/lit/ - Literature

>societal elite
>who are not even major players
does not compute

>>4945122
Shouldn't it be obvious? The wealthy tend to be more educated, traditionally. Mass and public education only came about in the United States because factory workers and their children needed to be educated enough to use instruction.

>>4945126
Well, not so much elite. 'Upper Middle Class' puts it well; they're not wage slaves, but they're not part of the business owners who the wage slaves depend on; social elite, but not economical elite.

>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite; academics and upper middle class members who are not even major players, and might not even benefit, in the struggle between workers and production owners?

It's not.

First: the societal elite in our society are the millionaires, business owners, CEOs and so on and so for. If you can show me a Marxist businessman I will eat my hat. Meanwhile academics are largely ignored or mocked by wider society (except economists, the only ones who have any influence on the capitalist economy, and they are almost entirely neoliberal).

Secondly, the sort of Marxism that is prevalent in academia is only used as an analytical tool: i.e. it is DELIBERATELY shorn of its revolutionising practice. It is relegated to the simple analysis of historical or societal phenomena, which was the sort of 'Kritik' that Marx explicitly abandoned around the period of the German Ideology in 1845.

I'm kinda drunk and could go on but I'll stop here

basically, they are the ones smart enough to understand marxism and why it is basically on-point, but also principled/not-well-adjusted enough to join those fucking the vast majority of society.

i know many people my age (late 20s) who, though they have quasi-marxist ideals, have chosen to deaden themselves and work for banks/other similar institutions. when i meet them if we're a few drinks deep they will admit, because i knew them in earlier times "i know i'm a bitch". later on they will probably have midlife crises

>>4945122
>thinking academicians and the university is relevant or important to anything outside of the university

>>4945171
i should probably add that they are not only "smart enough" but they also "have the time" and are inclined by their societal position to read books

>>4945154
Bertell Ollman, respected Marxist academic and businessman, creator of the widely-played game "Class Struggle"

Please timestamp pics while eating hat...

>>4945171
how does one not deaden oneself and support the marxist cause and live the punk rock vegan lifestyle all at the same time

>>4945177
They know nothing of economics and would rather theorize an ideal system rather than look at reality

>>4945122
Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite; academics and upper middle class members who are not even major players, and might not even benefit, in the struggle between workers and production owners

Because these people hope to become the hidden rulers in the new order; they have spent their careers avoiding doing anything actually creative or productive but still see themselves as somehow indispensable to other peoples' lives.

If the Revolution ever actually happens in the US it will be hilarious to see these useless twats cleaning public restrooms and picking up roadside garbage.

>>4945171
>later on they will probably have midlife crises

I thought about becoming an actuary or something for the dosh but then I realized I'd probably just end up miserable and full of hatred for myself in a few years. It seems like a horrible fate.

>>4945179
Are you srs?

he's a professor of political science whose only 'business' was selling the boardgame 'class struggle' (which he failed to do).

>>4945194
But they are not only "smart enough" but they also "have the time" and are inclined by their societal position to read books.

>They...would rather theorize an ideal system rather than look at reality.
Perhaps some, but not all think exactly like this. (I accuse you of the same thing)

What *is* up with usurping the Zhs, man?

>>4945224
>But they are not only "smart enough" but they also "have the time" and are inclined by their societal position to read book

I never said they are not smart enough or that they didn't have the time.

They simply would like to lead with good intentions while not understanding how economics works

>>4945224
>the capitalist system is going to collapse any moment now!

Because Marxism gives absolute power to the intelligentsia. I mean, someone gotta be that central planner/political commissar.

