/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10822279]

Im a final year econ major at uni and take capitalism as the given system. I am familiar with Marx through a sociology course at A level (that’s high school in freedom land) and know I disagree with his ideas.
Can I get anything out of reading Das capital or the communist manifesto?

[Anonymous No.10822282]

>haven’t read him
>but you KNOW you disagree

Just try reading him. He’s good at identifying issues, but awful at suggesting solutions

[Anonymous No.10822283]

yes, you will stop being a brainlet

[Anonymous No.10822296]

>>10822279
Reading him will either confirm or change your beliefs, either of which would be beneficial.

[Anonymous No.10822299]

>Im a final year econ major at uni and take capitalism as the given system.

lmao no shit. capitalism is literally the only thing you study in econ and it's always from a positive point-of-view.

[Anonymous No.10822303]

Why do so many of you guys need anonymous permission to read books?

[Anonymous No.10822306]

Yes, and then you'll realise that economics class lied to you.

[Anonymous No.10822307]

>>10822279
Communist manifesto is only a pamphlet. Read Das Kapital; it's an actual book.

You know, I've been interested in learningg about Social Credit and Distributism

[Anonymous No.10822309]

>>10822279
>"concentrating money in jewish pockets" the system
>good
think again kid

[Anonymous No.10822310]

>>10822299
Most of these authors are jewish?

Why? What naturally draws the jew to marxism?

[Anonymous No.10822311]

>>10822279
The real problem with marx is that he couldn't know then that capitalism is completely unstoppable, or what it really is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwqC8-1LIps

[Anonymous No.10822312]

>>10822279
>not reading some of the most influential texts in recent history
as FPBP said, Marx has some really valid criticism of the capitalist system, however his alternative has turned out to be worse

[Anonymous No.10822313]

If you're gonna read Marx, then don't just jump on the meme works.
Read:
>Engels' Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
>The German Ideology, Chapter 1
>Wage Labour and Capital
>A Contribution to the critique of political economy
>Engels' Origin of the family, private property and the state

If you read these (shorter) works, you'll have a good background in the materialist method utilised by Marx, which will help you understand Kapital later on. Also, Lenin's State and Revolution is a classic of later Marxism.

[Anonymous No.10822324]

>>10822310
No

[Anonymous No.10822332]

>>10822279
>brainlets in this thread

Marx never really wrote about alternatives to capitalism. In total, he may have written about 5 pages total on what a socialist society should look like throughout his life. People like Kropotkin and Lenin are the ones who set out alternatives

[Anonymous No.10822333]

>>10822279
>huhuh I got indoctrinated by capitalists at university
>huhuh I got smug memes
>huhuh north korea is socialist. Juche is totally socialist ideology u guys and not an authoritarian reaction to being destroyed by an imperial power akin to nazism
>huhuh lemme ask 4chan if I, a highly credentialed person indoctrinated into contemporary economics, can get anything out of reading a historical criticism of capitalism
>huhuh

[Anonymous No.10822358]

>>10822279
The communist manifesto is just a brief booklet meant to lay out the platform of a particular party in a particular moment, not be some sort of eternal guide to politics. Speaking as a Marxist I never recommend it to people, it’s more of a historical interest piece than anything.

If you are well versed in economics already I think you might find reading Capital interesting. Have you read anything by either Smith or Ricardo before? If you were serious about reading Capital I’d recommend you at least glance through something like Ricardo’s Principles or Political Economy and Taxation, just to get a feel for the tone of 19th century economics writing.

I think there is something to be gained by reading Capital. The concept of Commodity Fetishism is something that I don’t think mainstream economics has a parallel.

The other thing I like about Marxist economics is that is all very objective, there is not the looming subjectiveness like in the econ classes I took. The idea that firms don’t necessarily fill wants, but actually manufacture desire first, then provide the material fix for that want is something I never saw articulated in econ.


If you want to check out some cutting edge Marxian economics, to see how it’s developed, see Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, and Crisis by Anwar Shaikh, it’s a graduate level textbook that synthesizes his life’s work in economics.


>>10822299
Damn I desperately need to remake one of these.

[Anonymous No.10822366]

>>10822332
This. Marx was a critic of capitalism and even said in his lifetime "I am not a Marxist."

Yet ancap brainlets wanna time machine murder him to ostensibly save gorillions from inevitable 21st century conflicts.

