/lit/ - Literature

This book provides a good critical overview. Also, marxists.org is a very helpful repository of writings by various authors from various times.

>>15700668
Ok thank you. I'll be sure to look into that.

bump

>>15700634
You could just read Marx OP

>>15700941
he could also read a micro-economics textbook

>>15700941
>And yes, I've tried to read the source material itself and honestly, I just had a hard time reading and understanding it because of how dated it is
Call me a brainlet but I couldn't make any headway beyond the communist manifesto

>>15700982
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/index.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm
Try these for the very basics of Marx.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/arcive/wilde-oscar/soul-man/
And this if you want to understand the utopian appeal of socialism.

I would highly recommend this if you want to understand Marx.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBazR59SZXk

Also, it is perfectly understandable why people would be wary of totalitarian variants of socialism after the historical experience of Stalin, but mainline socialism is libertarian in its ethos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBXUBYYEHhk

>>15700634
If communists believed even half the shit they claim, all the books on it would be free.

>anti-marxist can't even finish commiefesto
the absolute state

>>15701493
Right, because www.marxists.org is behind a paywall.

>>15701493
Communists need to eat and deal with capitalist publishers just as much as anybody else. It's not optimal but it is what it is.

>>15700941
Do I have to read Hegel first?

>>15701493
Trantor.is is antifa and you can read most of the books on Marxism, or at least most of the ones that are any good.

>>15700634
Read Marx faggot

>>15701509
I said that's all that I read.

Read Thomas Sowell - Marxism

>>15701770
Do I start with grundrisse, capital, or the German ideology?

>>15700634
>centralizes the power of the government e.g. communism
Congratulations, you don't know what communism is.

>>15700634
Honestly, Marxism is one of the hardest philosophies to understand just by reading the source material. I’d recommend you to watch some lectures by Richard Wolfe.

https://youtu.be/VdHO78PWr_8 (SKIP TO 16:28)
https://youtu.be/T9Whccunka4

If you need help understanding Das Kapital, then here is a series to help you with that.

https://youtu.be/yxDpF3XqpV4

I’d also recommend reading “The Principles of Communism” by Friedrich Engels as an absolute basic.

>Centralization of Power
Most modern day marxists do not want this. The authoritarian socialism of the 20th century was popularized by Lenin, and became widespread due to the influence of the USSR.

>>15702302
I actually just finished reading discrimination and disparities and I quite enjoyed it. I also just picked up pic related from a used book store but I haven't started it yet. Is Sowell /lit/ approved? I've heard a bunch of different opinions about him ranging from calling him an unrecognized genius to saying he's a phony ideologue who makes up statistics to sell a point

>>15700634
Give up, identity politics has killed the left and assured marxists will achieve nothing. Capital won. Climb and join before it's too late or die when automation apexes and the culling starts.

>>15701168
>Also, it is perfectly understandable why people would be wary of totalitarian variants of socialism after the historical experience of Stalin, but mainline socialism is libertarian in its ethos.
Well you are certainly saying the right things to pique my interest. I'll look into those videos.

>>15702354
Thanks for the informative post. I will make sure to check out these sources you've provided

>>15702713
>identity politics has killed the left and assured marxists will achieve nothing
What makes you so sure of this? The movements that are taking place right now have so much traction that I'm legitimately scared of some kind of Orwellian revolution

>>15700634
Just what this 5 min video and you'll be a socialist by the end of it

https://youtu.be/BIegWEfTDGw

>>15702733
Not that guy but it's controlled and supported by every major corporation and their politicians, even the banks. You wouldn't see something like this over any real issues calling for any real change.

>>15702733
This post makes no sense.

>>15702912
which part of it doesn't make sesnse? and I hope you don't mean that BLM isn't an Orwellian institution because it absolutely is.

>>15702304
Anyone of these.
>>15701493
For what i know, Das Kapital must be in public domain (more than 70 years since publication).
Also, Marx, when Das Kapital was first published, made sure that it was published in small fractions, so that the working class could buy it, little by little.

