/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11084377]

Why the FUCK should I read Marx, /lit/? Does he have anything to offer to the world that isn't selfish, degenerative, and destructive?

[Anonymous No.11084412]

>>11084377
no he destroyed our white world and got women into the workforce to further destroy the civilization built by our white forefathers of virtue. He invented white genocide. Try reading Evola and Hitler if you want the real truth

[Anonymous No.11084726]

People like you have no reason to read him. Just stay away for your own good

[Anonymous No.11084742]

because he is pretty much the greatest exponent on all human sciences which are today studied? shill harder poltard

[Anonymous No.11084746]

You probably should. You've already got an opinion on what you think the consequences of his work have been. So the intellectually honest thing to do would be to actually read him and see if your opinion is based in fact.

[Anonymous No.11084748]

>>11084377
>defending capitalism by calling others selfish
Stop shitposting and actually read a book you mongoloid

[Anonymous No.11084774]

>>11084746
>skims book
>reads uncharitably
>I knew it was a waste of time all along!

[Anonymous No.11084781]

>>11084377
Not really worth it to be honest, he's a retard and his books complete drivel, he doesn't deserve the fame he gets

[Anonymous No.11084782]

If you read his essays on cultural topics you will actually find a lot to agree with.

[Anonymous No.11084786]

>>11084774
>try to read marx
>too boring
>read a critique of marx instead and memorize one or two points
>shoehorn those points into any conversation about marx or socialism for the rest of your life

[Anonymous No.11084793]

>>11084748
>keeping your stuff is selfish
>gibs me dat is selfless

[Anonymous No.11084807]

>>11084786
>read marx
>flip through pages looking for his plans to subvert white culture that i learned through a 4chan infographic
>only find boring shit about economics
>find his letters to Engels
>he says nigger

[Anonymous No.11084817]

Youre better off just reading shit about actual economics than some old rambling neet that has been btfo constantly.

[Anonymous No.11084820]

>>11084807
kek

[Anonymous No.11084876]

>>11084377
Yes, it's an interesting take on the world in terms of the problems defined if not the answers. You don't have to agree with him but it's important to understanding a lot of modern thought.

[Anonymous No.11084878]

>>11084726
This. Don't bother OP. You would only end up being a lumpenproletariat either way.

[Anonymous No.11084887]

Reminder that we are having a celebration on Saturday and you are invited.

[Anonymous No.11084890]

>>11084807
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/

[Anonymous No.11084892]

>>11084807
>What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.…. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities…. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange…. The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.
B-b-but it's a Joo-oooish conspiracy, a-anon.

[Anonymous No.11084893]

>>11084890
He's talking about Jewish culture, hes not attacking them for being Jewish. same with Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.11084899]

>>11084893
>they're shit people
>but it's okay because I'm not attacking them, just their culture
w0t

[Anonymous No.11084901]

>>11084899
Yeah exactly. Its not about attacking people personally, its about the system that allows those people to abuse their power

[Anonymous No.11084910]

>>11084893
mh i feel enlightened

[Anonymous No.11084911]

>>11084793
capitalism is built on theft. I should recieve the wealth I produce, not the slimmest morsel that my master is willing to give me just so I can return tomorrow. you to are similarly a slave and yet you engage in apologetics for those who keep you. you're a class traitor and an uncle tom and such a wretched character I'd have to pity you if you weren't so blinded as to be willing to sacrifice your humanity to ensure that your peers are without humanity too. you can pretend you're on their side but you're not one of them and you never will be. for them you're not even worthy of their contempt. turn away for the poison that has sucked your very soul out and stand in solidarity with your brothers so tomorrow you might regain that which makes you a man.

[Anonymous No.11084915]

>>11084377
Marx is the least interesting/useful Marxist

[Anonymous No.11084918]

>>11084911
>labor theory of value

[Anonymous No.11084920]

>>11084793
Under communism you keep everything you thing is meaningful to you and that you need to live a happy life. Then you work at a job you feel accomplishing and it helps you feel like you are giving back to the commune.

[Anonymous No.11084921]

>>11084377
If you agree with him yes
If not absolutely
It's not like it will hurt you to read the other side of the fence

[Anonymous No.11084925]

>>11084915
How can you call him the least useful? That just doesn't make any sense

[Anonymous No.11084930]

>>11084911
>capitalism is built on theft

[Anonymous No.11084932]

>>11084930
Yes. Exploitation of the worker is also theft.

[Anonymous No.11084933]

>>11084930
Not him but according to Marx it is
If the capitalist profits off the labor of the worker, then the worker isn't receiving his fair share

[Anonymous No.11084942]

>>11084377
You should read him because he's probably the thinker who had the biggest influence on world history ever. He also pretty much invented the social sciences, and his approach to history (historical materialism) basically turned the discipline into an actual science which is able to go way beyond the "muh great men" idiotic theory.

[Anonymous No.11084943]

>>11084377
>isn't selfish, degenerative, and destructive?
Says the man who admits to not reading Marx.

[Anonymous No.11084946]

Read him primarily for his critiques of capitalism. Many of them still hold true, and it's hard not to see the problems with our current set up without at least giving credit to his ideas.

Other than that, he doesn't really say a lot. His social ideas are pleb-tier at best, and the fact he was an unironic revolutionary makes him a legitimate autist.

[Anonymous No.11084955]

>>11084946
>being the influence of some of humanities biggest changes in history is autistic

[Anonymous No.11084968]

>>11084955
Hitler also influenced some of history's biggest changes. Doesn't make Hitler not an autist.

