/lit/ - Literature

>>13597322
Yes there has been: The bible

>>13597322
Plato's The Republic.

>>13597328
I can guarantee that book has stopped many peasants from dying, many diseases from breaking out, and many venereal diseases from even coming into existence.

Meanwhile The Communist Manifesto is responsible for creating many new peasants, has created many different strains of HIV to be spread throughout Marxist festivalgoers with poor morals, and has caused many illicit children to be born who are indoctrinated into the Marxist theory of social behavior, which essentially utilizes the many living vessels as landmines to socially progress a Marxist agenda, turtle-like, into the foray of public discussion.

Marxists sicken me.

Yes....

anything from The Source

>>13597322
>one book/person caused communism
Spoken like a true brainlet. I bet you are a god-fearing filthy fucking amerimutt.

>>13597334
>creating many new peasants
name a single state where the people didn't leave as peasants before communism

>>13597330
I can guarantee The Republic has caused many new adherents to an objective-moral based form of progressive ideology.

Somehow a concrete form of how people should function could be mandated to favor those whose ideas and conception of 'the good' (an Aristotleian and Platonic term) is nearest to the objective truth of this, instead of taking the harmful Nietzschean stance to say that every other person's idea of morality in general is the correct one.

This idea necessarily causes people to deviate in the correct behavior, as 1 and 1 cannot make anything but 2, and subjective morality or moral nihilism makes the answer necessarily incorrect no matter what, the building blocks of life no longer consisting in similar elements but chaotically and of a sect-creating nature, of different forms of life.

Morally, and biologically, this ideology does not hold. The pre-socratics preceded Socrates for a reason. Both Plato and Aristotle created the whole of philosophy on a science of figuring out objective reasoning and how best to approximate it within society and civilization as a whole, epistemologically and teleologically.

>>13597351
Fix your punctuation and grammar you stupid fuck, I would rather not engage with such a pedestrian way of speak.

>>13597322
I mean iregardless of ones feelings towards communism that book is really not that important to the movement, so almost definetly yes.

>>13597322
5/10 bait

>>13597334
> has created many different strains of HIV to be spread throughout Marxist festivalgoers with poor morals

>>13597369
>critizing grammar

The lowest form of brainletism.

>>13597334
>Meanwhile The Communist Manifesto is responsible for creating many new peasants, has created many different strains of HIV to be spread throughout Marxist festivalgoers with poor morals,
lolwut

>>13597406
It is the MOST important book to Communism’s spread. The fact that you say that alone shows your ignorance of human history. This book, along with various other Communist pamphleteering was extremely prevalent in the early 20th century. It was like Elvis in terms of popularity, even in America, but like Hurricane Irene in terms of destructivity.

>>13597632
>>13597577
>doesn’t understand how Neo-Marxism works

Let me help you out: it’s done by brainwashing the masses.

>>13597643
Back to youtube, Peterson

>>13597643
Stop calling liberals Neo-Marxists.

>>13597700
Marx said progressive income taxes were the surest way to an eventual realization of change within The Communist Manifesto.

It was listed as one of the things necessary to bring about the coming revolution

>>13597737
>progressive taxation is communism

The only bigger brainlets than communists are Magapedes talking about communism.

>>13597322

>>13597322
No other book has killed more commies. God bless Marx - I hope he's found the nicest place in hell.

>>13597737

>>13597334
> Meanwhile the **idelogical text** is responsible for creating a subdued class, has created many different strains of disciples to be spread throughout **ideology** indoctrinates with poor morals, and has caused many illicit children to be born who are indoctrinated into the **ideology** theory of social behavior, who essentially utilizes the many living vessels as landmines to socially progress a **ideology** agenda, turtle-like, into the foray of public discusison.

**ideology** sicken me.

Thanks for your big brain commentary.

