/lit/ - Literature

Marx

Freddy the 'Stache

>>5094300

Nietzsche

No seriously

James Clerk Maxwell

>>5094300
>>5094303

MARX VS. NIETZSCHE IN A STEEL CAGE

Marx, Nietzsche, Stirner.

>>5094300
So much /thread.

Freud I guess. More 20th century of course but he did publish in the 19th.

Hegel, Schelling, Kant's opus postumum if it counts, Marx, then I guess Nietzsche

Marx by a mile.

>some guy who thinks there's no point to living
>some other guy who thinks humans are capable of empathy and sharing

>helpful

RUSEV CRUSH AMERICA.

DUN DUN DUN DUN.....

Mercier.

>>5094296
Marxism

>>5094296


carlyle

>>5094300

the fuck are you talking about?

marx is all but irrelevant today. his economics are long since exploded and no one takes his social commentaries seriously except undergraduate political science majors

like every other philosopher in any way descended from hegel, his doctrines have not stood the test of time

>>5095824
...but muh Cultural Marxism!

Soren Kierkegaard.

"by far, the most profound thinker of the nineteenth century". -Luddy the Witt

>19th century
Not a single one.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "UNDERSTANDING THE WORLD TODAY"?

>>5095824
>no one takes his social commentaries

Happy birthday, America!

>>5095824
>no one takes his social commentaries seriously

Happy birthday, America.

>>5095877

No one in the first world, pardon me

>>5095824
>marx is all but irrelevant today.
Please keep your intellectual dishonesty to other boards. At least try harder.

>>5095891

how much more of your parents money are you going to waste kiddo?

it's time for you to get a job and start supporting yourself

>>5095891
>intellectual dishonesty

seems like people are using this phrase just about anything they don't like. it'll soon join the ranks of words like hipster and troll as totally meaningless

>>5095890
>U S A! U S A! U S A! U SA ! U S A! U S A!

>>5095909
>>5095891

>>5095891

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkaxekY2Hqg

>The members of the communist league were overwhelmingly intellectuals and professionals; it had the same kind of social composition that would in later years characterize many radical groups in which the youthful offspring of privilege called themselves the proletariat.

>In other words, Marxism is the conceit of rich kids with fancy educations.

It's time to grow up

>>5094296
Marx, Schopenhauer, Malthus

>>5094307
Nietzsche is good too

>>5095891
as an economics major Marx gets mentioned once throughout a billion different courses and that's two paragraphs in the introductory history chapter of Microeconomics 2 and once again where he gets mentioned as an afterthought amongst various theories of value. Certainly I would say that he is considered near irrelevant amongst economics academia.

>>5095946
>imagine there is somewhere a rich kid with a fancy education that is a Marxist
>ergo, Marxism is wrong

It's time to start thinking for yourself and thinking (self-)critically. That is: it's time to grow up.

>>5095957

The problem is that most 'Marxists' fit that description today.

And the sad thing is many of them don't even understand Marx or the economics of communism.

As the joke goes, if a Marxist understood economics, he would cease to be a Marxist.

>>5095950
>as an economics major

>>5095978
I'm not sure what you're whining about Marx as an economist is largely irrelevant

>>5095962
You're aware, of course, that it's not clear that all Marxists being "rich kids with fancy educations" wouldn't say anything to Marxism being wrong? There's no argument here. And of course it's complete bullshit.

>>5095983
No one cares about economist undergrads like yourself whining about the most cited scientist ever is "irrelevant," if only because the economics taught in unis is a joke. You're basically saying Darwin and evolution are irrelevant to science because no one at in the science department of Christian universities takes him and the idea seriously.

>>5095988
*would

>>5095950
>economics major
I hope you're not the guy here >>5095909
talking about someone else wasting his parents' money.

>>5095983
you don't see the massive appeal to authority?

the current economy would be preferred, if it wasn't terrible. find me a way to limit growth and make the economy function. otherwise, you'll be to blame when ecosystems collapse

also, Marx's methods of understanding history and classism are far more relevant than his economics

>>5095998
>thinking Marxism is scientific
>comparing Marx to Darwin
>thinking 'Christian universities' have a problem with Darwin
Looks like this thread attracted folks stuck in the 19th century.

I don't know how anyone can buy into the labour theory of value with modern knowledge. I can understand plebians and high minded intellectuals back in the 19th century lapping it up.

Marginalism works, the labour theory of value is riddled with many more holes. This shabby foundation, plus Marx's fucked up view on antiquity should be enough to distance any modern reader from him.

I love Marxism and marxist theory, but as a hobby.

>>5096006
>massive appeal to authority
It's not a problem if it's true. Marx is irrelevant in economics, and subsequently his analysis of history suffers.

>>5095998
>yourself whining about the most cited scientist ever is "irrelevant,"

That's a really funny way to put it. Maybe if you mentioned those citing his "science" are all in the humanities, i.e. non-sciences. I think a problem has obviously occurred when a supposed scientists is cited more by novelists than his colleagues.

>>5096020
Average labor it takes to produce something affects supply, which affects demand.

>>5096005
>talking about someone else wasting his parents' money.
Excuse me? It's actually quite a lucrative major. This is my first time posting in this thread and I do not endorse the view that Marx is irrelevant. He is quite clearly a towering figure in political economy, much like Smith and Ricardo.

>>5096028
I don't think he asked for a definition.

>>5096026
Irrelevant to western universities, yeah. that doesn't mean irrelevant to economics

>>5096016
>doesn't know the difference between a comparison and an analogy
>thinks intelligent design isn't a thing
Looks like this thread attracted one person stuck in the 19th century.

