/lit/ - Literature

>blows the fuck out jews
This is the interesting part

> Nazi Bourgeois Capitalist exploiter of the working classes hates Marx with a seething, burning passion.
Well duh.

>>22126212
>I can't get laid because the auto industry exists

>>22126212
Dilate

>Effortlessly refutes Marx
Where?

>>22126232
>>22126237
Oh cool, I totally didn't expect any these responses at all! Gee, I don't think I can keep up with your guys' wit but I guess I'm gonna have to try, aren't I?
Well, in any case I will continue to call out nazis, fascists, racists, and bourgeois murderers of the proletariat wherever I see them and oo lets see: oh! oh dear! Ford checks all of these!
Turns out beating workers trying to organize (see: The Battle of the Overpass) sort of goes together with Nazi sympathees! who would have thought?
On a side note, here's a cool song you folks might enjoy :)
>https://youtu.be/ykP7utXGiCk

>>22126292
>writes a paragraph of pathetic seethe
You're an embarrassment even to your own movement. Reflect on yourself.

>>22126200
please elaborate for us kind sir

>>22126309
Did you like the song? :)

>>22126200
Your obsession with socialism is so pathetic. Your poor working-class ass is looking for reasons to submit yourself to capitalists/bankers (break free out of pharaohs’ rule).

The point is not to revolt in order to establish a communistic state, but to increase workers’ pay and benefits.

>>22126200
Your obsession with socialism is so pathetic.
Your poor working-class ass is looking for reasons to submit yourself to capitalists/bankers.

>>22126200
>He reads 20th century airport terminal midwit lit because the author hated jooz

> I wonder if le based Elon will ever write a book where he blows the fuck out of Marx!

>>22126209
reminder that he cucked out and officially apologised in 1927

>>22126309
>>22126237
>>22126232
How does the boot taste?

>>22127448
They must have gave him the Kanye treatment. He was still lowkey a Hitler supporter all throughout the war and was probably hoping that Hitler would come to power in America but he never did of course.

Well? Are you going to post it?

>>22126200
>hurr durr muh jews
He was an absolute brainlet.

>>22127771
The bourgeoisie supported Hitler? Well I'd never!

>>22126200
>refutes Marx
Does he refute the idea that:
>new technologies disrupt existing social arrangements and create classes according to people's relationship to these technologies
>the different material conditions and interests of these classes motivate the political, economic, and social conflicts that make up historical events
>capitalism is the latest, most productive, and most disruptive arrangement to appear in the course of human socioeconomic evolution
>capitalism is governed by dynamics that are destabilizing and ultimately self-destructive
I'm curious to know which of these he btfo's so easily

>>22127887
>new technologies disrupt existing social arrangements and create classes according to people's relationship to these technologies

Was this written in "on machines".

>>22127887
I kind of hate how people think that Marx was some deep philosophical thinker because he noticed things change with time and technology but tried to meme a return to post black death, pre trader prince feudalism into reality by clogging discourse on his asinine ideas with walls of meaningless text

The welfare of the country is squarely up to us as individuals. That is where it should be and that is where it is safest. Governments can promise something for nothing but they cannot deliver. They can juggle the currencies as they did in Europe (and as bankers the world over do, as long as they can get the benefit of the juggling) with a patter of solemn nonsense. But it is work and work alone that can continue to deliver the goods—and that, down in his heart, is what every man knows.

There is little chance of an intelligent people, such as ours, ruining the fundamental processes of economic life. Most men know they cannot get something for nothing. Most men feel—even if they do not know—that money is not wealth. The ordinary theories which promise everything to everybody, and demand nothing from anybody, are promptly denied by the instincts of the ordinary man, even when he does not find reasons against them. Heknowsthey are wrong. That is enough. The present order, always clumsy, often stupid, and in many ways imperfect, has this advantage over any other—it works.

Doubtless our order will merge by degrees into another, and the new one will also work—but not so much by reason of what it is as by reason of what men will bring into it. The reason why Bolshevism did not work, and cannot work, is not economic. It does not matter whether industry is privately managed or socially controlled; it does not matter whether you call the workers’ share “wages” or “dividends”; it does not matter whether you regimentalize the people as to food, clothing, and shelter, or whether you allow them to eat, dress, and live as they like. Those are mere matters of detail. The incapacity of the Bolshevist leaders is indicated by the fuss they made over such details. Bolshevism failed because it was both unnatural and immoral. Our system stands. Is it wrong? Of course it is wrong, at a thousand points! Is it clumsy? Of course it is clumsy. By all right and reason it ought to break down. But it does not—because it is instinct with certain economic and moral fundamentals.