>>13597322
You need to read up on Hegel and his Phenomenology of Spirit. Hegel was a known occultist and part of a heretical religious-philosophical movement known as German Idealism. Most of them initially were training to be ministers but Immanuel Kant had put an epistemological fence around God and put serious doubt into any true knowledge about God. This deeply disturbed Hegel and his group so they turned to the writing of the subversive Jew, Baruch Spinoza, who was exiled for his radical political and philosophical views. Spinoza outlined a conception of an immanent God which was rejected by most of his contemporary philosophers and theologians. Kant had barred off actual knowledge of a transcendental God, so the German Idealists went with trying to realize the immanent God Spinoza had written over a century earlier. They had set out to work on the project which they named "the system" where the completion of the system would bring about god or Spirit. Hegel's plan's on how to complete the system was a very convoluted theory that truth had a historical dimension to it which necessarily involved conflicts. The end of these conflicts was the absolute truth which was Spirit. Hegel distilled all of this into his version of dialectics where all ideas had underlying contradictions which was to be exploited. Hegel had completed the system when he finished his Science of Logic and by the time he already died, the contradictions he had spoken of already appeared between the left and right hegelians, who subsequently caused numerous revolutions in Europe in the 1830's and 1840's.Marx was a deep reader of hegel and directly borrowed Hegel's dialectics and his idea of spirit, which Marx called a "specter haunting europe" at the beginning of his manifesto. Many other Marxists such as Lenin, the Frankfurt school, Zizek, and Fukuyama were well read in Hegel. It's not really known whether Hegel's occult magic is still working beyond his grave but the Indians have a competing attempt in trying to realize their god "Vishnu", which they claim resides inside the BSV blockchain. Hegel was known as a furious critic of Hinduism.

Imagine being handed the field of software development and not immediately realizing it is the easiest place to seize the means of production and hand control back to the prole.

Instead, these filth slurping slaves bowed to the masters and built systems of global control without a second thought.

We are dead.

>>13597328
F P B P

>>13598003
Based

>>13597809
>>13597762
It’s listed as one of the ten steps towards Communism?

Do you even read the book that the thread is about?

>>13598003
You sucked my cock today :3

>>13597322
I think even if you are Christian you have to admit the bible is the most harmful book because you likely believe most oher Christians are wrong and the amount of blood spilled on these disputes is immense. The koran is equally bad but has been around for less time.

A different answer is some very important contribution to science and technology, maybe something by Newton, because without that the industrial revolution and the greatly increased power to do harm would not have happened. Idk if this is stretching the spirit of the question too much. Idk if just bulding the steam engine relies much on math or science, but we couldnt have reached the levels of power on hand in the 20th century without them.

>>13597334
The book mainly talks about uncucking yourself from wageslavery
All the revolutions were their own abhorations

>>13598003
*Snap*

>>13598024
It calls for a violent revolution, buddy.

>>13598011
the ten planks are proposals for the early stage of the dictatorship of the proletariat, as distinguished from communism.

OP, you need to read this post >>13598017
and this post I made here >>13597997
. Hegel is talking about this movement in the Force and the Understanding in his discussion about the law of the inverted world. What really started in the 1060's as soviet attempts to subvert the US and indoctrinate leftists was really in actuality Russian shitposters indoctrinating white Americans into white nationalism and tricking them into forming a world-wide ethno-alliance between the slavs and the anglo-germanic white Americans to subdue the minorities. Hegel predicted all of this.

>>13598013
The only time I ever think of you is to imagine putting my boots on and stomping your face into a curb, you stale fart.

>>13598011
Most commies haven't, so all you'll get when you make a point is a smirk and regurgitated drivel. They aren't rational beings Anon. Fire up the choppers

>>13598042
You’re just pissed I’m the OP of this thread :p

Why are you so dodgy? What on earth were you doing all day if not masturbating to me? Why do you work at night now?

>>13598030
It's the only kind of revolution. Anything else is just a meek protest that will quickly be ignored.

>>13598047
I work for a living. You’re ban evading.