"Probably the intellectual has more difficulty than the common man in freeing himself from this ideology which, like the State which derives from it, is his especial handiwork. The Soviet government rules in the name of a doctrine elaborated by an intellectual whose life was spent in libraries and interpreted for the past century by countless other intellectuals. Under a Communist régime the intellectuals, sophists rather than philosophers, rule the roost. The examining magistrates who unmask deviations, the writers coerced into socialist realism, the engineers and managers who are supposed to execute the plans and to interpret the ambiguous orders of the central authority—all must be dialecticians. The Secretary-General of the Party, master and arbiter over the lives of millions of men. is also an intellectual: at the end of a triumphal career he offers to the faithful a theory of capitalism and socialism—as though a book represented the highest accomplishment. The emperors of old were often poets or thinkers; for the first time the emperor actually reigns qua dialectician, interpreter of the doctrine and of history."

Raymond Aron, The Opium of the Intellectuals

Because in a marxist society they got to be the priestly class in a theocracy.

It's mostly held by the intelligentsia, who are often afluent/upperclass in our society, but not really by the ultimate societal elite.

Also it hasn't always been this case at all, in fact around the turn of the century the working class was incredibly socialist, that's what lead to workers rights and reoforms and shit.

>>4945236
That's the most hilarious load of nonsense I've ever read.

Let me just simply point out that the central planners, commissars and secretary generals of the USSR were never intellectuals, who were instead suppressed by the secret police. it was the bureaucracy that was the ruling class.

>>4945217
A failed businessman is still a businessman. And an ineffectual Marxist is still a Marxist.

I don't care how drunk you are. Timestamps while you consume your labourer's flatcap.

>>4945232
It collapses periodically. It doesn't work.

>>4945122
>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite; academics and upper middle class members

Sure smells Anglo-Saxon in here.

>>4945224
This made me chuckle, thanks anon

>>4945269
lol you are actually serious. good joge

I take comfort in the fact that the only 'Marxist businessman' you were able to find was some political scientist who tried to make a Marxist boardgame about class struggle as a side-project. some societal elite that

>>4945253
And who formed the bureaucracy, who sent the secret police to persecute dissident intellectuals? Other intellectuals.

And every marxist intellectual think they are going to occupy this position, they always think they are going to be the ones who will choose who will be sent to the gulag (i remember Zizek joking about this some time).

>>4945176
They are more than you think.

Zizek ran for the presidency of Slovenia; missing a seat in the four-man presidency by 1.8% of the vote.

Chomsky used to be close friends with Hugo Chavez.

Because Cultural Marxism has infected American/European society

I don't think there are any business owners (except in the case of cooperatives) or landlords who support Marxism....

Most people would (theoretically) benefit, since it would posit quality over brand, and people over money. If everything is more efficient and higher quality, if you have more guaranteed time off, etc. It would also bring about a radical alternation in culture that would mean more freedom of expression and sex and many other sorts of things.

Finally, they might actually care about the exploited. That's really something you should consider.

>>4945281
Not involved in the social elite shit going on here. I just read this
>If you can show me a Marxist businessman I will eat my hat
and it reminded me of Ollman. I just wanted to see some hat-eating. More fool me for taking a drunken Marxist at his/her word.

>>4945283
>And who formed the bureaucracy
mostly the well-off peasantry, NEPmen, social climbers who joined the party after the revolution

>who sent the secret police to persecute dissident intellectuals
the above, stalin being the archetypal bureaucrat. he gained the post of general secretary of the party because he was a good organiser and left the theoretising to others

>And every marxist intellectual think they are going to occupy this position, they always think they are going to be the ones who will choose who will be sent to the gulag (i remember Zizek joking about this some time).

Isn't this the point? Zizek, a self-proclaimed 'marxist intellectual', has no interest in class struggle or revolution. His schtick is cracking jokes, writing in Hegelian philosophy and 'posing questions'. So how is he a Marxist? You've just succinctly described the whole nature of so-called Marxist university professors.

>>4945316
Nice troll m8

Marxism is incompatible with humanity, academics and the middle class are unconcerned with this reality(and most others). The poor are mostly still living in reality. As for the rich, who fucking knows, I am not invited to their dinner parties.

>>4945351

I agree. Anglo-Saxon intellectual elite is poisoned with Marxism and deluded with its artificial moral imperative.

