/lit/ - Literature

People's History of the US

>I'm a _________, but LOL I don't even know why.

You're a moron, OP.

>>4198923
That seems like one of those "101 Things My Teacher Never Taught Me" kinda books, is it? Also what does it have to do with socialism?

that;s because socialism is a shitty system

>>4198933
I know why I'm a socialist I just can't justify it to other people because it's an opinion. Being a socialist is the morally right thing to do in my mind, how would I go about justifying that to other people? You don't.

>>4198892
The problem is that socialism is the try to fix the contradictions inherent in capitalism. Some by inciting a revolution and others by playing nice and remedying the contradictions from the inside, the latter is the absolute minority, since you are forced to be pragmatic within the system and it's own logics (foreseeable profit prospects) prohibits you from trying anything radical and severely limits the scope of viable solutions.

You can read Rand or Hayek to get some critical prospect on the social attitudes socialists mostly takes as good as a given. You can also read Bakunin for a more radical anarchist perspective.

Or if you want a critique or alternative of the notion of progress put forth by Hegel and further developed by Marx, look in the reactionary/traditionalist thread in the catalogue

>>4198892
I would recommend that read about the economies of Vietnam, and Cuba for a clear view of socialism. On paper the system works, however, in real life it creates a robotic style society. Honestly, in any well developed nation the system itself would not work. Why? Because, an individual who has no education working at McDonald's should not be considered on the same level of an individual who has a PhD, etc. Why? Because, if we as human beings have no incentive that hard work towards the pursuit of a better lifestyle does not pay off later on, then what is the point of attending college. The effects of not having a class system are devastating because, you wind up with a society that resembles North Korea. Knowledge truly is power, and everyone who seeks it finds a reward. Knowledge should never be limited for only certain individuals to obtain and utilize. However, most people need an incentive to do so, and to put it bluntly money is a major incentive.

I have read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. However, in modern times these views do not apply.

>>4198952

> Rand or Hayek

tip top kek

>>4198957

This is a shitty post, ignore this.

>>4198945
>Being a socialist is the morally right thing to do in my mind

Why?

>>4198957
This is a dusty old view of incentives.

http://youtu.be/rrkrvAUbU9Y

Get with the times

OP, ignore everyone in this thread who clearly haven't read any Marx and make appeals to human nature, competition/incentive and Stalin and other dictators.

>>4198957
Vietnam and Cuba are both communist states, socialism =! communism. The rest of your argument is based on a slippery slope fallacy.

>>4198952
You mean that thread that's masquerading around as a literature thread when it's clearly a poor excuse for /pol/ users to shitpost on /lit/? No thanks.

>>4198972
Because I believe it's everyone's moral obligation to pay taxes and support those less fortunate, if everyone thought like this everyone would be much happier.

>>4198982
I keep seeing Cuba as a bad example of a communist state but honestly I haven't heard anything that bad that reasons such hate towards the country.
In fact besides the oppression of opposing political views their life expectancy and infant mortality rate was much better than America's in recent years.

>>4198982
>You mean that thread that's masquerading around as a literature thread when it's clearly a poor excuse for /pol/ users to shitpost on /lit/? No thanks.

Yeah I know it's hard to stomache, but those authors critique the notion of historical progress that liberal democrats and Socialists share. You have to read at least Hayek to understand the guidelines of the capitalist mindset. Those of them who believe capitalism to be grounded in nature, that is, which is the most common objection to socialism when we don't take into account strawmen like >muh gulags and >lazy hippies

>>4198997
I always thought capitalism was grounded in Darwinism more than anything else.

Though the people who use Darwinian arguments against socialism don't even bother to take account of social animals such as bees and ants who achieve much more than any other animal besides humans through team work.

>>4198982
>Because I believe it's everyone's moral obligation to pay taxes and support those less fortunate
Again, why is this a good thing? Why is it a good thing that the 'less fortunate' are artificially sustained instead of dying off? Is there a particular benefit they offer to society? Or is this just altruistic masturbation. People need saving and you're just the guy to do it.

>>4199007
Bees and Ants are Monarchical

>>4199007
Though the people who use Darwinian arguments against socialism don't even bother to take account of social animals such as bees and ants who achieve much more than any other animal besides humans through team work.

Wow, you so profoundly misappropriate the term socialist its unreal.

The concept of 'Teamwork' isn't socialist. Otherwise every fucking civilization in history could be defined as socialist in those terms.

>>4198892
Stop thinking that communism has anything to do with the sowjet union and start reading "the communist maifesto" (which is actually pretty shitty") and go on with "Das Kapital", which is awesome and explains how capitalism works.

Basically understanding the mechanism of capitalism is crucial to know why you are against it (understanding it even made me realize that i am actually against this society).

"socialist" is just a word with 1000 meanings. There is no reason why a social democrat is more or less a socialist than some anarcho-syndicalist who claims he proclaims the only true version of socialism.

>>4199052
>artificially sustained
>dying off
We aren't talking about natural selection, we're talking about real people. I can't imagine anyone short of a sociopath advocating acquiring money or luxury at the expense of someone's life. Even if you look at it from a 100% capitalist perspective, when poor people "die off" you lose your means of production.

>>4199052
>Bees and Ants are Monarchical
Yeah I know but I'm using the basis of cooperation between bees and ants as an argument against the capitalist idea that strong should inherently rule over the weak.

>>4199074
see
>>4199078

Sorry if that was misleading.

>>4199077
Not him but that's not exactly true.
Asylum immigration to Europe is one example that's primarily the realm of welfare queens who never actually enter the job market and are a massive net drain on state resources.

>>4199052
>artificially

It's not like they'll willingly die off, look at poverty ridden ghettos the world over. Your fantasy is nothing more than creating gated communities where someone sits and controls the land and resources backed by private armies who are payed by getting a tiny slice of the cake. What radical capitalists don't see are that their ideas have been tried and have failed and are the reason we are where we are today. The socialist notion is that we can do even better.

>anthills are monarchies

Read some actual biology the queen is a birth machine, not a political ruler.

>>4199078
Why are you comparing an ant and a bee to a human being, the difference in complexity is so huge, it's just ridiculous.

So....books....

>>4198957
>then what is the point of attending college

There already is no point, its just one of those things you HAVE to do in order for some assholes to take your money.