[Anonymous No.11084971]

>>11084930
>clearly didn't read beyond the first sentence
>frog
you know you can have more than an unjustifiably inflated self-esteem through assosciation with the ruling elite, right? Like you could have things such as control over your own life, material comfort and a life free of the mental polution that is hyper-individualism and consumerism?

you gain so little from this sort of behaviour yet your cowardice prevents you from reaching for so much more. Why not try to be strong? Why not dream for a life better than watching someone fuck your wife and thinking 'god, his thrusts are so manly, I truly am lucky to witness such a display' and then going on a shitty imageboard to tell everyone about how want to fuck your own wife is dumb and that the big strong men who fuck your wife are so great and once one of them accidentally got a bit of cum on your face and he gave you a look that was basically a silent apology and so you guys are probably buddies now.

[Anonymous No.11084986]

>>11084968
hitler was a marxist

[Anonymous No.11085001]

The only people that support capitalism are the ones too cucked to be self-aware or the ones cucking. Both should be shot against a wall for the betterment of humanity.

Inb4 Americans equating Stalinism to communism

[Anonymous No.11085013]

>>11084892
>google "jewish question"
>2nd result is the On the jewish question by Karl Marx
>it talk about jews injecting their value into christianity
>/pol/tards use Marx's talking points despite calling him a brainlet
like pottery

[Anonymous No.11085029]

REVOLUTION SOON GUYS I SWEAR.

[Anonymous No.11085036]

>>11084918
do you agree that the owners of the capital receive a disproportionate amount of profit compared to the business risk sustained?
if not why?

reminder that Bezos is already at 130 bln while destroying the retail sector on a global scale and not offering enough jobs to make for its loss

[Anonymous No.11085037]

>>11085029
same with the race war

[Anonymous No.11085044]

>>11085036
>implying that risk could ever be a moral justification for profit
Hey guys look, I'm standing near an edge acting like a retard, where are my gibs?

[Anonymous No.11085045]

>>11085037
UMMMM EXCUSE ME KIKE BASEDBOY??? LE RACE WAR IS VERY LE REAL AND ONE DAY ALL N*GGERS AND K*KES WILL BE HANGED!!! YES DEATH TO ALL ROASTIES WHO REJECTED ME AND RACE TRAITORS!!!!

[Anonymous No.11085055]

Both Stirner and Marx were right. Through the consciousness of ones egotism toward their love of their fellow man communism would allow ones ego to finally be at peace once he sees the people he loves not being exploited by the bourgeois.

[Anonymous No.11085065]

>>11085055
Socialism is a spook, bud

[Anonymous No.11085069]

>>11085036
>>11085044
if you're going to agree over something so small maybe do it in a more understanding way as to engender cooperation so one of you can hold down the true enemy whilst the other jumps on their head

[Anonymous No.11085073]

>>11085044
>Hey guys look, I'm standing near an edge acting like a retard, where are my gibs?
what's your problem? i just said capitalist receive too much compared to how little they risk

[Anonymous No.11085075]

>>11085065
that isn't how spooks work

[Anonymous No.11085076]

>>11085069
I know, I just felt like shitposting. Sorry, comrade.

[Anonymous No.11085079]

>>11085075
ideology is a spook

[Anonymous No.11085081]

>>11085065
Is my egotistical love of man a spook? I want what I want and I don't like seeing people suffering.

[Anonymous No.11085091]

>>11085081
thats not socialism, thats empathy

[Anonymous No.11085094]

>>11085091
socialism is political and economic empathy

[Anonymous No.11085104]

>>11085036
>do you agree that the owners of the capital receive a disproportionate amount of profit compared to the business risk sustained?
begging the question
economy isn't also a zero sum game, wealth isn't fixed and is constantly created.
But yeah, I do believe that corporations have too many liberties. Still, that doesn't mean that I believe that capitalism.
>destroying the retail sector on a global scale and not offering enough jobs to make for its loss
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.11085107]

>>11085104
that capitalisn is built on theft*

[Anonymous No.11085110]

>>11085091
Its empathy that drives me to socialism though. I see that the prevailing system isn't working well on to appease my egotism and so I want to bring on something that does.

[Anonymous No.11085114]

>>11085094
politics is a spook
economies are a spook

>>11085110
so youre not an egoist, you're a socialist

[Anonymous No.11085121]

>>11085114
I'm following my egotism. The two aren't exclusive.

[Anonymous No.11085127]

>>11085121
So you're just being an ordinary human being? Gotcha.

[Anonymous No.11085140]

>>11085127
Normal people aren't aware of their own egotism and fall for spooks that lead them to follow something that isn't according to it.

[Anonymous No.11085155]

>>11085140
I mean, is "egotism" literally anything other than "recognition of conditioning?" There's literally no need to attach a label to something that intelligent humans have been aware of since the dawn of history.

[Anonymous No.11085185]

>>11085104
>economy isn't also a zero sum game, wealth isn't fixed and is constantly created.
that a meme only possible thanks to debt fueled long term unsustainable economies. in a sane world the wealth avaiable is determined by the natural resources avaiables and tech level not on how many greenbacks can you issue for buying german cars every 2 years

>Prove it.
walmart employ more than 4 times the employees working for amazon despite having a revenue only 2.4 times higher
reminder that walmart is a gigantic company that already receive subsidies from the govt and benefit from both brand recognition and scale economies.
this mean, for all the mom and pop store in the world that amazon it's like a more efficient walmart opening near every single one of them
see here for how the online is going to kill the retail and since an online retailer have an inherently more efficient structure (it's pretty much developing an online site+warehouse slaves) that mean less workers.
https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/trend/2017-retail-trends

[Anonymous No.11085284]

>>11084793
You're confused only because religion-based morality tells you selfishness is bad and you actually believe it

[Anonymous No.11085308]

>>11084748
Capitalism uses the innate selfishness of humans to its advantage while communism builds essentially proves the theory that humans are innately selfish, while simultaneously denying (or just ignorant) of this very fact

[Anonymous No.11085312]

>>11085308
>capitalism use the innate selfishness of humans to its advantage
>supporting an ideology which even you admit is fundamentally immoral and exploitative
nice

[Anonymous No.11085316]

>>11085312
He didn't say that's immoral.