>>15702877
It's only supported by major corporations and politicians because the movement has them all by the balls. We're in the middle of a legitimate witch hunt right now and anyone who is convicted of wrongthink gets publicly crucified. people are falling in line because they're being blackmailed

>>15702972
And with their money and support it will continue like this but there's no revolution in sight, you don't actually see them go after the banks and the politicians, just public figures like comedians and actors etc. You may see it as a witch hunt which is scary to the average person but I'm pretty sure the powers that be sees it more like a laughable goosechase. All that outrage channelled into something so petty.

I really don't think the left can get us out of this hell, they'll turn on eachother before they would go after anyone or anything of importance.

>>15703072

I know this isn't what you were really going for, but I live a few blocks from a bank which was burned so I have a difficult time with an assertion which is literally false.

Are there unironic marxist-/lit/inists? Why?

>>15703072
>you don't actually see them go after the banks and the politicians
two banks in my hometown got burned to the ground a couple weeks ago. people are chanting #shutdownSTEM so hard that science magazine published an apologetic concession and pledged to pause scientific research until justice is served.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/researchers-around-world-prepare-shutdownstem-and-strike-black-lives
I'm convinced that shit is getting very very real

>>15700634
>absolute power absolutely corrupts
That's just an excuse to be a degenerate.

>>15702748
>people are angry because they can't just decide to not work
I will never understand this. There are 300 million people in the united states. how are people supposed to eat if farmers had the freedom to decide they only want to work 2 days a week, and they want to produce hand-made tie dye shirts instead of food?

>>15703162
No. It's an excuse to decentralize power and set up systems that account for human degeneracy by holding everybody accountable

>>15703114

Marx is a regular subject of discussion/spicy debate on /lit/. To begin with, he actually wrote a lot of books, and so his work is germane to board discussion. Second, he's an historically (yes, I just wrote "an historic") notable figure who gets cited by lots of other writers and genres (especially philosophy) that /lit/ likes to read. Third, young people are stupid (see: current events) because they don't own any real property or have any children of their own, i.e. they don't have any real, metaphysical skin in the game of life just yet.

>>15703176
You realize unemployment exists only to keep wages low and weekly work-hours high, right? Technically everyone could be employed, working low hours, and still having high wages, if profits didn't go to the firm's owner.

No socialist is advocating for people deciding not to work. The point is that where you work should not be a dictatorship. What's so hard to understand about that?

>>15703088
>>15703120
Seems someone is making good use of the opportunity they've been given here but to my knowledge these people are condemned by the movement.

>>15703233
>Technically everyone could be employed
this is not true. Employers have to be discerning in the workers who they hire because at LEAST 10% of the population is literally too stupid or too impaired to function.
watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Ur71ZnNVk

>>15703088
One bank out of thousands and they'll file an insurance claim. We know the state has their backs. Losing a few places means absolutely nothing when the brunt of social discord is felt by the working class. Also, corporations legitimized the movement by condoning it through social media. There was no demand for their seal of approval, but as they weighed the odds, they found something of benefit from doing so. And the witchhunts are only possible through the activities of complicit HR departments. This movement could have fizzled out easily through a media blackout. A few sheebons screeching on social media to have someone fired is simply that until the corporation takes action.

>>15703233
You can do this today so long as you have enough people willing to invest in the collectively owned company (for equipment and facilities etc that doesn't spring out of the ground) but it would probably not have the same growth since profits go straight to the workers. A company that has profits invested back into the company will likely expand and so would employ a lot more people, still for shit pay though.

>>15703298
Even though you're right you'll probably get shit for linking Jordan Peterson.

>>15703233
Also, minimum wage laws literally create unemployment by forcing employers to lay off excess employees who they can afford to pay. there's statistics to prove it.
https://www.daily-journal.com/opinion/columnists/national/thomas-sowell-unemployment-rises-as-the-minimum-wage-does/article_61643828-6fa4-5264-a2a0-04326442d9bd.html#:~:text=Various%20studies%20going%20back%20for,the%20minimum%20wage%20law%20specifies.

