/lit/ - Literature

>>19866408
You can just try to read it slowly. If you are finding some concepts difficult to grasp, read the page twice and compare it with other external sources (don't be afraid to use Wikipedia)

>>19866408
Take notes as you read you dumb fuck.

>>19866408
Why would you read garbage like that, you retard? If you want to understand economics, you read Bastiat, Rothbard, and Hazlitt. You don't read shit like Marx.

>>19866507
>Rothbard
Kek, I was almost afraid that the lolbert anarcho kiddies don’t exist anymore

>>19866515
You're afraid of people who tell you to get a job. That's the only reason you don't like libertarians, Doreen.

>>19866408
I just listen to david harvey. He's a marxist. And he makes it accessible.

>>19866515
While you were dilating on reddit; Libertarians of Free State Project took over New Hampshire. We get shit done in the real world. You don't and never will.

>>19866525
>You're afraid of people who tell you to get a job. That's the only reason you don't like libertarians, Doreen.
I’m literally at my job right now, wasting my bosses money :^)

>>19866525
Rothbard was famously retarded for his baby-tier interpretations of economics. And im employed as a mechanical engineer so don't call me some lazy slob you faggot.

>>19866536
Marxists have controlled nearly half the world and created an economy rivalling the biggest in history, what are you talking about

>>19866544
None of what you typed is true. Don't be yikes.

>>19866542
Rothbard is famous for actually being successful in life. Marx died a beggar.
>>19866544
>controlled
LMAO, yes ancient history, and it proved to the world why it was such a terrible fucking idea in the first place. That's why a faggot like you won't ever control even your own bedroom. You don't have the intelligence to be responsible for things. That's why you're a Marxist. Its easier to blame whitey for your problems than yourself.

>>19866541
>Leftist at their job doesn't actually do any work or labor.

>>19866544
>created an economy rivaling the biggest in history,
Ahahahaha what is this

>>19866574
He was referring to China

>>19866582
>He was referring to China
holy shit are leftists are for real? Defending a country where workers have less rights than workers in the US and Taiwan?

>>19866582
Why do leftists bury themselves in holes like this? Is it because they're retarded?

>>19866586
Very cute that the graph stops precisely before the data that completely refutes your point. Yknow, like, the modern day, the one that we're currently living in?

>>19866574
>per capital, but not PPP
>international dollars
Khem.

>>19866586
>- Muh worker rights
>- Who cares about worker rights, it's just a cope for societies that have no economic growth!
>- Here's your Marxist economy showing tremendous economic growth.
>- But muh worker rights?
inb4 you start explaining how China has a growing economy because it is actually Capitalist, but it is still an evil bugmen Commie hellhole because it's actually not Capitalist at all.

>>19866408
Take notes and use secondary sources

>>19866598
>we were an economic superpower competing with the West
*struggles to beat Portugal and Finland*
Taiwan even has universal healthcare, and China forces people to pay for it. Its so fucking funny seeing leftists like you criticize Bezos, but then immediately changing your tune to defend Xi being a billionaire and having his kids go to American universities for an education. You are so stupid. You won't even move to China because you're to lazy to work, and Xi himself as said he hates parasites like you.

>>19866625
At least the chinese know who rules over them. Most westerners think they are living in a democracy.

>>19866571
Also seems like your success of the most fit theory also doesn’t work because it’s a very well paying job and I have received nothing but praise for my work so far because all of my colleagues are so retarded that they do a worse job than I do

>>19866598
If China is socialist, just go move there. Its not hard. You live and own the means of production there and you will never ever have to worry about exploitation or these evil porkies forcing to contribute to society to benefit from it. As we know, China will take very good care of you. Workers are not exploited in those lovely paradises over there.

>>19866625
What the fuck are you even trying to say?

>>19866634
>At least the Chinese knows who rules over them
Yeah, the Jack Mas of the party who order them to work 996 work weeks. Like I said, leave your comfy white suburb in Los Angeles and go live in a socialist country if its so great, kid. Nobody is stopping you.

>>19866652
Nah, I'll stay and shit up your country.

Fuck off subhuman.

>>19866661
This is why no one takes you subhumans seriously.

>>19866661
>Nah, I'll stay and shit up your country.
I don't think so, Tim.

>>19866642
>If China is socialist, just go move there.
Why?

>>19866408
If you stop believing in yourself that only means you've discovered you were lying to yourself this whole time.

>>19866408
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFL6qRIJZ_Y
but the simplest answer is just: be genuinely interested in reading it, and if you can't do that then just give up and do something else
>>19866526
harvey doesn't understand the book himself
>>19866586
leftists exist to defend capitalism. they only care about workers when the workers begin to threaten capitalism and need to be placated and turned away from organizing into an independent revolutionary movement

>>19866641
I'm a different anon, but also I totally believe in your made up copium, your fantasies about how you are for the working class while not actually working yourself, but also how you get praised for doing work that is somehow more than your colleagues have done, it's totally believable if it wasn't reeking of hypocrisy, delusions of grandeur and narcissism.
Seriously, fuck off back to r*ddit and lefty/pol.

>>19866684
What are you gonna do, you fucking loser

>>19866710
Your landlords will evict you from the shitty apartment that you fail to pay for rent cuck and the whole world will laugh at you. Have fun being a wagie with your shitty degree in some gay marxist shit.

>>19866703
Lmao I’ve never claimed to be working class or left wing you stupid faggot. I only made fun of lolberts. I have a comfy office job and all of my colleagues barely type at 25 wpm, an arthritic monkey would do better work than them.
Just stay mad that your Jewish lolbert hocus pocus is nothing more than propaganda to tell the wagecucks lmao

>>19866408
Use Heinrich for reference, his writing is very clear.
>>19866507
>classical economics
Lots of big problems here, illuminated by Marx.
>Austrian school
Pretty much solely a response to Marxian critique of classical economics, not very much of an interesting read without context provided by Marx, assuming of course that you aren't intending to spend all of your time on the Hayek-Sraffa debate.

>>19866574
Now do industrial capacity

>>19866767
heinrich can't read. see e.g. http://www.ruthlesscriticism.com/heinrich.htm

>>19866747
>I've never claimed to be working class or left wing you stupid faggot.
You act like a leftie faggot though, so that's good enough for me.
>I have a comfy office job and all of my colleagues barely type at 25 wpm, an arthritic monkey would do better work than them.
Sure you do, you do absolutely nothing while acting like you get all the credit, totally not full of shit fantasies from someone that has never worked a day in their life.
>Just stay mad that your Jewish lolbert hocus pocus is nothing more than propaganda to tell the wagecucks lmao
But your Jewish communist hocus pocus is so much better right? At least one jew suggests people should work and knows about economics.

>Now do industrial capacity

>>19866408
You should be executed publicly for having that book. Death to all communism.

>>19866778
Yes, tankies hate theory, nothing new here. He is literally complaining that Heinrich isn't inserting enough ideology and pseudo-religious class war fantasies into his work.

>>19866791
>you do absolutely nothing
Never claimed that, my job is just so piss easy and inconsequential (just as our society) that I have plenty of time to shitpost left
> At least one jew suggests people should work and knows about economics.
Lol so you admit that you’re an ancap-kiddie. Stay mad that I don’t fit into your ceo-grindset fantasy

>>19866827
what are you even talking about you schizo? which tankies?

>>19866838
This guy's complaint mainly derives from the fact that Heinrich tends to disregard Leninist concepts.

>>19866831
>Never claimed that, my job is just so piss easy and inconsequential (just as our society) that I have plenty of time to shitpost left
>I’m literally at my job right now, wasting my bosses money :^)
Tell me how I know you have both Alzheimer and that you voted pedo joe.
>Says one jew suggests people should work and knows economics
>Lol so you admit that you’re an ancap-kiddie. Stay mad that I don’t fit into your ceo-grindset fantasy
So you are illiterate yet you post on a literacy board? Just because I think Rothbard knows his shit when it comes to one area of expertise doesn't mean I like him or his ideology. Again, you can fuck off back to r*ddit and lefty/pol/ back to where you belong.

>>19866872
no, you're a retard. keep reading your bourgeois academics instead of Marx

It's really not that hard. Stop listening to audiobooks would be a good start you midwit. How about you treat philosophy and economic theory as things to be studied instead of comfy McNovels?
Damn I'm thinking Mark Fisher was right about this whole cyberspace escapism crap. Seems like the west could learn a little from Chinese discipline. Maybe that's why China is winning.

>>19866872
>>19866896
and the article doesn't even mention Lenin once you illiterate redditor lmao

>>19866886
>both Alzheimer and that you voted pedo joe.
Nope, brain works fine and I’m not American
> Just because I think Rothbard knows his shit when it comes to one area of expertise doesn't mean I like him or his ideology.
No but the fact that blood is gushing from your anus in torrents as soon as I make fun of him proves that you’re a. an ancap and b. underage

>>19866898
China is "winning" because it's a relatively young capitalism with an enormous labour force that let Western capital flow in in the recent decades. it'll follow the same path as the other capitalist states and become just as senile
besides, Marx is anti-philosophy and anti-economics. read the subtitle of the fucking book in OP

>>19866918
>Marx is anti-philosophy and anti-economics
Holy mother of hot takes, kek

>>19866929
>Just as the economists are the scientific representatives of the bourgeois class, so the Socialists and Communists are the theoreticians of the proletarian class.

>Where speculation ends — in real life — there real, positive science begins: the representation of the practical activity, of the practical process of development of men. Empty talk about consciousness ceases, and real knowledge has to take its place. When reality is depicted, philosophy as an independent branch of knowledge loses its medium of existence.

So you're interested in learning about Marx! Lesson 1: Learning to spot a literal tranny.
>>19866838
>>19866896
>>19866906
This is a tranny. Note the hostility to differing opinions, which needs to be expressed in gaslighting terms. Trannies are mentally ill histrionics with ego dystonia, so they assume everybody else is too, and that they are thus equally afraid of being "called out" and shamed.

This particular breed of tranny, the discord tranny Marxist, is identifiable by its simultaneous claim to authority on Marx (a result of spending 80% of its time in a discord channel talking down to channel neophytes) and its incredibly think skin (a result of spending so much time on discord that it feels out of place and defensive on 4chan).

Remember, if you plan on becoming a Marxist, you don't have to become a tranny too, but 90% of your peers will be trannies. Learning to spot them and their odd behaviors may save you much time and energy.

>>19866953
Rent free

>>19866953
I never used discord but I wish you well on your struggle with mental illness nonetheless

>>19866906
But it does talk about "eastern marxism", which is Leninism. Mao, Stalin, Trotsky etc. are all theorists proceeding from Lenin, which in turn derives from Engels --> Kautsky, but let's not get into that.

>>19866408
Only the first couple chapters are really that bad in writing style I think. You shouldn't be using an audiobook for something dense and verbose like that. The chapters on stuff like primitive accumulation would be ok to listen to. A lot of works Marx cites like Wealth of Nations would obviously work better in that format.
If you're going to read Marx just have a good idea what he's getting at before trying. The weird accounting stuff is him trying to refute David Ricardo's value theory.

>>19866536
>Libertarians of Free State Project took over New Hampshire
If New Hampshire is an example of a libertarian paradise today than that's a rather bad indictment of the entire project lol

>>19866898
Just because you are too poor for audiobooks doesn't mean you are superior to people that do in fact enjoy them.

>>19866959
>I live rent free in your head uwu :3
You may want to reconsider whether admitting you're a tranny is ever a good strategy, when literally everybody on earth hates their guts.

>>19866962
>I don't hang out with societal dropouts whose central concern is discussing their mental illnesses and prescription drug cocktails all day!
>MENTALLY ILL SCHIZO WOWWW ARE YOU LISTENING TO YOURSELF RIGHT NOW SCHIZO? TAKE MEDS
Get out of your echo chamber.