>>13598048
No necessarily, just most likely.

>>13598044
Indeed. You can see many Marxists haven’t even actually read any Marx. Typically the people who are against his ideologies have delved a fair bit into him, I would expect anyone else to have done the same.

>>13598048
Ah yes of course. It’s the only kind of revolution your kind would know, like throwing a tantrum at dinner because you can’t have dessert before your meal. The vegetables are a metaphor for hard work, you see.

>>13598052
>ban evading
This is 4chan(nel) you dumb cunt LMFAO

>>13598052
Yeah but you didn’t have a night job before. That’s why I ask

>>13598017
>bezmenov
Guy is a literal CIA asset. Yeah, all the cultural marxism and frankfurt school guys? Financed by CIA, not soviets.

>>13598062
>Typically the people who are against his ideologies have delved a fair bit into him

Doubt, but the thing you said about marxists is probably true though

>>13598070
I have no doubt this is indeed the case to some degree.

Interestingly enough Hollywood has a prominent history of engaging in Marxist propaganda.

I think the ACTUAL revolution comes when we drift from Capitalism vs Marxism into Austrian Socialism or some debates about capital diffusion like the practices adopted by congress already, like the ESOP

>>13598062
The americans are beasts that only understand violence as an answer.
It's like fighting to get your meal back after it was stolen.
Of course, you're an indoctrinated neoliberal.

>>13598068
You’re still not aware of my time zone?
W/e. Shut up, troll

>>13598080
When was it stolen, then?

>>13598081
I don’t understand. You made a post at like 4 est about getting back to work.

>taking your lunch break at 1 pm

Anyway bitch I don’t have all day. And you don’t want this to continue forever so get your dildo out and start sucking.

>>13598048
liberal capitalism in England didn't off the kings the way it did in France, unless you want to count the glorious revolution, which is really stretching things. It just gradually overcame the old systems through incremental reform and outcompeting everything else.

I understand the idea that communist attempts at making worker-owned companies would be crushed but idk if that's really true everywhere, there's that one in Spain right?, and if there were a bunch of them succeeding all the time people would be a lot more friendly towards communism. But you guys want this totalitarian upheaval of the state into something that just looks like dictatroship to most people, and not of the proles, but of a small party or just a man.

Why would the state care if it was taxing worker owned or capitalist owned companies? Capitalists dont literally run the government they just have influence on it through lobbying and influence in the press, the situation is a lot more complicated.

Obviously im not a marxist and I get all these complicated ideas involved in his theory about the way shit has to progress, and furthermore I dont actually care about your cause, i dont mind working in capitalist society, or in some functioning socialist society, it's all the same to me so long as the government isnt acting fucking insane. all the same I dont understand why there aren't more companies like that one in Spain, and why this isn't a larger talking point for socialists.

>>13598089
Ok I’ll play along this time

>>13598092
Thank you, finally.

Through sheer persistence and sublimation I have transformed you into a straight person. Thank you very much. Now get to work, baby. This cock ain’t gonna suck itself

(Not trolling actually suck your dildo please thank you)

Americans shouldn't be allowed post anything related to Marx

>>13597700
Being extremely pro immigration and wanting radical change to the government is pretty reminiscent of Trotskyism.

>>13598028
Based

>>13598105
It is, but the liberals these days are worse than the Trotskyists: they don’t even KNOW they’re communists. A lot of the hints they are pushing for are decent short term solutions and also part of a much larger road map to nationwide reform in favor of communism. That’s why I say that many liberals are being duped
>>13598091
That first point you made is an important one. It’s the reason why thinkers such as Edmund Burke had cautioned against the French Revolution.

The way that the French Revolution occurred and the leaders put in charge showed an impetuous petulance that was unrivaled at the time.

We need some sort of authority in charge who aren’t money bankers, as bankers destroyed most of the church land under the French Revolution as they would under a Marxist (atheist) revolution.