[Anonymous No.10822371]

>>10822279

>take econ class
>have to buy the book that the proff wrote to take the class
>only some of the books chapters used
>have to remember all these theories and charts that have no real world applications
>realize its all a scam and the main goal is just ideological indoctrination
>summary is that (((we))) need to keep expanding markets

Killing the boss and running things ourselves looks better everyday...

[Anonymous No.10822374]

>>10822366
>Marx was a critic of capitalism

No. He wasn't.

Marx was a feudalism. A capitalist. A socialist. A communist. All are necessary. He would explain why each would "fail" but each would be necessary.

[Anonymous No.10822385]

>>10822358
>The idea that firms don’t necessarily fill wants, but actually manufacture desire first, then provide the material fix for that want is something I never saw articulated in econ.
what is publicity?, what is propaganda? (even politic propaganda)

[Anonymous No.10822387]

>>10822374

[Anonymous No.10822392]

>econ major

Might as well have just done finance

[Anonymous No.10822407]

So much butthurt, this board has ressentiment
>>10822282
>>10822296
>>10822307
>>10822313
>>10822312
Thanks for decent answers

[Anonymous No.10823569]

>>10822392
can you explain why? curious

[Anonymous No.10823582]

>>10822387
Marx is alt-right now kiddo, deal with it

[Anonymous No.10823604]

i think we can all put aside our differences and agree that social democracy is the true cancer

[Anonymous No.10823610]

>>10823604
But the nordic countries have a strong strand of social democracy and are very successful.

[Anonymous No.10823637]

>>10823610
You would have to be a complete moron to believe they are successful because of succdem

[Anonymous No.10823869]

Read "The Foundation for Exploration"

[Anonymous No.10823876]

>>10822279
>final year econ major
>hasn't read any Marx
dude what? have you not taken any History of Economic Thought type units?

[Anonymous No.10823879]

>>10822282
This is absolute drivel, surface level analysis of the most incorrect and intellectually dishonest variety. You know what you’re doing and should be rightfully ashamed. You massive, massive pseudo. You mean-spirited fraud. You conniving trickster. Get off this board and never return

[Anonymous No.10823881]

>>10822392
Econ is more enjoyable

[Anonymous No.10823890]

Marx ist protoacceleration. That being said just read Braudel.

[Anonymous No.10825347]

>>10822324
well, um, yea they are

[Anonymous No.10825355]

>>10823604
No it works quite well. See Germany.

[Anonymous No.10825362]

>>10822282
>haven't read Mein Kampf
>but you KNOW you disagree

Just try reading him. He's good at identifying issues, but awful at suggesting solutions

[Anonymous No.10825537]

>>10822279
Econ rots the mind, anyone who studies this should be shot.

[Anonymous No.10825545]

>>10825362
nigga i actually have read mein kampf and i can tell you its almost all rambling nonsense

[Anonymous No.10826655]

>>10822279
> I am familiar with Marx through a…
That's the problem.

[Anonymous No.10827113]

>>10823637
Got another explanation for the correlation then?

[Anonymous No.10828149]

Does the Marxist form of materialism necessarily deny the existence of the metaphysical?

[Anonymous No.10828153]

You disagree because you're a STEMsperg.

[Anonymous No.10828162]

>>10822310
Probably because they're a historically oppressed group of people with an above average intelligence.

[Anonymous No.10828163]

>>10822299
>anarchy
>all commies/syndies
fuck off

[Anonymous No.10828181]

You clearly don't understand Marx, since you studied him only in high school, and only through a perversion.

Marx's body of work is largely a description of capitalism and its historical situation and development. His conclusion is that like previous systems, capitalism is not sustainable and will fall. That is it. Very few can give a valid criticism of his description. The fact that you haven't read one of the most influential CAPITALIST economic theorists to ever live is a really fucking sweet reflection on American education. I have read Marx several times and have absolutely no concern with abstracted economics.

[Anonymous No.10828184]

>>10823604
>>10823610
They aren't successful, at all. You just have a perverted idea of what success is.
Socdems are disgusting liberals.

[Anonymous No.10828214]

>>10822279
>and take capitalism as the given system
I bet you didn't know Marx called capitalism the most efficient and fruitful mode of production we have ever created. Skip the manifesto, go for Das Kapital if you have a background in econ. The Manifesto was written for workers, it was basically pleb propaganda.