>>19866408
Watch david harvey on YouTube capital lectures they will make it easier to understand

>>19866507
How about you a priori this dick in your ass, retard

>>19866989
>But it does talk about "eastern marxism", which is Leninism.
so what? you mentioned Leninism twice already too. are you a tankie?
>Mao, Stalin, Trotsky etc. are all theorists proceeding from Lenin
Mao and Stalin go against Lenin at every step, but I guess the phrase "proceeding from" is so vague that it can subsume almost everything.
if you have a point to make then state it instead of hiding behind vagueness. do you want to raise some actual criticism of the text or are you just one of those anarchocucked redditors whose brain stops functioning as soon as they encounter a single mention of class struggle and they go into basedrage calling everyone and their dog a tankie but don't really have anything concrete to say beyond that?
>>19866995
>Get out of your echo chamber.
what echo chamber? are you still on about your discord delusions? I'm an IRC boomer but I stopped using that in like 2007 and never picked up any of the things zoomers use. and I'm not very keen to if there's a risk I'll end up like you

>>19866942
>>19866918
Marx was against German Idealist philosophy which was highly speculative. That doesn't make das Kapital "anti-philosophy". Materialism is also a type of philosophy, especially considering that Marx and Engels adapted Hegel's dialectical method but without its Idealist content. At most you could say that he was against the philosophical tradition of his time. And him using empirical data in das Kapital doesn't mean that it's "against theory", science uses theory too after all, that's how it works in the first place. To collect empirical data without putting it into theoretical context, i.e. interpreting what it means in terms of causality and correlation, would be useless. These quotes that you ripped out of context don't support your statement.

>>19866408
https://youtu.be/Hb6dXR6AfXE

>>19866994
This isn't about enjoyment you retard. You're not supposed to "enjoy" das Kapital, you're supposed to understand it. Like holy shit do you have any reading comprehension at all? No wonder you're getting filtered.

>>19866993
>If New Hampshire is an example of a libertarian paradise today than that's a rather bad indictment of the entire project lol
Its one of the freest states in the union the lowest income taxes and lowest unemployment rates.More people are moving here than living here, retard.
>>19867072
You will never be defend capital.
>>19867123
>You're not supposed to "enjoy" das Kapital, you're supposed to understand it.
Its propaganda, retard. You're suppose to throw it away. Only faggots and trannies that garbage.

>>19866959
Your death would make the world and those around you better off.

Just a reminder. Marx thought that you can get rid of religion and hierarchy, because primitive societies didn't have them.

>>19867166
>because primitive societies didn't have them.
but they did

>>19867170
>but they did
I know they did, but he thought they didn't. Marx thought that primitive societies were irreligious and communal (in the communist sense).

>>19866408
The only hope for marxshitters is full AI takeover of the government, which will probably never happen.

>>19866995
>You may want to reconsider whether admitting you're a tranny is ever a good strategy, when literally everybody on earth hates their guts.
Oh no, what are you gonna do, write some big bad meany words? Post pictures of ugly trannies? I’m literally shaking right now

>>19867188
>The only hope for marxshitters is full AI takeover of the government
Marxism is anti government

>>19867109
>Marx was against German Idealist philosophy
which is consistent with him being against all philosophy, since German Idealism was the apex of philosophy just like Smith and Ricardo were the apex of political economy.
>which was highly speculative.
and philosophy can never be anything more, since "high speculation" is all that remained for it after it had been superseded by historical materialism. Engels:
>[The Marxist conception of history] puts an end to philosophy in the realm of history, just as the dialectical conception of nature makes all natural philosophy both unnecessary and impossible. It is no longer a question anywhere of inventing interconnections from out of our brains, but of discovering them in the facts. For philosophy, which has been expelled from nature and history, there remains only the realm of pure thought, so far as it is left: the theory of the laws of the thought process itself, logic and dialectics.

>Materialism is also a type of philosophy,
no (unless you limit yourself to a semantic argument based on equivocation between different referrents of "materialism"). Engels:
>modern materialism is essentially dialectic, and no longer needs any philosophy standing above the other sciences... That which still survives, independently, of all earlier philosophy is the science of thought and its laws — formal logic and dialectics. Everything else is subsumed in the positive science of nature and history.

>especially considering that Marx and Engels adapted Hegel's dialectical method but without its Idealist content
Engels:
>in the course of the further development of philosophy, idealism, too, became untenable and was negated by modern materialism. This modern materialism, the negation of the negation, IS NOT THE MERE RE-ESTABLISHMENT of the old, but adds to the permanent foundations of this old materialism the whole thought-content of two thousand years of development of philosophy and natural science, as well as of the history of these two thousand years. IT IS NO LONGER PHILOSOPHY AT ALL...

>And him using empirical data in das Kapital doesn't mean that it's "against theory",
I never said anything about empirical data and about "being against theory". if you pretend to respond to my posts then get off your script
>To collect empirical data without putting it into theoretical context, i.e. interpreting what it means in terms of causality and correlation, would be useless.
TIL physics is philosophy. it's funny how quickly people like you degenerate into "everything is philosophy". it's the same as with economics fanboys who will be so insistent on wanting to call Marx an economist that they'll have no problem affirming that farting is an object of economics because it's about distribution of scarce gasses
>These quotes that you ripped out of context don't support your statement.
lol cry more. Marx: "Philosophy and the study of the actual world have the same relation to one another as onanism and sexual love."

>>19867123
actually you do enjoy it immensely it if you're genuinely interested in reading it. but if someone's just looking for a hobby, then they aren't going to be interested in it enough and at that point it's better for them to just look for a more pleasant hobby.
>>19867166
quote me Marx saying you can get rid of religion and hierarchy because primitive societies didn't have them

>>19867334
>Marxism is anti government
Marx literally called for the nationalization of private property - how the fuck is he anti-government you retard?

>>19867358
in the sense that nationalization is for him not the end goal but only the means through which political rule will be done away which

>>19867350
Exactly

>>19867334
So it's utopian.

>>19867374
>I'm anti-government; I'll pinky promise withering it away if you just give me give me absolute political power
are you really this fucking retarded? you don't do away with the state by giving more power, you retard. That's like saying you're going put out a fire by pouring more gasoline onto it.

>>19867385
no, it's anti-utopian. thinking that class society and political rule will survive indefinitely is what's utopian, since the study of capitalist society shows otherwise

>>19867358
One can tell you're high IQ by the sophisticated use of the Socratic method in your discussions here. The constant recourse to ad hominems is so Socratic as opposed to ghetto or: "Me Big Macho Man, need to dominate you like was my little girlfriend, cause, yeah, I treat her like that too when she disagrees with me and my regurgitation of my Fox brainwashing programming."

>>19867397
>cuckmunism isn't utopian
The biggest cope. Also, Class society will always exist, it's biology after all.

>>19867397
yeah bro just give the communist party all your guns, all your property and just trust the plan. give it two more weeks, the state will just wither away. holy shit how do people fall this shit.
>since the study of capitalist society shows otherwise
then why the fuck do you even need to have state power when you believe capitalism will collapse on its own, dumbass?

>>19867341
Go back to LF you diseased old troon, did you get banned from your usual haunts for some drama and need a new space to continue your eternal larp in

>TIL
What a surprise. 36 year old troon

>>19867420
people with high IQs don't be communists; they're smart enough to know from history its a scam. a smart person would just call the police and have a SWAT team have talk with you because they wouldn't waste their with a fucking retard like you advocating for rioting and violent revolution. you want to kill white people and steal their property for your fantasy utopia, and turn the country into a Venezuela. its shit like this that makes me vote Republican

>>19867421
Yeah bro, I’m sure a lot of cavemen owned stocks and made a living just sitting on their asses all day
Classes does not equal Hierarchies, one of the biggest strawmen any right wing youtuber argues against
And before you reply, let me also add
Marxism is not about equality
Marxism is not about justice
Marxism doesn’t concern itself with ethics
Marxism is dialectical materialism and unless you can’t answer me what that means you have proven to be a pseud that doesn’t know what he’s arguing against

>>19867324
Wowzers, sister, you REALLY showed that xeckin' chud!!

I somehow avoided jumping into this one, but leftists really should let this low effort bait go.

>>19867450
>Marxism is not about equality
>Marxism is not about justice
KEK. When will you liberate workers btw?

>>19867437
Like I said high IQ for thinking something that is part of the Western civilizational (and university) canon is cause for calling the police.

>>19867374
>Marxism is anti-government and anti-property by which I mean we will take over the government and nationalize all property but it's okay because that's only a temporary move to dissolving it which is the next step (which has never been taken by any of the many communist states who claim to have successfully seized the means of production)
The people who think communism is a governmental type that has "failed" numerous times are indeed uninformed about historical materialism's actual mythology, but that doesn't make historical materialism's actual mythology any less mythical.

The boomers are wrong for the right reasons. They sense the childish utopianism of Marxists, which has been a party of effete intellectuals and academics since the collapse of Marxism as an actual working class movement (and then they always held a deeply "bourgeois," revisionist form of Marxism that fell short of authentic historical materialism anyway, according to orthodox Marxism).

Marx's critique of utopian socialism in the 19th century is doubly applicable to Marxism in the 20th century. It's a myth kept alive only by bourgeois eccentrics and wannabe radicals. That doesn't make capitalism valid, nor does it make liberal academic appropriations of Marxism valid. It's simply a fact. When pressed on this, Marxists will point to a few third world "Marxist" movements that are all highly heterodox and have more in common with national socialism or syndicalism.

There is a complete class divide between the "Marxist vanguard" of properly orthodox first world university students and eccentrics and actual practicing socialism everywhere, and there has been since practical Marxism imploded in the 1920s.

>>19867450
Marxism is just sophistry for retarded humanities majors.
>Marxism is not about justice
Its an ideology for anti-fa terrorists like you who just want to around burning and looting small businesses and being a criminal.
>Marxism is dialectical materialism
Word salad, meaningless bullshit for psueds. Kill yourself.

>>19866507
>If you want to understand economics, you read Bastiat, Rothbard, and Hazlitt.
lmao bruh
>>19866408
it's straightforward as fuck, especially in the Engels

>>19867474
Engels is a revisionist metaphysician.

>>19867470
Correct.

>>19867474
the Engels translation*

>>19867470
>yeah bro, no one tried to implement gommunism and failed bro it's a CIA propaganda!!
This is why the working class will never support you.

>>19867450
>Classes does not equal Hierarchies
This doesn't speak in the favor of marxism, by the way.

https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2019/05/29/the-allure-of-marxism-and-why-its-a-mistake/
"Here’s the problem with Marxist theory. I don’t think that private property is the true problem. Private property is just an ideology that justifies hierarchy. And it’s hierarchy, I believe, that is the real social evil. Hierarchy concentrates power, leading to many forms of debauchery.
With hierarchy in mind, let’s take another look at the role of private property in capitalism. Marx focuses on the ownership of things — the tools and machines that workers’ use to do their jobs. But I think this is a distraction. What is really important is the ownership of institutions.
When you own an institution, in effect, you own a hierarchy. But it’s not the ownership itself that is important. It’s the fact that ownership is what legitimizes your power. As the owner of hierarchy, you are the legitimate ruler.
Let’s illustrate this principle using a modern example. Think about what it means to purchase all the shares in a company. What are you buying? I argue that you are buying hierarchical power. As owner of the company, you gain the right to command the corporate hierarchy. Your subordinates obey your commands because, as owner, they believe you are the rightful ruler."

>>19867470
>The people who think communism is a governmental type that has "failed" numerous times are indeed uninformed
ah yes. it wasn't real communism.
> there has been since practical Marxism imploded in the 1920s.
it was very practical for jews like Lenin as he lived in a mansion and owned nine rolls rocyles while workers starved from his war communism policies. but that wasn't real communism bro. under real communism, we'd all be happy and live happily ever after

>>19867396
>>>I'm anti-government; I'll pinky promise withering it away if you just give me give me absolute political power
>are you really this fucking retarded?
you're the retarded one if you seriously believe 1) that political rule is supposed to wither away because of a pinky promise and not because of necessary historical forces and 2) that political power rests with individuals or bands and not with classes
>you don't do away with the state by giving more power, you retard.
you can't abolish class society without organized power. that's like saying you're going to win a match by staying in the lockers and praying very hard
>That's like saying you're going put out a fire by pouring more gasoline onto it.
no, it's more like saying you're going to end arsons by burning the last arsonist alive
>>19867421
>Class society will always exist, it's biology after all.
if repeating that like a mantra helps you cope then be my guest
>>19867427
>yeah bro just give the communist party all your guns, all your property and just trust the plan.
The Manifesto:
>But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation.