>>5095998

on the contrary. uni professors are only too eager to spout marxist claptrap

maybe you haven't noticed but colleges in this country are predominantly liberal. the only reason his shit doesn't fly in the circle of actual economics is because his economics are clearly incompatible with reality and the nature of human commerce.

the central premise of marx is that the government should be supreme so as to best provide for all members of society. but what marx did not understand is in the system of governance he proposed the probability of corruption becomes almost 100 percent.

>>5096026
>his analysis of history suffers.
your undergraduate education is showing

>>5096028
>Average labor it takes to produce something affects supply, which affects demand.

But it doesn't effect demand. Demand is the different quantities you will purchase at each and every different price. What is effected is not demand but 'qantity demanded' and price.

And besides, Land is also a necessary component in everything produced. So the same argument you are making here can also apply to an argument for 'land theory of value'

>>5096006
>find me a way to limit growth and make the economy function.

Capitalism. It is actually very efficient to be self-sustaining, which is why the market is moving in that direction where the technology has advanced enough to allow sustainability. "Limiting growth" seems like an empty platitude, you don't have to limit growth to make the economy function or to have a sustainable market. Do you mean growth of the human population? This would speed up the process of sustainability, but it isn't necessary to go down that road now because we have yet to reach any significant crisis in our ecosystem. The only market force operating now is green party groups lobbying for government money to "save the earth", pocketing it, and running off. These same groups cause increased regulations to make their business venture seem profitable, though no actual resource scarcity is being observed.

>>5095983
>Marx as an economist
Besides being wrong, this is moving the goal-posts. Even if Marx' economics -were- irrelevant, he's clearly not irrelevant in other fields or as an intellectual figure.

Friendly reminder that Marx's ideology is responsible for more deaths than any other ideology in history.

>>5096040
>implies it's not stupid regardless
>thinks ID is taken seriously
Looks like we just have a moron.

>>5096042
>Marxist
>liberal
>the central premise of marx is that the government should be supreme

>>5096057

Friendly reminder that Marx, Lenin and Trotsky were all Jews.

Friendly reminder that Communism was a Jewish intellectual movement to dissolve Gentile power bases and break European hegemony over commerce.

>>5096050
Supply's relationship with demand is reciprocal.

Owning land doesn't affect its existence. If I cease to own land, the land is still there; if I cease to labor, there is no more labor.

>>5096055
>he's clearly not irrelevant in other fields

Where it isn't possible to disprove theories and the adherence to one simply relies on academic popularity. If a violent revolution is necessary to make all the lame and lazy "unoppressed", why not the rich have their own violent revolution and remove the lower class so they can finally implement their automation utopia. The latter is much more likely than the former to succeed.

>>5096057
Bait

>>5096057
Happy Birthday America :^)

>>5096073

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

>implying

>>5096072
I hope you just stumbled into this thread because that was cringe-worthy. Refrain from posting in topics you don't understand. Let me suggest that you read some introductory texts about Marxism and communism. The go-to is, of course, the Communist Manifesto, it's a very short, non-academic read and should be manageable.

>>5096071
>Owning land doesn't affect its existence

Except the supply of land is not entirely static and it's total quantity and quality is also under the flux of market conditions. Water can be reclaimed from the ocean, desertification can be reversed, etc.

>>5096057
>dat Ritsu
And do not forget that it was all logical consequence.

>>5096087

>wasting even 10 minutes reading a completely exploded manifesto

I'd rather read the Unibomber Manifesto

>>5096071
no you just ceased using it

>>5096101
If you're not going to put in the work then refrain from having an opinion, or at least refrain from voicing your opinion.

>>5096101
teddy keks' magic manifestival is actually quite good.

>>5096087
>I hope you just stumbled into this thread because that was cringe-worthy. Refrain from posting in topics you don't understand. Let me suggest that you read some introductory texts about Marxism and communism. The go-to is, of course, the Communist Manifesto, it's a very short, non-academic read and should be manageable.

But I have. A violent revolution is what he advocates for, in order that capital be redistributed among the workers so that oppression can be stopped. Its a nice theory, but it has no evidence of success or plausibility besides other theorists word.

>>5096153
One who uncritically conceives of the world as composed of "lame and lazy" masses and a benevolent, successful rich class that don't need the lower classes isn't really ready for judging what is plausible or has evidence.

>>5094296
If youre a bad enough dude to understand the Will and disregard the stuff thats autobiographical (like the misogyny in some cases)

Arthur Mutterficken Schopenhauer

>>5096006
>you don't see the massive appeal to authority?

So it "relevancy"

Hegel

>>5096057
Friendly reminder that imperialism decimated the majority of the population in the "New World."

>>5095824
>his economics are long since exploded

Marx never outlined in any detail how a communist economy should function.

Marx wrote primarily about Capitalism. Seeing as capitalism is the world's dominant economic model that shapes our lives in untold amounts of ways I'd say that makes him more relevant than ever.

>>5096205
Imperialism has been the cause of the most complete genocides in history.

http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.24.2.163

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/journal_of_world_history/v012/12.1catanach.html

http://ageofex.marinersmuseum.org/?type=webpage&id=48

http://books.google.com/books?id=A8dzZAFnHmQC

>>5095950
>understanding the world
>economics

kek'd

>>5094308
Very underrated answer.

Based Spinoza.

17th century but still the best.

Charles Darwin

>>5095846
He means misinterpreting heaven yesterday.

>>5094296
Satre Is My teenage angst god

>>5098754
>>5096193

These guys got it right if you ask me

>>5095983
this is like a psychiatrist or psycho-analyst or psychologist who, today, says the same thing about freud.

both of you treadmilled specialists are wrong, l2 history

Nietzsche, by far.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm

/thread

Nietzsche