[Anonymous No.11085325]

>>11085316
>Capitalism uses the innate selfishness of humans to its advantage
that is not a statement that is devoid of moral judgement

[Anonymous No.11085326]

>>11085308

Humans are not selfish. Humans have a will to survive but that does not mean selfishness by any means. When the elites create artificial scarcity it also creates a sort of selfishness. Capitalism made that and it's called "human nature" (which is dependent on the environment) which is completely wrong.

Humans are naturally cooperative and altruistic.

[Anonymous No.11085331]

>>11085308
Under communism you can no longer exploit anyone so no one is being harmed as much by selfishness.

[Anonymous No.11085335]

>>11084911
Of course I'm not a capitalist, I'm a laborer. I trade my time for a measure of currency that is adequate to fulfill my desire and nothing more. I don't have the technical knowledge to become a successful entrepreneur and so I leave that to the hyper-productive people that do and exhange with them in a mutually agreed upon contract.

[Anonymous No.11085336]

>>11085326
Chomskyhonk

[Anonymous No.11085341]

>>11085325
You would only think the words used are inherently judging words if you think altruism is the only moral system.

[Anonymous No.11085401]

>>11085336

Honk honk anarchism honk honk.

I am an anarchist goose, anon. You are correct.

[Anonymous No.11085411]

>>11085401
I'm an anarchist but I'm not a chomskyhonk you pleb.
Humans are just as selfish as they are altruistic, don't be naive. Humans have the full spectrum of moral and social behavior

[Anonymous No.11085422]

>>11085036
What an arrogant and benighted post on business. While, yes many would agree there are a vast amount of overpaid CEO's, the value that makes them worth Billions is the amount of stock they own in the company. Thus if you owned that much stock in Amazon you would have a similar value. Because he owned so much stock at such a low price and led the campaign to raise it high enough to be worth billions, that seems to be the direct fruit of his labor. To spread his billions to the poor would require dismantling Amazon itself. Similarly, employees who own stock literally own a part of that business and the majority who strike it rich do so off cashing in their stock.

But what really shows your lack of knowledge is the thought that Bezos is somehow "destroying the retail sector, and needs to make up for it directly with new jobs." Part of what sets capitalism apart is the ability to rapidly innovate industries and societies. The retail industry fell pray to someone who out did them, who improved upon what they did and thus re purposed their business into his. At the same time, by doing so he lowered the price of many goods and increased user satisfaction to untold levels. Amazon deserved to destroy those business that stagnate and fail to innovate. With new innovation comes new entities, new jobs and new markets. The jobs will be replaced, there is no evidence that we are currently in some sort of unemployment crisis is there? A lack of jobs? No instead there is nothing but evidence suggesting the opposite.

I will give you this however, if you want to talk shit about Amazon, then look at AWS. once again, an innovation that is killing old stagnant business (like IBM) for the better of the customer. But their data policies are very dangerous and deceptive. It should be worrying everyone if they receive the JEDI deal and literally own our DoD.

[Anonymous No.11085572]

>>11085312
You don't need to support capitalism to go against communism. In fact, National Socialists and Fascists managed to have systems that aren't selfish and were productive. They were hardly exploitative in any sense similar to those of the two others.
Though they might be too limiting for the local ego.

[Anonymous No.11085591]

>>11085572
National Socialism and fascism are capitalist. Every implementation revolved around privatization. Wtf are you saying?

[Anonymous No.11085598]

>>11085422
i answered to those points here >>11085185
what you brainlets don't seem to understand is that internet cuts down on the needed labour.
unless you're suggesting everybody start serving coffee to each other there no way we can employ enough people to sustain the current spending levels
we already produce enough to feed and cloth the world. sooner or later we just realize that we're paying one guy to dig a ditch and another one to fill it just with added layers of marketing and edonism

>I will give you this however, if you want to talk shit about Amazon, then look at AWS. once again, an innovation that is killing old stagnant business (like IBM) for the better of the customer. But their data policies are very dangerous and deceptive. It should be worrying everyone if they receive the JEDI deal and literally own our DoD.
the problem is not that it companies are not innovative, but that they are too much efficient to need all the workers. our economies are based on the tertiary sector. what happen when you cut in half the needed paper pusher thanks to cloud computing?

quite ironically you fuckbois fail to understand how the internet let a global company cut down on all the cost related to distance. you no longer need a physical shop in every big city. just build an online shop and exploit the flexibility offered to you by modern logistic.
just like the steam engine and thus mechanized industry heralded capitalism the internet is a radical paradigm shift
>b-but just become a programmer xD
even if there were enough programmer jobs for everyone how do you re-train the 45 y/o 95 IQ retail worker that never went to college? you don't.
how do you re-traint the 50 y/o truck driver? you don't.
you can even replace more "difficult" jobs like medics since their job can be done by big data and AI
https://hbr.org/2016/10/robots-will-replace-doctors-lawyers-and-other-professionals

so now you have a massive unemployement and your castle of card explode in a debt fueled nightmare
talking about debt fueled nightmares, how do you solve the pensions problem with an aging population?

also where do you think we're going to find the resources for when indians and chinese start to ask for that sweet western lifestyle?