I’m trying to help you, and hopefully others understand, that the more rash, the more rage induced, the revolution, it seems to be the more likely that bankers will be in charge after it.

Which should tell you something about
A) who is really controlling society
And
B) why you should resist it and strive for privatization

Just relax

Also Butterfly is lying about having a girlfriend

harry potter

>>13598095
Why not? America is the last place Marx has not touched. Europeis forgone, I try to stay the fuck away from non-privatized countries

>>13597369
>Fix your punctuation and grammar you stupid fuck, I would rather not engage with such a pedestrian way of speak.

>>13597700
It's not a term you're going to accept because it doesn't come from academia in the sense in which it's being used here, but the concept is very simple for the people who use it. It's the idea that the economic prole as sanctified victim was replaced by racial, religious, sexual, etc. minorities.

It's more talking about the ethical framework and what society focuses on now than meaning the evolution of Marxist though. It's a very basic slave morality argument, and that's really it, the right have noticed that academics and popular culture don't really talk about class much anymore but focus on the other idpol things so they made a dumb name for it, as people are wont to do, and they're going to continue to use it because that's how language works and you can't just control how everyone terms things.

The fact that marxists fall in line with prog doctrine almost all the time makes it especially hard for the right to tell you apart, because it's the progressivism they really hate, they dont think about communism very much anymore. Basically classical marxists are just seen as progs with some other weird leftwing ideas, your central defining feature to the right is your progressivism.

>>13598091
>Capitalists dont literally run the government they just have influence on it through lobbying and influence in the press, the situation is a lot more complicated.
Haha I wish
>>13598114
>who is really controlling society
It's easy to tell, in my case. The hierarchy goes like this:
1) US Embassy
2) US Companies
3) Local Oligarchs
4) Military
Why would I want privatization, if these four groups have pushed for extreme capitalism over a century and have done naught but drive the country into misery

>>13598124
There is no rigid hierarchy, ya dip. Most likely in any nationwide economic decision scheme, all four of those have major overlap. How these things work is that there are always political decisions affecting the corporate sphere and corporate decisions affecting the political sphere and military sphere etc etc.

It’s why it comes down to a hyperspace n-dimensional Analysis where a Ben diagram would fit for two interested parties.

Just something to think about man, I think you’re visualizing the problem a bit too linearly.

As others have pointed out, no the US government, not even all companies, have pushed for extreme capitalism. :3

the reason anti-Marxists talk about the Manifesto so much instead of Capital is that they have no refutation of Marx's theory of value.

>>13598124
You know about all the various government agencies and their random power structures, and you know you can't reduce it just to capitalists controlling them. It has always immensely bothered me that you guys do this, the fact that a society is ultimately ruled by its ability to produce wealth, its economic system, because this is like the food it consumes, doesn't mean that that system is the chief executive(in practice there are always a bunch of competing forces of power that interrelated in complicated ways), it just means that the executive will always have to take into account the system, just as he will have to take into account a million other things. The specific political systems and social contexts involved vary from country to country.

>>13598138
How about this: Das Kapital is a largely inferior form of visualizing economics, as the economic rate of growth has actually been shown to be a constant rate, contradicting Marx’s underconsumption theory.

That and he looks at wage as price-adding processes instead of value-adding processes. He associates the gradual lowering of wage rates to exploitation but doesn’t realize that it’s because a larger amount of profit is going towards capital owners, while capital becomes restricted (a point espoused by Louis Kelso).