[Anonymous No.10828230]

>>10827113
a house of cards built on exploiting natural resources and americans

[Anonymous No.10828242]

>>10822279

Regarding your question, (I'll try to be helpful):
1)The Communist Manifesto isn't actually that important. If you want to learn about Scientific-Socialism, (as opposed to Utopian, and Anarchist Socialism), then read either Socialism: Utopian & Scientific, or the Verso Books compilation of Marx's political works in three volumes.
2)Marx's Political thought, his economic thought, and his philosophical thought all overlap to some extent, but it's entirely possible to be a Dialectical-Materialist without being a Socialist, or to be a Marxian Economically without accepting Diamat. So, even if you have already decided that you don't like Marx's Socialism, you should still read Kapital.


Regarding your shitty image:
1)Venezuela was never socialist. A socialist party is currently leading their parliament, but they still have a society where almost everyone needs to participate in a market to survive, and the vast majority of capital-goods are privately owned. Socialism, (or more accurately, lower-stage socialism, as outlined in Critique of the Gotha Programme), requires you to have abolished private property, and handed control of all enterprise to either workers co-ops, or the state).
2)Ukraine was part of the USSR, why is it listed seperately? (Unless you're talking about the two 'Soviet' Republics set up in Novrossiya early into the civil war, in which case, no shit they're not doing well, they're in an active war zone.
3)North Korea only went to shit after the Soviet Union collapsed, because prior to that point they imported 90% of their food, and over half of their oil from the USSR. When communism fell, that trade stopped overnight, and the resulting scarcity began a series of a events that ended with the military dictatorship it is today. Pre-91, it was a significantly nicer place to live than South Korea.
4)The fuck's Cuba on a list of failed states for? Cuba's awesome.
5)Cambodia was never socialist either, Pol Pot just payed lip service to Communism in an attempt to get backup from China & Vietnam, (which didn't work, never forget that it was Ho Chi Minh who finally brought the fucker down)

The USSR, and East Germany I'll give you, those both were socialist by the traditional Marxist definition, and they both fell primarily due to their own internal contradictions. I would argue that we should learn from these mistakes, and do a better job next time, rather than just say "THOSE COUNTRIES COLLAPSED THEREFORE COMMUNISM BAD"

[Anonymous No.10828255]

>>10823879
So this is the power of the revolutionary vanguard. Nice try my burecratic friendo, but accepting a transition state is a really, really bad idea.

[Anonymous No.10828266]

>Reading about Marx through a social liberal
>The crimes of Hitler are somehow related to the ideas of Marx
Lmao capitalist apologists will literally stop at nothing.

[Anonymous No.10828414]

Mainstream economics has actually vindicated many of Marx’s claims. For example:
1. Gary Becker has shown how the mode of production - technology and people’s perceived costs and benefits - affects social life, such as crime, family structure or obesity. In Marxist terms, “base” does influence “superstructure.”
2. Daniel Kahneman’s work on cognitive biases can be read as corroboration of Marx’s theory that capitalism generates an ideology which prevents people seeing its injustices. For example, the fundamental attribution error leads us over-estimate the extent to which the poor are to blame for their poverty, and to under-rate the importance of environmental or societal forces. The availability heuristic leads workers to blame immigrants for unemployment rather than less obvious forces. The just world phenomenon and system justification cause us to believe that capitalism must be fair. The status quo bias causes us to accept existing evils rather than risk new ones. And adaptive preferences cause the poor to resign themselves to their fates and want less.
3. A lot of work in public choice theory is quite consistent with the Marxian view that “the executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.” James M. Buchanan has demostrated how often capitalists can capture the state and use it to advance their interests.
4. Empirical research suggests that the labour theory of value does a decent job of explaining relative prices (see, for example, http://www.ehu.eus/Jarriola/Docencia/EcoMarx/EcoMarx%20frances/labthvalue.pdf or http://reality.gn.apc.org/econ/DZ_article1.pdf))
5. The efficient market hypothesis of Eugene Fama implies that housands of high-paid financiers are actually overpaid charlatans, since according to the EMH stock-pickers can't beat the market in risk-adjusted terms.
6. James Meade and Jaroslav Vanek have shown that an economic system in which firms are owned and managed not by capitalists, but by workers would be Pareto efficient (see “The Theory of Labour-Managed Firms and of Profit Sharing” by James Meade and “The General Theory of Labour-Managed Market Economies“ by Jaroslav Vanek)

I could go on, there are fewer differences between orthodox and Marxist economics than you might think.