>then why the fuck do you even need to have state power when you believe capitalism will collapse on its own
I don't believe it will collapse on its own. I believe it will be forcefully destroyed with means of state power by a proletarian revolution
>>19867430
>Go back to LF you diseased old troon
what's LF?
>What a surprise. 36 year old troon
I'm not THAT old lol
>>19867470
>Marxism is anti-government and anti-property by which I mean we will take over the government and nationalize all property but it's okay because that's only a temporary move to dissolving it which is the next step (which has never been taken by any of the many communist states who claim to have successfully seized the means of production)
yes

>>19867464
>>19867472
>>19867497
None of you have proven to know what dialectical materialism means, your opinions are invalid
I’m also not a Marxist, I’ve just actually read Marx and I’m very autistic about discussion in general

>>19867509
>if repeating that like a mantra helps you cope then be my guest
>m-muh cope
Some people are biologically superior to you, deal with it, subhuman.

>>19867509
Do you not realize this is an ineffective way to communicate? All you're interested in is flamewars. You definitely are that old, I can smell early 2000s forums on you. Your bitchiness and the way your brain resets to only the most recent most the other person made, which you're only interested in picking apart for quotes to snarkily half-reply to.

When you're 50 and still doing this, will we have praxis then?

>>19867513
>I'm very autistic
We already got that.

>>19867470
Agreed and same for “muh free market”. In theory Adam Smith might be correct but the reality is most markets do not have many sellers and buyers in competition nor are humans rational. Instead it’s controlled by a handful that manipulate the population with propaganda (aka advertising). Capitalism and communism are theories that do not stand up to real world corruption.

>>19867509
>I don't believe it will collapse on its own. I believe it will be forcefully destroyed with means of state power by a proletarian revolution
Yeah, 2 more weeks and you'll dismantle capitalism.

>>19867509
>Marxism is anti-government bro!
>here's me defending why communists like me should hold power forever and not you
LMAO, you fucking retard. Nobody cares what you have to say its retarded.
>you can't abolish class society
You can't abolish classes at all, retard, class is determined by genetics. Its human nature. You can't destroy that's intrinsic to human beings you retard. To have a society; you are going to have to have people who work at the bottom to do the jobs nobody wants to you stupid children. Nobody cares about your stupid ass theories, you dumb kid. We're talking about reality, and reality exists outside of books. What should abolish is people like you by just shooting you before you become a problem to society like you always do.
>>But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit.
But it does, because money is property. Because money can be used to buy property, you retard. No exploitation happens because you signed up for the job, and you know what you being paid for when you do it. And you're forced to work a wage job. You can start a business, you can become a volunteer or a salary worker. Stop being a dumbass who just regurgitates what you read without applying critical thinking skills to it.

>>19867519

>>19867546
Again, you are biologically inferior, that's why you're always seething at successful people.

>>19867546
cope

>>19867513
>None of you have proven to know what dialectical materialism means
Dialectical materialism is when:
1. Some medieval scholastic heretics try to actualize the Absolute, i.e. to merge with the One, i.e. to bring forth the Apocalypse.
2. Some guy named Hegel reappropriates this line of thought and rewrites it in a very technical jargon, with intention not to understood by people who read him.
3. Some guy named Marx crudely puts this ideology upside down and says "Let's alleviate all differences guys, and it's gonna be... er... good, yeah! Communism, yeah!"

Or an actual quote:
"Where, then, is the positive possibility of a German emancipation?
Answer: In the formulation of a class with radical chains, a class of civil society which is not a class of civil society, an estate which is the dissolution of all estates, a sphere which has a universal character by its universal suffering and claims no particular right because no particular wrong, but wrong generally, is perpetuated against it; which can invoke no historical, but only human, title; which does not stand in any one-sided antithesis to the consequences but in all-round antithesis to the premises of German statehood; a sphere, finally, which cannot emancipate itself without emancipating itself from all other spheres of society and thereby emancipating all other spheres of society, which, in a word, is the complete loss of man and hence can win itself only through the complete re-winning of man. This dissolution of society as a particular estate is the proletariat.
<...>
By heralding the dissolution of the hereto existing world order, the proletariat merely proclaims the secret of its own existence, for it is the factual dissolution of that world order."

tl;dr - because proletariat is viewed as completely dissoluted and devoid of any characteristics, it is somehow good. Sounds familiar?


Or to put it even more plainly. Dialectical materials is - when you make a cargo cult of a heretical death cult.

>>19867546
>>19867509
Yes, lets abolish class. Lets prohibit people from having specialized roles in society with expertise because anyone can be a heart surgeon, even people with Lou Gehrig disease can become bus drivers. We can just get rid of any need for people to have specialized knowledge to make sure our food is safe, to ensure bridges are safe to drive on because Marx in his book said so. Lets get rid of functioning society because some stupid Jew 200 years ago said the capitalist was exploiting him by expecting the worker to provide labor for which he was paid for. You're right. I'm totally convinced bro. That's why we must burn down Amazon and loot Walmart because all those single mothers are being exploited by having jobs that pay their bills. I'm smart. Vote for me, I'm a tranny.

>>19867534
I agree, and also it's interesting to note that Marx himself was half correct and very insightful about this: "pure" capitalism, the capitalism of classical political economy, is a creature of the 18th century, and it already had an internal crisis about how the "pure" theory was inadequate by the early 19th century. Marx was correct in diagnosing this as a new stage in political economy, but wrong in diagnosing it as pure cope.

It was cope, i.e. it was coping with the failures and naivete of 18th century utopian ideals of self-balancing and self-regulating "economics," scientifically and logically understandable. But it wasn't cope in the derogatory sense of being ineffectual and pointless. That's how Marx read it.

In fact there is an entire tradition of mixed and pragmatic political economy that emerges in the early 19th century around figures like Sismondi and Friedrich List, people who are perfectly cognizant of the limitations of autistic pure theory and trying to deduce an economic system from "pure" logic. There are liberal political economists who tend socialistic as a result, and there are socialists who take up liberal political economy in a critical and problematic way, without turning it into the behemoth eschatology of Marxism (which really has to be blamed on Marx's Hegelianism). There are even pragmatic conservative and counter-revolutionary political economists like Bonald who work with liberal regimes like Louis-Philippe's and advocate mixed methods.

The admirable but monomanic autism of Marx, and the decadent eschatological autism of 20th century Marxism, have occluded all these figures and of setting up false binaries and false dichotomies everywhere. The very idea of an opposition between pure communism and pure capitalism was held by nobody after Sismondi. It was only resurrected by equally autistic anti-communist "neoclassical economists," who tragically are now the representatives of non-Marxist economics, despite being equally autistic cultists.

Even Adam Smith was not a pure "classical" economist or political economist, he often noted the limitations of theory and the anti-social tendencies of a "pure" classical economy.

>>19867546
Are you the commie who spams dozens of Nazis are gay / le /pol/face images whenever he gives up on arguing?

>>19867513
>>19867509
the real reason you want communism is because you want to abolish age of consent laws; without class, there would be no laws to stop you from raping children

>>19867519
I'd bet all my money that you resemble your pic rel more than I do
>>19867524
>Do you not realize this is an ineffective way to communicate?
so? nobody I respond to is worth effectively communicating with. this should be obvious
>the way your brain resets to only the most recent most the other person made
nothing people write here is worth addressing at all, so I'm already being generous even if I address only a small part of it.
as for my brain, I like to keep it free of garbage as much as I can
>>19867538
it won't take 2 weeks. an arduous process of reconstruction of the independent proletarian movement is necessary before there can be talk of conquering political power
>>19867539
>here's me defending why communists like me should hold power forever
communists can't hold power forever. when the proletariat is in power it can either give it up, turn back and restore capitalism or it can push forward destroying class society and with it its own class rule. there's no historical possibility of it pressing a magical suspend button and remaining in purgatory for eternity
>You can't abolish classes at all, retard, class is determined by genetics.
no, it's abolition of classes that's determined by genetics
>you are going to have to have people who work at the bottom to do the jobs nobody wants to
no, it's written into genetics that once classes are abolished (as is determined by genetics) people divide the tasks nobody wants to do among everyone so as to minimize the time any individual person takes doing unpleasant things.
>money is property... money can be used to buy property
the worker can only buy what he needs to stay alive to work for the capitalist. and today he still has to go in debt so the average amount of money he has is actually negative
>And you're forced to work a wage job. You can start a business
the wage slave class is forced to exist. without it there's no capitalism and bourgeois society collapses.
>Stop being a dumbass who just regurgitates what you read without applying critical thinking skills to it.
"thinking" lol. you're the stupidest motherfucker in this thread
>>19867575
1. it's not a matter of prohibition but a matter of what people will choose when free of capitalist incentives that turn people away from multidirectional personal development and towards becoming a single-minded machine providing the maximum amount of surplus value for the capitalists
2. withering away of division of labour doesn't imply lack of expertise and it doesn't mean that everyone does everything. it simply means that there aren't careers. each person will still have things they most like to do and are the best at, some more things they do occasionally, many things they try a few times, many things they never try and even things they can't try because they aren't physically or mentally fit to
>I'm a tranny.
and that's fine, I don't care about your private life details
>>19867588
self-owned by posting a tweet by a nationalist

>>19867635
>no u
Do cuckmunists really?

>>19867524
You actually talk like you're older than the other guy, there's also something a little bit military about you.

>>19867635
>spending 40 minutes writing a "no u" bad faith greentextathon nobody will reply to in good faith as a result
Deeply deeply mentally ill individual. Enjoy your friday old man.

>>19867635
>it won't take 2 weeks. an arduous process of reconstruction of the independent proletarian movement is necessary before there can be talk of conquering political power
You will never gain power, you will never win, fucks like you cannot do shit against capitalism. I dunno what gives you this determination, but the working class is not on your side and will never be.

>>19867652
Pure ad hominems, boy you're just the sanest guy out there. Remember not to bully your girlfriend too much tho!

>>19867653
>You will never gain power, you will never win, fucks like you cannot do shit against capitalism.
what's with all the mantra copers today

>>19867635
>nothing people write here is worth addressing at all, so I'm already being generous even if I address only a small part of it.
>as for my brain, I like to keep it free of garbage as much as I can
Lmao, you're in an anonymous imageboard, subhuman. Don't think you're better than anyone else.

>>19867666
Is this what all of your arguments are? "Cope"? When will you realize that the working class will never be on your side? They know that cuckmunists are all lazy entitled manchildren. They hate people like you.

>>19867683
Is this kind of mindless offensiveness like a sort of addiction?

>>19867660
Encouraging a 2004 forum brained retard to have a constructive conversation instead of acting like a petulant child doesn't put me in the same category as him. This is very likely a pushing middle age individual deliberately seeking out unproductive greentext gotcha fights on 4chan with zoomers. As in, the unproductiveness is deliberate.

I'm just trying to help. Unlike him I am not invested in these conversations for any reason other than having an interesting conversation. If what I say is rebuffed or ignored I did my best.

>>19867649
I am old, that's why I find it extra disturbing when someone whose mindset I can recognise isn't on the same level of doneness with being petty and childish. People don't go seek out internet quote flamewars into their mature adult years unless something's wrong.

>>19867693
Cope, all anti-capitalist do is post on twitter about how much they hate White people, while they endlessly consume product.

>>19867693
Nice projection, old man.

>>19867705
Anti-whiteness has nothing to do with Marxism.

>>19867141
>Its one of the freest states in the union the lowest income taxes and lowest unemployment rates.
I more meant the limitations of still being under federal laws and the state government being far from libertarian in a lot of ways. I'm not questioning the academic integrity of the scholars of the prestigious CATO institute of course but a lot of those freest states also have gone on strange binges in legislating such as enacting state laws criminalizing boycotting Israel and many other petty things. Problem with lolbertarianism is it attracts a lot of blowhards

>More people are moving here than living here, retard.
You mistyped something there or you're gonna be having some real issues... good luck managing over doubling a population without increasing spending on upgrading public infrastructure.

