
>>11992169
You are no better than a slave, as are most people. You have no genuine choice than to enrich people with capital, unless you happen to get extremely lucky. You are a fucking cuck man. Start sucking your bosses cock just like you really want to, faggot.

>>11992175
You have no alternative you actual idiot. You also have a curious obsession with sucking dick

>>11992175
p.s.
I guarantee I'm wealthier than any of you ITT. Yet I still can see clearly that this system is fucked. I make more from interest than the average American makes per year, lmfao.

>>11992183
>champagne socialist is so insulated from the realities of life that he wants to overthrow society violently
yeah it checks out

>>11992196
I'm not a socialist.

>>11992175
But if the middle class is significantly and broadly content (with food, shelter, etc), isn’t that at least partially an objective of society? I don’t really care that there are a handful of people out there with yachts and private planes, one day they will die just like me. And probably our definitions of a “content middle class” are different, but is destroying our society for whatever you propose truly worth the risk? What is the realistic chance that oligarchies will still form in a classless society? Why have there always been elites still in socialist states? What if the HDI of a classless society was lower than the HDI of the status quo that includes poverty and elites, is it still worth it?

>>11992211
you havent said what you are, im uessing because it's some ludicrous impractical ideology with absolutely no evidence of having ever worked that you have adopted because it assuages your fears of being inferior

>>11992156
>i dont care.

i think that's the gist of it really, you're numb to life. you could have summarized your entire position with those three words.
>we can improve
>"i dont care"
that's it really. plug yourself back into your hyperreal media feeding machine, down another bottle of SSRIs and read some trump tweets. because who cares.

>>11992215
I don't have an ideology, ideologies are retarded.

>>11992233
I dont care that there are people richer than me, you context-eradicator

I care about my family, friends, my community, where I live, my art, the literature I read, being healthy, improving myself, etc. Ie. the normal fucking things humans are supposed to care about. Not obsessing over abstract economic inequalities - which again you have never shown you can improve on even slightly, and have failed amssively every time you try.

>>11992255
ily anon.

>>11992255
>I care about my family, friends, my community, where I live, my art, the literature I read, being healthy, improving myself, etc.
All of those things are dimished and influenced by the super elite and the current economic system, you silly slave.

>>11992282
I’ve been a neutral observer ITT for a while and come on bro this was a real air ball

>>11992255
not him but if you do care about those things are you not concerned with capitalism's breakdown of the traditional family system, its voiding of the value of fidelity and commitment, its commodification of art and literature robbing it of any truly creative spirit, etc. etc.? To me, capitalism's demand - to seek profit, amass wealth, to seek purely self interest - is what is unnatural and clouding what humans are supposed to care about in order to live a fulfilled life.

>>11991989
the chap trap house fags genuinely believe they'll be able to pick their occupation in their ideal state like it's a candy shop
I wish I had the screencap of a bunch of socialist fags on twitter saying how after the revolution they're gonna be the ones who design the military uniforms or be apart of the orchestra

>>11992062
>I don't know how to refute
>"fucking incels!"

>>11992113
>there were no masters in communist societies
kek

>>11992298
yeah i dont like capitalism that much, and i have a lot of problems with modern technology in general but I fail to see an alternative that isn't worse

I hate to quote Voltaire but sometimes Il faut cultiver notre jardin

>>11992308
I'm not arguing for communism, you absolute moron.

>>11992315
what are you arguing for

>>11992315
>thread is explicitly about communism
>makes several points that are in line with common communist tropes
>”actually I win the argument because I’m not talking about communism and don’t have an ideology”
Really makes you think

>>11992255
>I care about my family, friends, my community, where I live, my art, the literature I read, being healthy, improving myself, etc

then you should care about the commercialization and commodification of every aspect of your life, your community, etc. as qualitative primacy is shifted to quantity for purposes of raw economic growth. i'm not explicitly anti-capitalist but it's naive to pretend that the hasn't been an abject decline in the quality of products, which coupled with very risk-averse entrepreneurism results in cultural stagnation - and this is antithetical to the entire objective of progress vis a vis capitalism, ergo a lack of innovation that has been a grand narrative central to the very spirit of "growth" (which is now objectively defined as a line on the dow jones). and as capital, being an omnipotent master signifier, can easily turn your community, your values, whatever you hold dear - regardless of how intangible it may be - into a commercial product to be manufactured, packaged and sold, you have every reason to care about "abstract economic inequalities" because they're indivisible parts of the same socioeconomic nexus that have come to define the value of everything you DO care about.