>go study economics 101 lool
already doing it thanks

[Anonymous No.11085603]

>>11084971
Stop projecting your cuck fantasy onto us you commie onions boy

[Anonymous No.11085624]

>>11085572
>fascism and nazism are not pro-capitalism and pro-worker exploitation

[Anonymous No.11085633]

>>11085598
>>11085422
also look at this
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/aug/03/insideit.guardianweeklytechnologysection
http://www.businessinsider.com/games-artificial-intelligence-cannot-win-2016-3?IR=T
they are learning too fast for the average human to compete and robots are almost pure Capital

[Anonymous No.11085644]

>>11085591
>National Socialism and fascism are capitalist.
They are not.
>Every implementation revolved around privatization.
Though the state could sanction them at any moment, issued methodologies and prevented exploitation. Capitalism has the industries only follow the law, not the orders of the state. In a capitalistic system, the state has to buy from the institutions, whereas in national socialist / Fascist states the institutions follow orders. Regardless of that, both the state and the industries were expected to follow laws. There were anti-exploitation laws, at regarding nature and nation.

[Anonymous No.11085650]

Skip Marx, read Gramsci through Lacan

[Anonymous No.11085659]

>>11085624
They were not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ5II-1dIbw

This video isn't my proof. It's a take on the subject by Hitler.
You believe that all use is exploitation. I don't believe all life is parasitic.

[Anonymous No.11085747]

>>11085335
>being this cucked
I wonder if in the glorious and inevitable communist future people like you will be seen as mentally ill people trying to cope.

[Anonymous No.11085955]

>>11085598
Just as concerns appeared in the other industrial revolutions, they appear again. These technology sector jobs are overwhelmingly coming in and people will be forced to adapt. Not everything can be automated fully, and people will need to train Ai with datasets among other things. These jobs, maintaining machines are essential. AI is not a future as "artificial intelligence" but as "augmented intelligence" they need to be monitored. Robots can't preform the tasks of someone like a firefighter, but what can do is help them analyze and understand a burning building to find out where people are so they can rescue them. A future where "everyone is a programmer" isn't true, we won't be slaves to building machines. But technology will be inserted into every aspect of our lives, and you willl be expected to know how to use it. Oh wait, that could be hard, so companies have realized this and now pursue "usability" as main traits in programs. Tableu is focused on growing their audience beyond trained data scientists so that tech illiterate Marketing people can use their product. It's almost as if increasing the number of people who can use your product efficiently will increase its impact.

>"quite ironically you fuckbois fail to understand how the internet let a global company cut down on all the cost related to distance."

Your concerns are that of a crazy analyst circa 1998. We had they IT boom, it happened and all businesses were disrupted. Like Toyota expanding to the US and dicking over American car companies, it increased choice and competition making it better for the consumer. Internet business did not exist, and now they do. That facet added a huge amount of jobs to many existing companies and allowed companies to compete on a global scale. The "paper pusher" no longer exists, and has been replaced with the online operator. But not every job will be a 1-1 switch, industries will fall and rise. A 50-year old truck driver will no longer have his job, and must move to another industry once autonomous vehicles rule the roads, which won't be for a while. To insinuate that they should always have the same job forever is ridiculous, how many steam boat operators still exist? How many fax experts are there? You have to update your skills to get a new job, that is how the world works.

And finally to suggest that the steam engine and industry heralded capitalism when it had been practiced for hundreds of years before is ludicrous.

[Anonymous No.11086021]

our ancesters knew what living in anarchism was like, because there was no order and humans wanted to be controlled, more than 10.000 years of anarchism have lead us to feudalism, now capitalism. communism is anarchism therefore will lead to order.

[Anonymous No.11086060]

>>11085747
Actually, what is wrong with that guy's post? If I have a stable job with a good family, in a good community with close friends, with only the desire to read and enjoy nature (i.e. my backyard and town) — why should I care about revolution? My charity extends as far as my reach.

[Anonymous No.11086063]

>>11085659
lol what a fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.11086175]

>>11085747
It won't because in a stateless society you have no way of stopping people like me from engaging in contractually-mediated market enterprise.

[Anonymous No.11086446]

>>11084748
>hating communism means you support capitalism
It's not either or.
Take the monarchy pill

[Anonymous No.11087258]

>>11085335
fucking embarrassing dude

[Anonymous No.11087321]

>>11085955
>These jobs, maintaining machines are essential. AI is not a future as "artificial intelligence" but as "augmented intelligence" they need to be monitored
humans becoming mere maintenance workers for the physical manifestation of the Capital. literally textbook marxist alienation

>Robots can't preform the tasks of someone like a firefighter, but what can do is help them analyze and understand a burning building to find out where people are so they can rescue them.
every jobs that doesn't need predictable interactions with the physical world (like plumbing) but rely on analyzing data can be automated away. i simply doubt that the jobs created will be less than the jobs needed.