>>19867575
The existence of a division of labour doesn't have anything at all to do with class in the sense Marx meant FYI. Marx didn't use the term class like how a modern sociologist talking about white collar/blue collar/etc. Some people generate surplus value and others don't and expropriate real goods through various nominal income forms from property rights, state redistribution or outright crime, workers collectively have to take back less than they give.
Some dude earlier up was talking about biological caste systems like in ants or something earlier to prove class, that also doesn't have anything to do with class in Marx sense since human relations aren't biologically evolved in that sense. The closest aspect would be sexual dimorphism in humans and you can get into some unPC territory there if you want but male attributes have been devalued by modern capitalism

>>19866408
Read it together with a companion. David Harvey's is good.PWGR8

>>19867696
I think most people that argue on the internet, especially about politics, think they're making a real difference in the world. But in reality they're just neck beards that have no life, or very young.

>>19867727
I agree, but I'm only here because I'm on vacation.

>>19867717
>Anti-whiteness has nothing to do with Marxism.
Tell that to the majority of people who call themselves anti-capitalist.

>>19867718
>muh gapitalism
Capitaism is just an economic system, dumbass.

>>19867758
Ya that's what I said, it's not a biological imperative... just a (flawed) system of accounting

>>19867676
well I am better than some, because judging by this thread there's clearly at least a few people ready to talk nonsense about things they don't understand. I, on the other hand, don't go shit up other threads about stuff I know little about.
>>19867683
>Is this what all of your arguments are? "Cope"?
no, that's all your arguments. I'm telling people why they're wrong while you're just reciting cope
>When will you realize that the working class will never be on your side?
I'm on the side of the working class already
>They know that cuckmunists are all lazy entitled manchildren. They hate people like you.
I agree they hate pb anarchist student losers, but I don't know what that has to do with me. in fact I hate them too.

>>19867777
>no, that's all your arguments.
Lmao you really do project a lot, don't you?
>I'm on the side of the working class already
Not (You), they should be on your side, which aren't, and will never be.
>I agree they hate pb anarchist student losers, but I don't know what that has to do with me. in fact I hate them too.
>Yeah, you see, they only hate those stoopid anarchist kiddies, but they absolutely looove us heckin' based communists and antifachads, trust me!
Lmao. None of you are different. We hate all of you.

>>19867777
You have 0 self-awareness. You are just as pathetic as everyone else here. You are not special in any way and it would've been great if you dropped this attitude.

>>19867696
>People don't go seek out internet quote flamewars into their mature adult years unless something's wrong.
it's common knowledge that it's the types who go on shitposting forums and larp as Very Serious Business Psychologizers who end up revealed as the biggest life fuckups, not those who indulge in some retarded flaming back and forths from time to time for fun
>>19867807
>>I'm on the side of the working class already
>Not (You), they should be on your side
looks like someone never took basic uni level algebra. unsurprisingly its the guy who probably regularly calls humanities students tranny marxists
and you accuse me of projection lol
>Yeah, you see, they only hate those stoopid anarchist kiddies, but they absolutely looove us heckin' based communists and antifachads, trust me!
you do understand that antifa is just more pb anarkiddies?
>>19867828
the quads are telling me otherwise

>>19867845
You should've worded it better then
>The working class is on my side
Like this, retard.
>humanities students tranny marxists
And they're not? Lmao come on now.
>you do understand that antifa is just more pb anarkiddies?
>Individuals involved in the movement tend to hold anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-state views, subscribing to a range of left-wing ideologies. A majority of individuals involved are anarchists, communists, and socialists who describe themselves as revolutionaries, and have little allegiance to liberal democracy, although some social democrats also adhere to the antifa movement.
Nope. Stop lying. Most of them aren't anarchists.

>>19867777
You're obviously more informed and more serious than the majority of the posters here, of whom I can only assume they're malign baiters.

>>19867928
stop replying to yourself, freak.

>>19867928
He's a dime a dozen Trot who occasionally forces himself to skim something still available on marxists.org. These types harden around a core consensus on what they take to be orthodox in their 20s and spend decades repeating it online. If you like this, unironically try communism reddits.

>>19867894
why did you leave out the next sentence?
>According to professor of journalism and political science at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at the City University of New York, Peter Beinart, "antifa is heavily composed of anarchists"
>>19867928
I'm more informed about communism but I'm not more serious, because someone informed about communism understands that a serious discussion about communism on 4chan is not a thing
>>19867944
trots are leftist retards and communism reddits are made up of people who didn't even skim marxists.org, let alone the mirrors that hold the deleted works

>>19868157
>I'm more informed about communism
>tankie
>altright edgecore (antiracist baby edition)

>>19868157
>yeah, this one journal proves my point
No, not really. This does also not prove that the working class likes any of you, cuckmunist, socialist, antifaggot, anarchkiddie, does not matter.

>>19868171
you don't even know what a tankie is you internet brained child
>>19868183
what journal? I'm just quoting your source back at you you stupid faggot. I'm not the one citing wikipedia as an argument

>>19868197
Ok? This still does not prove that the working class likes any of you.

>>19868197
>tankie
>definition: terminally online transvestite constructing identity from internet politics
>would be an altright neonazi if didn't have accidental affinity for "punk" aesthetic and/or dislike of racism
>50%+ likelihood visible minority or jew
>otherwise neurotic sexual deviant who doesn't like "authoritarian culture" (any culture that frowned upon prostate stimulation during the '90s when tankie was coming of age)

>>19868209
I don't care who likes who. are you projecting your unfulfilled desire of being liked by others or some shit? talk about it with your therapist then. it has no relation to communism
>>19868213
not really, but nothing of your definition fits me at all either so whatever

>>19868157
>, because someone informed about communism understands that a serious discussion about communism on 4chan is not a thing

Obviously

>>19868237
no he's saying your movement that claims to be the champion of the working class and also the spear-tip of the class consciousness of the working class is universally despised by the working class

do you really have a hard time following this? learn to read, tranny

>>19868237
It does. You need support from the majority. If the majority doesn't supports you, then it's over for your so-called revolution. You faggots just aren't popular on the west.

Dont read any economic thinkers. They are retarded. Every school of economic thought elevates to great importance that which they like and devalues that which they dont like. commies and austrians both do it.

Barter instead. Everywhere you go barter. Rave over the greatness of bartering, how pure it is, the required knowledge for bartering is essentially Zero, whereas for any form of economics the knowledge required to actually benefit from it is astronomical. Bartering is timeless, in times of peril bartering comes back proving that it is foundational, secure, and a tangible concept, unlike money which especially in the modern world exists on a screen represented by a bunch of pixels. It either is too scarce, or too abundant depending on the individual and neither states actually provide anything since no matter what its only true purpose is to expend itself. Sure, some people do make more when they do this but it is a gamble, and it is unnatural. Bartering can never be unnatural, it is pure and simply an equal exchange at all times. Person A receives an item they value and Person B receives an item they value and both are out an item they value less or do not value at all. It always equals out there cannot be losers with the barter system. Economics is gay

>>19868249
he's not even talking about communism, he's only talking about various leftards like anarchists and tankies
>>19868251
the working class will follow its own class movement not out of liking someone but out of it's own interest. and the section of the petty bourgeoisie that will also follow it will certainly not do that out of liking anybody but rather as last resort when it realizes that the bourgeoisie is unable to guarantee its petty property any longer

>>19868242
>i was only pretending to be retarded, to own the magapedes
>talking about communism online is stupid anyway. i'll ruin any chance of sparking people's curiosity about it by deliberately making it look bad, to own the magapedes

online leftist discourse in a nutshell. either jacobin or new left review telling you to watch more CNN and vote for biden, a pro-sex work tankie explaining why he's been accused of unwanted sexual advances 16 times in his community, or the same tankie justifying his horrible optics and damage to leftist discourse by saying who cares they were chuds anyway

this is why every leftist movement falls apart, quality control. they select for freaks, losers, and rationalizing failures.

>>19868401
it sounds like he's talking about communism to me, since he's talking about the working class and its relation to a vanguard of the communist revolution. what is the point of restating empirically wrong tankie mythology from a hundred years ago? what you are saying "will" happen demonstrably didn't happen. and in all the places that claimed it happened, it turned into totalitarianism and senseless genocide.

>>19868401
This is just all wishful thinking and has no bearing in reality.

>>19868269
>Rave over the greatness of bartering, how pure it is
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/barter-society-myth/471051/
It is a myth, invented by Adam Smith.

>>19868446
>it sounds like he's talking about communism to me, since he's talking about the working class and its relation to a vanguard of the communist revolution.
no, he's was talking about people in antifa shirts and losers who talks about "the leftist commune" on twitter. those people have zero relation to communism beyond maybe putting "anarcho-communist" in their twitter bio
>what you are saying "will" happen demonstrably didn't happen.
do you have a problem with comprehending tenses? that sentence doesn't even make sense
>and in all the places that claimed it happened, it turned into totalitarianism and senseless genocide.
yes, capitalism has used totalitarianism and genocide to establish itself against precapitalist production and to preserve itself against the proletarian revolution. it'll keep doing that too
>>19868501
there's nothing more grounded in reality than classes following their material interests and modes of production collapsing after being outgrown by the productive forces of society

>>19868446
>this is why every leftist movement falls apart, quality control. they select for freaks, losers, and rationalizing failures.

Kinda like Trump, Bush II, war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Wall Street crash 2008, Boris Johnson. Yeah, I get it: it sucks to be Scandinavia or have socialized medicine, like throughout the EU, where quality of life is incomparably better than in the US.

>>19868525
no he's talking about communism, as in people who claim to adhere to communism. he's saying those people, like you, are faggots and despised by the working class. he's right. why is this so hard to follow for you?

we don't care that you hate antifa, you are identical to them

>that sentence doesn't even make sense
as i already said above, learning to read would be a good first step toward being able to convince people of your ideas. "what you are saying 'will' happen" is a phrase used substantively as the subject of the sentence. this is grade school english.

>>19868525
you're delusional. Communism or any sort of that leftist shit is not popular on the west. No one takes any of you seriously, on top of everything you have no power.

>>19868547
>george bush once sucked a cock so it's okay for me to suck cock too
the idea is to stop sucking cock. stop hanging out with illiterate faggots like >>19868525 and you will start being able to think outside your bubble.

>>19868525
>there's nothing more grounded in reality than classes following their material interests
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_architecture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudge_theory
You follow only what you are told to.

>modes of production
Pic related.

>>19868525
There's no leftist society without totaltarianism though.

>>19868570
there is in his magical version of communism that has never happened but will inevitably happen, any day now! just not when marx or engels or lenin or trotsky or anybody else said it would happen!

>>19868547
>m-muh scandinavia
They're capitalist and pay enormous amount of taxes. But they also shit up their countries with immigrants, so I wouldn't call them good.

>>19868570
Rojava exists

>>19868588
No one recognizes that place.

>retards still arguing about fake stuff when the barterchad shut economics down

>>19868646
>>19868517
Barter historically existed only between enemies. When you distrust someone so much, that you'd accept only immediate exchange in whatever goods you have on you right now.

>>19866625
>struggles to beat Portugal
do marxists really?

>>19867450
Class is simply the word we use to describe human hierarchies and cliques in society. We don't mix people of different cliques together unless it's deemed necessary or unless it happens by circumstance; people will autonomously segregate regardless. There will never be a commie paradise where we all hold hands and frolic, people will simply form their own gangs and factions naturally based around their interests, as they should, as is healthy, being against class and hierarchy as a whole is just unbelievably stupid, screeching into the void. You cannot simply neuter human behavior this way, you would need magic to erase the existence of class. I just don't understand why you would ever want to erase class or hierarchy, to begin with; do you not enjoy the company of other Marxists, who themselves are a kind of class? Do you not have any shared hobbies or interests or haunts with people that you'd rather keep between yourselves? Wanting to remove class is so... nihilistic, it's just not desirable, it's like throwing out the game because you suck at it, it's childish screeching petulance.