The economic fundamental is labour. Labour is the human element which makes the fruitful seasons of the earth useful to men. It is men’s labour that makes the harvest what it is. That is the economic fundamental: every one of us is working with material which we did not and could not create, but which was presented to us by Nature.

>>22128134
(cont)
The moral fundamental is man’s right in his labour. This is variously stated. It is sometimes called “the right of property.” It is sometimes masked in the command, “Thou shalt not steal.” It is the other man’s right in his property that makes stealing a crime. When a man has earned his bread, he has a right to that bread. If another steals it, he does more than steal bread; he invades a sacred human right. If we cannot produce we cannot have—but some say if we produce it is only for the capitalists. Capitalists who become such because they provide better means of production are of the foundation of society. They have really nothing of their own. They merely manage property for the benefit of others. Capitalists who become such through trading in money are a temporarily necessary evil. They may not be evil at all if their money goes to production. If their money goes to complicating distribution—to raising barriers between the producer and the consumer—then they are evil capitalists and they will pass away when money is better adjusted to work; and money will become better adjusted to work when it is fully realized that through work and work alone may health, wealth, and happiness inevitably be secured.

There is no reason why a man who is willing to work should not be able to work and to receive the full value of his work. There is equally no reason why a man who can but will not work should not receive the full value of his services to the community. He should most certainly be permitted to take away from the community an equivalent of what he contributes to it. If he contributes nothing he should take away nothing. He should have the freedom of starvation. We are not getting anywhere when we insist that every man ought to have more than he deserves to have—just because some do get more than they deserve to have.

>>22126292

>>22126200
Fordism helped lift many out of poverty, so yes.

>>22127506
I dunno marxists how does it taste considering u want the state to hold ur hand in all matters? Remind me again whats the state of the city of Detroit when the marxists applied their new rules and laws?

>>22128141
>There is no reason why a man who is willing to work should not be able to work and to receive the full value of his work. There is equally no reason why a man who can but will not work should not receive the full value of his services to the community. He should most certainly be permitted to take away from the community an equivalent of what he contributes to it. If he contributes nothing he should take away nothing. He should have the freedom of starvation.

How will antiwork fags ever recover?

>>22128367
If capitalists move their factories to Mexico the second it becomes more profitable, why should we cede control of society to them? It seems like these are the last people who should have anything to do with politics because they don't share any sense of social responsibility with the people beneath them.

>>22127506
why are anarchists so obsessed with licking boots? it kinda makes me notice that when they go out to riot they dress up in gimp outfits with really tight black denim and all kinds of chains and metal accessories. they instigate trouble with the police who then swoop down and discipline them. anarchists are subs aren't they? you really can't unsee it.

>>22128406
>Moving the goalposts
But why did they decide to move the factories in the first place. Detroit was set up to be even richer than fucking jew york, a center of industrialism in america. Look at the state of the nigger infested city today.

>>22128422
So you want the state to prevent blacks from moving where the jobs are, but permit capitalists to move jobs overseas at their own fancy? Do you have anything to say besides screendamaged stormfag babbling about niggers?

>>22128134
>>22128141
Holy based. Marxists can never recover from this.

>>22127771
"talk shit get hit" is a primordial truth

>>22128447
>Again moving the goalposts because he refuses to answer the core of the question
Why did they move the factories out of detroit in the first place subhuman?

>>22126279
I expect the same kind of thing from all 'refutations' by capitalists, in that they just ignore almost everything said and act like they won something.

>>22128499
Are you just gonna ignore what was posted in this thread?

>>22128508
You mean this:

>>22128134
>>22128141
This exactly the 'nothing' I, the "yep, Capitalism sure is natural and works right, not like what those Russians did" I expected. I would respect Capitalist apologetics far more if they actually did things like, say, acknowledge Bismark's model of the welfare state as being a crucial step to saving what they like so much from those who were righteously furious at its results.

>>22128490
Because it was more profitable to have them elsewhere. The difference between us is that you believe this happened because black people have a special gland in their brains that makes them do crime and not because of globalization allowed factory owners to minimize labor costs.

So should I be a capitalist or a marxist?

>>22128530
>Bismark's model of the welfare state
is just a federally run insurance company that nobody has any say in opting in or out of.