>>13597997
Can someone elaborate on why Hegel was so bad
I know he wanted social intervention and stuff to escape "reason" but what exactly was his end goal

>>13598139
It also might say something about the overall behavior of the human species :3

One might say we are based on a method of exchange. There are forms of socialism that operate through this exchange, just not ones that pander to a collective majority’s every whim. (Because you would end up with some bad policies by doing that)

:3

>>13598136
Ben should be Venn but you understand I’m sure

>>13597322
Fuck sakes I hate Americans

>>13598145
>How about this: Das Kapital is a largely inferior form of visualizing economics, as the economic rate of growth has actually been shown to be a constant rate, contradicting Marx’s underconsumption theory.
Marx didn't propose an underconsumptionist theory and actually explicitly criticized such theories in the second volume of Capital.
>That and he looks at wage as price-adding processes instead of value-adding processes.
you don't mean "wage" to be synonymous with "variable capital" here, right? because the opposite is true.

By the way if Butterfly is seriously being tsundere it’s really cute but very terribly hard on me ;_;

>>13598158
Faggot.

>>13598162
It’s like all you’re doing is finding some sort of discernible pattern in my replies and trying to argue based on that rather than the actual points I’m trying to make.

Marx’s Theory was underconsumption, that the growth rate would eventually completely stall, along with profits. Not understanding this would be a criminal misunderstanding of Marx.

Variable capital includes wages. But fixed capital would take up more of the productive labor over time. Under Marx’s system, the price of the goods would stay the same while representing a lower variable capital portion. If wages were supposed to stay the same the price would have to increase leading to decreased spending.do you see how I’m doing more typing and explaining than you? It’s because you’re bad at debating. :3

My argument is that wages should go up in value as the workers produce more and the only reason they don’t is because 1) capital is not diffused and 2) workers rights are not diffused

Marx focused on wealth diffusion and price increases and decreases, not capital and actual value.

Therein lies the difference

>>13598166
keep fapping loner, shes just a dry cunt being silly

>>13598185
I don’t know man, you see that pause after I asked her to start sucking cock? She’s done this before, and remember we have proof she masturbated to me before.

She could just be a tsundere, which being on 4chan this wouldn’t surprise me

>>13598184
>Marx’s Theory was underconsumption, that the growth rate would eventually completely stall, along with profits.
this just isn't true. you think his falling rate of profit theory proposes that profits will "completely stall?" the point is that the ROP will decline suring long-wave periods of expansion, then rise during depressions.
>Variable capital includes wages.
variable capital IS wages, on Marx's view.
>Under Marx’s system, the price of the goods would stay the same while representing a lower variable capital portion. If wages were supposed to stay the same the price would have to increase leading to decreased spending.
I really don't know what you mean by "under Marx's system." are you suggesting he prescribed an economic system wherein this ought to be the case? or are you saying that this describes Marx's conception of capitalism? either is incorrect.
>Marx focused on wealth diffusion and price increases and decreases, not capital and actual value.
what do you mean by "actual value" here?

>>13598215
Workers rights, the ideas that matter in the long run, to be able to comfortably live while provided for by a company or organization you add value to.

I fail to see how this sort of thing is impossible from where we are now without a violent revolution

The first two points: you’re right. The next one, you’re wrong. As a matter of fact I know that is Marx’s conception of how underconsumption works.

Marx’s economics is based on underconsumption and Keynes on overconsumption. It’s why both systems are inherently flawed.

In addition, Marx added a level of moral subjectivity into his system and built his point around a common political rallying cry inherent within Democracy, hence why many poltical philosphers like Tocqueville and Schumpeter saying that the coming democratic ending could unleash chains upon humanity through a willingness to be controlled by an organized economic body, Marxist communism certainly does not respect worker’s rights in this way in the slightest. :3

>>13598234
This point actually brings it home why my statement in the OP is correct.

>>13598234
>Workers rights, the ideas that matter in the long run, to be able to comfortably live while provided for by a company or organization you add value to.
so more or less Marx's view of reproducibility.
>The first two points: you’re right. The next one, you’re wrong. As a matter of fact I know that is Marx’s conception of how underconsumption works.
you'd have to explain to me what you take "Marx’s conception of how underconsumption" to be, because, as I said, the mainstream view among Marx scholars is that he rejected underconsumptionist theories.
>In addition, Marx added a level of moral subjectivity into his system and built his point around a common political rallying cry inherent within Democracy, hence why many poltical philosphers like Tocqueville and Schumpeter saying that the coming democratic ending could unleash chains upon humanity through a willingness to be controlled by an organized economic body, Marxist communism certainly does not respect worker’s rights in this way in the slightest. :3
don't really see what any of this has to do with the topic at hand (Marx's theory of value).