>>19868698
Not true at all. Classic ecunomicks trying to rewrite history to justify his stupid beliefs

>>19867588
wtf i love communism now

>>19868269
a real practical thinking man my hat is off to you

>>19868838
>There will never be a commie paradise where we all hold hands and frolic,
No communist has ever promised nor earnestly worked toward a utopian delusion

>>19867588
>without class, there would be no laws to stop you from raping children
Your conclusion does not follow from the premises

>>19868900
Thank you friend. It's nice to be recognized I won't lie. I came to this conclusion when I started using kijiji and the FB marketplace a lot. I wasn't selling anything crazy on them so when people came to me with trades at first it was annoying but then I gave pause and thought about it. Truly superior. They give me 20 bucks I go buy a joint and a pack of cigarettes have a nice relaxing weekend. They trade me 2 books, or the last lady was a bison farmer so we traded some bison meat for these cute little rabbit collectibles I had that she wanted. Super simple, a nice social occasion some talking some back and forth you learn a bit about the person by seeing how they value things. Buying with money is so soulless

"Uhhhhhh 9.59 please"
"Here is my card"
*both stand in silence or make gay small talk for 10 seconds*

>>19869004
>Buying with money is so soulless
holy shit it is indeed, i often got this feeling myself

>>19866544
>>19866598
China is heading towards an Asian variant of Fascism/NS. It's amusing how leftists try to take credit for the success of the CCP when they only became successful after abandoning all semblance of Marxist thought beyond superficial public posturing. It was Deng who was the sole man responsible for the success of modern China, and he was violently purged twice by Mao during the cultural revolution. It's lucky the guy is even still alive. The CCP have their young party members reading Carl Schmitt in schools and other Nazi political theorists while instilling ethnonationalist and eugenic principles among their predominately Han population. They literally have billionaires. How the fuck are they a leftist party?

And for some reason the oversocialized browncels on this board seem to think that free market capitalism is a right wing position? What is that about? It was the fucking Reagan era that tied fiscal globalism to social conservativism knowing it was a total contradictory stance that only ends in the decay of the latter for the advancement of the former. It was a trap to swindle Europeans across the West and decay their traditions to the point of no return - one which they succeeded in doing. Now all that's left is the end goal of the POC alliance world revolution against whitey.

>>19868986
Marx talks about how after the revolution man can be free to fish and do what whatever he wants without alienation. It's essentially utopian in nature. Total bullshit, but that's what he believed, and I'm sure that's what communists thought they were getting into.

>>19869165
>thinks Deng is still alive
>doesn't know they have entire university programs dedicated to marxism
>regurgitates /pol/ tier fantasies
>has clearly never read marx
Can natsocs go even one post without utterly embarrassing themselves?

>>19869165
Thanks for being the very best Pentagon spokesperson this website has to offer. Not disappointed

>>19866642
It's socialist in the same way Hitler's Germany was. It has nothing to do with Marx whatsoever. In fact, it's this explicit rejection of Marx that created modern China's success. They could have achieved the same results if the nationalists won the civil war in 1949 and 40 million chinks wouldn't have died as a result of communistic autism.

https://odysee.com/@TheFascifist:c/Dr-David-Duke-on-China:b

>>19866592
>June 1986
very pertinent anon, thank you

>>19869175
>Marx talks about how after the revolution man can be free to fish
This is what I don't get about leftists. Why do they describe after the revolution like life now? Was fishing something we can't do now?
>>19869252
>They have entire university programs dedicated to Marxism
Same shit is all fucking western countries, that's why it such a cancer here. That's why we should defund universities and make people like you homeless.

>>19869252
>>19869263
>pic related
Yeah, obviously they will say that. They have to keep up appearances. There is nothing Marxist about the CCP whatsoever. I actually think lolbergtarians like yourself are worse than communists. At least the latter acknowledge that they are striving downwards.
>thinks Deng is still alive
I meant to say was still alive by the late 90s or whenever it was he died, it was Deng who explicitly rejected Mao and ushered in what constitutes modern China.
>can natsocs go even one post without utterly embarrassing themselves?
I'm not a natsoc and don't understand why you are getting so uptight. China is the future whether you like it or not. You are the one repeating talking points from the US state department.
>has clearly never read marx
Why would you think that? You are the one arguing that China is a Marxist country. I'm telling you it isn't and laid out exactly why. It's you that has to prove the claim.

>>19869263
Nigga the pentagon and the Jewish neocons and all the boomers are the ones pushing for war with china. Is you retarded?

>>19869175
This isn't entirely accurate, I am not Marxist but this kind of caricature doesn't do either side any good, as it only increases confusion. Marx wasn't THIS utopian. The "revolution" was to be a revolution in consciousness in which the forms and attitudes of capitalist/bourgeois production are dissolved and new forms and attitudes become possible. It is exactly analogous to the way that the capitalist, bourgeois mode of production replaced the "feudal" mode of production.

The bourgeoisie didn't plan this or even recognise itself as "the bourgeoisie." Attitudes and class conflicts, according to the Marxist understanding that is, simply worked out the conclusions (intractable conflict) already implicit in their premises (the mutual exclusivity of feudal and capitalist conceptions of domination of the means of production). Kings and nobles who converted traditional feudal estates and resources into capital, organised according to capitalist modes of organisation, contributed to this process as much as the bourgeoisie did, just as the bourgeoisie will contribute to the emancipation of the proletariat by essentially doing everything BUT, everything UP TO BUT NOT INCLUDING, communism (rational organisation of society's production according to its needs). The proletariat at that point simply steps in and takes the rational apparatus of control from out of the hands of its atavistically irrational and arbitrary owners, the bourgeoisie.

Once this happens, new modes of organisation will become possible. You shouldn't visualise a bunch of workers writing a constitution like the constitutional assemblies of the French Revolution, but a whole PROCESS of constitution-writing and state-making and re-making now becoming possible as a result of the class of actual producers having the collective realisation that bankers owning all the fruits of their labour is weird, and simply saying "no" to that fact in such unison that the bankers and banks essentially cease to exist in their current form. How such a revolution in thought and mentality will concretely manifest in different regions is another matter.

Another way to think of it is to think in terms of nationalism. Did anyone sit down and say "I want to replace feudalism with nationalism" in the 14th century when regional vernaculars began to supplant ecclesiastical Latin? No, but this was one important seed of the long process of the emergence of the modern nation-state and nation-form of thinking about human organisation. All the myriad things we do and have done within the rubric of "the nation" were not planned during that revolution in consciousness, and yet that revolution occurred. A condensed version of this story is told by Benedict Anderson in Imagined Communities, a book about how the emergence of communities gradually seeing themselves "as" distinct from their metropoles (by developing a Habermas style public sphere, e.g.) allowed them to conceptualise independence and rebellion.

>>19868549
>he's talking about communism, as in people who claim to adhere to communism
Marx:
>as in private life one differentiates between what a man thinks and says of himself and what he really is and does, so in historical struggles one must distinguish still more the phrases and fancies of parties from their real organism and their real interests, their conception of themselves from their reality.

>he's saying those people, like you, are faggots and despised by the working class. he's right. why is this so hard to follow for you?
no, he's saying that some pb antifa basedboys and such are despised by the working class and he's right, but that has shit to do with me.
>this is grade school english.
that's not the point. the point is that your epic argument is that something that's supposed to happen in the future hasn't happened in the past. it has to be the most retarded thing said in this thread, even though the competition is exceptionally strong
>>19868550
sure, if communism was popular right now you'd be seeing a revolution today
>>19868567
don't care about random wikipedia links and schizo walls of text, but good luck
>>19868570
there's no such thing as "leftist society" at all. leftism is a political trend of the ruling class in bourgeois society, but it's not the only one and it doesn't define bourgeois society as a whole.
>>19868573
communism has been happening continually since over 200 years ago
>>19869315
I hope this is copypasta and you didn't just get baited by that clinical retard into writing so many paragraphs that he won't be able to read

>>19867470
>>19867503
Counter point:

>>19869315
>Marx wasn't a utopian; he just wanted people to play jedi mind tricks so that socialism would suddenly appear
Wow, this is really retarded. Why do you retards exist? You said nothing of value. All those words. Nothing subutatial.
> (rational organisation of society's production according to its needs
We already have that you, retard. Where do you think profits come from? People who buy things based on need. What is with you retards where you are just doing tautologies and sophistry to make your ideas sound profound and unique. Its so pathetic.

>>19869312
They're also pushing the China fascist trope, are u retardant?

>>19869332
I told you I was presenting Marx's view, not mine. You didn't read the post charitably. In the long run doing this will make you retarded.

>>19869326
>I hope this is copypasta and you didn't just get baited by that clinical retard into writing so many paragraphs that he won't be able to read
You should always effortpost in good faith. Even if the person you're talking to doesn't respond positively, and even if you're saying something half wrong yourself, it'll still at least shed some light on your viewpoint and probably affect him on an unconscious level when he thinks about people like you at some later point. Even more importantly, you should remember that there are several lurkers for every poster and you could always be helping somebody out or giving them a perspective they didn't have.

There are lots of people browsing /lit/ who are just getting into these topics, lots of young people. If I can save them extra time and work understanding something I had to struggle to understand when I was younger or less informed about it, great. It's like having a friend or teacher explain something to you in 5 seconds that you would otherwise have had to be frustrated and half-sure about for 2 years of searching and never fully knowing where to look.

>>19869315
>tavistically irrational and arbitrary owners, the bourgeoisie.
>Business owners are irrational and arbitrary
Wow, you guys are dumb. How the fuck do you run an economy by being irrational and arbitrary? You really think business owners are being arbitrary when they try to seek profits, invest, employ people, and make business plans? You really think they don't even incentive to make the rational decisions from their shareholders, their consumers, and creditors who rely on them for money, products and services? You really think business owners can just randomly do everything out of thin air like magician? Are really dealing with people this fucking stupid?

>>19869359
You're just saying stupid shit that has no basis on reality. You say some really dumb shit about production being not rational under capitalism (I run a business you people are dumb have no idea how hard it is), and make some speculative claims about future social organizations like a moron. Literally utopian shit because you attempting the future economic system. This is the type of shit for retards who do not know anything about business let alone fiance. Why don't you motherfuckers run a business, or read into basic financial theory. The fuck are you talking about Marx when don't even know run a business or even pay fucking bill. Its a joke talking to retards like you.

>>19869315
>The "revolution" was to be a revolution in consciousness
Sounds utopian to me. All these arguments are hinged on the premise of dialectical materialism, that aside-
>this was one important seed of the long process of the emergence of the modern nation-state and nation-form of thinking about human organisation
For instance here, which completely ignores the ethnic and grassroots cultural component of societal organisation that constitutes the modern nation state. France (Franks), Germany (Germanic tribes) etc. Marx failed to predict pretty much all of the events of the 20th century, including the rise of national syndicalism (fascism) that was more of an anti-capitalist reaction to decay than a dissolution of older traditional forms. And in the places where communist revolution was successful, we didn't see anything that Marx predicted, such as the immediate abandonment of commodity production, or abandonment of production at all, which is a real blow in his ideology at this was supposed to occur alongside the revolution itself.
>class of actual producers having the collective realisation that bankers owning all the fruits of their labour is weird
It's amusing here because Hitler was the only man to ever arrest a Rothschild and fast forward to the current day and the bourgeois are more scared of a 10,000 year old Indo-European Hakenkreuz than a hammer and sickle. I wonder what he would have made of that.

>>19869299
>they have to keep up appearances
Cope
>it was Deng who explicitly rejected Mao and ushered in what constitutes modern China.
Good, because Mao's idealistic plans for China was wrong.
>China is the future whether you like it or not. You are the one repeating talking points from the US state department.
Ok? Yeah, I do like it. And what state department talking points am I repeating? That Deng is dead and they have university programs for marxism? KEK retard
>Why would you think that? You are the one arguing that China is a Marxist country. I'm telling you it isn't and laid out exactly why. It's you that has to prove the claim.
I can't find where you laid it out. Is it somewhere between the /pol/ cope and Qanon tier screeching?
Let me introduce you to the first piece of marx that you will ever read that's not on a /pol/ schizograph:
>We shall, of course, not take the trouble to enlighten our wise philosophers by explaining to them that the “liberation” of man is not advanced a single step by reducing philosophy, theology, substance and all the trash to “self-consciousness” and by liberating man from the domination of these phrases, which have never held him in thrall. Nor will we explain to them that it is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. “Liberation” is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse...