Most of European continental, intellectual elites are not Marxist though, so I put emphasis strongly on Anglo-Saxon part.

>>4945388
>I agree. Anglo-Saxon intellectual elite is poisoned with Marxism and deluded with its artificial moral imperative.
>Most of European continental, intellectual elites are not Marxist though, so I put emphasis strongly on Anglo-Saxon part.

Ahahaha are you serious?

It's the other way round

>>4945397

Are we talking about academics or people in power?

>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite
no it really isnt
why? because if it were they would have replaced capitalism with it by now

>>4945122
Because they aren't necessarily harmed by the struggle between workers and production owners.

>>4945300
I agree. If we just lynched all the marxists we could continue doing err, stuff.

pic related

>>4945443
We'd have a moral society again if we outlawed liberalism/socialism/communism

>>4945435
good point

>>4945451
/po/ pls go

>>4945463
>/po/ pls go
no

>>4945463
>>4945394

>>4945397
This. The last serious anti-socialist holdout is the US and even the UK is 'troublingly classist' according to the EU.

>>4945481
>This. The last serious anti-socialist holdout is the US and even the UK is 'troublingly classist' according to the EU.

The far right is on the rise faster than socialism is in Europe

>>4945451
hiphop is fantastic though
only good thing to come out of pomo

>>4945493
>hiphop is fantastic though
You can't be serious

>>4945499
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0PccPy_pTM&feature=kp

>>4945499
You can't be serious.

brb getting a graph to prove im right

>>4945493
>hiphop
>coming out of pomo

nigga what?

>>4945490
>the far right
M8, just because dipshit legitimately marxist journos claim these parties are all all batshit libertarian gnatzies that want to kill six shillion jews doesn't actually make them so. They're right compared only to the people in power. UKIP doesn't even want to dismantle the NHS for fuck's sake.

>>4945516
>UKIP doesn't even want to dismantle the NHS for fuck's sake.

they don't say it, but they do. that goes for the tories and probably labour as well. what do you think the whole point of introducing 'competition' into the nhs has been for the last 10 years? it's hollowed out the organisation and made privatisation the simple matter of flicking a switch once it becomes 'necessary'.

>>4945514
>hiphop is literally the intertextualization of one culture/time's music into another via sampling and the adoption of rapping
>concerned entirely with self-reflection and a tongue-in-cheek approach to grandiosity
>how is it pomo

>>4945205
>Because these people hope to become the hidden rulers in the new order; they have spent their careers avoiding doing anything actually creative or productive but still see themselves as somehow indispensable to other peoples' lives.

This. I live in a former Communist country, to this day it is infested with people who did nothing but live a parasitical life as Party brown nosers. Communism is a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats dictating every facet of life until the system inevitably collapses.

>>4945521
>they don't say it, but they do.
I wish.

>>4945516
M8, there is more to the Far righ than UKIP
National Front in France
NPD in Germany
Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance (Ruling party)
Jobbik (also Hungary)
VMRO-DPMNE Macedonia (Ruling Party)
Swiss People's Party
Golden Dawn - Greece
Serbian Progressive Party

>>4945521
>what do you think the whole point of introducing 'competition' into the nhs has been for the last 10 years?
Have you considered that if something can't survive if competition is introduced it might not be that good to begin with? If people are paying for private alternatives even after they've already been taxed to pay for the NHS, it's because it's that fucking shitty.

>>4945543
LOL you're keeping tabs i see

>>4945532
just wait a couple of parliaments anon

>>4945546
>LOL you're keeping tabs i see
yes

>>4945543
And which among those want to end muh social safety net? I remind you that national socialism is still socialism.

>>4945544
>Have you considered that if something can't survive if competition is introduced it might not be that good to begin with?

What are you on about? The NHS has survived competition...considering it still exists today. It's nothing to do with the ability of the service itself to function.