Tell me, why do you think we have to take English/Math/Physical Education classes, if one is studying the arts?

I'm not saying there is never any correlation between different classes, but you should still be able to understand the message I'm trying to send.

>>4199104
I'm arguing on the same basis people who argue on Darwinist terms argue.
You're right though, most comparisons drawn between humans and animals are ridiculous.

>>4198892
When you say that you are a socialist, what do you mean? Socialism is many different philosophies.

>>4199052
So we should artificially kill them off? It's still someone's political decision.

Also, it's not natural to "own property" does that make it wrong, nature doesn't give a shit if someone steals to survive?

>>4199077
>when poor people "die off" you lose your means of production.
Not exactly. What if there isn't any labor for these excess people to do? A lot of poor people dying off would be great for the job market - at any rate. Millions of immigrants flooding into the States has permanently depressed wages for native workers who would traditionally have filled those positions.

>>4199099
>What radical capitalists don't see are that their ideas have been tried and have failed and are the reason we are where we are today
You're here shitposting on 4chan instead of out in the fields because capitalism has created such a society. And your same comment can be directed towards radical socialists as well - I won't go into all the worker's paradises that sprang up during the 20th century.

>>4199134
>it's not natural to "own property"
Maybe to a filthy Communist.

>>4199138
>Not exactly. What if there isn't any labor for these excess people to do? A lot of poor people dying off would be great for the job market - at any rate.

2edgy4me come out of your ivory tower

>Maybe to a filthy Communist.
How is it natural? Make your case that property rights isn't just a good idea someone made up?

>>4199138
>You're here shitposting on 4chan instead of out in the fields because capitalism has created such a society. And your same comment can be directed towards radical socialists as well - I won't go into all the worker's paradises that sprang up during the 20th century.

That third world countries became fully industrial in one generation?

>>4199138
>Millions of immigrants flooding into the States has permanently depressed wages for native workers who would traditionally have filled those positions.

This is in the interest of the exploitative capitalist.

>>4199157
>2edgy4me come out of your ivory tower
There is historical precedence for what I said. Look at what happened to Europe after the Black Plague. High wages for everyone!

>>4199169
I was referring more to the millions that were killed but whatever. Industry transformed those countries - not welfare.

>>4199183
And also the millions of social justice morons influencing policy today.

>>4199099
>failed and are the reason we are where we are today

Richer, healthier, better educated, and happier than at any other point in history?

>>4199183
It's also completely untrue, the empirical evidence on immigration and its effects on the wages of locals is absolutely crystal clear.

>>4199194
Yes because of the endless struggle of people demanding emancipation, by failed I mean paradigm shift as in revolution.

>>4199196
Care to elaborate on what the effects are?

>>4199183
You know, I was standing in line at Wal-Mart the other day, buying a rug made in India, some shirts from China, a coffee maker from Bangladesh, and some shoes made in Hong Kong and it occurred to me--those Mexicans are taking all our jobs!

>>4199193
>There is historical precedence for what I said. Look at what happened to Europe after the Black Plague. High wages for everyone!

Well, kill yourself then, it's the right thing to do.

What if I'm unemployed and decide i would rather become a murderer or thief than starve and die off?

>>4199202
Unemployment is unaffected, mobility of labor increases, locals shift toward complex service professions while immigrants supplant them in unskilled positions, and the incomes of locals (both those previously in unskilled and those in highly skilled professions) are permanently increased.

People's intuition regarding immigration is completely retarded. Mostly the retarded idea that the economy is static. The fact of the matter is that there are no scarce resources constraining employment, other than labor. The benefits of specialization are gigantic.

>>4199211
>Well, kill yourself then, it's the right thing to do.
I have a job and don't give a shit about the wellbeing of strangers.

>What if I'm unemployed and decide i would rather become a murderer or thief than starve and die off?
Then in an ideal world you'll die anyway but by state retribution.

When will people realize that no form of government will yield the results you are arguing about, not because of the system, but because of the pure stupidity and incompetence of the general public? Once the average human is able to sacrifice some personal gain for the greater good, maybe a system of government can operate effectively.

>>4199222
And to give an example of just how nonsensical people's thinking about immigration is, consider:

Why do New Yorkers have high salaries?
If half the people in NY died right now, would NY salaries increase or decrease?
If someone emigrates from Seattle to NY, what is the marginal effect on NY salaries?

>>4199219
I have a job and don't give a shit about the wellbeing of strangers.

Ok fine, and exactly why should we care about your opinion since you don't give a shit about what's best for anyone but yourself.

>Then in an ideal world you'll die anyway but by state retribution.

This my exact point about private armies and it has been tried. Welcome to the 21st century.

>>4199240
You sound exactly like Hitler.

Can someone recommend some books?

>>4199247
What amazing clarity you see the world with.

>>4199250
That did sound like an excerpt from Mien Kampf though.

>>4199252
You think recognizing that people are somewhat short-sighted and self interested is unique to hitler?

>>4199247
I sound like Hitler? Look at what he did for Germany. Now picture that except without the more ludicrous policies of world domination.

>>4199258
How would you get that mass employment going without preparing for war?

>>4198936
Well, I've actually never read that book, but my understanding is that it provides a picture of some of the evils of capitalism, and provides images of some of the effects of unionism -- so I dunno if it touches on socialism per se.
>>4199104
There's obviously a great difference in complexity, but the many similarities between humans and animals are undeniable.
>>4199134
Well, actually, humans are natural. But there are other animals that fight each other based on territorial disputes, and, you know, territory is a kind of possession. Also, we all know that a dog will growl at you if you try to take its bone away; I'm not really sure if there are other examples, but a kind of ownership is present in animals.
>>4199157
Property rights aren't just a good idea that someone made up. Feelings of ownership are a psychologically inherent thing, and that's just part of the mind.
>>4199193
>I was referring more to the millions that were killed but whatever. Industry transformed those countries - not welfare.
Well, if you look at Venezuela, it's been improved enormously by socialist government programs -- literacy initiatives, welfare, that kind of stuff.

>>4199262
I have no idea, but that's not my point. My point is that it's an example of what can happen when people are in a position where they are willing to sacrifice (in that case things were so shitty it wasn't that big of change).