>Your concerns are that of a crazy analyst circa 1998.
look at this gap. this is literally the capitalist saying "no pay raise or i'm gonna ship your job to pajeet or just build a robot"
https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

no it didn't. modern capitalism was born with the industrialization.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_capitalism#Industrial_Revolution

>But not every job will be a 1-1 switch, industries will fall and rise. A 50-year old truck driver will no longer have his job, and must move to another industry once autonomous vehicles rule the roads, which won't be for a while. To insinuate that they should always have the same job forever is ridiculous, how many steam boat operators still exist? How many fax experts are there? You have to update your skills to get a new job, that is how the world works.
like what? legit walk down the streets and look at the people. how many of them do you think they can survive in an hyper-competitive global job market? also how do you think a worker that only did menial jobs can retrain 20-30 years after the last time he opened a textbook? should we just put them down like injuried horses? also how can a casualized job market offer the needed stability to kickstart a family and sustain the welfare state?
also i love how every single supporter capitalism has complete blind faith in how new (not clearly defined yet) jobs will simply pop up. all the new jobs i'm seeing is amazon warehouse slave or delivery boy for foodora

you're also forgetting that we already produce enough for everyone and yet the inequality is rising
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-holt-gimenez/world-hunger_b_1463429.html
>muh global poverty fell
yes, while productivity skyrocketed and even then they had to cook the books
https://www.sharing.org/information-centre/articles/world-bank-poverty-figures-what-do-they-mean
this is on top of capitalism chronical inability to deal with externalities, such as pollution, and being sustainable in a non infinite growth enviroment

[Anonymous No.11087427]

>>11085955
Legitimate question, what do you want the endgoal of all this to be? Everyone slowly becomes programmers, then when even robots can do that better, we just become passive blobs like the people in Wall-E?

[Anonymous No.11087428]

>>11086446
>monarchism is an economic system
t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.11087597]

>>11085335
You are a cuck with something called stockholm syndrome.

[Anonymous No.11087679]

>>11085114
Is this person actually philosophizing,/lit/? I’m scared. Did he really just shoot down that other guys arguments by just stating they’re spooks? Am I committing any spooks right now?!?!?

I’m scared /lit/ hold me

[Anonymous No.11087713]

>>11087679
I was pointing out the contradictions of calling yourself an "egoist" but then engaging in the things Stirner described as spooks.

Don't worry about things being "spooks", the recognition that the social forces compelling people are ultimately arbitrary is hardly a profound revelation, and not even all that useful, all things considered.

[Anonymous No.11087724]

>>11085422
>To spread his billions to the poor would require dismantling Amazon itself.
What’s the problem chief

[Anonymous No.11087812]

How many Marxists and anti-Marxists on this board have actually read all of Das Kapital?

[Anonymous No.11087822]

>>11087812
About the same number as the number of non-traditionalists have actually read Evola, I guess.

[Anonymous No.11087868]

>>11084412
>tfw can't see if this is ironic or not

[Anonymous No.11087945]

>>11087427
End goal implies there was some purpose in what we were doing. As though every human being needs to come together to find an answer to a question. The End Goal is the same as its ever been, for individual humans to decide their own fate, what matters to then and to be the master of their own destiny so they may find fulfillment and happiness

[Anonymous No.11087985]

>>11087945
We've had the cult of individualism for the better part of half a century now, people are more confused and isolated than ever

Putting the entire onus of finding meaning in the cosmos on every single individual is a good way to create a spiritually depressed society

There needs to be a broader sense of the transcendent than just whatever your ego is currently lusting after

[Anonymous No.11088319]

>>11087945
your analysis is pathetic, think more or read more or something because it isn't even internally consistent let alone historically or scientifically accurate.

[Anonymous No.11088870]

>>11086446
>I let my autistic fondness for larping dictate my political beliefs

[Anonymous No.11089877]

>>11084968
No he didn't, poltard

[Anonymous No.11090478]

>>11087985
Where you're born, your religion, the time period you exist in, these all help an give you suggestions as how to live life. I agree you can't just go after your ego,you find meaning in the values you accept and what you craft as your own philosophy. Its about the freedom to let people take in ideas and craft that from what they seek, putting different emphasis on Nationalism, Faith, Self improvement, ect.

[Anonymous No.11090486]

>>11087812
>reading beyond volume 1

[Anonymous No.11090514]

>>11084377
t. Ben Shapiro

[Anonymous No.11090584]

>>11087321
>humans becoming mere maintenance workers
>every jobs that doesn't need predictable interactions with the physical world (like plumbing) but rely on analyzing data can be automated away
That is just not true, robots are significantly dumber than you think. People who have bet so heavily on Automation continue to be wrong time and again. IBM bet so heavily on AI which turned out to be not better than simple DL algorithms. Tesla invested so heavily in automated workers it ended up with a huge productivity gap that has become part of their current ruin. Musk himself admits how much he "underestimated the value of human labor." You need to humans to assess the value of AI, to work in tandem with them, to make the end decision and use their insights as educated guesses.

>modern capitalism was born with the industrialization
But the foundation for it has been around for much much longer. Just look at the history of economic crisis, The Tulip Bubble, The South Sea Company, both precede the industrial revolution by a century and are the direct result of unregulated capitalism.

>should we just put them down like injuried horses?
Adaption has been around forever. You need to adapt to trends period. You should be guaranteed a job with not a single skill?

>very single supporter capitalism has complete blind faith in how new (not clearly defined yet) jobs
https://www.geekwire.com/2018/amazon-now-employs-566000-people-worldwide-66-percent-jump-year-ago/
Half a million is a hell of a lot of people that seem to be working for this new company.
Start-ups are at an all time high, people are literally following their path and seizing new opportunity wherever it lies.

>you're also forgetting that we already produce enough for everyone and yet the inequality is rising
We produce enough food for everyone. Do we have the supply chain to get that to everyone? The infrastructure to take food from high yield areas and bring it to third world countries without hiccups? That article spends 90% of its time talking about yield gaps in organic farms and just has that title for clickbait. Without those countries having a distribution network to gather food for every person there's no way to give everyone that food. What about instable governments? What if they take over those networks once we establish them and all the value is lost? What about biofuels as the article points out? You talk about an inability to deal with pollution but it seems you want to take away one way we achieve this. In addditon the article directly says how a significant portion goes to animal feedlots. Come on.

