/lit/ - Literature

>>15213019
About most things he was. Had way too much faith in the proletariat though. If they had any spine they would have rebelled long ago.

Let's just agree to stop talking about philosophers we have not read.
This is the board's general problem, but is particularly obvious regarding Marx, because everyone feels as if they must have some opinion on him.
You know this is just going to be yet another shitflinging thread without substance.

>>15213019
Was he right about the Jews?

Isnt accepting marx the contrarian opiniob?

>>15213019
people like being confrontational, idk.

very worthwhile thread coming up

>>15213019
He was right and Fascists who hate on Marx are just NPCs. It is possible to incorporate a Marxist understanding of capitalism and staple it with ethno-nationalism. I'm confused why in 2020 Fascists/Nazis haven't accepted Marx, but not surprising given their autistic, ad-hoc racial views. Nazbol is the only future for any rightoid, class collaboration is finished.

>>15213048
this. i'm a marxist in almost every way except this

How can a pseudo-monarchy like North Korea's be avoided?

He is not right about everything, he is right about most things.

>>15213019
Interesting. What specifically was he right about?

>>15213054
You have to go back

>>15213250
Then you must read Camatte, then Ellul, then Kaczynski.

>>15213019
I've always maintained that, though.

This thread is basically shit quality. No one is actually discussing anything this is hilarious.

Was this the point? Is this a thinly veiled troll thread?

North Korea is what Marx wanted and its a shithole

When he recants his materialist metaphysics

>>15213293
>Is this a thinly veiled troll thread?
It's a Marx thread, what do you think? It's the easiest thread to get a lot of (you)s in with no effort whatsoever.

>>15213301
>clean
>ethnically coherent
>law and order
>people look happy
>nice art
Best Korea isn't a meme
https://youtu.be/NkpojqXVt-g
https://youtu.be/Pl5hHazNJcE

>>15213355
>>15213393
This doesn't mean you can be hateful to certain groups of people, it just means people are good at different things

>>15213405
I thought Marxism didnt care about morality

>>15213412
Everyone belongs in the same interest group under Marxism. There is no exploiting certain people because of their identity.

>>15213421
yeah but what about retarded assholes? Theyre still going to be around

>>15213434
What about them? As long as they aren't exploiting others then it isn't a problem

>>15213442
and if they just sit around being dicks?

>>15213451
As long as they aren't bothering anyone or doing anything illegal

>>15213019
he wasn't thought
and most "marxists" here can admit it with no problem.

>>15213376
I cringe at the life of luxuries the Kim family and their bootlickers have. Kim Jong-il was a terrible leader, Caligula-tier.

>>15213405
No, it means that Marxism rejects egalitarianism and multiculturalism. Marx's rejectiong on notions of equality do revolve around the notion that different people are good and different things, they revovle the abolotion of class. Please try reading Marx.

>>15213483
a good leader can be a terrible person
what's is your point?
>my american brain "cringes" at something foreing

>>15213489
I'm going off that famous quote about abilities

>>15213489
imagine being this condescendent and not avoiding the mistake of atributing qualities of your time to a thinker that died centuries ago
please
read Marx and use your brain when doing it instead of thinking of the memes you can now use

>>15213500
I'm not american. Kim's lives are literally the american dream. Being filthy rich and untouchable, having no responsibility at all for your actions.
I'm saying that if your people are starving to death you shouldn't import tons of useless and expensive luxury products.
That's all.

>>15213434
We would've cut your balls of but you're ugly as shit anyway so this problem has basically solved itself.

>>15213514
Imagine thinking the problems of egalitarianism are any different today as they were in the time of Marx. Or are you simply accustomed supporting equality whilst also calling yourself a Marxist?

>>15213536
based fascist

>>15213517
fair
but still can name a world leader that doesn't do it
if you could i would take it to heart

>>15213293
Reddit raid man

>>15213051
Do a quick scroll through the catalogue, try to find ONE post with substance. There's a handful of intellectual discussions confined to the more serious threads like this one but 90% of posts right now are super low-effort one or two linerd s with no /lit/ content whatsoever!

>>15213541
When did i call myself a marxist? no one online should be able to call himself a marxist and still be taken seriously
i will imply ignore your question as it has many asumptions you have made about myself.

