/lit/ - Literature

For me, it’s Spengler

>>23203159
Spengler can only be understood by 145IQ+

>>23203146
>this book is to hard i dont understand!!!
>HURR DURR it must be duumb, beccauacuse i am so smartt!
Get off my board + you need to be 18 to post here

>>23203146
"It's so simple!" (Economics)

Yes, the sheer complexity of factors involving human beings and the tug of war between the state and corporations/businesses and supply and demand, rich and impoverished, all revolving around the nature of human emotions such as greed means economics is black and white, so simple.

Thomas Sowell IS simple. He's a simpleton.

>>23203237
>offended over Karl Marx's drivel being insulted
Do you still believe the lie that communism is "good on paper"?

Also, if you're going to call someone underage, maybe don't make such an immature strawman of their post.

>>23203237
Who said it was hard?

It's painfully brainlet.

>>23203352
we both know you've never read marx and are a low IQ libertarian or something equally as cringe, so why bother pretending otherwise?

>>23203237
>>23203392
I opened this thread specifically because I knew it would attract a retard like this, and I wasn't disappointed lol

>>23203237
hi troonyfag. how is acking going?

>>23203392
i wanna rape you so bad

>>23203146
There is a 90% chance you've never read Marx and a 99% chance that, if you have read Marx, you've only read parts of the Manifesto.

>>23203146
Marx was literally right about everything

>>23203146
?
Marxist theory and some of it's offshoots like Marxist-Leninism have proven time and time again to be proven right. From the falling rate of profit, worker alienation, and that modern democracy is only used as a plaything for the ultra-wealthy. I would recommend reading Engels as well as Lenin if you get the chance. Also the Prison Notebooks by Gramsci, a more philosophical aspect of Marxist thought explaining the hegemony of the rich and powerful and how they maintain it over the workers and peasants.

A guilty pleasure of mine is Erich Honecker's "From my Life". Happy reading, anon.

>>23204288
Wow, insights anyone without a working brain can see just by existing.

Niggas really need a dude from the 19th century to come to these obvious insights about Capitalism?

Why would you not want to read the books of one of the most influential economist and political thinker of the 20th century

>>23204298
You have to remember, anon. Capitalism was still fresh. The world was barely coming out of the shell of feudalism. Its precursor, mercantilism, was on its way out and ripping out of the grip of monarchs. many of Marx's predictions came true several decades after the fact, what we would deem "obvious".

Also if you haven't already. I would actually recommend reading Marx. You will find its a little more than just obvious observations, but please do not read the manifesto, that's just a pamphlet. I will admit, Marx is a little dry, so you may find Gramcsi's Prison Notebooks or Lenin's State and Revolution more enjoyable as your first reading into Marxist theory.

>>23204288
>>23204311
Based Leninposter.

>>23203146
i read post-commie polandball fiction by comrade Stanislav Lem.
>IQ:121.

>>23204288
>>23204311
Based. Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, with a few modifications, could have been written this year. Everything Lenin observed is still true, only it’s gotten worse.

>>23203146
Correct. People with IQs >90 <145 don't read Marx and that includes so called self described Marxists and even those in so called Marxist parties and people seething like this guy >>23203237, this guy >>23203251 (while Sollow is wrong, you countered with a non materialist analysis, opinion discarded), and >>23203392 this guy. You're all midwits which is why you react emotionally. If someone mentions Marx to OP, he has a visceral classically conditioned reaction. The other guy who most likely is some humanist moron, if someone mentions Hitler to him he'll have the same visceral reaction. Both of your opinions are formed by people saying person or idea bad and you can't wrap your heads around entertaining it. The sheer non response offered initially by the HURR DURR imbecile responder, really is non sequitur, as the premise was not that the book was hard but that it's simple and you could have came up with something better. Marx is for big brains and stupid people only. And one day the big brains will have the dumb dumbs blame pin everything on people like OP and the pseud seether for their lot in life.

>>23204288
>>23204311
>>23204312
>>23204322
>nonono, THIS time it's late stage capitalism and THIS time people will forsake cultural/racial/etc bonds and/or the stability of democratic captalist globalism purely for supposed material gain (which they also know (oh sorry, are "propagandized") is complete bullshit given the absolute state of the Warsaw pact during the last century)
>Yes, that's why our genius revolutions all succeeded in areas that were in highly industrialized states during the last century, and not backwaters that were chafing under the rule of backwards monarchies hundreds of years out of date

>>23204346
>THIS time it's late stage capitalism
I never said this. I do not believe we are in the late stage at all.