>>19869349
>They're also pushing the China fascist trope
Yes because fascism is the only thing they are scared of. Hence why it's been demonized for 80 years as the epitome of evil, while communists can run rampant and subvert our institutions and nobody bats an eye.

>>19869315
>atavistically irrational and arbitrary owners, the bourgeoisie.
SOVL
>rational organisation of society's production according to its needs
soulless

>>19869413
>fascism is the only thing they are scared of.
Why are they scared of invoking the enforcement of class subjugation? That sounds like something they would want very much.

>>19869412
If you think China is a Marxist country I don't even know what to say to you bro. Maybe get your head out of your lolberg austrian school textbooks and tie your shoes instead. And what does that quote have to do with China? And I'm the one that hasn't read Marx? Do you know what class warfare is? I'm literally an anti-communist and libertarians like you make genuine right wingers look like retards because they are so high on free market globalism that everything that doesn't have trannys or BLM stickers on it must be Marxism or something. Read a book.

>>19869315
>atavistically irrational and arbitrary owners, the bourgeoisie.
my nigger they earned that shit, they literally were superior specimens of humanity who had the big massive balls and the Giga sized brains to make shit and to employ and secure the payment and loyalty of men that could make and improve the shit, there was nothing arbitrary about their rule, they realized that its the rule of the fittest and took the initiative to secure power in whatever form it may be, they established rock-solid foundations and spread their roots thick across society, becoming princes of the industry that pioneered the great works of their time and laid the groundwork for the future. these men eclipse you and me millennia after their death, they are the reason we can sit around in our cushy homes with your autism devices and have long winded discussions about bullshit, they are the crown of all earthly ambition, these men that were the bourgeoisie are deserving of far more respect than the petulant infantile Marxist child can ever summon.

>>19869423
>Why are they scared of invoking the enforcement of class subjugation?
Class collaboration under a corporatist system, the abolishment of central banking and usury, a complete monetary reform, and eugenic policies that isolate Jews from the volk. Yeah, strange, that seems to be what they would totally want, correct?

>>19869370
No, the provisional or partial rationality of Marxism, the way that it's rational "all the way up to, but not including" full and ultimate rationality (as I said above), is that it rationally administers the whole economy, but is then incapable of rationalising itself (the arbitrary ownership of this highly rational economy by a bunch of descendants of former merchants and noblemen who adapted to capitalism) out of existence. Capitalism is highly rational up to a point, but its "head" is an irrational and outmoded class of industrial capitalists who unconsciously try to run the global economy like it's still the industrial revolution, causing recurrent crises and other absurdities.

>Why don't you motherfuckers run a business, or read into basic financial theory.
One of Marx's most valuable contributions to social thought was to relate "scientific" apparatuses like classical political economy or 19th century sociology to historical (materialist) conditions of possibility of their emergence, or put more simply, how people who think they're being "objective" and "scientific" are often just superimposing idealised fictions onto phenomena that don't really correspond to them, with more and more desperation precisely BECAUSE the phenomena are failing to correspond to them. Marx's diagnosis of the crisis of classical political economy is really good even if you aren't a Marxist.

Modern economists are total pseuds, failed mathematicians who don't even know their own theories. They just apply models they learned in college.

>>19869408
It is utopian ultimately and it does hinge on a Hegelian critique of irrationality. It's ultimately a development of Hegel's political economy in Philosophy of Right. One of Marx's earliest and most important writings is a line by line critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right.

>For instance here, which completely ignores the ethnic and grassroots cultural component of societal organisation that constitutes the modern nation state.
I was only giving one analogous example of how a historical materialist sociology might be applied, to show how it focuses on unconscious conflicts in class structures and their broad mentalities and habits rather than individual plans.

There's nothing saying you can't accept Marx's overall critique of capital and the bourgeoisie and not be a communist in the final analysis. That's what Sorel, Mussolini, and Sombart all did. Historical materialism can interact fruitfully with other critiques of capitalism as a process of rationalisation (like Weber's) too.

>>19869440
kek looks like I short circuited the bot

>>19869446
>Class collaboration under a corporatist system
Most countries already have this.
>the abolishment of central banking and usury
kek implying
>a complete monetary reform
such as?
>and eugenic policies that isolate Jews from the volk.
Isn't your big deal that jews make up the ruling class? Don't you think they'd just, you know, not do this?

>>19869440
>>19869447
>>19869446
>>19869412
>>19869408
>meaningless words
Stop arguing. Start bartering.

>>19869482
real and true, how these nerds do this shit is beyond me

>>19869442
Marx acknowledges this, his point isn't that the bourgeoisie is bad, he's not hypostatising "The Bourgeoisie" as the villain of history. He actually admires them and talks perfectly positively about them, DURING the epoch when they were not an atavistic class but were the self-emancipating class and thus representative of the process of emancipation in general. But Marx's whole point about having to supersede and transcend German idealism, transcend "philosophy," is that the bourgeoisie only carried out their (admittedly great) revolution, the culmination of which was the Enlightenment, on an IDEAL level. They elaborated all the concepts of universal rationality, freedom, citizenship, rule of law as opposed to custom and privilege, etc. They then formally enshrined these ideals, still only ideals, in the constitutions of the great liberal states, and assumed that this was enough to achieve CONCRETE emancipation.

But the materialist side of historical materialism is all about continually referring back to the actual conditions, the actual results: Who is free? Instead of progressive emancipation, Prussia was actually becoming lapsing into reaction and romantic conservatism in the 1840s, turning into a regime of censorship after decades of proclaiming its intent to be the leading enlightened liberal state in the world. This disillusioned a generation of radical liberals, Marx's friends and teachers, many of whom then said "well if the state won't do it on its own, only pretend and proclaim that it's doing it, I guess it's up to a new vanguard of radicals (who?) to make it happen in actuality."

That's when Marx "discovered" the proletariat, based on his experience with the (then very very dynamic and promising - remember this is literally right before the 1848 Spring of Nations revolutions) radical socialist movements in France, Belgium, and England. The year Marx and Engels became friends, Engels had just gotten back from England where movements like the Chartists seemed like they could actually force a new socialist wave of politics in England at any second.

Don't think of the Bolsheviks first when you think communism, think of Marx in 1845 thinking this shit was about to happen any minute (and being right, in 1848, when it really seemed like it was happening - and then really didn't).

Again I'm not a communist, just explaining it to the best of my ability here.

>>19869482
No one is going to let you barter until you ruthlessly extirpate financial capital and anybody who tries to undermine societies in order to ensure financial capital's reign continues. Look at the fate of every single nation that tried to pay off its national debt, abstain from the dollar or petrodollar or global finance system, establish an autarkic economic zone with other friendly nations, etc. These people will burn your entire country to the ground if you try to simply exist outside of their systems of control. You are already at war with them.

>>19869447
>It is utopian ultimately and it does hinge on a Hegelian critique of irrationality
I haven't read Hegel because I'm uncultured, all I know is that Schopenhauer hates him for some reason
>to show how it focuses on unconscious conflicts in class structures and their broad mentalities and habits rather than individual plans.
That makes more sense.
>That's what Sorel, Mussolini, and Sombart all did
Yeah I'm aware of these madlads, in the end they all rejected Marx with the exception of Sorel who was more puritanical.
>Historical materialism can interact fruitfully with other critiques of capitalism as a process of rationalisation
I agree but it's only a piece of the puzzle and there are other forces at work that are never even discussed. I have never heard a communist even mention fractional reserve lending in passing, yet that's how our whole economic system is staying afloat. And ultimately as a worldview it's completely anti-natal. Familial, kin, and ethnic affiliations are all 'bourgeois institutions' or whatever...

>>19869481
>Most countries already have this.
Holy christ, yeah I'm done here. You are mistaking corporatocracy with corporatism.
>such as?
https://archive.org/details/a-history-of-central-banking-and-the-enslavement-of-mankind-pdfdrive/mode/2up
>Isn't your big deal that jews make up the ruling class?
My big deal? It's the truth mate.
>Don't you think they'd just, you know, not do this?
Not do what? Sperg out and declare war on a country the size of Texas for wanting Jews expelled?

>>19869447
>irrational and outmoded class of industrial capitalists who unconsciously try to run the global economy like it's still the industrial revolution, causing recurrent crises and other absurdities.
This schizo theory is no different than /pol/ Jew one. How do they unconsciously run the economy when they have to compete with the competitors? Where does this stupid idea come from that capitalists are all just setting in a room planning everything that happens? You really think the '08 crash is connected to the pandemic recession? Like why do you retards always have these generalized theories, and ignore the unique factors that cause historical events when clearly they can not? Its shit like that led to Lysenkoism because the Soviets even tried to use Marxism to explain fucking plant biology.
>One of Marx's most valuable contributions to social thought was to relate "scientific" apparatuses like classical political economy o
Social science is not scientific. You have no control variables. You have limited knowledge, and you are making inferences based on constantly changing variables from profits to consumers. His analysis is not good at all; its a load of bullshit. More so even now because what he wrote is over 200 years old. Who the fuck would use shit like that to discuss how the global economy works? We access computation models that can accurately predict economic phenomena. We don't have to rely on theoretical speculation for sociologists who have never worked in the field of business. Idiots really are saying capitalism is collapsing when people are living longer, working less, and have a higher consumption per capita of durable commodities than any time in world history. There's literally no argument Marxists could make against capitalism that make logical sense. Your entire argument rests on a ridiculous moral claim of exploitation which essentially reduces it to saying competition and wage labor are immoral (the ridiculous notion human beings ought to not compete to survive or to be efficient with their scarce time by employing profitable labor), or you just lie about climate change and exaggerate its impact to call for essentially emerge measures. Just no. Its utter non-sense. Literally none of you people work or own businesses. You people have no idea how the world works. You entire understanding of the world comes from being a degenerate on twitter.

>>19869527
>You are mistaking corporatocracy with corporatism.
No I'm not. Australia for instance literally has a formal system of arbitration between workers and employers not unlike fascist italy.
And why can't you provide me some examples of monetary reform that are different to moddern states instead of linking a fucken book. You have read the book yourself, haven't you anon?
>Not do what?
Expel themselves you fucking donkey seeing as they're the ones in power. I'm arguing with an illiterate.

>>19869502
Do you ever think that maybe the reason why total emancipation has never happened is that it isn't possible? that the people are retarded and not capable of handling higher ideals? that they need to be treated like the worthless cattle they are because it's all they're ever going to be worth? that trying to lift the goyim up to enlightenment is an adorably doomed endeavor? the "people" are just fucking stupid, bigoted yawping apes that cannot handle change or difference, they just want to mindlessly consooooooooooooom, with no ambition or sense of higher values, just an endless gaping maw of an existence ruled by pure hedonistic nihilism. they are like dumb domesticated animals that have been cut off from the mantle of nature and seek only to make everything as comfortable and convenient and docile and unchallenging and nonthreatening as possible so that they can wallow. if the dull masses were such poor downtrodden bright souls you'd think they'd have ascended long ago, but instead entire industries are built around manipulating their cattle like psychology and controlling them like whelped hounds. anyone who has spent a significant amount of time around the general public loathes them with a burning fucking passion, these low IQ gibbering apes are so fucking stupid that they cannot be described in words, it is beyond infuriating dealing with these subhumans and their baffling stupidity. maybe higher ideals and greater things exist outside the reach of the plebs for a good reason. maybe it simply has to be this way, a natural filter.

>>19869503
Even if you never really get into Hegel it's worth at least understanding how he was interpreted by the Left Hegelians since their view was so influential. This will gradually introduce you to Hegelian dialectical thinking which then makes understanding all subsequent Marxists way easier.

Have you read Sorel's Decomposition of Marxism? The standard view within Marxism is that the "revisionists" were philosophically illiterate but if you actually look at what happened, there was a lot of legitimate discontent with dogmatic "Marxism" in the 1890s, which was often more of a cultural movement fixating on metaphysical materialism, scientism, atheism, etc. A lot of genuine socialists with more metaphysical and theological inclinations were driven away from left socialism during this period because they just assumed that all ordinary socialists were ultra-materialist utopians who hated the family, hated everything natural and traditional, etc. It's one of the biggest shames in history, since ordinary working people are never that radical, they are usually patriotic religious family men.