>sustainable in a non infinite growth enviroment
Like what? Markets that are over saturated? Those markets become replaced, there are pivots, the companies that run in them transition or become bought out. I don't understand what your even trying to say here

[Anonymous No.11090884]

>>11084377
>Why the FUCK should I read Marx, /lit/?
You shouldn't unless you're writing a history of mistakes.

>Does he have anything to offer to the world that isn't selfish, degenerative, and destructive?
No.

[Anonymous No.11090909]

>>11090884
Just admit you haven’t read him and fuck off.

[Anonymous No.11090926]

>>11084377

>open Sociology textbook for my Intro to Sociology class
>it's just a lot of left-liberal drivel presented as objective sociological analysis, drawn from Marx and other 'thinkers'
>white female Sociology professor talks about how awful white people are literally every single class
>realize that the field of Sociology, and perhaps the social sciences in general, is useless and degenerate, if not dangerous, in its current form

Marx not even once.

[Anonymous No.11090988]

>>11090909
I have read him. I don't care too much about forced equality and the destruction of individualism.

[Anonymous No.11091285]

>>11090988
You clearly haven’t read Marx, he wrote very little about equality and always emphasized the importance of invidual liberty.

[Anonymous No.11091288]

>>11091285
*individual liberty

[Anonymous No.11091291]

When will people realise post modernism isn't a real thing?

[Anonymous No.11091745]

>>11089877
You don't have to be a poltard to realise the man who started the biggest war in human history had a pretty big impact on the world

[Anonymous No.11091761]

>>11084742
desu marx is a really shitty hegelian since he and his followers just want their antithesis to skip over the synthesis stage and become the eternal thesis

[Anonymous No.11091768]

>>11084920
also the state will fucking murder you when they decide you're a bourgeois khulak pig in a genocide people will deny for decades

[Anonymous No.11091770]

>>11084932
why is an alleged mao quote overlaid over a group of black revolutionaries?

[Anonymous No.11091774]

>>11085075
spooks are spooks

[Anonymous No.11091780]

>>11087428
>communism isn't a political ideology

[Anonymous No.11091785]

>>11084920
>Under communism you keep everything you thing is meaningful to you and that you need to live a happy life
Who determines that? The collective? How does the collective know what's more meaningful to me than I do?

[Anonymous No.11091877]

>>11090584
People being wrong in foreseeing the progress of AI doesn't hinder that anon's point about the trend of automatization slowly making work obsolete.

[Anonymous No.11091882]

>>11084920
*starves*

[Anonymous No.11091908]

>>11091785
Communism is a post sacristy society so the collective won't give a shit

[Anonymous No.11091969]

>>11084807

[Anonymous No.11091977]

>>11084920
Read Socialism: Utopian and Scientific you nigger. You be peddling a buncha half truths.

[Anonymous No.11091989]

>>11084412
>got women into the workforce
>he doesn't realise this was brought about by capitalism for maximising labour and consumers, breaking down any structure of kinship in favour of disgruntled pure consumerism

[Anonymous No.11092134]

>>11091780
It is, but it's also a social, philosophical, and economic ideology. Monarchism just means advocacy of monarchy in a (almost always) contextual sense. It isn't comprehensive or universal, elaboration is needed if you want to say anything. You most likely just mean a hereditary dictatorship but that's not a real position because it addresses almost nothing about the function of a society.

When I say that I'm a monarchist as an Australian, I mean that I advocate the retainment of the 'constitutional monarchy' part of Australia's political system as well as the cultural and historical baggage as being of paramount importance. For some other Australian monarchists, they hold the same views except with the addition of it only applying to the present Queen. There may be other monarchists who advocate a huge shift in our political system, perhaps in favour of moving closer to absolute monarchy or creating an Australian monarchy, absolute or otherwise. Obviously for different people and different countries, being a monarchist has the required (contextual) elaboration that general meanings do not have.

You can't just say 'monarchism'. It isn't a collection of ideologies/systems that can run a country/society. It could be any combination of them.

[Anonymous No.11092145]

>>11084412
Okay, you don't like /pol/. We get it, dude.

[Anonymous No.11092174]

>>11084377
>Why shouldn't you read Marx?
Because inequality is a far, far deeper issue than Capitalism. Capitalism actually deals with inequality far better than many of the systems of governments that have spanned the last 2 millennium. I'd say the most basic proof of that is the fact that monarchy is based on inequality at the very core, you have a chance in capitalism to get to the top. Anyway. that's my reasoning, you need to go deeper into far more complex issues and scenarios than Marx to solve inequality.

[Anonymous No.11092177]

>>11092134
>A monarchist upset that a communist lumped his diverse and nuanced ideology into one strawman

The irony is all too real

[Anonymous No.11092231]

>>11084377
hb spend the infinitesimal 1 week reading it and forming your own opinion you brainlet

[Anonymous No.11092306]