[Anonymous No.10829740]

>>10822279
Watch this (or just the bit where he talks about undergrad) and ask if Wolff's experience resonates with your experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc

The truth is most economics programs are highly ideological, examining particular areas with very particular assumptions and fixed conclusions. Good on you for seeking out socialism - the ever-present shadow of capitalism and coalescence of it's critiques. Read what people suggest, and start questioning the policy levers that are declared OFF LIMITS.

[Anonymous No.10830056]

>>10822311

Marx was out for his own personal gain

[Anonymous No.10830259]

Yeah, you can get a lot. You're going to have a bloody open mind though because if you're going into it thinking its some wishy washy pseudo-economics that's easy to understand, you're wrong. Its really boring and technical and takes a long time to finish.

[Anonymous No.10830448]

>>10825362
>Just try reading him. He's good at identifying issues, but awful at suggesting solutions
He's actually great at generating solutions desu

[Anonymous No.10830520]

>>10828230
That's really only true for Norway, and they'll probably fine if the government takes an active role in building up strategic industries that Norway can depend on once oil runs out, which they'll probably do just like all the other Nordic countries. And natural resources are hardly a guarantee of economic success or a high quality of life, just look up the paradox of plenty.

[Anonymous No.10830570]

>>10830520
t. bootlicking faggot

[Anonymous No.10830595]

>>10822279
One cannot gain perspective on a man, nor his ideology through second hand critiques.

[Anonymous No.10830601]

>>10828242
Why does China have a mixed market economy and why are they much more powerful and wealthy with a mixed market state managed economy than under a self-sufficient socialist planned economy?
>>10828414
would you mind explaining Fama's efficient market hypothesis a little more if you have the time anon?

[Anonymous No.10830606]

>>10822282
I don't understand this line of criticism. Isn't the point is to find the solution dialectically?

[Anonymous No.10830612]

>>10825362
>but awful at suggesting solutions
How so?

[Anonymous No.10830634]

>Marx was in favour of a centrally planned economy.
What a meme, Marx didn't write out how a socialist nation would or should work, he just predicted capitalism would cause it's existence.

[Anonymous No.10830746]

>>10822374
"Critique" in the sense Marx uses it doesn't mean "burn it with fire"

[Anonymous No.10830752]

>>10828149
Marx supposedly abhorred any of that, cue famous quote about "the point is to change the world" but nothing in Das Kapital is really anti-metaphysics or whatever, he just puts out a weak hint that he thought metaphysics was just a result of alienation or some shit

>>10828153
Orthodox marxism is STEM as fuck though

[Anonymous No.10830776]

>>10830752
>Marx supposedly abhorred any of that, cue famous quote about "the point is to change the world" but nothing in Das Kapital is really anti-metaphysics or whatever, he just puts out a weak hint that he thought metaphysics was just a result of alienation or some shit

That's even more retarded, then. It's almost offensive, really.

[Anonymous No.10830819]

>>10830570
socdems forever BTFO

[Anonymous No.10831018]

>>10822358
Shaikh posting is starting to grow on this board. I'm glad I'm not the only one making the time to hammer through 800 pages of theory and research.

[Anonymous No.10831026]

>>10828242
>The fuck's Cuba on a list of failed states for? Cuba's awesome.
are you fucking stupid?

[Anonymous No.10831944]

>>10828184
Lol. They rank among the top of every international metric. Life expectancy, education, wealth, quality of life, civil rights, democracy, corruption, etc.

Social democracy is objectively the best system.

[Anonymous No.10832320]

>>10830752
>Orthodox marxism is STEM as fuck though
Not relevant
>>10831944
Nope, all wrong.
None of those factors are valuable
>international metric
Designed by liberals. Who cares? Statist shits love to lie.
>objectively
No just thing exists. Try again, Bernout.
Democracy is fascism. Any state is corrupt. Wealth is disease. Education is propaganda.

[Anonymous No.10832374]

>>10830606
The dialectic has to be the most cancerous fucking idea ever put forward in philosophy.
>something doesn't work and millions die
>just keep doing it! We're dialectically moving towards the absolute idea of history!
>doesn't work again and millions die
>it's okay! All just part of the dialectic!
>but comrade! The whole country is starving because we don't have food!
>the dialectic will solve it!