>>15703305

Yes yes, I understand that (I pre-empted your reply to this exact effect), the site itself is unimportant, but still. Back to your earlier comment to which I'd originally replied, >>15703072 I wonder what prompted you to write something so stupid as "I really don't think the left can get us out of this hell", when of course it is they themselves who are responsible for it, and not capital.

>>15703342
>who they *CAN'T* afford to pay
my bad

>>15703348
I'm not the guy that wrote that. I'm another guy t hat hates BLM and wants to see their skulls crushed by death squads.

>>15703369
Hate is not the answer anon. We need to learn to love. ESPECIALLY our opponents

>>15703348
I'm the guy with the stupid post. Since you already think I'm an idiot I have little to lose so I'll just tell you that the way I see it they're two sides of the same materialist/hylic coin and we suffer from both with neither being able to really save us from the suffering of the other.

>>15701493
Virtually all important Marxist texts are available for free and most are public domain.

>>15703298
Of course I meant "everyone employable could be employed", c'mon. And there a lot of jobs people with disabilities could do. And there would still be discerning in socialism, the difference is that there would be much more job opportunities because the work-week would be way shorter.

>>15703313
Yeah, co-ops are a thing but capitalists will always opt for a capitalist firm structure since it's obviously more profitable for them. Socialism will not come about through co-ops.

>>15703342
They could afford it if there wasn't an "employer" keeping the profits to himself.

>>15703397
They can love a boot to their face.

>>15703410

>hylic
>probable guenon-poster

Thank you at least for qualifying yourself with a minimum of fuss. I trust you'll see yourself out.

>>15703397
If you love something you naturally would (and should) fight to protect it, hate helps with that.

>>15703432
Never read guenon and no I won't.

>>15703417
I'm genuinely curious how we're supposed to set up a functional system of production that's devoid of hierarchies. How would that even work?

>>15703449
>If you love something you naturally would (and should) fight to protect it
sure i can get behind this
>hate helps with that
i think this is an enormous leap to make. hate is blinding, destructive and inhumane

>>15701509
>the absolute state
And Revolution

>>15703509
Blinding? No, it gives you focus. Destructive? Yes, with good reason this is a positive. Inhumane? No, it is absolutely human, but with good reason I'd argue that it even borders on divine.

>>15700634
>e.g. communism and socialism.
No no no.
<— This is true communism/socialism

>>15703489
There would be hierarchies but they wouldn't be based on relation to the ownership of the means of production but rather on more important things like experience, knowledge, education, etc.

A democratic organization doesn't mean devoid of hierarchies. Think of current institutions that are arguably democratic like political parties, universities, some governmental agencies, etc. They all have hierarchies.

I know you mean horizontal organization and I agree, it has its problems and it wouldn't be applicable to all enrerprises. It's still an option though.

>>15703540
anger is not hate. anger is a justified emotional response. hate is an irrational malevolence that grows until it consumes its host

>>15703509

Feminine take. I disagreed with that person on something else, but he's on the right track with that. The better word, I think, is ANGER. When you are pissed off at something, and yet able to govern your emotions with some intelligence, you can channel that anger into solving the problem very quickly, if it's a relatively small problem as opposed to overthrowing the government or whatever. There is such a thing as being constructively-pissed-off (and taking pleasure when the damn thing starts working as it should, because you made it do so) that most men experience at some point. I suppose in principle that women can experience the like emotion, but I have my doubts.

>>15703574
Not necessarily, we hate the sin, it's just unfortunate that they embrace it completely.
>Consequently it is lawful to hate the sin in one's brother, and whatever pertains to the defect of Divine justice, but we cannot hate our brother's nature and grace without sin. Now it is part of our love for our brother that we hate the fault and the lack of good in him, since desire for another's good is equivalent to hatred of his evil.
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3034.htm#article3

>>15703667

At this point though you're just full academic, as there is no such thing is sin. Because sin is defined as that which is contrary to god's will. It's a useful imaginative metaphor, but can't be taken literally by serious persons.

>>15703680
Yes it can, and not only in academia.