>>11992312
I am right there with you. I find myself agreeing with either primitivist or confucian ideas but realize both are retarded

>>11992324
I'm arguing that the current economic system is designed for the benefit of a tiny % of the human population.

>>11992356
That's just how G-d intended it, goyim, there is no alternative.

>>11992370
It’s not how God intends it. The system is becoming more aligned with Satan day by day

>>11992374
Can we cool it with the anti-semitic remarks?

>>11992384
do you know where you are? fuck off (((newfag)))
>>11991537
im actually confused do you really think DFW wanted communism? i mean i wasn’t even that against capitalism, just its highly consumeristic nature.

i’m inclined to agree with that. consumerism is definitely cancerous and disgusting but comjewnism isn’t the fucking answer. i was a communist for 4 years in high school but as a college student you start to realise how full of indoctrination and propaganda it is and how closely tied to social justice it is. you can’t separate the two anymore.

furthermore it can’t work when multiple races are in the picture. people don’t care about those that aren’t their own kind. we need a nationalistic syndicalist or mutualist state with an aristocracy and a king. it’s the only solution

>>11991537
Communism has never been tried.

>>11991537
Communism will work in the future with the right technology in place.

>>11991730
ass

>>11992384
back to r/books

>>11991562
It is working you dumb shit, capitalism is doing exactly everything it should do. Not according to Marx off course with his outdated economics he got everything wrong. (How Theory of history is a fucking joke too)

>>11992755
yikes
>>11992608
It doesn't have anything to do with DFW, just a good pic

>>11991537
Communism works in communes. It's literally in the name. I don't know why anyone would try it at a large scale. Large populations require specialists, which naturally leads to capitalism.

>everyone in this thread thinks communism is a state of affairs to be established
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>11991663
yeah, brutal dictatorships are bad. what does that have to do with communism?

>>11992828

>>11992796
good luck establishing a commune when every piece of dirt on earth belongs to the ruling class in some way shape or form

>>11991730
You’d be pretty surprised to know that Marx himself admired capitalism for always revolutionising the productive forces, but despite that he still pointed to the contradictions that arise from the existence of the wage labour, namely the the antagonism between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

>>11991733
the vast majority of the actual gains in these charts is because of *China*, along with other Asian nations that have heavy state intervention in the economy
https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/29/distorting-poverty-to-promote-capitalism/#.UumBUj1DnZw.twitter

>>11992159
The fact is that he is moralising onto an all-too-common example and is reducing it to a bathroom/house simplifies the point.

Even if capitalism did increase the conditions of every single human to the level where the basic needs are met (housing, clothing, food, education), communism will still be there to respond to the contradictions inherent in capitalism, because the antagonism between the proles and the bourgeois still stands on its feet as long as we live in a class society. This will go on as long as the relations of productions stay the same and we have on one side the propertied class hoarding all the wealth and information of the world, and on the other the propertyless ones who will always get the scraps.

>>11992159
Why should you be mad?
Think about your job being automated and a UBI being implemented. This will surely only cover your basic needs (a basic studio and some food cans, say) since it will be reduced to the bare minimum for you to not revolt. The existence of the bourgeoisie is entirely dependent on the proles’ one, just consider the scenario where the working people would dissappear: who will maintain and build all the things which the rich today take for granted? Who will generate the electricity necessary for the maintenance of the automated devices already in use? Who will clean their houses, feed their children, drive them around, build their buildings, input their data etc? They would either recreate a class society by demoting some of the poorer ones to the role of slaves or something akin to a proletarian today OR they would establish a classless society, nothing else than a micro-communism.