>>15213019
He wasn't, though. LTV is obsolete in modern economics, to begin with,

>>15213019
He was wrong on the core issue. Historical progress and development of the means of production as a way to emancipation.

We are going towards technocracy with advanced means of controlling the individual, not communism.

>materialism
>teleology
>dialectics
I honestly can't get behind this stuff even if I think some of his economic descriptions are worthwhile.

>>15213672
good post

>>15213638
>Is asked a questions.
>You're making assuptions.

Are you suggesting that there has been a reuction in extremem povery therefore we should not be concerned with rejecting eaglitarianism and egalitarian systems such as multiculturalism?

>>15213649
It´s hard to apply these days, because globalization and outsourcing. But Marx was writing capital as a critique of classical political economy which was using LTV.

>>15213683
ESL
you just lack common grasp of the language bro

>>15213649
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emnYMfjYh1Q&ab_channel=PaulCockshott

>>15213084
This. NazBol is the future.

>>15213687
Not exactly a critique of classical political economy, but pointing that due to LTV, profit could only exist from surplus value. Quite smart observation, really, the only issue being that a few decades after, LTV wouldn't be relevant anymore. Even before globalisation and outsorcing, as the marginalist revolution offered a far better theory to explain value.

>>15213019
Marxism is a petit-bourgeois approach to economics because it still remains entrenched in a middle-class paradigm of utility and productivity. Revolution can only further cement man's alienation from himself because Marxism is just another philosophy that reduces man to a thing, submits him to an order of things. Read Bataille.

>>15213716
imagine a right-winger trying to refute this video

>>15213752
le average labor face

>>15213019
>vulgar materialism
YIKES

>>15213051
Pretty much this. If we keep complaining maybe the illiterates will leave?

>>15213694
>German as a second language
Have you actually read Marx?

>>15213727
>but pointing that due to LTV, profit could only exist from surplus value
Which was important for his theory explaining "tendency of rate of profit to fall". IIRC there´s no hard consensus if the rate of profit is really falling or not, but evidence is leaning towards accepting that the rate of profit has a tendency to falling.
>Even before globalisation and outsorcing, as the marginalist revolution offered a far better theory to explain value.
Not really. They denied existence of the category of intrinsic value at all. Generally speaking liberals know that equilibrium economics don´t give good long-term prospects to capitalism so one can´t expect them to ever acknowledge them.

>>15213791
> evidence is leaning towards accepting that the rate of profit has a tendency to falling

Nice source, meanwhile Schumpeter showed that profit can rise and fall in various industries, with regard to technological or systemic improvements, which is indeed what we see.
>They denied...intrinsic value
Uhhh then what did Walras mean by ‘numeraire’

>>15213048
They did, and got crushed, again and again. Paris commune (1871), revolutionary Catalonia (1937), Budapest commune (1956), Occupy wall street, Yellow vests etc...

One of the biggest takeaways I had from when I took Marxist theory was that each misunderstanding of Marx is inherently contradictory:
In terms of politics, people say he's either too partisan (leftist politics) or too ambitious in scope, with seeing the social whole. He's either too simple (reductive: all about money and class) or too difficult (confusing ideas and prose). He's either dangerous - association with history of dictatorships - or he's utterly useless (unrealistic - the notion that socialism would never work). Finally, he's either too economic (not literary enough) or too literary (not economic enough).

I'm convinced nobody on this board has a decent understanding of Marx

>>15213278
LTV. Wrong about everything else

>>15215049
>Nice source, meanwhile Schumpeter showed that profit can rise and fall in various industries, with regard to technological or systemic improvements, which is indeed what we see.
We are talking about the general profit, on a global scale. We don't give a shit if some economic sector sees it's profit increase for a few years.

>>15213019
When will tankies stop being contrarian retards and admit Marxism is dead and it's not coming back?

>>15213019
What do you mean he was right? His theories haven't had a one instance of successful prediction.

>>15213268
Still no one has answered this yet?

>>15215134
Oh boy, it's my favorite meme graph again! Thanks, David!

>>15215061
I know that you commies like to steal, but would you kindly stop appropriating opposing political ideologies like anarchism, nationalism and anti-regulationism as your own?