>>4199257
I'm honestly joking really but no it's an attribute of all fascists and 20 something year old young men/women.
>>4199258
Hey I never said what Hitler did for Germany (excluding the genocide/taking over the world) was bad, it just did sound a lot like Hitler.
Sometimes I wish I lived in a society that simply gave me a goal instead of having to choose one for myself.
>>4199262
The self sufficient side of the plan wasn't too bad.

>>4199264
>it's been improved enormously by socialist government programs
It's been improved because it has a commodity (oil) that people want. It'd be just another South American shithole without it.

Long term comprehensive sustainability over stretching your immediate and exclusive profit margins is just about THE reason why socialism works.

>>4199264
>it's been improved enormously by socialist government programs

...you don't ACTUALLY believe that, do you?

>>4199274
Yeah, and then the government takes the money that they make off of that commodity and they invest it in social programs.
>>4199281
I do. Hugo Chavez was a great man.

Capitalism is self contradictory.
Suppressing wages reduces the market.

>>4199264
>Well, actually, humans are natural. But there are other animals that fight each other based on territorial disputes, and, you know, territory is a kind of possession. Also, we all know that a dog will growl at you if you try to take its bone away; I'm not really sure if there are other examples, but a kind of ownership is present in animals.

Yes, but this ownership is not a respected right if someone need your possessions he is, by nature, free to kill you and take it. Social Darwinists never mention that they are willing to lay down their own life's to a thief who is naturally inclined to survive too.

>>4199264
>Property rights aren't just a good idea that someone made up. Feelings of ownership are a psychologically inherent thing, and that's just part of the mind.

There's a leap from feelings to right.

>>4199245
>Why do New Yorkers have high salaries?
Because of resources pumped into the city by being one of the world's financial trading hubs.

>>4199308
>he is, by nature, free to kill you and take it.
Yeah, everyone is free to do whatever they want for whatever reason or lack thereof. That's free will for you, but it doesn't really mean shit to an economics discussion.
>>4199315
Rights exist only as ideas, subjective preferences for the universe and human behavior. As for the notion of a legal right to property, that's based off of the feeling. The government is another dominance hierarchy, and those are found all throughout nature.

>>4199245
>Why do New Yorkers have high salaries?
They do not all have high salaries.
>If half the people in NY died right now, would NY salaries increase or decrease?
Who knows? I expect that some would go up, and some would go down.
>If someone emigrates from Seattle to NY, what is the marginal effect on NY salaries?
I do not know. There is not enough information.

>>4199222
>People's intuition regarding immigration is completely retarded. Mostly the retarded idea that the economy is static. The fact of the matter is that there are no scarce resources constraining employment, other than labor. The benefits of specialization are gigantic.
That's dependent on the pipe-dream of infinite growth and doesn't take into account the effect immigration has on welfare state and the (economic and otherwise) stability of homogeneous nations.

>Yeah, everyone is free to do whatever they want for whatever reason or lack thereof. That's free will for you, but it doesn't really mean shit to an economics discussion.

I have to disagree that economics alone should dominate how we structure our society, since like Marx, I suspect everything will degenerate, since the only valid question to ask is "will we profit?".

>Rights exist only as ideas, subjective preferences for the universe and human behavior. As for the notion of a legal right to property, that's based off of the feeling. The government is another dominance hierarchy, and those are found all throughout nature.

Ah, good I thought only socialists were feeling oriented. So it's legitimate to judge society around how it delivers on our preferences and aesthetics?

>>4199379
>So it's legitimate to judge society around how it delivers on our preferences and aesthetics?
I am of the opinion that any reason to judge society is legitimate, so, yes.

>>4198892
well, op, a good place to start would be basic economics. I like the N. Gregory Mankiw's Intro to Micro and his Intro to Macro economics text books [they are college level textbook but if you're formulating opinions on the way a market works it's best to know how markets work. He's even a liberal so there's that. From there you should read Hayek's The Road to Serfdom. Marx's Das Kapital and a few other of his works plus whatever lenin wrote should give you a sense of socialism / marxism / communism. and though not an exact critique of marx and etc Why Nations Fail is a great study on historical economics and historical economic development though it is one sided I think it defends it's position extremely well

>>4198892
The question would be simply what you define as "better" or best".

If you somebody who thinks that the best would be, a system that support individuals taking as much as their can for themselves and shit on the rest, capitalism is pretty neet. Given it's nature, it pushes for innovations too.

If you want everybody to have work for the sake of work, communism sounds better (though abominations of regulated capitalism got it too)

Keep in mind that systems aren't static and it's not unlikely for communism to turn into a dictatorship, while unregulated capitalism is the best way into neo feudalism. (inb4 some faggot tries to explain how there won't be monopolies)

The pic on OP shows anarchism and fascism pretty well.

Well, my personal priority is to allow every fucking human on earth a decent live, with work being voluntary (which isn't even utopic anymore thanks to machines), as long the state supports the basic needs, I couldn't give a fuck about the rest, so even free market would be fine.

>>4198952
>Rand
Oh come on, even most capitalist don't take this lunatic serious.

>>4199294
Since infinite growth is impossible, this just leads to a needed "low" to rise again after the crisis. So in the long run it shouldn't matter too much.

>>4199454
>Well, my personal priority is to allow every fucking human on earth a decent live, with work being voluntary

OK so what happens if nobody wants to work, how will you provide a decent life for all of them?

>>4199476
But it's a pretty unrealistic scenario, just look how many people do volunteer work this days when they have the motivation of cash and yet don't give a damn about it.
There were experiments with basic income in some places already (although obviously limited) and people still went to work.

In a society where you don't have to work, not everybody will suddenly turn into an artist or just sit home and jerk off all day. Humans are too social for that and the social aspect of work would remain unchanged after all. Even now, going to work isn't necessary in the first world if you want to survive yet most people want more out of their life, besides, just imagine going to work without the pressure of what could happen if you lose the job...

Now if we still try the scenario, given that most services would be automated, the society wouldn't even downright collapse instantly, though obviously, they would need to change the system in this case.

>>4199476
Why shouldn't you want a job?

>>4199476
"The objection ordinarily made to a system of community of property and equal distribution of produce—'that each person would be incessantly occupied in evading his share of the work'—is, I think, in general, considerably overstated. . . . . . Neither in a rude nor in a civilized society has the supposed difficulty been experienced. In no community has idleness ever been a cause of failure."