As for the other claims, I will not get into the historical contexts of former states and the precedent for their national policies. I will, however, give you a prediction based on what I've gathered from my studies: There will come a time when the world crosses a threshold. I believe it will be two-fold.

One, many nations from the US to Africa liberalize into social democracies, this will be unsustainable.
Two, there will be abundant technological advances in automation that leaves people jobless.

This will all lead to an extensive strain on all economies while the wealthy owners of automated factories make off like kings and give a few scraps (Universal Basic Income) to the remaining menial workers and unemployed. Eventually this strain on the economy and further concentration of wealth will shatter into a revolt against the owners at first, and then escalate into a total overthrow. At the very least in one or few countries. From there the idea of collective ownership of these automated factories and stores will swim for a while until adopted by one or more of these revolutionary countries and slowly (or quickly) spread.

When will this happen? I don't know. Will it happen exactly like this? Probably not, but Marxism will win in the end. It's the only natural conclusion to wealth hoarding and the inevitable automation of nearly every job. Could take decades or even centuries. Rome didn't fall in a decade, it took over 300 years.

>>23203392
go back to r/politics

>>23204373
>TL;DR: I think post scarcity gay space communism is a thing that will ever fucking happen
kek
Several issues with this line of thinking buddy, first is that, if the owners of said automated capital are not retarded (and they are for the most part not, given how cutthroat the system gets the higher in it you rise) they will very, VERY quickly develop the optimal material conditions to keep the proles in line, for the least amount of expenditure.

Two, the level of computational intelligence that would be required for a genuinely automated piece of capital means that this can also be applied to military hardware. What does that mean?
Well, for a grossly simplified version, Terminators by McDonalds™ guarding said uber rich and their property. Good luck overthrowing said elite with...what exactly? Conventional firearms? lmao.

Third, and I'm going to be VERY blunt here, if that level of technological ascendency is achieved, literally any form of government would be able to maintain its grip on power, as virtually any uprising against it would be efficiently crushed.
The exception to this, is of course elite x elite conflict, but even then the common man would have virtually no involvement. Remember, everything is automated, no need for pesky humans clogging up the efficiency of mechanical perfection after all.

Where was I? Ah yes, you're more likely to be slaughtered wholesale by the capital owners like cattle because you're just not needed anymore, than anything like your gay fantasy of a Utopia

>>23204343
I automatically discarded your opinion based on your subjective bullshit.

Kill yourself.

>>23203237
>>You have to be 18 to post here
>Still believes in utopian nonsense written by a jobless trustfund baby
Cool, when are you leaving?

>>23203146
illiterate cope

>>23203146
>70: Pretend you read Marx.
>80: Actually read Marx and pretend you understood.
>90: Understand Marx, try to read Hegel, fail, call yourself a "libertarian socialist".
>100: Just pretend you read Hegel.
>110: Cite lots of tertiary works and become a world renowned expert on Marxism without reading any Marx.
>120: Create your own theory, translate it into Hegelian language and claim it's the key to understanding Marx (no reading required).
>130: Just be a stemfag and get a real job.

>>23203392
It's not long, nor difficult to read. Why are you so butthurt about the truth?

>>23204288
Not OP, but

>I would recommend reading Engels
Did that in college, he was a retard, then when I criticized him openly in class, the teacher scolded me.

>as well as Lenin
Another retard who doesn't understand economics and simply executed his competitors and critics.

If it was so "self-evident", you wouldn't need to kill your opposition to prove your point. It would naturally unravel itself in due time. But it never did, because it's all a bunch of pseud nonsense by low IQ morons.

>Gramsci
Never read him, but if he's anything like the previous two, it's a complete and utter waste of time, and I would be better off masturbating to BDSM porn than reading his slop.

>>23204480
One of the few intelligent posters ITT

>>23204667
>If it was so "self-evident", you wouldn't need to kill your opposition to prove your point. It would naturally unravel itself in due time
lol you definitely read Lenin.