>>22128530
>I would respect Capitalist apologetics far more if they actually did things like, say, acknowledge Bismark's model of the welfare state as being a crucial step to saving what they like so much from those who were righteously furious at its results.
It probably did, but there is only so much "reform" any economy can withstand and socialism must ultimately lead to ruin without a free market, private property, and a working price system and socialism is more inefficient than laissez-faire almost as a rule. I personally have no problem with public works, services, and even benefits per se but it's obvious that these should be kept to a minimum and even eliminated wherever this is reasonable but then, once any government gains power it is difficult to make it relinquish it.
To circle back to your original point: there is a reason von Bismarck threw socialists into prison. He was a wise man.

>>22127448
Fake quote

>>22128580
To be a Capitalist or a Marxist is simply a matter of either practicing Capitalism or Marxism. Hundreds of nations have chosen either and we have over a century worth of examples of how those choices tend to play out. All modern Marxist whinging derives from the plain observation that most of the fruits of Communist and Socialist countries' labors tended to be spoiled at best and nonexistent at worst.

>>22129058
USSR was capitalist

>Communist and Socialist countries
no such thing has existed

>>22128751
get rekt lmao, it's mentioned on his company's website
https://archive.org/details/StatementbyHenryFord

>>22129249
>USSR was capitalist

>>22129307
>company now owned by kikes
>anon wants the quote to be true
Will is power, anon

>>22128090
>things change with time and technology
The fact that this is all you got from Marx shows me that you, like 99.9% of anons who sperg about him on /lit/, haven't read him
>tried to meme a return to post black death, pre trader prince feudalism into reality
Speaking of meaningless text

>>22128134
>>22128141
>inane bullshit that sounds Ben Shapiro could have written it
>"oh my God Marxists btfo"
You deserve to be a slave to capitalists and bankers. Get back to work, wagie, the shelves aren't going to stock themselves

>>22129584
>the shelves aren't going to stock themselves
Correct. They will not. Somebody's labor is required to restock those shelves. If they aren't restocked, the items that are supposed to be on display there cannot be sold. Which means people do not get any of their goods because they cannot buy them. Which means the retailer does not get any money in exchange for those goods and makes less profits. Which means the manufacturer or producer of those goods cannot sell them to the retailer and they lose out on profits. Which means the trucking company whose jobs it is to transport those goods cannot afford to put as trucks on the highway and also lose profits. Which means the people who build or maintain those trucks receive less work and they also lose out on profits.

As meager as his labor may be, that shelf stocker has his own role to play in the Capitalist tapestry and thus his employer is compelled to pay him his wage. Because the shelves simply will not stock themselves.

>>22128134
>The economic fundamental is labour. Labour is the human element which makes the fruitful seasons of the earth useful to men. It is men’s labour that makes the harvest what it is. That is the economic fundamental: every one of us is working with material which we did not and could not create, but which was presented to us by Nature.
Could have been written by Marx himself

>>22128141
>When a man has earned his bread, he has a right to that bread. If another steals it, he does more than steal bread; he invades a sacred human right.
Likewise. Ford, correct me if I'm wrong, is agreeing with Marx that surplus value is theft and that labour is entitled to all that it creates. As Lenin remarked on the fundamental principle of socialism, it is 'to each according to his abilities'.

>There is equally no reason why a man who can but will not work should not receive the full value of his services to the community
Again, Ford sets himself up in opposition to the type of capitalism that has begun to predominate since the 1980s.

Being serious for a moment, are non-marxists not familiar with Gramsci's concept of Fordism and Marxists' concept of post-fordism?

>>22126232
Kek

>>22128141
> If their money goes to complicating distribution—to raising barriers between the producer and the consumer—then they are evil capitalists and they will pass away when money is better adjusted to work; and money will become better adjusted to work when it is fully realized that through work and work alone may health, wealth, and happiness inevitably be secured.
> There is no reason why a man who is willing to work should not be able to work and to receive the full value of his work.
He’s advocating for communism here but doesn’t even realize it because he has no clue what Marx actually wrote kek

>>22128477
>talk shit get hit
more like talk shit get systemically punished by a belligerent group with a bizarre amount of power and the ability to focus it on an attack on one person in turn completely vindicating your shit talking

>>22130310
Yes, that's pretty much my thought as well. All the "dude, this economist/industrialist totally DUNKS on communism" arguments basically play out similarly and just ignore actual Marx in favor of "aw shucks, we're obviously just the good guys" propaganda that's barely different from what they're supposedly fighting.