>>15703688

No, it can't, and you know why, because there is no such thing as god. It's a dressed-up metaphysical word for "bad thing I don't like".

>>15700634
Oof.
In my opinion you shouldn't.
Marxist books shouldn't even be considered real books to begin with.

Marxists are wannabe intellectuals who fell an idiotic rabbit hole in order to attempt to justify trash pop doctrines that failed multiple times through history.

Marxists books aren't books, as Marx himself claimed his trash as a manifesto, instead of a book. It's not based of sizeable measurable facts, rather the perspective of a deluded moron who never had a job (a pre industrial era freeloader).

His doctrine is trash, never accounted for stuff like automation or the idiocity of your average minority.

His ideas are shit, they produced shit and are not applicable to modern day society.

>>15703980
>t. 60-IQ Prager University graduate

>>15703980
Cringiest post I've read, please don't post ever again

>>15703980

>>15702692
In my personal opinion Sowell is highly under-rated. If you can get a copy of his book on Marxism it's one of the best written on the topic and is filled to the brim with references. If you want a critical and indepth look at not just Marxism, but Marx himself you can not go wrong despite the difficulty in finding a copy cheaply.

>>15700634
>(And yes, I've tried to read the source material itself and honestly, I just had a hard time reading and understanding it because of how dated it is)

>>15704193
Sowell's book on Marxism is an absolute joke. The guy is just a shill for capital.

>>15704219
Proofs?

>>15703348
Theyre all impostors. Im actually the guy that wrote that, and id like you to know that im a cock gargling illitetate halfwit

>>15704219
>The guy is just a shill for capital
as in he is in favor of a free market? because yes that's true but thats not a criticism

>>15704569
It's a criticism if you're looking to read an objective book on Marxism. Sowell is biased and utterly clueless.

>>15703348
>when of course it is they themselves who are responsible for it, and not capital.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

>>15700634
>the protests that are happening in the US as being ultimately founded on communist and socialist principles
They are mostly founded on 'police please don't kill citizens anymore". If that is Marxists and socialist, then I guess that would make most people marxists.

>>15704635
>They are mostly founded on 'police please don't kill citizens anymore"
if that's what they were actually about then they wouldn't be so focused on the racial aspect of this. nobody cares if cops kill an unarmed white dude. look at what happened with tony timpa

>>15704704
I can't recall Marxism ever having an explicit racial focus. You certainly meant 'some American left-leaning groups' who are seeking social justice.

>>15704716
>why are police killing proportionately more blacks than whites?
because more blacks commit crimes so they statistically have more encounters with police
>well blacks only commit more crimes because they are more poor and poverty motivates crime

almost every conversation i've had has turned into this. the ultimate goal of all of this is to attack the disparity of wealth amongst racial groups. some people just don't fully realize that when they take to the streets chanting that black lives matter

>>15704756
Not really. I see it as an extension of the militarization of police forces. Sure, the police should be allowed to defend themselves from violent attackers with potentially deadly force. But the problem is, they are using deadly force in unnecessary circumstances.
The protests are about racial discrimination because that is an issue in the police force, coming to a head with several high profile wrongful death cases.
I don't have any problem using these protests as a way to roll back the militarization of the police forces. Remember Ruby Ridge.
I think the idea of BLM and 'Antifa' as some super secret guerrilla Marxist terrorist group is laughable. There are actual violent political groups more worthy of our time, both left-aligned groups and right-aligned groups.

>>15704782
>I don't have any problem using these protests as a way to roll back the militarization of the police forces.
I don't either. Unnecessary police brutality is fucked. And we should be restructuring the police force to prioritize de-escalation while also implementing some kind of neutral third party that's responsible for prosecuting police misconduct.
>The protests are about racial discrimination because that is an issue in the police force
But can you prove that's an actual issue in the police force? I don't think it's a problem with the police force at all. I think it's a problem with black crime. Black people make up 13% of the population in America, yet they are responsible for 52% of all homicides from 1976-2005. And that's just the homicide statistics.

>>15700634
mein kampf