>>23203146
>>23203159
It’s possible to read something without agreeing or subscribing to their beliefs and ideology
I read both them and Engels so I could understand commie retards when they talk and better shit on their arguments

>>23204405
>Several issues with this line of thinking buddy, first is that, if the owners of said automated capital are not retarded (and they are for the most part not, given how cutthroat the system gets the higher in it you rise) they will very, VERY quickly develop the optimal material conditions to keep the proles in line, for the least amount of expenditure.
Besides the significant depopulation of most proles the other alternative or compounding it would be that the proles are given a lot of free time due to technological advancements. You're right that this would indeed cause the workers(formerly) to just not do anything against their masters.The only thing you can bank on in that case would be a scarcity problem. And if we're lucky enough to not just get liquidated by the capital owners to solve that problem, they will fight among themselves. In that case, it may bring up an opportunity to overthrow them given that there may be gaps in their defenses, or may be even puppet rebels being supported by the opposing side which eventually break away once they have enough power and influence.

Regardless, the future seems bleak. And I choose to have at least SOME hope for the future proletariat.

>>23203327
>>23203352
>>23203427
>>23204298
>>23204343
>>23204346
>>23204480
>>23204614
>>23204667
Refute him then

>>23205445
>Everytime someone has tried to establish a egaltarian society it has gone completly shit because it goes against human nature
Wow, that was kinda easy. Now i get that you are in ur first year of uni and you think ur smart or something. But my advice to you is get a job and start paying taxes and you will quickly grow out of ur phase.

>>23204480
Yeah, you should worship a trust fund conservative grifter instead.

>>23205461
>you should worship a trust fund conservative grifter instead.
That is exactly what you are doing you fucking monkey. You read marx but you refuse to read about his life and history? Get a job nigger.

>>23205464
Ok tourist.

Poopy caca shid maggots; diarrhea shart and fart but hole, poop pee doo doo feces a solid stool; let loose. Foecal matter matters. The niggardly nigger sniggered calmly: BRAAAAPF!

>>23204346
>nonono! THIS time it’s late stage feudalism, THIS time people will forsake cultural/racial/familial bonds and/or the stability of decentralized feudal monarchy for supposed material gain (which they also know (oh sorry, are “heretical”) given the absolute state of the Ciompi Revolt in the last century)
>yes, that’s why our genius revolutions all succeeded in highly developed states during the last century and not backwaters that were chafing under a weak king

>>23205488
Get a job nigger.

>>23205457
>he seriously thinks Marxism is about egalitarianism
My advice to you is to go read more trad twitter threads and go back to /pol/

>>23205513
My advice to you is to get a job and grow up. Because you will never be a real woman.

>>23205520
>standard /pol/ deflection when faced with an argument he can’t win

>>23205543
>Marx says lets get rid of all classes
>NOOOO THATS NOT HECKING EGALTARIANISM!
Get a job nigger. You are embarrasing urself and your discord friends who think you are smart.

>>23205543
>>23205556
Well that argument was won easier than a thought. Get a job nigger.

>>23205556
>standard /pol/ deflection when faced with an argument he can’t win
Do you even know what the word class means in a Marxist context? The abolition of classes amounts to the abolition of private property. That’s it. (Note: not personal property. If you know the difference that is)

>>23205572
>The troon now has to bend words and change meanings to his liking in order to win a petty argument on a mongolian basket weaving forum
Get a job nigger.

>>23205543
fyi it takes an exceptionally undeveloped mind to 'oppose' something that they have no interest in understanding. You'll get more sense talking to dogs than arguing with these types of "people".

>>23205579
What a genius

>>23205583
>>23205586
>2 jobless niggers are marxists.
Imagine my shock, you are just like marx himself. A useless bum who accomplished nothing, wrote gibberish which everyone made fun of even from his time from London to Switzerland. Everytime his idea has been tried it has led to complete slavery. Again i beg you idiots to grow up and get jobs. Perhaps you will even make enough money to move out of mommy and daddys house.

>>23205572
you're trans btw

>>23205609
>>23205614
I know you are but what am I?

Why are all of Marx's detractors midwits who haven't read a single page out of him.

>>23205457
>he doesn’t know about hunter gatherer societies

>>23205513
enlighten us, if marxism is not about egalitarianism -- that is, if end-stage communist society is not an egalitarian society -- then what is it?
form your own argument, coward.

>>23205698
>he thinks hunter gatherer societies were egalitarian

>>23205781
Bro, you don't get it. After the world burns around us and we're all living in mud huts things will be nice and egalitarian. Paradise. Trust me, bro.

>>23205684
most of marx's detractors haven't read a single page of him, but that's ok, because most of his supporters are the same.