Unfortunately, we're seeing right now exactly what happens when you allow the corporate world to gain too much power.

>>22130310
>>22130429
Marxists really do just see what they want to see.

>>22127887
Marx didn't come up with historical materialism. Stop attributing it to him.

>>22130448
What’s fords argument and how does it refute Marx. Show me and yourself you actually understand this

>>22129402
It's a well-documented historical fact that he officially apologised on June 30th 1927. A single google search will clear that up. Your denial is flat-earth tier.

>>22128530
God, the amount of cringey commies on this board is amazing...
I wonder why..?

>>22130554
Funny how /tv/ and /sci/ are inmune to jewish tricks, the IQ curve meme is real apparently

>>22130564
kek, /tv/ your board is awsome

>>22126212
>exploiter
>by offering them higher wages than competitors

>>22130448
I would like you to thoroughly explain how capitalism and profit accumulation can exist simultaneously with workers receiving the “full value of their work.” I’m sure it will be enlightening.

>>22126200
>hires local people, not immigrants and foreigners
>pays workers great salary, even if they don't have high education
>makes good products
>makes affordable products
>refutes (((their))) tricks
Sounds really simple, why don't CEOs follow the same winning formula?

>>22130554
/lit/ has always been a left-leaning board. Go back to /pol/ if you miss it so much

>>22130564
imagine taking /sci/ as a benchmark for high iq. and i say this as an ophthalmology resident. for at least 8 years now it has been flooded with literal high schoolers discussing their homework

>>22130506
Are you actually that dumb? You don't know that a sentence being written by a person does not, in any way, make that sentence authentic? In the media world, people are forced to declare shit, therefore a quote can be fake even if it was publicly pronounced.

>>22130604
I remember saving this picture probably 13 years ago.

>>22131472
So you got destroyed and now you resort to saying that "muh Ford didn't mean it!"

>>22131472
He cucked out and kept his mouth shut about jews for the next 20 years till his death

>>22131515
Nope, that's literally what I thought from my very first post. You are just too dumb to know expanded meanings of adjectives. (But what could I expect, from someone who defends kikes?)

>>22131524
Sure, the same that happens today to every single public figure who tries to speak against Jews.

>>22126292
Lmao how assblasted is this guy, chill out man fucking hell.

>>22126402
Spell jew properly you coward
>>22127825
What colour is your factory?

>>22131551
By the way he apologised AGAIN in 1942. You're gonna tell me now that that was also fake?

>>22131570
Answer me: why are you insisting?

>>22131574
Because you think reading a few /pol/ infographics makes you a free-thinker, when in reality you're living in a circlejerk,and are unable to confront anything outside this bubble of soothing statements that simply confirm your worldview. You would rather delude yourself with the comfortable lie that you're always right. It would have been so much better if you had said "Yeah yeah, I don't care if he was a cuck in later life, I still hate jews though". Instead you try to argue with ridiculous delusions like "he didn't mean that" or whatever. It's not very sporting honestly.

>>22126232
This tickled me goodly

>>22131599
I'm just smarter than you, accept it. To summarize:
1) You are defending Jews because you are a redditor, while on the other side I hate Jews without having ever been on /pol/. I simply read books, and I have enough evidence to glimpse the evil behavior of Jews against the rest of the world throughout history.
2) I don't try to argue, and I don't change my points. From the very beginning, the word "fake" could mean both counterfeit and inauthentic, and I will even add a third meaning: irrelevant. That quote is inauthentic and irrelevant, perhaps even counterfeit. Why? Because someone who writes The International Jew can not change his mind. And even if he did (which he didn't), that wouldn't mean absolutely nothing, because the substance of his stance against Jews is still here, available to us. Disowning an entire book with a "sorry" does not constitute a reversal. Only a book pro-Jews of the same lenght and complexity of that one could legitimately reopen the question and lead to a retracting. But until now, that opinion has not been retracted and never will be. Thus, the quote is the same as fake. This reasoning (perfectly consistent) is the reasoning that a philosopher follows, and, while we're at it, it's also the factor that makes the Protocols still valid, eloquent, urgent and successful nowadays. The matter of the authorship has no relevance when it comes to abstract ideas.

Pic extremely related.

>>22131677
>I'm just smarter than you
Thanks for proving my point. By all means continue living in your comfortable bubble. You're gonna be the smartest person in the room, and the room will stay empty.