Sombart actually wrote a book about the socialist movement around this time, during his transitional phase, and it's a good way to see how Marxism ACTUALLY looked and felt for workers on the ground. That should not be completely conflated with 1920s, re-Hegelianised "orthodox Marxism" (Leninism).

You can't be an "orthodox Marxist" and still be religious, since you have to be essentially a Hegelian pantheist (Lukacs said he was trying to "out-Hegel Hegel") or at least some kind of vulgar Engels style materialist. Marx's own perspective as a secular Jewish youth of the 1830s Berlin Enlightenment loaded Marxism with a backbone of Hegelian rationalisation (partly understood as secularisation) that makes it hard to make room for religion or nationality. But there's nothing saying you can't take what is true from Marx's critical theory and simply reject his Hegelianism. Or even turn it into a theistic/metaphysical right Hegelianism, if you want.

>>19869544
If you have a problem with Marx's theory you should have problems with any Weberian theory of modernisation too. I think again you're reading things into my post that aren't there.

>Social science is not scientific.
>We access computation models that can accurately predict economic phenomena.
>make logical sense.
You are doing what Marxists usefully critique, hypostatising "science," "logic," "models," and now non-human computing as the epitome of the above. Your "pure" models emanate from (are "alienated" from) very impure processes of very human cognition, which are complexly interwoven with class interests. "Interpellation" is a useful term here.

>>19869558
>Australia for instance literally has a formal system of arbitration between workers and employers not unlike fascist italy
Holy kek. It's a literal liberal democracy. There is no regimentation of society into corporates or guilds whatsoever, not in any impactful way.
>And why can't you provide me some examples of monetary reform
Because the book is downstairs and I can't be bothered moving my fat ass of this chair to go and get it nor can I be bothered scrolling through a pdf to show you something you can literally look at yourself. State banking is the bane of the NWO.
>Expel themselves you fucking donkey seeing as they're the ones in power
They've been expelled 109 times and it's never their fault.

>>19869581
Even if you really believe that, you should still be a natural right thinker like Louis de Bonald, and still be oriented toward the common good.

If you are just a Nietzschean-Hobbesian "life's a jungle and I'm the apex predator!" type, then you aren't speaking morally (normatively) anymore and so it's a category error to be talking about what "should" be done at all. If you are morally nihilistic and don't believe in any natural or proper state or goal of society, then it's just as permissible for me to say that I am exercising my will to power by reverse-engineering society into communism (or whatever) to spite you or because I prefer it etc.

But I agree that one of Marxism's most ambiguous and contentious points is the (ultimately Hegelian) notion that rationality begets rationality and the proletariat as the universal class will "emancipate itself" from all arbitrary domination, a radical form of Kant's famous essay "What is Enlightenment?" Marxism has itself split recurrently over the issue of how this "rationality" is to be interpreted. If it's so rational, why doesn't it just happen? Why does the proletariat need to be organised, why doesn't it self-catalyse like the bourgeoisie did against the old estates? What is a vanguard party, why do we need a super-rational vanguard if we're the agents of rationality itself? Does the vanguard, being super-rational, have a right to manipulate or compel an "insufficiently" rational and stubborn proletariat? If a vanguard is by definition a minority, who decides which vanguard is right? What do we do in issues of doctrinal disagreement?

Some of the most fascinating and frustrating answers to these questions are given by Lenin. It's very easy to be sucked into thinking he has all the answers even though he never actually gives you them, and what you're really doing is following his force of conviction and charisma.

>>19869544
>This schizo theory is no different than /pol/ Jew one
Good evening Moshe

>>19866408
>Includes Vol I, II, and III
But not IV?

>>19869584
>Have you read Sorel's Decomposition of Marxism?
I have not I will check it out thanks for the info anon.

>>19869612
Holy fuck you're a dumb cunt. I'm not trying to prove that Australia is fascist, just that why would the ruling class be scared of fascism when they can have all the perks of fascism without any of the downsides to them? Class collaboration is hogwash and not significant at all for workers, as we can already see in Australia.
>Can't remember even one point about something as simple as monetary policy from a book he's apparently read
Really made an impression on you, that book. Not to mention you quite literally linked it to me, meaning you don't even have to walk anywhere, you fat, dumb fuck.
>They've been expelled 109 times and it's never their fault.
Ok, and? What's your point? Can you just take the time to read a little slower and understand what I'm saying, and respond to my point, you illiterate cunt?

>>19869613
>words words words words words words words
>le common good
I hate the dull masses so much it's unreal.

>>19869502
>They elaborated all the concepts of universal rationality, freedom, citizenship, rule of law as opposed to custom and privilege, etc.
>" conservatism in the 1840s, turning into a regime of censorship.. This disillusioned a generation of rad libs, Marx's friends and teachers, many of whom then said "well if the state won't do it on its own, only pretend and proclaim that it's doing it"
No, this isn't what happened.
This is what happened:
>" But the unsatisfied are still in great uncertainty, and their dissatisfaction expresses itself only in a “boundless resentment.” The equally unsatisfied critic now wants to become master of this: he can neither want nor attain more than to bring that “spiritual being,” the masses, out of its resentment, and “uplift” those who were just resentful, i.e., give them the right attitude toward those results of the revolution that are to be overcome; he can become the head of the masses, their determined spokesperson. Therefore, he also wants to “do away with the deep chasm which separates him from the mob.” He is distinguished from those who want to “uplift the lower classes of the people” by wanting to save not only these from “resentment,” but also himself."
>"But, of course, his consciousness also doesn’t deceive him, when he thinks of the masses as the “natural opponents of theory,” and foresees that “the more this theory develops itself, the more it will consolidate the masses.” Because the critic can neither enlighten nor satisfy the masses with his requirement, the human being. If over against the bourgeoisie they are only the “lower classes of the people,” a politically insignificant mass, then over against “the human being” they must be even more a mere mass, a humanly insignificant, indeed an inhuman, mass, or a mob of inhuman monsters."
People like you, are so narcissistic that you ignore the reality that your ideas don't reflect reality. The "proletariat" is not monolith, nor is the bourgeois. None of them understand or have any idea of what "universal rationality, freedom, citizenship, rule of law" are these are all vague and nominal ideas without concrete object to them. They're bullshit. HisMaT is not about conditions. Its just story telling.. More so, Marxists argument is strange. You're not changing society; you're merely replacing one group of people with another. All the tyranny, censorship, and crap you speak of would and did happen under proletarian regimes. Proletarian resentment with the bourgeois has nothing do with emancipation. Its a way to just shackle the individual, and to force him to conform to the ideal of the Marxist - the Homo Sovieticus. You do not care about the worker; you only care if the worker serves you and your interests; and you're willing to enslave him just as much the Prussian bourgeois to live to your utopian ideal. You merely wish to have their power peoples' lives out of pitiful revenge and megalomania.

>>19869678
That's really interesting, thanks. Both the Trotsky and the Stirner (?). Again I think you're confusing me for arguing for these things instead of stating them though. Have you read Voegelin's New Science? There's a quote in there, something like "the political gnostic is convinced he can save humanity; he just has to kill half of it to do so." He focuses on Marx in particular.

I agree that critiquing the naivete and arrogance of these thinkers is necessary, especially those who may or may not have been sociopaths, megalomaniacs, and monsters, because naivete and arrogance open the door for the latter types. But I think this should still be distinguished from a sympathetic understanding of the genuine idealism in genuinely idealistic thinkers' philosophies. Not even sympathetic in the sense of sharing their views, I mean the sympathy necessary for accurate understanding. You want to accurately and thus sympathetically understand even your enemy. Some of what you say is simply not a fair characterisation of Marxist views, even if I did agree with your general sentiment and despise Marxists etc.

>>19869359
>you should remember that there are several lurkers for every poster and you could always be helping somebody out or giving them a perspective they didn't have.
people who can read and want to understand things will just read Marx.
>It's like having a friend or teacher explain something to you in 5 seconds that you would otherwise have had to be frustrated and half-sure about for 2 years of searching and never fully knowing where to look.
you're forgetting that most posts about everything everywhere are made by morons who don't understand what they're talking about. so it's more like having 1000 utter retards shout contradictory things at you and you just accepting on faith the one which says things that fit best with your preconceptions.
>>19869408
>Marx failed to predict pretty much all of the events of the 20th century
is he supposed to be fucking Nostradamus or something? lmao. besides, Engels has predicted WW I and a double revolution like October.
>including the rise of national syndicalism (fascism) that was more of an anti-capitalist reaction to decay
fascism wasn't an anti-capitalist reaction, it was anti-proletarian reaction and a progress of capitalism
>And in the places where communist revolution was successful, we didn't see anything that Marx predicted, such as the immediate abandonment of commodity production
stop pulling nonsense out of your ass. Marx hasn't predicted "immediate abandonment of commodity production". he said clearly that "Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other."
>or abandonment of production at all
what abandonment of production you tard? where are you getting this from?
>and the bourgeois are more scared of a 10,000 year old Indo-European Hakenkreuz than a hammer and sickle
thanks to the Stalinist counter-revolution hammer and sickle became a symbol of capitalist conservation under the false guise of socialism. the bourgeoisie has learned that when necessary it can dangle it in front of the workers and tell them they're in socialism to make them obediently keep working for capital. that's why they aren't scared of it.
and their reaction to Nazism is the reverse because the way they use Nazism is the reverse: they bourgeoisie reacts hysterically to Nazism because it 1) wants to hide the fact that Nazism was capitalist through and through and 2) uses Nazism as a boogeyman for the working class, making them defend bourgeois democracy and not revolt against it, or else evil Nazism will take over and do a bunch of bad things

>>19869671
>why would the ruling class be scared of fascism when they can have all the perks of fascism without any of the downsides to them?
What are you even talking about honestly? How can Jews benefits from fascism when the whole ideology is rooted in palingenetic ultranationalism that ousts them from public life? There's no such thing as drip-feeding fascism you dumb goy. Also calling me a cunt 50 times isn't going to make me understand your retarded premise.

Like how can I even respond to this:
>hurr durr why dont da joos expel themsevles?!? gotcha!!
Do you even know what Jews are?

Marxism is not for and never has been for the emancipation of anyone. Its a plan for enslavement to the critics. You just want a specific freedom; to terrorize your political and economic opponents. You want to be the social engineer to undo the so called "moral wrongs" of the bourgeois. The resentment of the proletariat is no different than the resentment of the previous noble class. You do not wish to rid the world of alienation, your goal is alienate humanity further by changing the bourgeois principle of productive labor being commerce to social labor - being the principle of the despotic communist party who will solely decide for themselves what humanity ought to be used for and no one else. Of course it would never work because humans don't conform neatly to these lofty ideas; humanity is a rhizome - it doesn't have set characteristics that can be unified under a world government like communists would do - without problems or frictions. Like the bourgeois, you would utilize censorship, violence, and all sorts of instruments of control & to eliminate any form of potential that was a threat to your ability to regulate human life. And you would have to. The mercantile nature of capitalism can not exist under communism; because you have to abolish exchange-value; you have to eliminate the ability for individuals to freely decide what to do with their labor, and ultimately their lives, because they will refuse to serve you, due to their their circumstances and instinctual passions, to serve the "social interests" of your society or the representatives of your idealistic communist society - the party.
>" Thus do I speak unto you in parable, ye who make the soul giddy, ye preachers of EQUALITY! Tarantulas are ye unto me, and secretly revengeful ones!"
>" They are people of bad race and lineage; out of their countenances peer the hangman and the sleuth-hound."
>" Distrust all those who talk much of their justice! Verily, in their souls not only honey is lacking."
>" And when they call themselves “the good and just,” forget not, that for them to be Pharisees, nothing is lacking but—power!"
>" With these preachers of equality will I not be mixed up and confounded. For thus speaketh justice UNTO ME: “Men are not equal.”
And never will be.
>"It is disgraceful on the part of socialist-theorists to argue that circumstances and social combinations could be devised which would put an end to all vice, illness, crime, prostitution, and poverty.... But that is tantamount to condemning Life ... a society is not at liberty to remain young. And even in its prime it must bring forth ordure and decaying matter. The more energetically and daringly it advances, the richer will it be in failures and in deformities, and the nearer it will be to its fall. Age is not deferred by means of institutions. Nor is illness. Nor is vice."
I will not let dumbass utopians fill my head with lies or lead people down such a degenerate path.