>>23203327
Marx is one of the most important historical thinkers in history. Just for his impact alone you should be familiar with his work, you would only spurn it if you allow your emotions to prevent you from learning about history and economic thought. In short, OP is an idiot and any poster who begins in the "commie bad" line of thinking is also a brainlet.

>>23205844
>Marx is one of the most important historical thinkers in history.
Appeal to authority.
Just for his impact alone you should be familiar with his work,
Appeal to popularity.
>you would only spurn it if you allow your emotions to prevent you from learning about history and economic thought.
Strawman.
>In short, OP is an idiot and any poster who begins in the "commie bad" line of thinking is also a brainlet.
Ad hominem.

>>23205844
>Marx is one of the most important historical thinkers in history.
Appeal to authority.
>Just for his impact alone you should be familiar with his work,
Appeal to popularity.
>you would only spurn it if you allow your emotions to prevent you from learning about history and economic thought.
Strawman.
>In short, OP is an idiot and any poster who begins in the "commie bad" line of thinking is also a brainlet.
Ad hominem.

>>23205662
trans

>>23203146
Marx is based. There I said it. No, I’m not a communist

>>23205918
I know you are but what am I?

>>23205918
what the fuck is this thing

>>23205913

>Marx is one of the most important historical thinkers in history.

Not an appeal to authority, seeing he's not claiming something and then using Marx's agreeing with him as proof, instead he's merely claiming his importance, which he then makes a case for in the next line:

>Just for his impact alone you should be familiar with his work

This is not an appeal to popularity, seeing he's not appealing to the popularity, but instead merely pointing it out. Despite the author's intentions, all this does is portray Marx as influential, and thus worthy of study, which is an absolutely valid thing to say. I think much of Descartes views on science are absurd (Vortexes causing planetary pull for example) but I still think its important to read in order to understand the development of scientific thought.

>You would only spurn it if you allow your emotions to prevent you from learning about history and economic thought.

Not a strawman, although it is a fallacy. An ad-hominem fallacy (You're too emotional to understand it), which you use to mislabel right after.

>In short, OP is an idiot and any poster who begins in the "commie bad" line of thinking is also a brainlet.

Not an Ad-hominem. He wrote a whole paragraph about Marx's importance, and then made an opinion claim that those who disagree (based on what he had already written) are thus stupid. It is an insult, yes, but that doesn't make it an Ad-hominem fallacy. If anything its a "No True Scotsman."

You aren't intelligent. Your post is a "Fallacy" Fallacy.

>>23204480
Conflating how useful his models were with his IQ is low IQ.
Academics including Marxist academics are relatively high IQ. If you're predisposed to dishonesty and manipulative thinking a high IQ may just help you lie, manipulate and justify your nonsense.

>>23206040
I'm wiling to bet that, if the anon replies at all, it will be along the lines of "I was being retarded on purpose and you've just effortposted over my shitpost". Based on interactions like this I have had in the past, my opinion of the quality of /lit/ postership is dismal.

It follows with my original point, posters here seem to have emotional or ideological positions which prevent them from even considering the merits of a particular historical figure if they already have prejudices against him, and thus they are consequently unable to even discuss such a figure intelligently.

>>23206013
a marxist

>>23206040
I keep thinking these kinds of basics of logical structure should be drilled in schools when kids are like 8-12 but the more I learn about history the less sure I am plebs should be educated at all. Mass literacy seems to have been a complete disaster. Any tool given gets turned into a pitchfork.

>>23204373
>>23204346
>>23204288
Marxism is the religious cult of the end of the world. The world revolution is the end of the world, communism is the kingdom of heaven. The cult is also egolitarian in the metaphysical sense, as in the Abrahamic religions the faithful are equal before God. This is Christianity/Islam for very stupid, jealous, beauty-hating people (proletarians).

>>23205776
The egalitarianism and social aspects of communism are secondary to the main point which is that the mode of production has to change from capitalism due to material necessity. Marx notoriously left his view on what communism would look like extremely fuzzy because it wasn’t his concern. Marxism is an economic theory which draws on social realities and not the other way around. There’s not even an argument to be had about egalitarianism in Marxism because that’s a post-revolutionary and sociological issue. Of course, a great deal of speculation that takes Marx’s moralizing in the communist manifesto (not a theoretical work) has been spawned over the years but that’s just what it is: speculation. Of course, Marx would make the objection that oppression always and only comes from economic inequality but whether or not you accept this point has no effect on the rest of the system. Communism will happen because if humanity is to survive the trials which face it a more efficient system of production than the world’s supply of fresh water being in the hands of a few 84 IQ billionaires with fracking interests is necessary.