>>13598249
I’m just making discussion. If you’re going to respond to intelligent answers with one sentence quipped responses with no justification or explanation of your own perhaps you should read more literature? :3

And not just Marx either, babby

>>13597334
Based as fuck

>>13598254
you claimed Marx held an underconsumptionist theory, which is at odds with mainstream Marxist scholarship. I'm just trying to get you to explain what you mean. you don't have to respond if you don't want.

>communist is bad
>no i haven't read anything by marx
>you should watch this PragerU on the USSR
>Haha commie no food!!!!
>my cat identifies as an attack helicopter!!!!

>>13598265
I explained what I meant in previous posts. As opposed to offering any support for your claim on your end, you simply called it wrong.

I could give a fuck what mainstream opinion says, that’s a rather Marxist idea in itself. I suppose if everyone was jumping off a bridge etc etc

Speaking about bridges it’s like I’m arguing with one right now

>>13598270
This but unironically

>>13598273
>I explained what I meant in previous posts.
all you said is that Marx thought "growth" and profits would completely stall, which I already pointed out is a misreading of Marx's falling rate of profit thesis.
>As opposed to offering any support for your claim on your end, you simply called it wrong.
the third section of Mehring's biography of Marx explains what I mean: https://www.marxists.org/archive/mehring/1918/marx/ch12.htm

>>13598292
No as in for wages to stay the same prices would have to rise because of the increased amount of fixed capital investment, the Ricardian argument of chapter IV of Ricardo’s Principles of Political Economy.

You DID read that right? Marx uses that as justification. :3

>>13597334
>marxism is things I dont like and the more I dont like it the more maxist it is

>>13598302
>maxist
Really taking the time to type out your responses there

I’m not surprised. Your average Marxist is around 15 years old

>>13598306
*you're. learn to grammer faggot.

>>13598300
>No as in for wages to stay the same prices would have to rise because of the increased amount of fixed capital investment
could you point me to where Marx argues this?

I've never read any marx, but i will still hold an opinion of it because internet memes told me what to think.

>>13598331
Answer my question.

Did you read Ricardo?

>>13598340
I don't see the relevance of that to what we're trying to figure out here

>>13598353
Because his idea of underconsumption hinges on a justification derived from chapter four of Ricardo’s Principles of Political Economy, which Marx cites In Das Kapital.

Sheesh, have you even read MARX?!

>>13598358
>which Marx cites In Das Kapital.
but this is the part that seems to be relevant. I'm just asking where he cites Ricardo's argument to justify an underconsumpionist theory in Capital.

>>13598364
Volume II, Chapter 11. Thats your homework, son.

You referenced that volume up above too fyi

>>13598369
what I'm not seeing is where Marx invokes Ricardo to justify an underconsumptionist theory. the point of this invocation is to critique Ricardo's theory of value, as I understand it.

>>13598385
Well surprise, you understood wrong. Perhaps you should have read Ricardo before Marx

>>13598117
And that's why it is a third world shit hole with a pseudo democracy with a borderline retarded population that unironically believe that they have """"""freedom""""""

>>13598168
I don't he is a burger

>>13597322

The Very Hungry Caterpillar

>>13597322
It's for those, like Peterson, who can't read Das Kapital.

>>13597322
Bruh.

