/lit/ - Literature

Jesus Christ, who has the time to read all of that. Yea life sucks and people are constantly being alienated from their labor, who the fuck cares. Either go full Walden mode or stop giving a fuck. Life is to short to waste time reading nerds like Marx and to be seething with resentment as some material contradictions or whatever.

>>14053818
>buy it from Amazon! TeeHee

>>14053818

Marx is the Monster Energy Drink of literature

>>14053818

Why is it the colour of blood?

>>14054056
because revolution is fueled by blood

>mfw at Oxford I'm known as the serious black commie but back in Africa I come from a very ruthless and wealthy family

>>14054056
Kill people

>>14054056
It's not. Have you ever seen blood?

>>14054056
>The purposeless massacres perpetrated since the June and October events, the tedious offering of sacrifices since February and March, the very cannibalism of the counterrevolution will convince the nations that there is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.

>>14053818
>Anglos in charge of reading comprehension

>>14054567
The edition in the picture is not an English translation, and I don't think an Anglo's search results would immediately happen upon the edition posted. The only thing worse than The Eternal Anglo is The Eternal Anglo Anklebiter.

>>14054023
It’s free on Marxist.org

>communism with religious
how would it look like?

>>14054588
The point being only people who on planetary doses of neoliberalism, could actually read Marx and conclude that was even remotely close to the content

>>14053988
fuck marx read baudrillard

>>14054622
>yes goy read the Marxist

>>14054608
Liberation theology is probably my best bet for organizing in East Texas to be honest.

>>14053818
thinking capital is about ethics

>>14054608

>>14053988
Dangerously based. Brooklyn hipsters seething rn

>>14053988
This but unironically.

>>14053818

KILL PEOPLE
BURN SHIT
FUCK SCHOOL

>>14053988
Resentment is based.

>>14054594
>Marxist.org : This domain may be for sale.
kek

>>14056599
We get it: kapitalism won

>>14053988
Unironically this. Nietzsche rightfully said that only the "little things" like nutrition, climate, place, recreation etc. are of importance in order to live well.

>>14053988
Clarifying the struggle for freedom beyond necessity in the context of a critique of political economy, attempting to unravel bourgeois society coming into contradiction through a critique on the science of the anatomy of civil society (bourgeois society’s own self-understanding), has very little to do with resentment against the rich. Capitalism, as the social foundations of modern politics, provides the basis for a movement towards freedom within and beyond its own contradictions.

The problem is that most people have forgotten what political economy originally meant. Its sphere as a discipline has been subsumed by political science (the science over the principles and policies surrounding the administration of state), economics (the science surrounding the administration of resource allocation), and sociology (the science of society). Prior to the fracturing of the disciplines, political economy was the science of society, in its economic and political forms of mediation. Marx’s schtick is how our social relations are mediated through material relations of production, so that economics as a science obscures the sociality of economic relations (ie capital as a social relation), and sociology obscures the materiality of social relations. This mystification, even when confronted (ie when sociologists use ”political economic” analysis), is nonetheless obscured because this transition is facilitated through a change of the understanding of politics (and thereby demarcating a science of “politics“ as its own discipline) from the organization of society to the administration of state.

If you read Adam Smith it is pretty obvious he is not really an economist as we understand it. Marx’s point is that the bourgeois political economists of his own time had regressed from Smith, who already assumed economic-political relations were mediations of social relations as a given, and against socialist critics of bourgeois society for not addressing this regression (uncritically taking up Ricardo). Marxists today have even further regressed, because the foundations of bourgeois society (such the importance of Locke’s argument that the origin of private property is labor) are even more obscure to us today, so that the anti-bourgeois pseudo-Marxist ends up repressing and internalizing bourgeois ideology as the utopian socialists of old did. Pseudo-radical posturing (usually using phraseology about transforming society from its foundations) further obscures the transition in the political imagination by trying to resurrect Smith - through his inheritance in Marx (and debasing Marx into positivist/moralist sociology)

>>14054056
The flag of the Paris Commune of the first French Revolution was red.