>>23206121

I've found that the only time these types mention fallacies is always in a "gotcha" type moment for internet arguments. Its because when they see someone arguing something they disagree with, their monkey brain gets stimulated, and they began brainstorming how they can discredit it. Their first idea is, of course, to go to fallacies, and so they pick apart their self-made opponent to find anything even resembling a fallacy, without considering whether its even relevant to point out (when someone makes an opinion claim or something obviously hyperbolic for examples) or if they understand fallacies enough to utilize them intelligently.

I am not a logician and so I rarely ever point out a fallacy unless it is an obvious one (Straw man, slippery slope, etc.) which pretty much only happens when discussing something with someone who isn't used to real discourse, and thus never use it as a "gotcha" moment.

It's sad though how aggressive these people are, and the lengths they will go to to feel validated through being "right."

Marx is an influential figure. Thats a fact. Everyone can name him. He's like Nietzsche or Plato in that regard. It is foolish and reactionary to claim no one should study him just because you think his views are wrong.

>>23205457
What level of cooperation and sharing is optimal depends on the situation. The Inca had environmental challenges that meant sharing of resources didn't discourage production and gave them as a federation an edge over other entities. A market system would still likely out compete them but Incas are an example of "egalitarian" sharing that worked. A market is cooperative and somewhat "egalitarian" too, the king's gold is worth the same as the peasant's.

>>23206040
>Not an appeal to authority
It was. The context was you have to read Marx because he's important.
>This is not an appeal to popularity
It was. The context was you have to read Marx because he's influential.
>Not a strawman
It was. The context was anon making a caricature of the other anon's argument.
>Not an Ad-hominem
It was. The context was anon asserting disagreement indicates stupidity.

Simple as.

>>23206140
I wonder if these types of people are even willing to read something written by someone who belongs to “the other side”. If you really want to combat an ideological stance you have to understand it and why it developed. If you are just arguing from an emotional and name calling perspective, you won’t get far. Major movements don’t get big for no reason and there is often logic and points that make sense going into these things

>>23206165
The point was "if you want to be well versed in history, you must read the important figures of history. Marx is an important figure in history. Ergo, you must read Marx to be well versed in history."

If you can't comprehend this, you are categorically a retard.

>>23206140
The fallacies are just rules of thumb and not getting the point of them is representative of a mind that can't explore logical structures and therefore can't build interesting ideas. People shouldn't need the rules of thumb, they're just examples of the underlying principles of logical thought. An appeal to authority can be fine given that we understand that's what the logical structure we're exploring rests on. The authority of established ideas can be walls trapping us within a limited space of possible ideas but we also always have to take something as given to explore/build anything.

>>23206195
>"if you want to be well versed in history, you must read the important figures of history. Marx is an important figure in history. Ergo, you must read Marx to be well versed in history."
That's so broad and unspecific to Marx that it's a non-point. If this is all you can come up with you might as well say nothing.

>>23206203
It's hardly "all I can come up with" since you seem to tacitly acknowledge my point is valid and correct. As others in this thread have correctly pointed out, Marx's influence can hardly be overstated; he is a monumental figure of the past two centuries. It's genuinely bizarre to me how anyone could downplay his importance or act as though he is not worth reading. Are you able to throw further light on this or are you content to agree with what I have posted thus far?

>>23206219
>sperg into a "no you"
Do better.

>>23206165
>It was. The context was anon asserting disagreement indicates stupidity.
I don't know how to tell you this anon, but disagreement on certain things actually does indicate stupidity.

>>23206229
Like having TDS.

>>23206228
Anon, I stated my case and asked a question. If you are interested in discourse, you should engage with my post, if you are not, kindly stop shitting up the board with your useless posts.

>>23206197
People often forget that it's good form in debate to attempt to understand your opponent's BEST CASE even if they themselves have put it forward poorly. If anything, that needs to be taught more widely. A discussion shouldn't be a battle arena where you score points, it should be an exercise in learning and refining your ideas, and this includes being able to shift into opposing points of view. It's painfully clear when you meet a person who has never attempted to entertain what it would be like to adopt an opposing view.