[Anonymous No.10832429]

>>10830634
It’s ironic that Hayek’s argument against a centrally planned economy can be used against centrally planned firms and in favour of socialist worker cooperatives.

[Anonymous No.10832432]

>>10832429
>a firm can fail and can't be violently coercive in order to maintain it's position
>a government can

[Anonymous No.10832439]

>>10832374
>The dialectic is a Marxist concept
>The dialectic is an abstract concept that solves your problems
Brainlet detected. At the very least read the Wikipedia article before you embarrass yourself

[Anonymous No.10832457]

>>10832432
Hayek argued that centralized forms of management are inefficient because they impede the use of dispersed information and tacit knowledge. This means that command economies are inferior to market economies, but it also means that centralized and hierarchical capitalist firms are inferior to cooperatives managed by workers.

[Anonymous No.10832461]

>>10832432
But what if the firm holds a great deal of power in the government. As is the case in the first world today. Or the firm is so large its failure would cause mass economic catastrophy.
You can call it cronyism, but people are social creatures who like politicking. As long as money has power it can buy you influence. And last I checked the police will come and get you if the firm says you owe them money and aren't paying

[Anonymous No.10832465]

>>10832439
I've read Hegel you shithead.
Marxists use the dialectic as an excuse for their endless failing in the real world, because muh dialectic is moving towards the historical scientific ideology which is communism.

[Anonymous No.10832482]

>>10832461
I mean, yeah I'm not particularly defending the idea of corporatism either.
But there's a clearly demarcated difference between a firm and a worker's collective.

[Anonymous No.10832498]

>>10832465
>I've read Hegel
Ok, but if you're talking about dialects as Marxists have applied the concept then you ought to know that it's a little different, since they're materialists rather than idealists. So that seems more than a little dishonest
So don't split hairs to excuse your strawmen. Literally fuck off to Wikipedia and search up dialectical materialism, it's the least you could do before making these shitty posts

[Anonymous No.10832505]

>>10832482
Sure, but im arguing that they will both (and we have seen both) resort to trickery and harness governmental force to prop themselves up. So I think it's kind of a bad framing of the problem

[Anonymous No.10832511]

>>10832498
I'm aware of what dialectical materialism is.
You're just buttmad because it's probably what you use to justify attempting over and over again your shitty system.

[Anonymous No.10832518]

>>10832505
I should clarify, I do mean we've seen both in the sense of; we have seen groups which nominally belong to either class do this

[Anonymous No.10832521]

>>10832518
>>10832505
Fair enough then. I won't really dispute that.

[Anonymous No.10832523]

>>10832511
>I know what dialectical materialism is
>It's that thing commies make burnt offerings to in exchange for a bountiful harvest
Just stop posting

[Anonymous No.10832526]

>>10832505
>we have seen both
You have seen a worker's collective harness government before?

[Anonymous No.10832531]

Why didn't Marx understand the "The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk" part of Hegel?

[Anonymous No.10832574]

>>10832498
>so
>so
>so
>SoSo
Stalin pls go i understand marx was ur heros hero but its time to stop ok

[Anonymous No.10832643]

>>10828162
>Probably because they're a historically oppressed group of people
Kek
>being in charge of banking, publishing, entertainment, media, and pornography
>being oppressed
Pick one.

[Anonymous No.10832660]

>>10822279
>Can I get anything out of reading Das capital or the communist manifesto?
Some pretty legit criticisms of capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10832676]

>>10825362
wtf he had the Final Solution

[Anonymous No.10832709]

>>10832457

Any future socialism is going to be completely computerized and run by blockchains.

[Anonymous No.10832924]

>>10823569
As a student studying both econ and finance, I can say that the two are very similar with the key feature being that finance is more applied. It relies heavily on accounting which makes it a more marketable degree, specifically in a banking or corporate finance setting. Econ has a much more academic feel to it which is nice and all but in my experience employers tend to prefer finance, all else being equal.

[Anonymous No.10833199]

>>10832374
Somebody doesn't understand Hegel.
>doesn't work
spook
>millions die
Thanks to cappycucks hoarding resources

[Anonymous No.10833201]

>>10832465
>reeeel world
I've doubt you've even read a hack like Peterson. Stop lying.