>>15215095
Not even that. STV has been accepted as the mainstream position for 130 years.

>>15215551
>the mainstream position for 130 years
all the reason to toss it out like the garbage it is

>2020
>Marxism
The good thing about materialist ideologies is that they are ephemeral due to their own nature. Wonder what will be the next fad after consoomerism.

>>15213451
Quit being a lil bitch, commie.

>dude like labor theory and costs and stuff, and like, surplus, and the proleta--
bro who cares

>>15213084
You sound like you enjoy taking nigger dick in the ass while drinking their piss, you pathetic pinko bitch lol

>>15215070
Well, that's quite obvious, no?
The next book on my list is Grundrisse, so I hope I will then be able to understand Marx.

>>15213084
The "fascists" you're referring to aren't even fascistic in any real, ideologically developed sense of the word. They're just racist liberals. I wouldn't call myself a fascist, but I'm definitely somebody who gravitates towards a third position, and I hardly disagree with most of Marx's criticism of capitalism.

I tend to find marxist themselves to be utterly repugnant, however, and I am not going to kid myself into believing that I could ever meaningfully cooperate with them. Where they overlap with liberals is where any agreeing between us ends.

>>15215539
Does it even matter? It's all a laundry list of people rising up and getting crushed. No matter what you believe it's demoralizing in the same way.

>don't even look at thread
>assume OP is a troll
>mfw I win
https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1588060714366.webm

>>15215551
The ruling ideology is the ideology of the ruling class.

>>15213019
*blocks your path*

>>15213084
ISWYDT. Juche-like ideologies are the future.

>>15215539
>If [the proletariat] had any spine they would have rebelled long ago
>Examples of proletariat rebelling of no avail
>REEEE THOSE WERE NOT MARXISTS
I thought the reading comprehension on /lit/ would be better than this.

>>15213019
That's not Heidegger

>>15213019
Try suicide nigger

>>15215049
>Schumpeter showed that profit can rise and fall
That doesn´t contradict "tendency of the rate of profit to fall".

>what did Walras mean by ‘numeraire’
Enlighten us, I through that Walras was one of proponents of subjective theory of value.

Commies and frogs get the bullet.

>>15215070
>I'm convinced nobody on this board has a decent understanding of Marx
Including yourself?

>>15213019

>>15217890
Probably.
There is no shame in saying you haven't read a philosopher if you do not make claims about him. And anon made no claims about Marx. He only noticed that it is likely that those who make claims about him have no knowledge of him, because they tend to claim contradictory things at different times.
I do not comment about Marx for the same reason, I have not read much of his works.

Is Marx even relevant today? Don't get me wrong, I agree with almost all of what Marx has to say and pre-WW2, there were many successfully mass protests, even full-on revolutions based on his teachings. But I feel like said violent revolutions and dictatorship of the proletariat are just not possible in our peaceful technologically advanced neoliberal countries. It seems to me as if we missed the timeframe of the early 1900s to the 1940s and are now bound to capitalism by our general prosperity, hedonistic consumerism and endless distractions. What comes when the prosperity ends through the mass unemployment by the ever increasing automation of jobs despite mixed with unnatural capitalist-motivated population growth through immigration? Do we just vote for the lesser evil year after year, waiting for the generations to come to take the hit? Where are the Rosa Luxemburgs, Lenins, Hitlers, Trotskies or Strasser brothers of our time?
>inb4 anprim larping

>>15217988
>But I feel like said violent revolutions and dictatorship of the proletariat are just not possible in our peaceful technologically advanced neoliberal countries.
Peaceful and prosperous neoliberal countries are merely one part of the world. It was adressed by Lenin that part of the world will be exploiting the other creating domestic "worker aristocracy".

>What comes when the prosperity ends through the mass unemployment by the ever increasing automation of jobs despite mixed with unnatural capitalist-motivated population growth through immigration?
We will soon find out.

>>15217812
What did frogs do to you?

>>15213048

rebel for what? the government already gives me free housing, free money, free schooling for my children, free dental care and free medicine

>>15218122
>the government
The state. The government is just one of its bodies.

>>15218138
don't give a shit

>>15218140
This sounds like bullshit.
Let me see the source.