>>22131689
That's a fair point. As soon as you stopped defending Jews to the hilt and you recurred to an ad hominem, you expressed something valid. I welcome it.

>>22131677
>fake means irrelevant
No it does not, galaxy brain. Are you 12, randomly assigning your own meaning to established words?

>>22131698
>you're the smartest person in an empty room
>thanks

>>22131677
>You are defending Jews because you are a redditor
One of the most screendamaged, lobotomized opening statements I've ever read. Lead-poisoning levels of conditioned self-importance. They need to put you in a lab and make you work through LSAT test questions while monitoring your brain activity. Truly plumbing the depths of computer screen induced retardation with this one. Bravo.

>>22129692
>When a man has earned his bread, he has a right to that bread. If another steals it, he does more than steal bread; he invades a sacred human right.
>Likewise. Ford, correct me if I'm wrong, is agreeing with Marx that surplus value is theft and that labour is entitled to all that it creates
A man works for bread, and a man earns bread.
Now, if some swine comes and says "we need half your bread for the greater good", then that swine steals bread, as that swine hasn't earned said bread.

>>22126212
Your daddy abandoned you. Pathetic commie.

>>22127771
Kanye was fake antisemite to trap awakened.
Don't fall for semites trotting out the old circus act

>>22132059
Cope, negroid.
yahweh tounges my anus, and so does your mother.

>>22132133
why are you so angry at the christian god?

>>22132076
>people taking stuff is stealing
damn really

>>22132139
Ah, my bad.
Both yahweh and baphomet tounge my anus.
happy now, kike?

>>22129249
>USSR was capitalist

USSR was socialist. It was on the 5th stages of historical materialism.

You are an idiot with impotent dream.

>>22129249
Sounds like socialism consistently fails before it starts every single time it’s attempted.

>>22132152
what about allah? might as well cover the entire desert trilogy

>>22132163
Communism has never been tried because the road to communism has always been failed.

>>22130574
USSR had wage labour hence it wasn't socialist. You don't know what historical materialism is so I suggest you stop talking about it until you do.

>>22132163
sounds like you're a memebrained degenerate

>>22132194
>Sounds like you-- ACK!

>>22132192
>>22132194
>eight billion trillion communist parties and communist revolutions
>many of them actually succeed and take power
>yet none of them are communist or socialist, especially not the ones that succeeded
So it fails before it begins

>gets cucked by labor unions for a century

yeah he really refuted marx lol

>>22132217
They are in denial.

>>22132229
>Red herring fallacy
>Switching the topic instead of focusing the substance to give appropriate feedback

Also Labor unions don't exactly mean shit. Scandinavian countries have strong labor unions but none of them starts socialist revolution.

>>22132217
Communists holding power doesn't make the societies in which they rule communist.

Excuse me, communist scholars of /lit/ I was listening to a podcast and they mentioned that Engels and Marx were heavily influenced by Moses Hess.
What was this influence like?

>>22132097
reddit is that way

>>22132259
minimal, marx and engels were friends with him at one stage then fell out with him pretty quickly as they released more books

>>22132379
I see, that's a little less than this guy described, glad I could get a cross ref.

24:30 starts talking about them.
https://odysee.com/@AvaWolfe:d/The-Jew-World-Order-Unmasked:d

>>22126292
Bait.

>>22128422
>>22128637
>>22129249
>>22130604
>>22131677
Seek God. You live in a delusion. Explain to your coworkers and mother how Hitler was correct and the Jews control the world. You won’t, you’re ashamed of your kindergarten playplace ideals. You ascribe to an ontologically evil ideology for shits and gigs sometimes.

>>22129249
Maybe one day you'll be lucky enough to understand you're a shithead.

t. born in a socialist country

>>22132217
>communism is when socialist/communist party is in charge
Is capitalism when capitalist party is in charge? You stupid N-word.

>>22132475
>t. born in the Democratic People's Republic of California, USA

>>22132476
You can't have capitalism with a central bank monopoly.

>>22132480
>ummmm sweetie, it's not REAL capitalism

>>22132487
You literally can't have capitalism if all you have is debt.

>>22132479
Du-te-n gatu ma-tii de labagiu prost ba cacatule!

>"The international jew" supplied with every model T

>>22132469
You know nothing. Read at least 20 books on political theology and then come back. The entire goal of jews on this planet is to submit other nations through the destruction of spirit, a notion alien to them. They hate what they don't understand.