>>23206239
>I can't
Understood. Better luck next time.

>>23206255
The dialogue that's relevant to me advancing is in my mind not a debate with someone else. We can build huge castles of logic around any idea using axioms everyone accepts. If I do that I'm deluding myself so I have to introduce a counter voice in the dialogue who attacks the castle by introducing elements not accounted for by models built only on the axioms I gave.

Simplified example:
Axiom: people are greedy. Conclusion: model of a system of central control overly focused on greed as the big bad.
Basically everyone agrees people are greedy and greed leads to bad things, the castle is unassailable, unless you start adding axioms like by noticing that people are in fact also kind, idealistic, religious and many other things than greedy, greed can even have benefits.

>>23206255
>>23206342
Incredibly levels of pseudery even for a Marxism thread.

>>23206366
These are basics you should understand when you're a child. If you think your meme relates to that post you're illiterate. If you can't criticize your ideas you can't think.

>>23206385
>I speak in platitudes and believe it counts as criticial thinking
Meme fit, slowboi.

>>23206264
>>23206366
>>23206390
Alas, your poor soul is doomed to drift, ever devoid of understanding, across the sea of your life. Hark! A chance to enlighten yourself! An opportunity, as precious as the newborn day presents itself to you, golden in it's promise. Doom, doom, doom, nothing but doom is the fate if your poor soul, however. Filled with trite bitterness and disconnected thoughts, you lash out against your own salvation and dash it upon the rocks of your ignorance. We, mere tourists, for a moment gaze upon your sorry state and bethink to ourselves what a sorry lot has been handed down for such as yourself. But we will soon turn our gaze away, and forget your mournful plight, just as many, undoubtedly, who have the misfortune to encounter your company will, likewise, turn away from you. You would have my pity, if I were not sure it would be wasted on you.

>>23206423
>pseud sperg
Not reading your pseud sperg, pseud-sperg.

>>23204288
Outstanding post

>>23206430
Ah! The ever reliable catchphrase of the ignoramus! "Pseud!" he cries, unable to think of anything else, drowning in the sea of dumb, unthinking, intellectual darkness he feverishly paddles in. Scorning the sun, he embraces the depths of this sea, deeper into the abyss he sinks, allowing it to twist his form to match the darkness he now dwells in! A cautionary tale to those who catch a glimpse of one such as this. Tragedy, in it's undiluted form is your fate, scoffing at any chance of salvation, doggedly sticking to cliches, buzz words, and misused memes. I bid you adieu, anon, for such a miserable being as yourself is tiresome even to merely contemplate for too long.

>>23206453
No more money dick for you

Adieu

>>23206453
>>23206430

>>23206468
That was supposed to be Moby

>>23206390
>platitudes
So you heard about logic before but just actively refuse to apply it. Why would someone do that? The only reason I can think of is to protect the lies you tell yourself.
>>23204288
This post is a good example of what I'm talking about, a broken mind who thinks looking for confirmations of his preconceptions counts as thinking and celebrates every time he finds some way to reinforce his delusions. People capable of finding things do the opposite, they look for flaws in their thinking and celebrate when they find errors in their preconceptions.

>>23206739
>midwit who speaks in vapid platitudes can't into criticial thinking
Lol

>>23203146
Reading Marx is based if you're not a commie. It's entry-level and mandatory if you are (and also cringe because you're a commie).

>>23204288
>falling rate of profit
Declining marginal returns is econ 101. It's not some heterodox idea, and is more common in liberal thought than communist.

>>23206739
>a broken mind who thinks looking for confirmations of his preconceptions counts as thinking and celebrates every time he finds some way to reinforce his delusions.
I was anti-communist at the start of my journey, anon. I opposed what I thought was an ugly and envy-filled ideology. I read Marx first as a critic, then read it again as a Marxist.

I do my fair share of reading books and watching videos from outside my perspective. Mostly because I find it entertaining to know how others think. But also because it brings a new perspective I've never thought about. But that doesn't mean I agree with everything I read, even with some Marxist theories I disagree. I was under the impression that if you read a book and suggested it to someone, they should know you're not 100% in agreement, no one ever is.

>>23204761
He's a stupid retarded faggot who's entire regime collapsed in on itself and had his statues torn down, and now is only looked back on like an idol by losers and idiots just as dumb as he is. I shit on Lenin and his "legacy".