—J. S. Mill, "Political Economy," Vol. I., p. 251

>>4199506
that shit work nigga

>>4199523
Yeah it's like they make the projection that nobody wants to be good at something and just want to slack off. It's like they think the rich is doing us a favor by suppressing our wages and keeping us to the fire so they can run off with the profits.

>>4199502
Why should someone who doesn't contribute to society be given free money? What happens to innovation? Why should someone get free money for not contributing to a society? I certainly don't want to work for someone who does nothing, how will you ensure my money is not going to those people?

>>4199533
You can always start your own business and you'll be good at something and the rich won't oppress you. Go get them tiger!

>>4199533
>he doesn't know how labor markets work

>>4199533
Nobody is forcing you to work. If you feel the wages are too low, then don't work. Or start your own business. Or acquire a skill that will make you earn your desired wage.

>>4199550
Supply and demand? Like commodities?

>>4199555
>Nobody is forcing you to work. If you feel the wages are too low, then don't work

Tell that to the children who made your shoes.

>>4199546
>>4199555
It's like, the system gives you two shitty choices, and if you complain they say just to choose the other one that doesn't fit you either. If you don't like the Republicans, vote Democrat! If you don't like the Democrats, vote Republican! The presence of choice doesn't validate the system.

>>4199541
>Why should someone who doesn't contribute to society be given free money?
As I said, my opinion is that every fucking human deserves at least his basic needs fulfilled, simple for being human (and us being social animals and all) The price for that would be pretty small seeing the big picture, so I don't really get the objection. If we would live in a world where resources are extremely limited, this would make a lot more sense.

>What happens to innovation?
It's usually done by few people who are invested, not the slackers.

>how will you ensure my money is not going to those people?
Don't work then. Hurr durr

I never got the envy to the welfare fags and similar. Everybody is free to choose the same life their do, but if you are more ambitious and talented, well make something out of yourself, giving a little share of your success won't kill you.

So it would be basically a small part of your income vs a life of a person, which should be an easy equation if you don't have an irrational hatred for people.

>>4199564
They're better off than not working.

>>4199568
or that person could just you know....get a job

>>4199571
There are better things than better off.

>>4199565
if enough people agree with you about the system being shitty and withholding their labor, then the wages will rise. clearly that's not the case, might be just that you're a bit entitled.

>>4199555
>Muh infinite possibilities and no economic reality

you need money to start a business, so I guess I'm forced to work low wage jobs.

I need money to go to college to get a certification that I'm good at anything. So I'm forced to work low wage jobs.

I guess it's just my flawed lazy personality of poor judgment.

>>4199575
Because there are jobs for everybody, I forgot, my bad.

>>4199582
Work low wage jobs until you can start a business or go to college.

>>4199583
Are you advocating unions?

>>4199587
acquire a skill that makes you an attractive choice to get hired. if you don't bring anything to the table...

>>4199583
Or the company could just find more desperate people who have to make the hard decision between shitty work and death.

>>4199589
Unions aren't good for the workforce that is just entering the labor market. If you have enough like-minded individuals then the wages would rise, it doesn't have to be unionized.

>>4199592
So basically kill everybody who isn't needed for the machine to work?

>>4199583
Just because I'm lonely doesn't mean that I don't matter, and sometimes there's a problem that's hard to help to solve.

>>4199595
If you have shitty skills, you're going to have shitty work. Also what is minimal wage.

>>4199588
In 15+ years there's bills and rent I have about 200$ A month when everything is payed and no wealthy parents basement to move to, to reduce costs.

>>4199607
Clearly aren't working hard enough. What a lazy ass.

>>4199599
You can create machines.

>>4199598
Why would you not want it to be unionized?

>>4199606
Certified "nice" skills costs money.

>>4199607
Share a flat, work another job.

>>4199612
I could work 3 jobs and hog employment from 2 others then I might get to college or start my own business in 5 years, of course 5 years with no money spend on "fun".

>>4199606
Dat assumption that there is always enough work. If we finally move towards automatization, even lesser jobs for the low qualified would be there and since giving them a tiny bit of our profits would be so inhumanly ... guess all the unqualified people have to die. Nice system you have there.

>>4199614
I just told you, I don't care. Unions are poor for the workforce that is just entering the market.

>>4199615
how much does it cost to become a welder? nobody ever made enough money without certified skills huh?

>>4199583
Agreeing that the system is shitty and withholding their labour do not necessarily come as a pair.

>>4199625
Time to get the 4th job then, slacker.

>>4199625
People have been through your situation by the millions, if you can't figure anything out then yeah you deserve a shitty salary.

I think there's just one anon arguing with everybody else at this point.

>>4199625
5 years without fun doesn't seem a big deal. Learn to have fun on the cheap. You don't have to go to theatres.

>>4199642
millions of people have been raped
millions of people have been killed
millions of people have starved to death
millions of people are capitalists

>>4199632
Then it isn't shitty enough.

>>4199642
>implying I have the time to figure anything out

You sound like someone who has never held an honest job.

>>4199644
Yeah that guy should really get off his lazy ass and stop complaining so much.

>>4199646

I have a stick and a wheel if anybody wants to take turns.

>>4199654
You sound like a baby. Clearly you have time to shitpost on 4chan by paying for internet. Looks like you don't have it that bad chief.

>>4199651
Precisely, so stop complaining that someone isn't paying for your low productivity through their nose (let alone for not doing anything toplel)

>>4199656
you sound like an incredibly boring person.

>>4199659
Did I strike a nerve? Did your parents pay for everything? I need to have Internet for my work, schedules etc. are kept up to date online.

>>4199666
Yet you still have time to shitpost on 4chan.

>not enough time to think about legitimate stuff, that might improve my well-being

>>4199650
>Then it isn't shitty enough.
Your opinion about that has no relevance to the post you have linked to.

Do you desire the best of all possible worlds, or is it merely enough that we not live in the worst of all possible worlds?

>>4199673

>trying to hold together your argument by being this pedantic

You sure showed him

>>4199677
It's not my opinion, it's an economic fact. You want higher wages, do something about it. Nobody owes it to give it to you for nothing.

>>4199673
Like you do this?

>>4199683
What are you talking about? Do you really think people are given what they deserve? Shouldn't the most tedious mind numbing be payed the highest by the logic that you won't get your time back?

>>4199685
I have plenty of time as well as being happy with my life. He's the one complaining of shitty work and shitty wages and not doing anything about it.