>>15217913
But I have, and I even shared my own critique in this thread that went wholly ignored, despite not fitting into any of the "misinterpretations" that anon was talking about. It's inevitable that a marxist would play a game of no true scotsman without actually addressing any of the points made prior to his post. All he gave was an opinion that was utterly bereft of content.

>>15216559

>>15213393
Equality? Or identicalness? Equality before the Law is one thing, the basis of any decent legal system. But no one is "equal" to anyone else in real life, everyone differs in a great variety of ways.

>>15213019
>be Marx
>excrete steaming pile of jewpoop
>it took 30 hours to produce it
>muh living wage
>30h * $15 = $450 value
>LTV

>>15218209
Honestly, you raised my blood pressure by writing this. Congratulations, I suppose.

>>15215538
So the current economical crisis is a meme? Or maybe you believe that the current economical crisis is caused by corona, in this case you are the meme believer, REversal.

>>15218038
>Peaceful and prosperous neoliberal countries are merely one part of the world. It was adressed by Lenin that part of the world will be exploiting the other creating domestic "worker aristocracy".
And is there a solution to this besides worldwide fully automated space communism in the form of some sort of totalitarianism?

>We will soon find out.
What do you speculate? Another big World War with recovery afterwards (nvm weapons too good)? A boring dystopia where a full collapse is prevented, peace is maintained through population control and people are the same as now but very poor?

>>15215551
>STV
> mainstream position
As already said, that's not a good sign. Every thing that is mainstream in our society is mainstream because it serves the interests of the Capital.

>>15216641
>I tend to find marxist themselves to be utterly repugnant
>Want to abolish class based society
>Are repugnant
Maybe you have some self loathing going on. Or maybe you just didn't read Marx, and your opinion of him comes from youtube vids.

>>15217988
>What comes when the prosperity ends through the mass unemployment by the ever increasing automation of jobs despite mixed with unnatural capitalist-motivated population growth through immigration?
Possibly, Capitism collapse, revolts, repression, techno-survaillance, more collapse, more repression, proletariat fight back, en masse, nothing held back this time, cost millions of proletarian lifes, proletariat wins, create a classless society based on the allocation of production to each according to his needs.
That's just a scenario, but it's quite possible it will happen like this.

>>15218670
Why wouldn't the bourgeoisie predict this and work against it? What sort of uprising would it be? Where I live 99% of people my age have never held a gun in their life and have never had any combat training so a violent revolution is impossible. And I don't think they will start teaching men how to fight again as things go south. The only way the proletariat could fight back seems to be with a military coup which also seems unlikely. With the techno-surveillance you mentioned, the military could get screened 24/7 by some algorithm for rebellious activity.

>>15218175
REad critique of the Gotha program. You will have your existential question about Marx's opinion on "equality" answered.

>>15218573
>And is there a solution to this
anti-Americanism has been essence of The Left for decades. Let´s continue in that direction.

>What do you speculate? Another big World War
That´s my bet, but there won´t be "a recovery" within our lifetimes.

>>15218733
Nightmarish techno-surveillance will probably be weakened as well with the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. About proletarian strength, the thing about the proletariat, is that they are many. LIke the vast majority of the population. They compensate their low fighting skills with numbers. That's what happened recently with the yellow vests. At the peak of the movment, the police could do nothing to stop them blocking the highways. Have they been a little more angry and determined, they could have overthrow the executive. Not that it would have changed anything, since the power that be would have replaced the president with an other lackey, but still. They were closer than you think to being able to overthrow the executive power.

>>15218873
>Have they been a little more angry and determined, they could have overthrow the executive. Not that it would have changed anything, since the power that be would have replaced the president with an other lackey
Perhaps that is the reason. People don´t know how would they run the state differently so they just act angry hoping that those in power would have to yield on at least some points.

But it´s a damn shame that the only European revolution of the last decade was cooperation between glowniggers, neonazis and Jewish oligarchs.

>>15218955
>But it´s a damn shame that the only European revolution of the last decade was cooperation between glowniggers, neonazis and Jewish oligarchs.
I do not agree. I've met them. Yellow vests are poor people struggling to make ends meet. Or maybe are you talking about what happened in Ukraine? In this case, yes, it was exaclty this: cooperation between glowniggers, neonazis and Jewish oligarchs.