[Anonymous No.10833206]

>>10825362
>Read Mein kampf
>It actually isnt incoherent rambling
>Read Das Capital
>It's isn't spooky leftist pinko faggot mumbo jumbo
A lot of radical literature is coherent , people just feel threatened by it and therefore want to dehumanize it.

[Anonymous No.10833374]

>>10822279
>A level sociology
>familiar

what a dumb fuck you are

[Anonymous No.10833403]

>>10832320
You forgot freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength, friendo.

[Anonymous No.10833434]

I like OPs pic, it has a dual sense. One that criticizes communism for ignoring the real problems that communist countries have faced in favour of their ideal. And another that exalts communism because we better turn our back on those countries and imagine new strategies to create the society we want.

Originally it may be just the criticism, but I see both. And the solution to both is the same, not ignore them to move on, but to recognize those countries and their issues and thus have a better view on how to move on from that.

[Anonymous No.10834519]

>>10832709
Read Towards a New Socialism by Paul Cockshott

[Anonymous No.10834611]

>>10833206
>>Read Mein kampf
>>It actually isnt incoherent rambling
which Mein Kampf did you read
did hitler finally pay for an editor?

[Anonymous No.10834641]

>>10832320
it would help, if you’re not false-flagging, to remind them that while “quality of life” is improved, mental health, happiness and savings are all plummeting in most first world nations. a large number of adults don’t have friends, are depressed and would be wiped out by a small financial disaster. wealth stratification is also still increasing

[Anonymous No.10834691]

>>10822279
>Das capital
Maybe. He expands quite a bit on the classical economists, though many of his ideas were later proven wrong, most notably by Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk.

>Communist Manifesto
Garbage propaganda, do not read.

There is a reason that most modern Marxists are political philosophers, not economists.

[Anonymous No.10834721]

>>10834611
The Ford Translation. It's one of the best translations according to any neo-nazi I've asked about it

[Anonymous No.10834737]

>>10832709
This desu

[Anonymous No.10834809]

>>10834737
yo what movie is that from looks comfy af

[Anonymous No.10834823]

>>10833403
Both are true in statism, though. Your abuse of language has taken from it its meaning and instead made it propaganda.
Fuck off, civvy.
>>10834641
Quality of life has not improved. I think you mean 'convenience' or 'feel-goodery'. I'm not a fucking Marxist, mate, class and economy are not my focus.

[Anonymous No.10834826]

>>10834691
>austrian economics
Point discarded.
>proof
No such thing exists.

[Anonymous No.10834832]

>>10834737
The question is do we brace our society for industry being entirely automated by starting to set down the foundations of socialism or do we dig deeper into capitalism and hope for the best? I can't imagine the Waltons are going to be too keen on using their new drone army to give every one proper healthcare and food access if they don't have to.

[Anonymous No.10834843]

>>10834832
Socialism is cancer, as is technology as we call it.
A Walton neck is just as easy to snap as any other. They are not some gods, you superstitious little statist.

[Anonymous No.10834846]

>>10834843
the waltons can hire a private army the size of a small state, you won't even get close to them

[Anonymous No.10834851]

>>10834843
>socialism is cancer
>lets kill the waltons for being rich capitalists

this is your brain on /pol/

try reading a book fag

[Anonymous No.10834857]

>>10834851
I've read much more than you.
You do realize there is a left beyond socialism, right?

[Anonymous No.10834858]

>>10834846
>>10834843
And let's even say that the Waltons are so universally hated that no mercenaries will fight for them, sometime in the near future technology will have sufficiently advanced to the point that autonomous robotic technology could do all the killing for them and they'd never need to hire anyone ever again. Depending on how advanced AI is they might have a program that can simultaneously run an entire army of boston dynamics style murderbots for them.

[Anonymous No.10834859]

>>10834846
Yeah you keep thinking that, you superstitious little secular humanist.

[Anonymous No.10834861]

>>10834858
>sufficiently advanced
Oh, you're fucking 12. No wonder you believe in evil spectre villains.