>>4199692
This is your assumption? Are you NEET or something?

>>4199691
The most tedious would work towards the fact that they make themselves the highest productivity workers around. You can pick up rocks and put them down all day, that doesn't mean anything.

>>4199692

>I have plenty of time as well as being happy with my life

You say that but how can we be so sure?

>>4198892

Hey OP, here you go.

Start with this:
http://oyc.yale.edu/political-science/plsc-114#sessions

Then follow that up with this:
http://oyc.yale.edu/sociology/socy-151#sessions

And read the texts given for each lecture.

Not only will you be able to defend your political position, you will actually understand what it is and which historical conditions underlie it.

>>4199698
But you don't become a millionaire by being the most productive burger flipper in the world?

Anyways I'm outta here, tired of ad hominems by people who can't into argument (what would you expect anyways from someone who holds the belief he should get paid for doing nothing through legalized theft, a belief that should surely result in serious consideration for an asylum).

>>4199709
no because the most productive burger flipper is a low productivity worker with little added value.

>>4199683
What is an economic fact? It's a fact that it's not shitty enough? How is "shitty" not a value judgement and therefor subjective, and therefor not a fact? And as for whether or not people should owe things to me for nothing, that also is just your opinion. I think that way of thinking is pretty hurtful.

And you cannot break away from this thinking that the presence of choice justifies the system from whence those choices spring. It doesn't. You keep saying that if I want higher wages I should do something about it while keeping within your provided framework. That command doesn't justify the framework.

>>4199711
Nice cop-out are you ego so hurt that you must declare a victory on an anonymous imageboard.

>>4199711
>someone who holds the belief he should get paid for doing nothing through legalized theft

You mean holding stocks? Fuck yeah, lock those bastards up.

>>4199711
How is calling your opponent insane not an ad hominem?

>>4199719
>What is an economic fact? It's a fact that it's not shitty enough? How is "shitty" not a value judgement and therefor subjective, and therefor not a fact?
please take a look at a labor market graph, they're really simple

> And as for whether or not people should owe things to me for nothing, that also is just your opinion.
So you believe in theft? because I can easily come into your house and steal your shit

>That command doesn't justify the framework.
then change the framework, go have a revolution with your ilk

>>4199716
It's harder than any excell desktop job.

Captcha: which anusgv

>>4199725
Stocks are risk. They also cost money. They also provide capital for the company. Pick up a book or something.

>>4199732
I bet more people can flip a burger than operate excell

but even then your argument with "hardness" is still faulty

>>4199728
I'm not that anon and I came here to say: You are really bad at arguing your case. You argue like an economics freshmen who have "discovered" how everything functions by virtue of economics, what we on the Internet call a n00bfag.

>>4199747
>I have never taken a basic economics course and have no idea what I'm talking about so I'm just going to throw in another ad hominem topkek m8 I'm so smart

>>4199739
It's tougher work, you'll be more exhausted when you get home. Doing spreadsheets all day is just as hard as shitposting on 4chan all day.

>>4199728
>please take a look at a labor market graph, they're really simple
What is that supposed to prove to me? How does that prove the objectivity of subjective value judgements?
>So you believe in theft? because I can easily come into your house and steal your shit
I believe in some theft, but not all theft. I believe in some human actions, but not all human actions.
>then change the framework, go have a revolution with your ilk
Again, you are using a command as an argument. Stop doing that. Besides, it's not like I can change anything anyway, so you're being absurd. Maybe you just had no argument? Then the correct response is "You are right."

>>4199757
yes and your argument is still faulty

>>4199756
Again, the freshmen is showing it's not like you are revealing a big secret we haven't considered by shouting supply and demand.

>>4199756
>I have taken one semester of microeconomics and am thus qualified to shit up /lit/ with my uneducated opinions lel

>>4199756
He wasn't saying that you are wrong, merely that you are bad at arguing for your point of view.

>>4198982
>Because I believe it's everyone's moral obligation to pay taxes and support those less fortunate, if everyone thought like this everyone would be much happier.

They would also be a lot hungrier, and poorer. Capitalism is the only reason you're alive. Yes, it does suck for developing nations who are exploited by super powers, but take a reality check buddy, without that exploitation, North America, and Europe wouldn't even be close to the level of civilization it is today. To get something, you need sacrifices. I don't mind pay-cuts, and raises to other professions or jobs i.e CEO's and attorney's shouldn't be making over half a million per year, compared to other jobs.

>>4199759
The economic fact is if people thought the wage was too low they'd quit working and wages would rise. Clearly since everyone works, the wage is not too low. There's also this thing called minimal wage preventing ugly capitalists from milking you to the point of exhaustion. They do need a workforce after all. Even with the machinery they still need customers for their products. It's not really that hard, in that sense the wages aren't shitty enough, I thought a 5 year old could deduct that. Save me your philosophical subjective objective hegelian marxist unicorns.

>>4199733

Wow, I totally missed that part. A pirate venture is a risk, it also costs money, some would call it an investment, and some might even call it work. It doesn't change what it is.

>>4199763
>>4199765
doesn't look like you considered shit because you're clearly not presenting any counter-arguments. Sorry kids, might be time to retake your basic econ course.

the idea that certain individuals can take possession the planet's natural resources and produce whatever they want with it with little accountability is moronic

socialism is simply better organization, this is all i see it as. planning out the use and distribution of natural resources. at a minimum

i also believe that popular media (film and television mostly) is so degenerate socially irresponsible as to be bannable. also mcdonalds, garbage food in general. wud up with that? how do we complacently let these things exist, they pollute our bodies and our minds

>>4199775
>Capitalism is the only reason you're alive.

Science and technology is the only actual driving force behind economic development, capitalism is just exploitation. Fuck your agenda.

>>4199785
>oh no they found me out, b-better call them kids!
2/10 you can do better

>>4199783
Yes one is a pirate venture and one is investing. One is legal one is not. And one involves investing your money to provide capital for a company. I fail to see how providing your money so a company can do business and you might or might not get back that money, is the same as getting money for doing nothing. Hey if you neckbeards want to fund your basic income by pooling up the money that you have, go ahead it's fine with me.