>>23205543
Marxists lost their argument when the Soviet Union collapsed. Cope and seethe tranny.

>>23206904
>I was anti-communist at the start of my journey, anon. I opposed what I thought was an ugly and envy-filled ideology. I read Marx first as a critic, then read it again as a Marxist.

The irony. You want to read Marx? Here everyone. Read the absolute inane bullshit here.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf

I made it around 5 pages before I tapped out. The sheer stupidity of it is astounding. It's the concept of market economy from the perspective of a silver-spoon elite who thinks he's a changed man after realizing the "plight of the workers", but just comes off as elementary and overly verbose in explaining the simplest of concepts.

>>23204346
>if you have a monarchy you can't be industralized because... le progress
literal communist logic. dilate

>>23206153
>The incas
>had a chieftan and a emperor
>Egaltarian
Nope, you are retarded, Having a welfare state is not egaltarianism. try again. I urge myou troons to get a fucking job.

Who was right at the First International?

>>23206904
>I was anti-communist at the start of my journey, anon.
Is not relevant. This doesn't change your post.

>>23207132
>Having a welfare state is not egaltarianism.
Then what is retard? Use your words you useless cancer. Just fucking say something. I mentioned Incas because they're an interesting counter example to a point that's broadly correct.
Why do retards like you show up in places like this when you have no interest in saying anything or even reading the fucking posts you reply to?
Why aren't the Incas "egalitarian"? Because hierarchy? Then you're talking about anarcho-syndicalism or whatever not the broad and vague term "egalitarianism".

>>23207541
I hate these fucks so much. They expect you to know whatever schizo thoughts they're having automatically. They don't ever want to have an actual discussion. You have to pull teeth to get anything out of them, but they never really have anything substantial to say. True dumbass behavior.

>>23207313
Bakunin. And Marxoids have never recovered.

>>23208019
Is modern anarchism any farther along than 100 years ago? Why are Marxist ideologies more popular?

>>23203146
All materialism is sex. They are slaves with no other life-potency-concept. Debating them is like debating with women for this reason. The purpose of communism is to bring about the coomtopia. That's all it ever could be under a materialist framework. Never forget

>>23208084
That's a convenient strawman you have there

>>23207074
>just comes off as elementary and overly verbose in explaining the simplest of concepts.
Many elementary economic concepts were only formulated in the 20th century, well after Marx's death. You have to be careful when making that critique, because it could be like saying Euclid's Elements come off as elementary and overly verbose compared to modern geometry textbooks.

>Condemns Marxism in the first breath
>Uses Marxism to condemn Fascism in the second breath
Why are conservatives like this?

>>23203146
Yippee, another thinly veiled ragebait /pol/ thread

>>23204261
He's just a ragebaiting faggot. I am anti-communist personally, but in order to be against something, you should know what you're talking to. I've gleaned plenty of good stuff from reading Marx. And you just know this faggot will have, in the past, shilled Marxists like Baudrillard or Debord in one of his little incel rages about society, before making this gay thread

The Power of Money by Marx, although written as a critique of money, inspired me to become outrageously successful in my early 20's and accumulate a very large amount of cash in a short time. I'm 30 now, hit a rough patch in my mid 20's when I attempted to go into business for myself and lost everything, and recently reread the book. Marx is criticized a lot, rightfully so, but he had a firm understanding on money and economy.

>>23206140

>>23206203
>doesn't refute the point
A point unaddressed is a point conceded
Cope, you lost

>>23203146
Ahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha whoever reads Marx is literally a dumbfuck

>>23203392
>Makes fun of the other person for not grasping Marx
>Marx is an entry level book
Ok normie

>>23210748
>responding to an online argument that happened 2 days ago
You lost at life.

>>23203146
>above 60 IQ
>still reading

>>23203146
>bought this as a joke birthday gift for my brother in law who is leftypol incarnate
>he exploded in anger and chucked it through our window, never expected that kind of reaction from an otherwise docile faggot
>he's a petroleum engineer with a master's degree, not stupid at all
Communists aren't dumb, actual communists I mean. They're just mentally disturbed.

>>23206140
>I've found that the only time these types mention fallacies is always in a "gotcha" type moment for internet arguments
It's because most fallacies can be addressed via plain language and logic. If you're talking to someone who makes an "appeal to authority," you can easily respond by bringing up evidence that opposes it or by challenging the source's authority (which are the reasons why appeals to authority are technically fallacious).