At bare minimum you have to read him as much as you have to read any religious text, if you are trying to understand the intellectual primary sources that changed world history. For better or worse, Marx and Engels are a huge part of the intellectual history of mankind, specifically in modernity.
Apart from that, as this thread proves to any Marx readers, the Marx who people who haven't read Marx argue against is not the real Marx. Marx has a far more nuanced view on capitalism than the ones that are usually portrayed. It's important to realize 1) that he wasn't the first socialist, the idea predates him and 2) that his and Engels' polemical critiques are leveled against other socialists who the socialists of today often end up emulating more often than they are against capitalist political economy.
Also, the methods of materialism and hegelian dialectic are not as obscure or difficult to grasp as they're made out, especially as used by Marx. They make intuitive sense to anyone who has thought about history, politics, economics, and the like, or at least make intuitive sense to me. Once they're clearly grasped, they're useful ways to think about things you probably already think about all the time in a different light.
Marx's materialism is not dogmatic, it's more of just an analytical method. In analyzing human society, there isn't a firmer ground to try to empirically analyze than material relations among human beings. Nobody can argue that production isn't an aspect of human organization which ends up affecting us. What Marx does is analyze how this happens, and concludes that its effects run deep into social life and individuals minds to a much greater extent than they are aware of. This is where the "pure ideology" memes come from. Once you see ideology (the unconscious internalization of the ruling material and social order), it's hard to unsee.
Furthermore, with dialectics, the only point relevant to Marxism is, as in Lenin's definition of dialectics, "the study of contradiction in the very essence of objects." Marx's most famous and I would say main thesis is that there is a material class contradiction in the very essence of capitalism. That is to say, based on the way capitalism operates in its essence, it creates a situation where the interests of the owners of private property necessarily have opposed interests to thoewho own nothing but their labor power to sell. This, among other contradictions of capitalism, makes it less stable than it appears.

The Communist Manifesto is a pretty good introduction, but only a stopping point for a lazy person. The German Ideology and The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte are both good mid-level difficulty Marx, and you can read Capital if you really care enough to completely understand Marxism with like 100% thoroughness (though some parts stand well enough on their own without reading the whole thing). Reading the first and parts of the others, you should get why its worth your time.

[Anonymous No.11092362]

>>11084921
>>11084746
unironically these. I can't say Marx is the greatest but I know this because I read him and formed my own opinions about his work.
>>11092174
>capitalism is actually good
>which is why you don't have to read Marx trust me he's useless
what level of willful ignorance are you on anon

[Anonymous No.11092593]

>>11090988
you took a risk and I can respect that, but it really didn't pay off

[Anonymous No.11092599]

>>11092177
>diverse and nuanced

[Anonymous No.11092606]

>>11091785
every freedom is decided by someone, the question is whether you want it to be decided by psychopathic pedophiles like Jeff Bezos or by you and your local community

[Anonymous No.11092619]

>>11092174
You might have watched a couple of dr jordan b peterson lectures but that doesn't make u an expert. Inequality is inherent to capitalism, the fact that there isn't formal exclusions for stratas of society is irrelevant. For capitalism to function there needs to be a working class and it needs to be far bigger than the capitalist class. It is possible for individuals to move between those classes (all though their are social and economic prohibitions that restrict this) but it is not possible for anything like equality.

[Anonymous No.11092621]

>>11084377
There is no dialectic.

[Anonymous No.11092625]

>>11092306
I need to write an article on the social phenomenon of how once the methodology of cult-like intellectual (or non) movements start showing undoubtable signs of epistemological weakness the its proponents start suddenly making amendments to it in an attempt to keep it alive. It happens everytime: Marxism isn't actually dogmatic, psychoanalysis wasn't mean to be a science anyway, Galileo saying the Bible isn't meant to be taken literally, science can solve everything except these things that it can't solve and to which we know the answers because they are self evident because we said so, et cetera et cetera et cetera.

[Anonymous No.11092640]

>>11092306
>Hegelian dialectics
>"materialist" Hegelian dialectics
>not dogmatic
>empirical
Stop.

[Anonymous No.11092713]

>>11091761
The “thesis, antithesis, synthesis” triad has little to do with Hegelian dialectics

[Anonymous No.11092720]

>>11092640
Hegelian dialectic is empirical, read Kojève: https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/kojeve.htm

[Anonymous No.11092792]

>>11084971
Kek'd audibly

[Anonymous No.11092811]

>>11092619
Why would you want equality?

[Anonymous No.11093060]

Here, I'll quote a letter from his father
>"Alas, your conduct has consisted merely in disorder, meandering in all the fields of knowledge, musty traditions by sombre lamplight; degeneration in a learned dressing gown with uncombed hair has replaced degeneration with a beer glass. And a shirking unsociability and a refusal of all conventions and even all respect for your father. Your intercourse with the world is limited to your sordid room, where perhaps lie abandoned in the classical disorder the love letters of a Jenny [Karl’s fiancée] and the tear-stained counsels of your father. "

[Anonymous No.11093080]

>>11090988
Fucking idiot, stop embarassing yourself here and read a book.

[Anonymous No.11093151]

Communism stifles freedom
The 'best' economic system would be highly regulated capitalism with a good amount of social programs as a bottom rung safety net.

[Anonymous No.11093179]

>>11085326
explain homelessness in first world country

[Anonymous No.11093204]

>>11090584
>You need to humans to assess the value of AI, to work in tandem with them, to make the end decision and use their insights as educated guesses.
yeah but when 2 human +AI can do the work of 10 what are the other 8 going to do? we're already producing more than what the earth can sustain. western economy works by selling useless gizmos that breaks after 2 years. at one point or another we need to shift the focus from "can we do it" to "how can we distribute it". that's communism.

>But the [...] capitalism.
modern industry is based on fordism+investment which is what capitalism is (no capitalism is not selling and buying on the free market). mercantilism was based on hoarding gold for no good reason.

>Adaption has been around forever. You need to adapt to trends period. You should be guaranteed a job with not a single skill?
what if every jobs require a minimum of 110 IQ to be done efficiently. do we genocide the useless? do we let them starve?