>>4945554
>where will you be when the Right kicks in
glorious return to the stately christian past from our modern degeneracy amirite

>>4945531
and yes I'd rather be a "wage slave" to a ruthless piece of shit capitalist boss than to a Communist hack whose authority only comes from party membership. One is more obsessed with making money while being a dick in the process, the other is obsessed with being a dick (naturally stemming from the fact that he is an incompetent talentless asshat) while making money in the process. Communists are just the worst people.

>>4945562
>glorious return to the stately christian past from our modern degeneracy amirite
yes

>>4945569
I wouldnt even be mad if it gave us more Bachs and Mozarts

>>4945563
>he thinks state capitalist countries were in any way 'communist'

>>4945560
>The NHS has survived competition...considering it still exists today.
No fucking shit. The money for it is taken from people no matter what so it's not going to die. Nothing could kill it besides the government finally pulling the chain and flushing the fucking turd. But if people are seeking alternatives even after it's already been paid for that's a damning indictment of it.

Why is it that all criticisms of Marxism are the same unsupported truisms regurgitated without end?

>>4945576
Oy vey goyim put down those dusty records and listen to a true master

you're not a pleb are you

>>4945577
Here we go with the 'communism has never been tried' shit.

>>4945591
I actually like Kanye, he's very good. I don't really consider popular music and art music to be the same artform though.
like paintings and cartoons, or novels and short stories

>>4945122
I get it, you heard some cultural anti-marxist drone (coworker, teacher, maybe a buddy) say this and you thought "that's such an amusing contradiction it MUST be true!" but that's not how reality works. But the truth is you've been fed these convenient truths your whole life, and probably none of them are anything more than masks. Before you scoff this off (though you probably already have) go ahead and produce some real, scientific data supporting your claim, that "Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite." When you fail to do this, realize that you were played for a fool and you sold your critical mind for comforting, convenient nonsense dressed up as gospel. My advice: reexamine all of your biases and don't let that mistake happen again.

>>4945194
>>4945230
>>4945300
>>4945451
>>4945468
>>4945490
>>4945499
>>4945543
>>4945554
>dribble

>>4945635
don't feed the troll

>>4945154
The only people I know who espouse marxism are hipster faggots like the ones on this board, and a few old hippies, some of which are college professors. Hell even the legit revolutionary leftists in south america right now are socialists who tend to nationalize assets out of a loathing for colonialism, perceived or otherwise.

Most of the upper middle class are doctors and business owners, who's quality of life would suffer terribly from collectivization. They are the REAL kulaks.

>>4945179
This may be the worst example I have ever seen of any rebuttal ever.

>>4945591
>Trying to chase Tyler the Creator's edgy rainbow

>>4945641
>The only people I know

>>4945655
This includes the entire spectrum of media that I peruse daily, news sites I read, my entire life experience.

I have no doubt that you are either a hipster faggot or a troll, no one could be stupid enough to actually want marxism over nordic socialism, unless you want to be the one shooting people in the back of the head to make dat omelette.

>>4945314
>Muac

Best poster.

>>4945672
>This includes the entire spectrum of media that I peruse daily, news sites I read, my entire life experience.

hurr media is a marxist conspiracy

Nice one

>>4945672
Unfortunately, "the people you know" being "hipster faggots" isn't very convincing.

>>4945584
>But if people are seeking alternatives even after it's already been paid for that's a damning indictment of it.

Perhaps because it's already been sabotaged? Also your analogy is retarded anyway. People get private health insurance because they can further tailor their experience. The whole point of private health is basically so you can get your own little hotel room in a hospital and your choice of specialists and doctors.

Who in fuck looks at the US system and thinks "That's better", retards and corporate shills, that's who.

>>4945216

I'm currently studying to become an actuary, I have a financial econometrics exam in two weeks. Give me a few years and I'll tell you how horrible the fate is.

>>4945697
>actuary
>econometrics

A masochist I see, well econometrics isn't that bad but accounting made me want to blow my brains out

>>4945697
>google 'actuary' to find out what that actually is
>second result: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2637598/Pictured-Brilliant-Cambridge-actuary-facing-life-killing-ex-girlfriends-brother-spear-gun-carving-knife-sister-dumped-him.html

>>4945692
>Who in fuck looks at the US system and thinks "That's better"
I do since people who have jobs have insurance. If you're a shiftfless nigger, society is not obligated to pay for you to recover from your dickrot.