>everybody says to take economics courses to understand the world
>take a few economics courses
>consists entirely of doing algebraic shit to y=c+i+e+g and graphs that are as meaningful as pic related, then the teacher trying to discuss occupy wall street by reading out various income statistics for the past 50 years from a powerpoint

FUCKING WHY

>>4199795
you really ought to try harder. it's too bad you can't find a basic supply and demand chart in your Kierkegaard book, but it's alright. spend some time surfing around on wikipedia, you might be better prepared the next time, you might even get a serious reply!

>>4199785
Don't get personal. It's an open invitation to step it up, it's just too obvious that you are regurgitating what you heard in class last week which is kinda annoying.

That said, I as a Marxist, personally enjoys getting bashed in the head with sound economics from time to time, it's a welcome challenge, but you got to step it up.

>everybody says to take economics courses to understand the world
>take a few economics courses
>consists entirely of doing algebraic shit to y=c+i+e+g and graphs that are as meaningful as pic related, then the teacher trying to discuss occupy wall street by reading out various income statistics from the past 50 years from a powerpoint

FUCKING WHY

>>4199812
>being this prostatepunished
take a break, step away from the computer and do something you enjoy, I guarantee you'll feel better when you come back

>>4199813
>I'm a sage Marxist who knows everything, I haven't written anything of value, poor plebs, step it up, so I can throw some Marxist Hegelian hoopla doopla at you, straight from the grand sage

>>4199831
As they say: you gotta know capitalism to be against capitalism.

>>4199476

If anything, it could see more people contributing to society. I'm currently unemployed and every week at the Job Centre, people make the (valid) complaint that there's no point in them working because all the benefits are taken by the top of the chain and there's very little chance of someone from the bottom of society getting enough from work that it becomes worth leaving JSA.

>>4199849
You must die or suffer then! Thus commandeth the free market whose functions and dynamics I designed and safeguard!

how do people "become" marxists?
it's like reading a book on early american political parties and then deciding to become a stuart
it's fucking stupid and it doesn't mean anything

>>4199778
>The economic fact is if people thought the wage was too low they'd quit working and wages would rise.
What does "too low" mean? Too low to be worth working for? Now you are just making a tautological statement.
>There's also this thing called minimal wage preventing ugly capitalists from milking you to the point of exhaustion.
Yeah, and that's definitely a good thing, although I think they should raise it in the case of America.
>Even with the machinery they still need customers for their products.
Absolutely. Higher wages can be better for the businesses, too.
>It's not really that hard, in that sense the wages aren't shitty enough
So, in your opinion, the quality of life of the wage-earner is immaterial, at least after a certain point, that point being the point of starvation? Well that opinion, though callous, doesn't change the suffering of anyone.
>I thought a 5 year old could deduct that.
You think like a five year old, so it doesn't surprise me.

>>4199884
>Too low to be worth working for?
Yes

>>4199871
Luckily that's not up to you to decide. If you're a capitalist you really shouldn't give a shit if I use Marxist theory for anything, you should concentrate on profiting.

>>4199798
>I fail to see how providing your money so a company can do business and you might or might not get back that money, is the same as getting money for doing nothing.

Only because you chose your blind spots with care. Legality is politically determined and there are examples of legalized privacy and profiteering, and those consequently were legal options for investment. The fact is you don't work, you exploit, you don't have the guts to even go to sea yourself for your plunder. The only risk you face is whether your exploitation scheme floats or sinks.

>>4199935
Who are you exploiting by buying stocks?

>>4199935
>The only risk you face is losing all the money you invested

/lit/ ladies and gentlemen

>>4199942
thales, for a start.

>>4199953
>/lit/ ladies and gentlemen

/lit/ ladies and gentlemen

>>4199778

Come on, stop being dense. There are plenty of examples of people working below living wage with no option of quitting.

Your "facts" are clearly something you are pulling out of your ass.

>>4199788
>socialism is simply better organization, this is all i see it as. planning out the use and distribution of natural resources. at a minimum
>planning out the use and distribution of natural resources.

by who, elites?
>what was the creation, decline of, and subsequent fall of the Roman Empire for 500
>what was the cloistering of China for 1000?
>What was the fall of the Mayan Empire for 1500?
>What was Apartheid for 2000?
>What are disincentives to sustained technological advancement for 2500?
>What are Extractive economic and extractive political institutions for 3000?

>>4199963
now multiply that number by several millions and you get Communism

>>4199997

Nope.

>>4199997

Right, when you don't have a case, pull the communism scare card. What is this shit.

>>4199793
How do you think those scientists, and advancements in technology happened? I can tell you one fucking thing, it wasn't because of communism. In communism your taxes go to everyone, even fucking leeches of society (garbage men, retailers, and janitors), instead of research projects.

You can thank your president, prime minister, or who ever the fuck rules your first world ass.

>>4200012
It's not a scare card. Someone is always going to be on the bottom. Communism just provides an equally miserable existence for all (aside from the party officials aka de-facto capitalists).

>>4200020
There were no scientists in Russia?

>>4200039
Hard to say no when you get thrown into concentration camps for not following the line and can't leave the country

>>4200020
>first manmade satellite
>first man in space
>not science or advancements in technology

>>4200043
And yet where is Russia today? Some sustainable model. I bet all the folks had a grand time too.

>>4200023
Actually, there are a lot of former communist countries that have significant portions of the population or more than half of the population that say that they were better off under communism.

>>4200023

Of course it is. It is a vapid, unfounded claim made by someone who isn't even trying to make a reasoned argument, built around half a century of "communism bad" propaganda prejudice sold to uneducated, uninformed people so they can have hate the enemy. If you have actual facts, argue them.

>>4200047
If you read actual history and not American public school propaganda. You would know that soviet culture had an emphasis on practical science. You sure are uneducated.

>>4200047
you realize that the foremost argument on the political collapse of the USSR was due to gradual democratization and weakening of state power, right? If the Soviet rulers retained the power that Stalin had many argue that communism would never have fallen behind.

>>4200020

Yeah, the cold war and nuclear arms race and the space race were all just US internal propaganda in order to keep their proles in check, because, clearly commies can't science.

But I am glad that at least you burn your own garbage, clean your own workplace, and pick up your products straight from the machine, since clearly you have no use for fucking leeches.

Fucking dimwit.

>>4200047
It's my understanding that Russia's "collapse" of its economic system came about because people saw capitalist democracy as an alternative to the repressive political system that they were living under; it wasn't because of some decay inherent to communist economics.