>>19869266
David duke is a retard, im not reading his brainlet takes

>>19869727
>fascism wasn't an anti-capitalist reaction, it was anti-proletarian reaction and a progress of capitalism
Which is why every capitalist power in the world declared war on them while giving $13 billion in munitions to the USSR. Makes sense. Tell me, what's the prevailing ideology today? What's the one single thing you cannot be in America? Is it a communist, or is it a Nazi? What movies are they making in Hollywood? What's the end goal of capitalism, ethnic nationalism in a nation free of usury?
>thanks to the Stalinist counter-revolution hammer and sickle became a symbol of capitalist conservation under the false guise of socialism
Schizo browncel
>1) wants to hide the fact that Nazism was capitalist through and through
Holy kek. What a cope. I typically call people here delusional for memes but this is outer-orbit delusion.
>2) uses Nazism as a boogeyman for the working class, making them defend bourgeois democracy and not revolt against it
No. It's used as a boogeyman for white Europeans to resist their genocide caused by international capitalism, which Hitler tried to prevent.

>>19869799
So you are anti-China then?

>>19869727
Communism and Capitalism are two sides of the same globalist shekel. You've swallowed reddit wholesale.

>>19869761
I don't know how you made such a simple question with such a simple premise so inexplicably retarded. Genuinely concerned for you anon.

>>19866408
Only volume 1 is worth reading and only pseuds disagree. As for understanding, read passages twice, take notes, put the book down and think about it.

>>19869861
I think have been genuinely trolling me this whole time so you're gay.

>>19869332
I definitely needed my hulu, netflix, and amazon prime subscription. I definitely needed all my bad dragon dildos. I definitely needed 20 big macs in one week. I definitely needed to give that vtuber half my wages from this month. I definitely needed to become poorer from inflation while my manufacturing plant has gained larger profit margins over the past year.

>>19869717
You need to stop reading theory and read history. Read anything about what actually happened in the Soviet Union. Learn about the Workers' Opposition, read about ideological struggles between the Bolsheviks after Lenin died. There's no reason to be talking about theory when we know about what happened in practice. I don't give a fuck about "theory." I care about what actually happened. I'm tired of people who want to "philosophize" and want to ignore the implications of their beliefs because its so easy to be a critic, hide behind dialectics,
>"Wherever authority is still considered good form, so that one does not “give reasons” but
commands, the dialectician is a sort of clown: people laugh at him, they don’t take him seriously.—Socrates was the clown who got people to take him seriously: what really happened there."
>"It can only be self-defense in the hands of
those who don’t have any other weapons. One needs to get one’s rights by force; otherwise, one makes no use of it."
>"Is Socrates’ irony an expression of revolt? Of the rabble’s ressentiment?Does he, as one of the oppressed, relish his own ferocity in the knife-thrusts of the syllogism? Does he take revenge on the nobles whom he fascinates?—As a dialectician, one has a merciless instrument at hand; one can play the tyrant with it; one compromises by conquering. The dialectician lays on his opponent the burden of proving that he is not an he idiot: he infuriates, and at the same time paralyzes. The dialectician and empowers the intellect of his opponent.—What? Is dialectic just a form of revenge in Socrates?"

but a not a doer. Read Volkogonov's works - the man was a firm Stalinist and a believer in socialism himself until he found out what they did and what they thought. Fitzgerald talks about how the party hated intellectuals, and philosophy majors, because they would argue a lot over abstract concepts and never talk about anything concrete - Stalin had them removed from the party. All the people talking "theory" are just stupid. Nobody cares about that shit; its sophistry. Its about being a finesser. And socialists are among the most finessed people who exist in politics.

>>19869894
Absolutely, Stalin absolutely hated theory couldn't stand or yakking intellectuals who spent all their time reading and writing. He himself wasn't much of a thinker, theorist, or writer, but he definitely was a doer!

>>19866536
>Libertarians of Free State Project took over New Hampshire
I looked this up and the first article that popped up showed how it turned into a shithole after lolberts took over

>>19869894
Absolutely, Stalin absolutely hated theory couldn't stand It or yakking intellectuals who spent all their time reading and writing. He himself wasn't much of a thinker, theorist, or writer, but he definitely was a doer!

this thread is so gay. Just a bunch of basement dwelling lolberts and zoomer trannies saying they'll put the others against the wall lmao

>>19869881
We definitely need to mass murder people because we can't just let people have amenities. We should create a society people where don't have the free time to do the things they want with their lives with their hard earned money. We need someone like you, with your messianic talmudism, to dictate every action of every human life.
> I definitely needed to become poorer from inflation
We solve that by implementing price controls, printing money to pay for universal programs, and killing people who own small businesses because that will some how eliminate all the exploitation making people suffer in life. We can't just give people their money back through tax cuts, we can't just stop giving out handouts to people like me who post on 4chan all day, smoke weed and contribute nothing of value to society other than endless bitching and whining about how hard my life is because I'm the only people who face hardship in life and no one else. Woe is me, but fuck you if you are think differently. I'm an empath btw, but fuck all you white people for being greedy imperialist bloodsuckers living on stolen land; you're all guilty of genocide and should die. Stay woke and spend at your local, inclusive corporation diversity hires.

>>19869923
>The first result is by the Democratic New Hampshire Party crying about the recent defunding of public schools
Sounds based to me

>>19869727
>they bourgeoisie reacts hysterically to Nazism because it 1) wants to hide the fact that Nazism was capitalist
Yeah bro, National Socialism was a big ploy thought up by the current American establishment. That's why Hitler pursued national autarky and arrested a literal Rothschild and is the most demonized and lied about man in history - globally.
>uses Nazism as a boogeyman for the working class, making them defend bourgeois democracy and not revolt against it
Nigger are you retarded? It's only a boogeyman for White people acting in their self-interest, because the last time they did that, they almost succeeded in overthrowing the entire Enlightenment project and the finance capital it necessitates. Why does the current order push a "nahtsee ebil" narrative when Whites will be an absolute minority at the end of this century in every single one of our countries? There are so many contradictions here I don't even know where to begin. Maybe you should just stay on Twitter or something, tranny.
>or else evil Nazism will take over and do a bunch of bad things
That's literally what communists say though. The "ebil nahtsee" and "muh hall of cost" rhetoric is the only thing that prevents people from acknowledging the horrific shit that occurred in Not Real Communism™.

>>19869938
that's every thread on communism, complete with verbose walls of text about political semantics that make zero impact on the world

>>19866408
It was probably meant to be confusing.

>>19869962
That's based tbf

>>19869938
Agreed. Politics should only be used as a tool to acquire power, not to LARP as an enlightened moralfaggot who's going to change the world or something. You should only be interested in politics if you plan to finesse as many gullible faggots as possible and use them for your grind. You should wear ideologies like clothes, ditching them for a clean pair when they get dirty so to speak. You should be some Marxist coup starter's military advisor who gets a junta running for the latest banana republic that will be gone in a year's time, sucking the life out of some shithole nation in the middle of nowhere, taking all their drugs and money, and women and then jumping ship as soon as the Commies in charge realize that you can't feed people with lofty humanitarian ideals. Men who do this are of a higher breed, made of pure testosterone, forged by sheer masculinity, giving two shits about the beta male nerd sissy boys and their gay philosophy bullshit.

>>19866408
Read Wage Labour and Capital/Value Price and Profit first, read slowly and don't be afraid to confront something else like "reading marx's capital" by David Harvey as a compliment to volume 1

>>19870001
Based and virilitypilled

>>19870001
I kneel

>>19870001
No anon, that is not the proper reaction to such faggotry.
>>19870030
Conan would spit on the poster you responded to

>>19869802
>Which is why every capitalist power in the world declared war on them while giving $13 billion in munitions to the USSR.
yes, there's competition between capitalist states, sometimes taking the form of warfare.
>Tell me, what's the prevailing ideology today?
the bourgeois ideology. belief in right to property, national self-determination, popular sovereignty and so on
>What's the one single thing you cannot be in America? Is it a communist, or is it a Nazi?
I already explained you why that is. Nazism is used as a boogeyman by all democratic bourgeois, whereas for communism it's more complex: the right wing of the bourgeoisie uses it as a boogeyman, while the left wing of the bourgeoisie uses apparent concessions to it as a carrot for the workers to get baited into complacency with.
>What movies are they making in Hollywood?
shit ones? do you think putting gay black people on screen is Marxism or something? spare me this shit
>What's the end goal of capitalism, ethnic nationalism in a nation free of usury?
it has no end goal. its continuous goal is to sustain the conditions for the capitalist mode of production to continue. nationalism is often used for that goal too, when fit. as for usury, it can't get rid of it because it simply can't exist at its current level of development without credit.
>Schizo browncel
what? the facts are Stalinism undermined the international revolution (see e.g. Shanghai 1927), murdered the Bolsheviks, allied with bourgeois states and built capitalism in Russia while telling the workers it was socialism to prevent their opposition
>Holy kek. What a cope.
nice argument lol. it should be obvious why the bourgeoise doesn't want it to be understood that Nazi atrocities were a product of a proper functioning of capitalism
>No.
yes, it's a historically proven fact. see the Popular Front in the 1930s. the workers were urged to follow the liberals and defend bourgeois democracy against fascism. anyone who defended independent proletarian position against both democratic and fascist forms of capitalism was immediately slammed as an enabler of fascists.
after WW II the bourgeoisie started using corpses of Jews for this purpose. anyone who opposes a popular front with the liberal bourgeoisie is immediately accused of contributing to a future repeating of the Holocaust
so it's patently obvious that Nazism is used as a boogeyman to keep the proletariat in tow
>>19869975
>Yeah bro, National Socialism was a big ploy thought up by the current American establishment
what? "capitalist" doesn't mean "controlled by American establishment". Germany was a capitalist power separate from the US and in capitalist competition with it
>Why does the current order push a "nahtsee ebil" narrative
explained above (for the second time)
>That's literally what communists say though.
no, communists oppose capitalism both in its democratic and fascist forms.

>>19869165
>It was Deng who was the sole man responsible for the success of modern China, and he was violently purged twice by Mao during the cultural revolution
Deng was an orthodox Marxist, unlike Mao.

>>19869252
>>19869412
Calling everything /pol/ just makes you look like a retard that's reaching for confirmation bias. It's a total projection that's consistently used by Twitter trannies, shitlibs and communists.

>>19870065
Nonsense, it is the only masculine response to such faggotry. The chad does not care for the ideological trappings and vanity of the sissy boy pseud, merely he cares for the good times he can get out of the capital and power and control that cabals of sniveling beta males accrue. This is because the sigma male doesn't care for the political theater itself or its sophistry but what he can exploit it for and how it benefits him and his fellow chads. History is full of vicious men who played hound to some ideology spewing fag for protection, wealth, status, fun, or personal gain. The real man cares for what is practical and what generates real value and prosperity, not the ego-stroking dick-measuring pissing contests of "intellectuals". They bear no fruit.

>>19870100
>calling a stick a stick makes you look like a retard
ok retard

>the bourgeoise!
Anyone who in 2022 uses this word because they think it makes them look smart, stfu.

>>19869951
>I'm an empath btw
I see im talking to a 14 year old

>>19870229
Bourgeoise is a very well-defined term with a long history of usage, it's not my fault you're either 12 or a boomer

>so many seething walls of text
Jesus

>>19866408
Like a few anons mentioned try reading it slowly, there are a few good companion pieces but the only one I've read(by Michael Heinrich) is a bit advanced. Definitely read it though, you are doing better than most by just attempting because not many people can read and actually grasp all the concepts in there.

bump

>>19868611
it's still a society separate from its neighbors though.

>>19866408
>how do read kapital without getting confused and overwhelmed??
Since trannies seem to be Marxist, I'd say getting your dick split will make it easier to read

>>19866953
forty keks.