Couldn't Communism work with automated "grunt work?" If no human needs to do the horrible jobs, isn't everyone free to do what they want?

>>11992865
>proletariat and burgoise
That argument is pure sophistry

>>11992234
That’s exactly the prevailing ideology btw, which is the strongest when it obfucates even the basic fact that it exists.
Tell me, what do you think about the current political climate? The state? The family? The church? Poverty? Are you really indifferent to all of these?

>>11992298
Capitalism is indeed as “natural” as Communism or any other form of organisation for that matter, because nothing is really natural, it’s a human category. We’ve been imposing upon us societal standards ever since we’ve started to think.

If anything, the arbitrariness of volcanic explosions, hurricanes, life-threating meteors hitting the earth and voiding it of life would be nature at its purest.

We are here alone and everything we do answers to our existence, and that alone. Capitalism did not arise on its own more than Communism will, it was a protracted struggle, the signs of which have been present in the feudal times along with the development of the bourgeois class, it owing its existence to the better quality of the productive forces (the industrial revolution).

>>11992045
Largely because assets increase in value based on future projections of profitability, and the aggregate value far exceeds the actual money supply.

In other words, the rich aren't hoarding all that wealth in a vault, and if you want to liquidize those assets the money still has to come from somewhere else. In other words, Bill Gates couldn't just "give" 50 billion to starving Africans.

>Wages in the West haven't increases in real terms since the 1980s AT LEAST

False, but even if true what matters is what those wages can buy. Today, everything is on sale.

>>11992755
False. Societies that didn't accumulate social surpluses and were based upon immediate-return did, and some still continue even if in a very distorted form, exist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X5cD6jd914

>>11992986
Are you denying the fact that there exists a class of people who base their existence on the surplus-value they extract from the others?

Do you really think that the biological differences between us would ammount for the immense social distinctions which separates us from eachother?

Or maybe you’ll retract in some absurd anti-semitism which is unfounded on anything and ahistorical for that matter, since capital knows no ethnicity, gender or age and is already global, irreducible to any one inherent biological contingency.

>>11992925
yuhh, but they only made these leaps after markets became freer and state control loosened somewhat. Ergo, China is not a great argument against capitalism and free markets.

Communism can work to improve the standard of living of impoverished people in a very rudimentary way, but modern economies are too complex and dynamic to function well through central planning.

>>11993013
The name for those is primmitive communism and he is obviously not reffering to those, even if they did offer the best standards of living, they have nothing to do with the movement which abolishes (as in Aufheben) the PRESENT state of things. This places Communism as a purely negative force, its basis being the critique of all that exists, taking nothing for granted.

>>11993039
What a foolish thing to say when you have centrally planned economies like Walmart and Amazon who are extremely good at that and proof that it’s infinitely more efficient than some decentealized arbitrary “free market”.

>>11992960
Automation is indeed one of the catalysts which could trigger a Communist revolution, since it will leave a vast majority of people jobless, and the burgeoisie would be represented by the owners and designers of the automated machines.

But in the meantime, you will have the constant precarisation of work with people moving between multiple shitty jobs, the privatisation of most of the essential services, the rentification of most of the services which are now free etc. If the ex-working classes would get anything, it would be the minimum necesaary which guarantees that they would still consume.

Profit has no limits.

>>11991733
>When you realise the greatest gains are the ones with Pinochet Chávez and cartels
https://youtu.be/zVqsGgOxRyY

>>11993050
That's quite a leap to say that since individual corporations can be managed from the top down so can entire societies. Walmart and amazon get instant feedback on their performance as they need to stay competitive in a free market. When there is no free market, this feedback mechanism disappears, and with it disappears not only the main incentive to make production more efficient, cut costs, and guarantee customer satisfaction, but also the barometer for actually gauging these variables in the first place.