[Anonymous No.10834864]

>>10834858
i agree
let's genocide robots

[Anonymous No.10834865]

>>10834857
>smash the state
>by killing people that aren't part of the state

oh yes, the muddle thinking, the deranged violent fantasies, i get your angle now, edgy teen anarchist

[Anonymous No.10834871]

>>10834861
Anon why do I get the feeling you're typing this from inside of a damp cave? Shoo troll, shoo

[Anonymous No.10834875]

>>10834865
>teen
I'm 30. What are you, 19? Fuck off back to le plebbit.
>cappycucks arent part of the state
ROFLLMAOXDDDD
>muddled thinking
Oh, you're just a white supremacist
LE EMOTIONS MAKE YOU LE NIGGERKEKKIKE XDDDDD I AM LE LOGIC MAN XDDD

[Anonymous No.10834877]

>>10834871
Yeah your'e mom is cunt

[Anonymous No.10834881]

>>10834875
>30 years old
>anarchist

wew

[Anonymous No.10834886]

>>10834864
Honestly I think rapidly advancing technology offers interesting potentials to achieve our ideals just as much as it does to fulfill our imagined apocalypses. Imagine a democracy in which all citizens are neurally connected and can therefore immediately vote to consensus on any given issue rather than relying on representatives to speak for us. We could have perfect democracy, though I'm sure that would present all of its own issues.

[Anonymous No.10834887]

>>10834875
>>10834877
Don't get so mad you shoot up a high school anon

[Anonymous No.10834924]

>>10834886
>Imagine a democracy in which all citizens are neurally connected and can therefore immediately vote to consensus on any given issue rather than relying on representatives to speak for us
spending five minutes on facebook should convince you this is a bad idea

[Anonymous No.10834952]

>>10834924
You'd have to hope that being permanently attached to the internet would allow for instant education on any topic, but I guess you're right we'd realistically just be drowned in lies and misinformation. Weber was right, Marx was a stupid idealist and humanity is doomed to the hell of an ever increasingly efficient capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10835269]

>>10834809
It's the operations room for Allende's Project Cybersyn, which was going to be an attempt to harness organizational cybernetics to construct a more distributed and self-regulating socialist economy. Never really had the chance to take off before the military coup.

[Anonymous No.10835292]

>>10834952
>Imagine a democracy in which all citizens are neurally connected and can therefore immediately vote to consensus on any given issue rather than relying on representatives to speak for us
you realize that the smartest people, and also small hyper intelligent cliques would spam the neuroptic feeds of everyone else who is mentally feeble and this would replicate the exact education-media propaganda environment we have now right? Or you'd just kill most of the population and engineer a super race who were all linked through neural feeds but that's not democracy its some form of communal aristocracy with fascist elements.

[Anonymous No.10835301]

>>10834886
Everyone's gonna pick at your specific example but I agree with you in spirit.

[Anonymous No.10835756]

>>10834875
https://youtu.be/xcWzsqAjfKw

[Anonymous No.10835799]

>>10822279
> Im a final year econ major

[Anonymous No.10835804]

>>10835799
Engineering student should be the first picture for the first 4 pics and then the second one for the final.
The pics that are used for engineering student should be used for math student.

[Anonymous No.10835816]

>>10834886
>Imagine a democracy in which all citizens are neurally connected and can therefore immediately vote to consensus on any given issue rather than relying on representatives to speak for us.
Is this supposed to be good?

[Anonymous No.10836183]

>>10834886
Holy shit transcucks are fucking delusional.

[Anonymous No.10836260]

>>10834721
>>10834611
>>10833206
>>10825362
>>10822282
I swear even people who have devoted their lives to studying Hitler, etc, haven't read it
For example, I don't believe David Irving ever read it because he believes its a forgery, and he ain't no fucking dilettante
He knows his shit

[Anonymous No.10836293]

>>10835799
>russian diploma
It should be the same monkey for everything but hard science and math.

[Anonymous No.10836673]

>>10836293
Our hard science and math curriculum is stuck in the 90s, it should be the same monkey for these subjects as well.

[Anonymous No.10836682]

>>10822279
>know I disagree with his ideas.
>Can I get anything out of reading the communist manifesto?


I fucking hate this board.

[Anonymous No.10836729]

>>10836293
Science and math are both childish shite

[Anonymous No.10837016]

>>10836673
Bachelor and most of master in math/physics are almost the same everywhere. You don‘t really learn any „modern“ post-war material before PhD/кaндидaтcкaя anyways. Stop talking about things you clearly have no understanding of, brainlet.

t. paшн aбpoaд