>>4945692
>Perhaps because it's already been sabotaged?
By the people who manage it since they're worthless idiots just like everyone else who works in the public sector? I agree, anon.

>>4945709
There are more unemployed people than there are job openings. That just fucks over innocent people.

even in america they're trying to disentangle health insurance from employment because it's utterly moronic

>>4945714
over 2/3rds of NHS services are provided by private companies m8

>>4945720
>even in america they're trying to disentangle health insurance from employment because it's utterly moronic
How so? Productive people are taken care of, useless faggots are left to fend for themselves. It's the only rational system.

>>4945740
Productive for who? Society? You are assuming a fictional class-neutral being. In actuality we live under a class society where all production is for the profit of the capitalist class that owns the means of production.

>>4945748
In fact, I don't even need to go that far. Assuming that being 'productive' in the contemporary economy is 'good' in any objectively moral sense is laughable according to many philosophies.

>>4945748
Muh classism! Sorry buddy but I'm swimming right by this b8. If you're so fucking useless you can't even learn a trade then I'm sorry but frankly you deserve to die. Or at least, deserve going at it on your own. There is no reason productive people ought to be saddled with your deficient ass just because you think you have a right to their money.

>>4945726
Certainly not management m8

>>4945759
>being a porcupine is bad
>Actually, your objections to being a porcupine are objectionable and unfounded.
>LOL FUCKIN PORCUPINE GB2FOREST

gr8 b8 m8

>>4945751
Then those philosophies are quite stupid. You can shout on and on about the moral righteousness of decrying the awful system that exploits us all and blah blah fucking blah but that still doesn't mean you're entitled to normal making sure you're healthy enough to shill at no cost to you.

>>4945761
the management of those private companies are private, yes

>>4945766
The people deciding who gets what amount of taxpayer's forcibly stolen money when are not. It's a complete perversion of the market.

>>4945772
>perversion of the market
ahahahahahhahaha

good one

>>4945759
>if you can't learn a trade die
>half of the United States go die

You do realize that without the lower half of the country that sits at or around the poverty line the entire system collapses, yes?

Your ivory tower isn't built up on your own labour, you're just some random retard, you have society to thank for everything you have, if not for those 'unproductive people' you would be shitting in the woods right now.

Its laughable that so many Libertarians and the like think like you do.

>>4945779
>Your ivory tower isn't built up on your own labour, you're just some random retard, you have society to thank for everything you have, if not for those 'unproductive people' you would be shitting in the woods right now.
Please explain how we owe society to the unemployed and we'd all be shitting in the woods without them.

>>4945785
>unemployed

Seven magical percent of the population, congratulations. You have identified a minority, how many of them wouldn't be willingly employed is pure speculation, but even saying they're all lazy bastards leaves us with a scant 25m people.

Half of the United States workforce is below or around the poverty line, 34k, and is mostly unskilled labour.

You're telling these people to just 'go die', the ones who transport materials everywhere, stock shelves so you don't have to grow your own food, etc. You owe them your central heating, refrigerator, running water, etc.

Talking about 'parasites' or whatever, such an irrelevant part of society, a fraction.

>>4945785
From the capitalist perspective, without the unemployed, capitalists would be harder pressed to force the proletariat to sell their labor for the scraps they receive, meaning the capitalists wouldn't be able to horde so much capital, which means that all civilization would break down, resulting in all of us shitting in the woods. But this is your theory.