>>11993106
Not that big of a leap since Amazon covers most of the world.

You’re correct to say that this exact feedback mechanism disappears (which would be with regards to price), but can you not conceive of anything being responsible for making production more efficient? Are you saying that in the absence of prices people would just roam around doing nothing because they can’t efficiently represent it?

Prices, if anything, should represent the actual cost of production in labour hours, that is until prices still have a meaning. After we’re developed enough there would be no need for them at all, since you can just use what you want and be use your subjectivity in undiscovered ways, there will be no limit to our development. It will only be then when history actually starts and we can solve the man-nature antagonism, discover and colonize other planets etc

>>11992255
And these are dependent on the conomic system under which they happen to develop, as history shows us that they were radically different in the 1700s or even 50 years ago. To focus only on that would be myopic and would ignore the inherent antagonism which actually fuels the capitalist order which in turn describes all the social structures from your post.

>>11993076
They'll have to put people on the dole, no one wants a revolution. I don't particularly want one, unless I get to be a party member.

>>11993155
>there will be no limit to our development. It will only be then when history actually starts and we can solve the man-nature antagonism, discover and colonize other planets etc
Oh boy. . .

>>11991537

>>11992771
And I will gladly fight in the war to prevent this from happening when the time comes.
I hope to God we are ready when it does.

>>11993155
>Are you saying that in the absence of prices people would just roam around doing nothing because
No, but you'd get the inefficient, sluggish, bureaucratic mess that's been a staple of all centrally planned economies.

>After we’re developed enough
Sure, automation, hitting the singularity, we'll all be smoking weed, fucking our sexbots and eating ice cream all day. But we're not there yet.

>>11992960
>>11993076
people have been crying about automation since the 1900s and yet jobs have been growing ever since
>hurrr why can't I operate elevators again
>hurrr why can't I switch phone lines manually
>hurrr why can't I quarry the mines like the good ol' days

No it won't trigger a revolution, it will just open up more opportunities for people to work in a non-automated role. Yes contrary to popular belief automation can't kill all jobs, just ones that can be automated.

>>11991562
>commies haven't defeated capitalism yet
>it only grows stronger and more all-encompassing
>g-guys, it's not working. haha

>>11993927
thinks his desk job won't be automated in 15 years.
you're like a baby. Every aspect of human intelligence is being reproduced right now. AI doesn't have to be perfect to fuck us over, it just has to be better than us, and monkey brain sucks.

>>11991562
Your misery is an indication that it is.

>>11993937
>Elon Musk is right, the end is near!
grow up

i wonder if google will find a way to automate sexual harassment using machine learning, like at the perfect moment a dildo will pop out of the wall of your cubicle and demand some suction, this will save a lot of money, they wont have to hire nearly as many stanford mbas

>>11994006
lel

>>11991562
Thanks for the butthurt quota. OP produces a whole lot of it. Gotta keep the (you)s flowing to know the world is working. >>11991537

>>11994049
Gotta hand some for myself. Then the annual benefits and bonuses. >>11991537
>>11991537
>>11991537
>>11991537
>>11991537
>>11994049

I love working for this company.

>>11991537
>communism working in Chile
>capitalists try to invent a strike to ruin it
>works so well it handles this with fractional workforce
>justkillthem.exe
>send Chicago Uiniversity economists to make neoliberal model
>it flops
>justpumpinmoney.exe
>economy finally turns around
>"look at how communism failed and capitalism succeeded"

>>11994073
>communism working in Chile
kek

>>11992196
>>capitalism is bad
>poorfag and jealous

>>I'm not poor
>richfag and guilty

I like how you can attack them from any position you like, good argument

>>11992300
You know these socialist types make good arguments until you realize how stupid the average person is. And on top of that they want more and more people coming into these systems when what usually happens is that these people have a shit ton of kids who aren't educated and will not be able to get the high paying jobs that we need in this increasingly need for technical aptitude that takes years to build up skill in. So they bitch and moan when they end up taking jobs that teenagers would do 15-20 years ago and then demand that they have enough money to raise a family.