Also, a lot of people who try to identify fallacies tend to misunderstand them. In my experience, the No True Scotsman is worst of them all, because midwits will often think that using standards to differentiate valid from invalid counterexamples is fallacious.

>>23204480
It's crazy how anti-communist ''comedy'' relies entirely on a dogshit understanding of communism. It really highlights the stupidity of the average anti-communist, in that they have no conception of the saying 'know your enemy'. It's not even *hard* to point out the actual myriad issues with communist practice and theory... yet you are incapable.

>>23206139
>if humanity is to survive the trials which face it a more efficient system of production than the world’s supply of fresh water being in the hands of a few 84 IQ billionaires with fracking interests is necessary.
This is just fantasy, a resentful idiot trying to justify why he should destroy instead of build. We have nothing that comes close to being as efficient and productive as markets. To survive humanity must focus less on immediate efficiency and more on local sustainability, this may include taking power from the free market but pretending that's more efficient is just flat out lying. Efficiency means globalization and specialization of entire continents, like how China is now a manufacturing slave colony. An appeal to efficiency is an appeal to greed.
You're an idiot and people like you have been working hard to destroy everything good in the name of hecking efficiency for a century. Just stop, I don't care what you call this horseshit, just fucking stop doing it.

no one in this thread has read a page of marx and you are all fucking retarded. Most of the argueements here are "marx bad because broke". The man fought for his ideas atleast unlike any of you faggots who just sit around all day pretending to be intellectuals. What Marxist literature did any of you even read? I am guessing you skimmed the manifesto.

>It is the year 2020 + 4
>Niggas are STILL allowing themselves to be consumed by the self-serving utopian ideologies psychopaths use to justify their rise to power
On god yall niggas stupid, fr fr

>>23211715
>>23207541
>>23211715
Please for the love of god just get a fucking job you losers. Because you will never be a real revolutionary and never be a real woman.

>>23213389
>The man fought for his ideas
AHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHA! OHHH NONONONONOHN!

>>23207541
>Then what is
Its another form of slavery, no i will not elaborate if you cant figure that out by urself it means that you are to low iq, get a job nigger.
>>23211715
Its crazy how jobless losers who have never acutally worked a single day in their lives especially manual labour has the audacity to speak for the worker. You clearly havent read marx since you keep falling for the most obvious psudeo-bullshit that was ever created. Get a job nigger.

>>23205918
How could a human being NOT have contempt for leftists

>>23214489
they're cool and actually have premarital sex, unlike you chuds

>>23214503
Premarital sex isnt cool.

>>23213389
>fought for his ideas
>by being a parasitic white collar paper pusher
>literally pussied out of actionable applications of his own philosophy everytime
>refused a duel to defend his own principles
lmao, you can't make this shit up

>>23214473
>>23214483
Just say something retard. I don't care if it supports or attacks "egalitarianism" as long as you just fucking say something. Are you completely incapable?

Yeah guys lets just change the worlds economic order right before automation and universal basic income, let's just try it because lazy low IQ people struggle rn haha alright you guys keep it real love you guys

>>23210722
If you got something out of reading Marx then you have room temperature IQ

>>23213389
>I've read Marx and now I'm smart
ok

>>23205572
Marx wanted to eliminate classes through the very usage of classes, some type of transitional period in which concepts such as capitalism was actually intrinsical in nature to the development of society that eventually lead to a socialistic period that ended with communism. He literally stated that this was a part of the requirements in order for communism to flourish, capitalism, seen as a necessary stage in order for his ideology to properly take place. Everything about communism was about transitional periods, everything about it was meant to be temporary, except it never actually went that way. It was supposed to set a standard for people to live up to, sort of like a guide book into a perfect society without being some type of totalitarian regime that it always ended up being, it predicted its own end and as a consequence because of this, it became the go-to ideology for edgy revolutiounists. The very ideology is, because of its perceived own end, perfect for volatile backing from people that want a justification to do what they referred to as revolutions.

>>23214473
>>23214483
''You don't have a job, and you are a communist!'' Neither of these are true. It's incredible that it wasn't obvious to you fucking RETARDS that I'm not on a communist, despite me saying that communist practice and theory have /myriad issues/. MYRIAD, YOU EXHAUSTING SOULLESS NIGGERS. YOU ARE LIVING ARGUMENTS AGAINST DEMOCRACY.