>Start-ups are at an all time high, people are literally following their path and seizing new opportunity wherever it lies.
kek start ups is a meme. you only start one to cash out 2 years later when you sell to a megacorp

>Half a million is a hell of a lot of people that seem to be working for this new company.
no it isn't because retail would require more workers.
>but then you just pay people to dig a ditch and then fill it
yeah, strangely enough after productivity is high enough, under capitalism, you need to pay people to do useless thing. why do you think silicon valley is pushing for an UBI?

>We produce enough food for everyone. Do we have the supply chain to get that to everyone? The infrastructure to take food from high yield areas and bring it to third world countries without hiccups? [..] Come on.
cmon now. half the reason those regions are a closterfuck is because of capitalism.
the syrian war was caused by a drought linked to climate change destabilizing the regime plus international players fighting over natural gas
do you seriously think it would be impossible to stabilize if not the middle east at least africa without conflicting interests?
also i linked the biofuel article was just to substantiate my claim that we produce enough food

>Like what? Markets that are over saturated? Those markets become replaced, there are pivots, the companies that run in them transition or become bought out. I don't understand what your even trying to say here
the markets are just social constructs (originally) buildt to feed capital in the most efficient way to the industry. the very simple fact that you don't understand this is proof of why capitalism is growing because it's the only thing it know how to do not unlike a cancer.
a non infinite grow enviroment is the Earth. we have limited fertile and livable soil, limited clean air, limited natural resources. the only way to escape this is terraforming mars.

[Anonymous No.11093226]

>>11092811
I'm responding to the point about capitalism being a force of equality, which it clearly isn't.

but to answer your question, because I like it.

[Anonymous No.11093874]

>>11093151
Wow, what an orginal opinion

[Anonymous No.11093888]

>>11092811
more equal societies have physical and mental health problems, less drug and alcohol problems, lower levels of obesity, lower rates of incarceration, higher rates of education, lower rates of teenage pregnancy, and lower crime rates

also /pol/'s much vaunted "golden age" of the 1950s in the USA also corresponded with the lowest wealth inequality in its history

[Anonymous No.11093895]

>>11093888
>[less] physical and mental health problems, less drug and alcohol problems, lower levels of obesity, lower rates of incarceration, higher rates of education, lower rates of teenage pregnancy, and lower crime rates.
So if there were a society that offered all of those things, yet was extremely unequal, there wouldn't be an issue, right? Hypothetically speaking.

[Anonymous No.11093900]

>>11084911
The humanitarian defense of communism has always been the most laughable shit. So quick to admit your ideology is just a reaction.

[Anonymous No.11093928]

>>11084915
Trots unironically believe this

[Anonymous No.11093936]

>>11093888
>More equal society
What does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.11094217]

>>11092606
I'll side with the pedos if it means they won't murder me for my stuff.

[Anonymous No.11094405]

>>11094217
no one wants your stuff u fucking moron

[Anonymous No.11094464]

[Anonymous No.11094792]

>>11091768

I don't think anybody denies it, though tankies still defend it as necessary. I think the fear of the terror is legitimate when it comes to total revolution, but the terror goes both ways. The infamous Chilean helicopter rides that anti-commies love may appear as though they were limited to a minority of potential tyrants, but in principle they are the same repression that occurs in any terror. We must kill these dissidents for peace and prosperity etc., but the all out revolutionary terror has a wider scope because it isn't repressing those who are dissidents to the current status quo, usually a limited group, rather it's suppressing those who are remnants of the status quo in order to facilitate the total overturning of the constitution of the society. This can be anybody, depending on how paranoid and violent the terror gets. And of course, if the revolutionary leaders begin fearing failure as a liability for the strength of the revolution, they may start imprisoning and executing people for simple human error under the justification of "sabotage" or "betrayal".

But of course none of this is a feature of communism, it's a feature of a group disempowering the ruling class. People get executed, people get charged with treason, people are sent to jail for their former affiliations etc. this has occurred throughout history. It's just a point of western propaganda that socialist states were special in this regard, that it is uniquely destined to be a repressive police state. The USSR had a pretty bad terror under Stalin, but even then it significantly abated after him.

[Anonymous No.11094901]

>>11094464
There is literally nothing wrong with being against fascism.

[Anonymous No.11095471]

>>11092640
read hegel before writing about him

[Anonymous No.11095475]

Marxists don't even read Marx.

[Anonymous No.11096367]

>>11094901
But AntiFa are fascists and use fascistic techniques

[Anonymous No.11096445]

>>11087868
The function of white as an adjective should be a good indication.

[Anonymous No.11098207]

>>11096367
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Anonymous No.11098603]

>>11098207
solid argument bud, you won that one for sure

[Anonymous No.11100482]

>>11094464
Assault and theft? Well, have fun in jail.

[Anonymous No.11100557]

>>11096367
Educate yourself, moron. Fascism is extremely complicated and very much a 100% opposite of antifa

[Anonymous No.11100562]

>>11100557
>it's another episode of fascist brainlet pretends his ideology is nuanced

[Anonymous No.11101565]

>>11100562
they like fighting and stories about the past and they don't like anyone whose name they can't pronounce, if that isn't a nuanced and balanced basis for a political ideology I don't know what is.

[Anonymous No.11101679]

>>11084377
Incredibly important philosopher and theorist of the Enlightenment. Marx gave the humanities tools to deconstruct and understand capitalism. As such, his work and analysis is used in aristic, literary, and film analysis. As well, his ideas are the foundation of many of today's philosophers, such as Zizek. And that's not even to mention the political theory.

[Anonymous No.11101689]

>>11101679
>such as Zizek