I consider myself an opportunist and vote socialist because I'm a poorfag on welfare. Feels comprehensible.

>>4200047

It's in channel 512.

>>4200090
You can de facto only vote centrist now a days anyways.

Feel free to join the revolution maybe the future has a place for you.

>>4200050
I live in one of those countries. The people who think that are lazy who got by on being leeches neck deep in red assholes. Today it is just the continuation of the same, except former communist officials are now some kind of capitalists (mind you literally the same people), but the principle is still the same, it isn't capitalism, it's the same system disguised under a different name. All the educated people are moving out, the only ones left are the leeches with former communist party cards. If you don't, you're fucked. That's why half of the population thinks it's better, if you're a parasite for the former elites then yeah it is better, all you have to do is keep supporting the status quo. the rest are emigrating or unhappy. But you couldn't read that in any book. Doesn't matter anyways this will blow up once again, because it doesn't work, just like communism didn't.

>>4200119
It's pretty much capitalism you're describing. The thing is it's just a system like every other where those defending the status quo will get brownie points and call those who oppose it lazy. Don't get your hopes up, there'll always be an elite taking advantage of you, the trick is to demand a slice of their cake for they'll have it no matter what and find some purpose despite of those fuckers.

>>4198957
Yeah because all the rich people work hard during all their life and all poor people are lazy bastards.

>>4198982
Please, fucking google the list of socialist nations before you form a retort. Cuba is listed. There is a very fine line between communism and socialism. You are thinking of Norway and Sweden. Socialism would not work in America so, it does not matter if Op is a fucking socialist or not.

>>4199927
i'm not a capitalist you stupid faggot

>>4200273
"Socialism" can be synonymous with "communism". For instance, the Communist Party of Vietnam is the ruling party of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. When people use these words, it is not always clear what they mean.

>>4200312
What are you then? Maoist? Extra terrestrial lizard man?

>>4200317
fat state school accounting student who lives with his parents
now tell me how reading a 200 year old book about rent prices in small english towns failed historical hypotheses and self-evident shit about the "value form" and then deciding that's it i'm a marxist isn't fucking stupid

marxism is like a t-shirt for stupid business major tier people who somehow went into academia instead of business
it's a stupid hobby circlejerk with zero meaning

pic related, your brain on marxism

ITT: People who have never read Marx, Lukacs, Engels or Gramsci or studied politics, and have no fucking idea of the bullshit they're spouting

>>4200342
people who study politics don't study marx rambling about the germ of the value form they study geography history political science rhetoric etc.

>>4200332
Read >>4200342 for enlightenment.

>>4200352
Wut how can you study history without Marx that amounts to propaganda.

>>4200357
i've read some marx and engels and from the wikipedia articles of the other two it seems like they just say shit anyone who is vaguely aware of reality knows about
how does "people who run society do bad shit" mean that i should become a marxist? please lay it out

>read through thread
>nobody really makes a distinction where state intervention begins or ends in economic affairs or the role of politics
>nobody defines if there even is a distinction between an economy and state
I'm not arguing for either side, but if either made or defined this the debate would go much much smoother

>>4200341
What a sound argument, could you critique some of marx's actual views pls?

>>4200362
That's not it at all, Marx lays out the very structure of capitalism and why it is bound to fail, you are just attacking petit bourgeois "liberal" Americans claiming to be Marxists without reading him. His method for doing this is then later used by others in other fields.

>>4200352

You're a fucking idiot, mate. Marx and other Marxist writers have had an immense effect on politics and political history and thought and is still very much studied. At my university there's numerous courses dealing with Marx, Frankfurt School, etc. in courses like Modern Political Theory and courses that in themselves are devoted to Marxism. Pull your head out of your arse, mate. It looks like you're the one who hasn't studied politics. inb4 you just go to some shitty state college with a shitty politics department, my politics department is ranked 6th in the world.

tl;dr you're a faggot, read more, scrub

>>4200411
my political study has consisted of watching like 2 episodes of le dessous des cartes (hahaha) and reading kapital 1 (worst book i've read) but i'd still rank myself smarter than your avg borderline schizophrenic marx reader

100% serious

>>4200438

>100% serious

no you aren't, 2/10

>>4200443
THIS BOURGEOISIE IS CULTURALLY HEGEMONIZING ME AND REMOVING MY INTERNAL EXPERIENCe

>>4200452

good one m8 but i didnt even 'ave a giggle

> can't even do satire properly

>>4198892
Hi. Only talk to Marxist. Thank you. Have a nice day.

>>4200460
i want women to have sex with my dick

>>4200385
>Marx lays out the very structure of capitalism
Yeah.
>and why it is bound to fail
Welp. It didn't fail apparently. The working class failed instead.

Oh, you motherfuckers about to get Marxed.

>>4200475
>Welp. It didn't fail apparently.

Toppest lyl

OP if you're still here, bourgeois identity politics is a cancer that needs to blasted with radiation, stay away from it and denigrate people who advocate it.

>>4200493
We're pretty capitalist in my country.

>>4200362
>from the wikipedia articles of the other two it seems like they just say shit anyone who is vaguely aware of reality knows about
The devil is in the details, anon. To look on the other side, any idiot can say "supply and demand!", but that doesn't mean that you actually know any substantial amount of economic theory for saying so.

>>4200543
dont care; not going to read

>ahaha let bash this marx guy becase hes a communisr
>fuk reading lexD

Oh btw, if anyone has questions, you should ask now.
.

>>4200553

What is this base-superstructure thing about? Isn't culture as much an instrument of capitalist domination as economic means?

>>4200553
What is communism?

>>4200546
Then at least have the honesty to not make sweeping claims about what they wrote.

>>4200558
Here's a friend's chart describing the relationship.