>>4945122
>what is a Nash Equilibrium

>>4945800
Ah-ah-ah. I said the unemployed. You think I have some weird resentment towards unskilled labor and truck drivers for some reason. Probably because you're too far gone into Marx's class war bullshit.
>>4945819
>From the capitalist perspective, without the unemployed, capitalists would be harder pressed to force the proletariat to sell their labor for the scraps they receive,
Correct, excessive supply drives down prices with labor as it does with everything else. I don't see how you imagine that means we need the unemployed, however.
>meaning the capitalists wouldn't be able to horde so much capital
They'd be forced to be more efficient. In the worst case they'd have to adjust their margins. Big fucking whoop.
>which means that all civilization would break down
That's quite a leap, little friend! People being unable to horde wealth as effectively leads to the downfall of society? You realize wealth isn't some magic birthright that is only transferred through bloodlines, yes? It accumulates and disperses naturally assuming you don't also hand the rich the reigns to an all-powerful government that can use it's power to bully and crush unwelcome competition. Like we're doing right now.

>>4945785
I noticed your post on the recent images when I typed in the web address. I had my face resting on my left hand in the same way. I felt like your picture was looking at me, looking into my soul. That's all I wanted to say.

>>4945854
What do you think about Marxism?

>>4945205
>>4945531
The two of you have conflated stalinist communism with marxism, which is what op was referring to.

>>4945563
Preferring one to another is absolute idiocy.

>>4945682
no u! <3

>>4945122
>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite

It's not.
In the first world it's mostly held by the lower-middle uni students and Sociology professors.

In the third world, it's mostly held by indigenous groups that have been fucked in the ass by the state and multinationals. (Naxalites, Zapitista's, FARC)

>>4945314
>you'll never see a communist society

>>4946268
Feel free to go to Vietnam

Speaking of Gommunism and Garl Marx...

What do ya'll have to say about Marx's law of value?

>>4946295
>Vietnam
>Communist
niggaplease

>>4946302
It inspired vaporwave and started my art career, so it's cool with me.

>>4946423
>>4946295
I'd sooner trust the CCP than the VCP. Chinese communists at least *try* to talk about Marxism sometimes.

>>4946427
cuba is really the closest your going to get to a country that takes communism seriously in the current world

After reading this thread I'm not sure if I'm really a libertarian anymore.

>>4946434
you can be a libertarian socialist you know, it will confuse the living shit out of Americans

>>4946432
The CCP does but at the same time doesn't. Chinese communism is the most fascinatingly complex thing in that no one, not even the people at the top, seems to be sure how much of their own theory they believe. I've read all kinds of books on the party, spoken to a lot of Chinese people, studied their own literature, and it's just impossible to gauge just what exactly is going on within its ranks.

>>4945154
>If you can show me a Marxist businessman
Slavoj Zizek, movie star.

>>4946438
i'd consider the latter a bonus

>>4946434
you know, libertarian implies socialist outside of the US, where capitalists have stolen it.

>>4946441
well, thats in part because of so many people joining the party and not believing in communism at all, merely joining to get ahead in society.

also partly because china today really seems to resemble a capitalist state with an oppressed proletariat and a totalitarian elite in charge exploiting them. combine that with a state ideology specifically directed against this and you get a lot of confusion.

>>4946438
>>4946448
Well I'm an American. I actually just stumbled into /lit/ and found this thread. I don't frequent here at all and I must say you guys use some advanced grammar at times. It's rather scary. Perhaps I should read more

>>4946446

>>4946456
You're a libertarian, of course you're an American who should read more.

>>4946451
>tfw it all turns to be true and China becomes socialist superpower master of the world through peaceful development

>>4946456
dont worry, sometimes i dont have a fucking clue what people are talking about on /lit/

needlessly complicated topic specific jargon and often impossible to read sections of books is easily the biggest flaw in the philosophical and political community right now. just a little effort to make it more accessible would go a long way

>>4946467
house-of-cards.jpg

>>4946462
You are mocking me correct?
>>4946469
I see. Thanks for putting that into perspective for me.

Most of Marxists at least in Western Europe are lower class workers but they get no media coverage or teach uni classes like academia people.

Academia might have a large amount of Marxists, but majority is still what Marx envisioned. workers.