We need to find a way to curb immigration, curb birth rates, and bring back factory jobs here. What happens is so many of these companies run away to get away from paying living wages to people here along with getting away with insanely questionable practices when it comes to the adverse effects they have on the environment. Again, Chapo Trap House and Citations Needed make good points, but they assume/demand too much from the average person.

>>11993180
Any reading recs on influence of economy in culture? Historiography's changed a lot since Marx

>>11993989
>implying i care about hip weed lmao CEO
>implying i think automation is a bad thing
>implying your strawman is not shit
Come on senpai, you just gotta admit your precious literature (or any form of art for that matter) will eventually be reproduced by heuristic systems, you cannot disprove this.
>inb4 burden of proof
Look at the logical progression you luddite horse, Google is both one of the richest companies in the planet and also the one with the biggest AI ever.

>>11994134
You should probably keep reading

>>11991537
>there are people who exist who believe a perfect system exists
>there are people who exist who desire a perfect system

>>11994272
Who are you quoting? Do you think "work" means perfect? are you actually this retarded?

Is it that bad that we don't want most of the world starving? I'm not even a commie, but even if capitalism is serviceable there's ways we could improve it.

>>11994281
I'm not even referring to communism specifically you moron. Fuck off.

> put together a commune
> it falls apart
wow fucking capitalists did this

>>11994286
>not referring to communism
>replies to OP, who's talking about communism

>>11994200
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin

>>11994254
>hehe just wait buddy, le heuristic google robot will take over your silly humanities, jussst wait ;)

but seriously how come no one shills an ideology besides communism

why do you worship free riders and the lowest common denominator but fear existing social structures that place a bare minimum of participation (that comes from the family unit or the community, and not the market-fixing-entity-thats-not-a-state-but-definitely-the-state)

>>11994299
Not referring to communism /specifically/.
My post was directed at people who put their ideologies on a pedestal and believe them to be near flawless, which can commonly be attributed to communists (and capitalists). It was tangentially related to the OP in expressing ire towards certain subsets of people who are obsessed with their ideology.

>>11994309
nice non-argument, try an actual rebuttal next time.

>>11994320
It's because communism is (perceived to be) the polar opposite of capitalism, the current prevailing system. So, when people take issue with the system they then take issue with capitalism and yearn for an alternative. Communism is the most obvious alternative, not only in nature but through its history, and with its steady fanbase ever since its inception it is very easy to get into, unlike other fringe ideologies.
Basically, communism is the popular 'other' choice. It's not necessarily that it's the best.

>>11994254
>i don't care about that musk faggot
>but google though...
lmao, we just have to look at Tay and see how big a failure that project was. These söyböys code monkeys can't do shit.

>>11994333
>cmon, debate me bro
>yea that's what I thought
There's nothing to argue, all you offered was 'look at google AI'. Grow up kid, this isn't some sci-fi fantasy. Let the adults converse about the realistic implications of automation.

>>11993927
Historically, revolutions took place when the relations of productions did not correspond to the ideological superstructure (i.e 1789, 1848, 1917, 1949 etc) and this has always come off as a response to a technical development that permitted these relations of productions to develop.

And since we’ve already established that capitalism tries its best to revolutionize the means of production for the profit motive, it gets pretty clear why it will bring its own death. How many non-automated roles could you even think of? There will be little to none besides the machines operators and maintanance workers. Or would you rather condemn people to working shitty, useless jobs all their life instead of having more free time to actually be human?

>>11994358
>literally calling other people kid
>still no argument
I accept your concession.

>>11994373
>no argument? I win lmao
literally just proving my point

>>11993050
You seriously think Walmart is as effecient as a smaller business? Lmao so much waste. It's impressive nonetheless that the companies run so smoothly, but there are constant little problems and hickups, and larger ones occasionally, that are much less likely in a small business.