>>4200584
Culture (superstructure) is formed by the base, but is extremely influence on continually influencing the base (think institution)

>>4198892
I think the greatest flaw in socialism lies in the fact that in order to be enacted on a large scale, it must be institutionalized, and given strict rules, regulations, and funding, creating a bloated bureaucracy that dehumanizes and fails to truly aid the people it seeks out to help.
I'm not so much a capitalist or a libertarian, but I do believe that most large bureaucratic structures, be they public or private, are by their very nature inefficient and dehumanizing, because they must have strict regulations to prevent corruption and abuse, but, because of these strict regulations, they must also become bloated to an absurd degree, and frequently (because no exceptions can be made to regulations, regardless of the intent of the regulation) poor decisions are made and people who could receive a great deal of help from the government are rejected, and vice versa.
I therefore advocate for the policies of libertarian paternalism among large scale structures, and that individuals do what they can to make their own local areas better through charity, community service, or simply helping out their neighbors and community members in a sort of old-school christian fashion, sort of like the "we must cultivate our gardens" philosophy of Candide, to make this /lit/ related.
I realize I have oversimplified the world in regards to global economic interdependence and stuff of that nature in discussing large scale, and I realize that fixing inner city ghettos is a much more complicated issue than both "chuck money at the situation" and "Just help out your neighbors, guys!" But I just think that solutions never really come from government regulations, and really can only come from the local population and community.

>>4200584
Question: it seems to me that relations & means of production might create ideologies and culture and the like that would be best at maintaining a different base from the one that shaped them. Does this happen? Where a base determines a superstructure that would legitimize a different base?

I know jack shit about this stuff, I admit.

Meanwhile, you fucks didn't even help answer OP's simple question.

The problem with finding literature on the topic is that most of it comes with biases for or against. I'd do some research and read up on multiple different texts because finding a truly objective approach is going to be incredibly difficult.

Good luck OP.

>>4198952
>Bakunin
Why do anarchist's always have to be antisemitic?
We get it, Jewish families have clout in the banking world and are a tight nit community.

>>4200589
I might be misreading what you're saying here, but it seems to me that you're saying that all socialism is central planning, which I'd say is untrue.

I agree with you as to the importance of (what I'd describe as) cultural solutions, though.

>>4200589
What makes you think that humans are so fallible that most of what they do will have the opposite effect as intended?

>>4200592
Could you elaborate? Give an example of the base doing so?

>>4200589
Stop reading Weber. Stop thinking socialism is the 3rd way socialism that Tony Blair put out in the 90s.

>>4200598
Antisemitism wasn't nearly as unusual of a thing in his time period, and if you spend your entire career attacking bankers and stuff during a time period where there are a lot of Jewish people in the financial world, then you're going to be predisposed to antisemitism.

That doesn't at all make it okay, though.

But consider also how many of the people who founded America were slaveowners despite it conflicting with the whole love-of-liberty thing they had going on, and how it seems relatively easy in hindsight to see how that belief in liberty conflicts with their owning slaves. I don't have a hard time, personally, separating Bakunin's and Proudhon's better ideas from their racism.

>>4200553
Seeing another MLM on 4chan.

>>4200563
A stateless and classless society.

>>4200615
Oh fugg


Here's a picture for the Anarchist. I took it from and anarchist MSpainted it. Ignore the class bit, I didn't feel like changing the text.

>>4200621
Sorry to stray from the subject at hand, but what organization do you think is the best in the U$? I've been to some Workers World stuff, but I can't see myself joining any party that doesn't use the mass line. Some RCP cadre are active near me, but I don't feel like being inducted into the cult of bob. The American Party of Labor seems like an alright organization, but again no mass line and they are not near me. I hear about the New Communist Party, but I have no idea about whether they are active or not.

>>4200640
Join all of them.

How many unions actively adopt a Marxist philosophy?

>>4198936
In high school I took an experimental U.S. History course where that was the central text. Pretty eye-opening. There were tons of other sources though, so it wasn't a propaganda class.

>>4200647
None.

>>4198952
This guy is a libertarian, less than scum. Marxism/Socialism provides infinitely more than just remedies to "problems with capitalism", and the start of the ideology is recognizing the fact no economist would deny; that applying any value in currency is about as abstract as saying a handjob should cost 1 evil if a burger is five goods. Further no real economist familiar with marxism, even if he hates it would deny that every cent of profit that involves a worker involves exploiting something, and making a profit on paying your worker less than you could and or charging more than you could. Everything that involves oil is based on the murderous domination of "the west" over MidEast, and subsidies are convoluted-ly linked together when you steal something and or exploit someone then subsidize oil that is used for everything for everybody. Then you take socialized medicine which either makes your country healthier or at least reduces the profits of insurance companies who feel entitled by the rules of capitalism to make a profit. .. As a marxist i know you deserve a death by rape for claiming we exist as opposition to capitalism, your system cant find a way to work without redistribution of wealth and or murdering people who have something you want, it is simple fact that giving anything out for free to the poor seems ok when Europe bails each other out as purely capitalist USA figures out that there is only so much water but it still only takes 5% of population to produce like 150% more food than we use

>>4200640
Oh fucking kek, the NCP is already being talked about.

Just wait for the NCP. For now, don't join RCP. Tbh, any ML party would be ok if you're just looking to meet folk and organize lightly. Although PLP's line is wrong and PSL has too much "talent" in a small chunk of party leadership, they're alright people.
>>4200647
Not a clue. They wouldn't openly call themselves marxist. Even the smaller ones. If they do, they're most likely trots who are probably on the Spart's level of FULLCOMMUNISM and not very poplar.

How does Marxism-Leninism differ from Orthodox Marxism or the Western Marxism of say, members of the Frankfurt School or Perry Anderson?

Is liberal identity politics a valid way of looking at additional ways oppression is promulgated by the ruling class or a bourgeois distraction?

>>4200647
The IWW, for one.

>>4199277
Thank you sir, fuck these morons with their total inability to understand how schools as an extension of daycare/indoctrination, where you can't just learn but must consistently jump hoops at the right place and time, and work as a means to be a "baller" who can only achieve said dream after hundreds of self effacing supplications and decades of work, each year of labor a clear model of pumping value or abuse along the "up" or downlines of a pyramid scheme so sacred you can't ever discuss the true value of something in anything but currency

Anybody here read Rosa Luxemburg? I've been thinking of checking out some of her work.

>>4200707
Marxism-Leninism is built on the foundation of orthodox Marxism and added the concept of the Vanguard Party as well as the experience of actually existing socialism in the soviet union.

I am not familiar with the Frankfurt school or Perry Anderson, but its seems to me that many Western Marxists are left communists or humanist marxists, who explicitly denounce Lenin and Marxism-Leninism as tyrannical and/or bloody.

>>4200721
Doesn't the IWW only participate in economic struggles, though?