>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite; academics and upper middle class members

>>4946481
i dunno, certainly the media doesn't portray them that way, but more importantly i do think a lot of the 'working class' that exists today in the west are drawn in by populist and pragmatist politics, on both sides of the political spectrum, and i don't think a lot of them could be described as serious marxists, just left wingers.

>>4946481
>Most of Marxists at least in Western Europe are lower class workers
Not true for us swedefags. They did a study in relation to the resent EU elections and the majority of marxist parties (left party, and feminazi party) have higher education. It was the nazi party that had a majority of lower educated people.
I should qualify that by saying that 'higher educated' likely doesn't mean smarter as it probably would be degrees in sociology and related bullshit that dominates.

>>4946488

>implying these aren't the elite of their shithole society

You guy's realize Marx was joking right?

>>4946835
Only me and you are so enlightened :3

>>4946735
Here in Finland the only Marxist party is the second least educated after True Finns and Social Democrats are still only averagely educated. Compared to Greens/Swedes/Democrats who are the most educated ones.

>>4945672
>I have no doubt that you are either a hipster faggot or a troll

You must peruse that "entire spectrum of media" pretty fast, because you concluded someone was a "hipster faggot" based off of one reply they gave you in which they.

1. Merely doubted your opinion.

2. Used less than six words

3. Did not call you names, or insult you

4. Did not reveal any of their cultural, political, or religious leanings.

Now, let's look at this again:

>I have no doubt that you are either a hipster faggot or a troll

Something tells me that, if you concluded this about someone based on less than six words, that you might (not 100% certain here) just be going around the "entire spectrum of media" concluding this about many other people, with limited data.

Now, what sort of credit does this lend to your notion that you see "hipster faggots" everywhere? Are you sure you don't just want to see them everywhere you meet even the mildest opposition? And what exactly about being a "hipster faggot" removes someone's credulity? Elaborate, if you have the time and patience.

>>4945122
>Why is it that Marxism is a view most often held by the societal elite
>marxism
jesus christ murika, get your shit together

>>4946458
Goddamn this one never gets old

Is Marxism really about equal distribution of wealth? How does one defend the idea when people are inherently unequal in ability to contribute?

>>4947139
Break it down to a family unit.

Do parents treat their best/exceptional children better than the ones they see as inferior? If they do, that's actually bad parenting.

How about people who have to go on a long trek through a desert. There's some elderly, and a guy with a bad leg. Later on there's a guy who was quite healthy but he's been bitten by a snake. Do you let these stragglers fall behind, leave them to die? You do?

lol obviously because bourgeois discourse is the hegemonic discourse so class struggle has to be waged in the bourgeois (that is, idealist) arena, which means academia

>>4947139
>Is Marxism really about equal distribution of wealth?

no. it's about the common ownership of wealth

>>4947153
What if one of the family members was a nigger? And what if he kept stealing shit and making the family become destitute all the while screaming moop da bloop bix nood dass rassis as soon as they tried to intervene? How would a marxist family deal with that?

>>4947184
oh for fuck's sake common ownership of the MEANS OF PRODUCTION jesus christ people

>>4947242
>implying wealth isn't a means of production

>>4945122

It isn't, not even in the first world.

But to answer your question, Marxism is the superior system of analysis so it is no surprise it is more popular with the intellectual elite.

>>4947287
In which of his writings does he discuss this method of analysis?

>>4945194
>They know nothing of economics and would rather theorize an ideal system rather than look at reality

THEY DON'T LOOK AT REALITY DUDE.

Could you produce more platitudes if you tried?

>>4947295
18th brumaire

>>4947306
What about Grundrisse?

>>4947139
>Is Marxism really about equal distribution of wealth?
Not from what I've heard. It's (partly) about removing the ownership of capital and everything that produces wealth in society from the hands of a very small minority, in order that said minority doesn't continue the material exploitation of the multitudes. I'm not aware of artificially 'equalising' people's possessions and personal wealth being a marxist idea. It might have been a practice of 20th century 'communist' regimes.