>>11994254
This ignores the conditions in which a machine learning algorithm could “learn” how to paint or write novels: they need to do that using millions of inputs from actual human works of art. They’re literally just another tool for HUMANS to make better art. You can’t just make a robot do what they “want” because they lack the human agency to create stuff out of nothing.

So instead of going mad about machines “stealing” art, we should welcome this like any other tool that expands our human subjectivity. It’s always been our creation, it cannot go off on its own (that is sci-fi wishful thinking, singularity, ray kurzweil, the ideology surrounding AI in general)

>>11994272
You are perfectly in line with what Communism entails, whether you like it or not. It is not an established ideal towards we should aspire, but rather the movement which abolishes the current state of things, it being derived from our current conditions. Nothing less than critiquing every aspect of capitalism. That is literally Communism.

>>11994391
If anything, their problems come from the existence of generalised commodity production and small businesses are as susceptible to it as any other big conglomerate. I am not even denying that they waste a lot, hoarding and throwing away good food, underpaying their workers and monopolising everywhere they can, but that is just the logic and nature of capital accumulation, nothing to do with their planning capabilities.

>>11991537
If human needs are constant throughout time and capitalism has met more people's needs than any other system than how is it a bad thing? I'm not slaving away for some master. I work in construction with a buddy and am soon changing jobs to work for another company. I don't see this as slaving myself and just because someone calls it that doesn't make it true. I have plenty of time to do stuff outside of work if I want to, I get paid what I have decided is satisfactory, and my desire and discipline, and intelligence/talent, is the only thing stopping and guiding me. I don't care that my bathroom didn't cost as much as a rich man's; it retains the same function. I also don't think capitalism is to blame for destroying the sense of community in the US, but rather immigration, welfare, and other terrible policies.

>>11994425
>I also don't think capitalism is to blame for destroying the sense of community in the US, but rather immigration, welfare, and other terrible policies.

so uh... who's gonna be the one to tell him?

>>11994414
No, they can't plan effeciently because they can't control people 100%. Everybody does a job, no matter how menial, better or worse than someone else, and people are late, lazy, passive aggessive, mean spirited, etc. the more people you have the more chances for these little upsets to damper productivity and effeciency. Smaller businesses are generally more tight knit and have less chance of employees slipping through the cracks, etc.

>>11994431
You can just say it. Is capitalism to blame for immigration and welfare?

>>11994425
Human needs are indeed not constant through time, just compare the bare minimum to exist today compared to the 17th century for example. It cannot be taken as a cue for what capitalism is good at because capitalism sets the tone for what the new standards are in the first place. You wouldn’t imagine people thought of phones as necessary in the Bonapartist periods, would you?

As I mentioned earlier, it is irrelevant even if capitalism did bring the living standards for everybody as they are in Scandinavia, say. We would not just tell ourselves “okay, we’re done here” but instead we will keep on revolutionising other aspects of life, and as long as the antagonism remains, we would be in the same predicament.

>>11991564
because you're shitting on someone's opinion, not their taste, not their actions, but their opinion, and you need arguments or else you're not better than the person you're mocking

>>11994368
>it gets pretty clear why it will bring its own death
yes very clear indeed, it's going to die very soon. Any minute now.

You just need to read a history book about ye olde occupations and how automation didn't spark revolutions but expanded the job horizon further with safer working conditions.

Imagine believing automation was a bad thing for elevator operators, who had shitty working conditions to begin with that they had to strike for their shitty job. None of these people would go back to that time, they went and did better things. Should we just burn it all and go back to doing things manually?

>>11994439
So your solution to that would be having thousands of small businesses each making the same product to compete with each other? That would result in monopolisation anyway and you’re back to my scenario.

I’m not even saying that Amazon is good, if anything their planning is not EFFICIENT ENOUGH to meet the needs of usual people, while still being loads better than any brick wall coffee shops and individual businesses you fetishise.

>>11994450
How are human needs not constant? We don't need to eat more, or sleep less, or anything like that.