>>13598123
> but the concept is very simple for the people who use it. It's the idea that the economic prole as sanctified victim was replaced by racial, religious, sexual, etc. minorities.
And it's a brain dead thing to say if anyone knew anything about anything.
Classes in Marxism aren't just "what people identify with". Classes are created in accordance to their relationship with the means of production. The Capitalists (the owners) // The workers (the non-owners).
Any sorts of group thinking or classification or us vs them thinking is NOT Marxism. The Slave vs master morality is a very good example of that.
I don't give a fuck what "the right" thinks society is like today. When they say things like this they just prove how ignorant, paranoid and clueless about modern ideological movements they are.
Also "marxists fall in line with prog doctrine almost all the time" That's wrong i many cases. Communist parties around the world have taken positions against many modern "progressists" thinking. They tend to be against immigration, pro-nuclear, against identity politics, against delocalization of capital and other.
The right saying that theses trends in modern politics are "Neo Marxists" when in fact they are just the logical continuation of the Neo-liberal movements they keep putting in power all over the globe since the start of the cold war is an incredible case of modern scapegoating.

>>13598011
Breathing and eating is one of the steps to achieve communism, since dead revolutionaries do not make good revolutionaries. Therefore anyone who breathes and eats is a communist.

>>13600645
This book was not harmful at all and raised some pertinent questions we would do well to pay attention to in this day and age, with all the profiteering in Congress.

>>13600813
>Therefore anyone who breathes and eats is a communist.

>he thinks communists are able to eat

I’ll give you breathing but eating is a bit too much

>>13600870
Well clearly the communists I posited haven't achieved communism yet, so your joke doesn't work :3

>>13600889
Not me, you’re actually responding to me.

Double- owned

>>13598723
>This wholly contradicts Ricardo’s doctrine of value, likewise his theory of profit, which is in fact a theory of surplus-value. In general he considers the distinction between fixed and circulating capital only to the extent that different proportions of both of them in equally large capitals invested in different branches of production influence the law of value, particularly the extent to which an increase or decrease of wages in consequence of these conditions affects prices. But even within this restricted investigation he commits the gravest errors on account of his confusing fixed and circulating with constant and variable capital. Indeed, he starts his analysis on an entirely wrong basis. In the first place, in so far as the part of the capital-value laid out in labour-power has to be classified under the head of circulating capital, the definitions of circulating capital itself are wrongly developed, particularly the circumstances which place the part of capital laid out in labour under this head. In the second place there is a confusion of the definition according to which the part of capital invested in labour is variable capital with the definition according to which it is circulating capital, as opposed to fixed capital.

>>13600987
Well you did your homework. Now how does that refute my original claim. I never stipulated that he referenced him in support of or to ‘invoke’ Ricardo. You made that assertion yourself.

Please instead of copy pasting sections from one of the worst books every written, justify yourselves using words

>>13598003
Love you mommy

>>13601010
>Now how does that refute my original claim.
well it doesn't but now you've claimed that I've misunderstood the chapter by claiming that Marx invokes Ricardo to criticize his theory of value, but I think the excerpt I posted demonstrates he did do that.
> I never stipulated that he referenced him in support of or to ‘invoke’ Ricardo.
"invoke" just means "reference" so I don't know what you mean.
>Please instead of copy pasting sections from one of the worst books every written, justify yourselves using words
well I asked if you could provide an excerpt that supports your claim that Marx proposed an underconsumptionist theory, because as far as I see, he doesn't in that chapter.

>>13597322
The Bible

>>13597817
>I watch Zizek interviews: the post

>>13597322
>Has there ever been a more harmful book written in the history of mankind?
Yes, the USA Constitution.

>>13598042
>putting my boots on and stomping your face into a curb
That's quite rude.

>>13597335
ahem

>>13598270
>You can only talk to me if you partake in and read all the brainwashing material I've consumed
I take the first hand accounts of my family members and friends who didn't enjoy their time in the USSR over the writings of a bunch of autistic Germans and Russians...who's writings gave my family members a hard time.

>>13601113
cringe

>>13601807
t. autist who doesn't know how to study the talmud

>>13597322
My diary desu