/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11830742]

why don't right wingers understand economics?

[Anonymous No.11830799]

>>11830742
because they think they will be rich one day

[Anonymous No.11830810]

Why don't left-wingers understand the infeasability of Utopia on earth?

[Anonymous No.11830811]

>>11830742
They do, they just have vested interests in pretending not to.

[Anonymous No.11830839]

>>11830742
"right-wingers" aren't a monolithic entity, a lot of them dislike capitalism too

[Anonymous No.11830847]

No one 'understands' economics. It's entirely based around political exigencies.

[Anonymous No.11830848]

>>11830742
Why don't Marxists understand accelerationism when Marx himself advocated for it?

[Anonymous No.11830850]

they wilfully don't understand marx.....that's different

[Anonymous No.11830855]

>>11830810
Why don't Nazis?
Marxism isn't utopian, but you would know that if you read literally anything about it that wasn't written by someone trying to "debunk" it.

[Anonymous No.11830859]

>engels
the goatee is becoming sentient

[Anonymous No.11830861]

>>11830855
>Marxism isn't utopian
it is
post scarcity is unachievable

[Anonymous No.11830868]

>>11830848
Not advocating reformism and advocating accelerationism are quite different things.

[Anonymous No.11830870]

>>11830799
and a decent percentage of those people will become rich one day according to their own perception of wealth. capitalism plays with human instinct in a mixed fashion while communism rejects it which leads to totalitarianism.

[Anonymous No.11830871]

>>11830839
I exclude communitarians and classical conservatives. unfortunately that's not very many people.

[Anonymous No.11830879]

>>11830861
Good thing that isn't the goal of Marxism.

[Anonymous No.11830884]

>>11830848
>Marx advocated for accelerationism
kill yourself NRx faggot, Marx didn't tell the people of the paris commune to just pack it up and wagecuck capitalism into collapse

[Anonymous No.11830889]

>>11830879
have you read the Fragment on Machines?

[Anonymous No.11830892]

>>11830855

>Marxism isn't utopian

Read Engels, Principles of Communism, question (and answer) 20 and then be quiet.

[Anonymous No.11830912]

>>11830892
>Marxism is utopian
Read Engels, Socialism : Utopian and Scientific, and then be quiet.

[Anonymous No.11830927]

>>11830871
>unfortunately that's not very many people.
Early liberalism killed a lot of people.

[Anonymous No.11830948]

>>11830889
Have you?
That's not describing post-scarcity, and Marx never uses that term.
The idea isn't to eliminate work altogether, and it never was.
Instead Marx believed that it's possible to reduce it only to a minimum of socially necessary physical labor, and distributing that work equally across all people will allow for more and better automation that doesn't merely benefit the interests of the ruling class.

[Anonymous No.11830949]

>>11830927
every revolution kills a lot of people.
literally name a single dominant political ideology that wasn't established through war

[Anonymous No.11830958]

>>11830927
>Early liberalism killed a lot of people.
not in america ;)
only euromutts had to fight over liberal values

[Anonymous No.11830972]

>>11830799
fpbp

[Anonymous No.11830973]

>>11830884

"The weapons with which the bourgeoisie felled feudalism to the ground are now turned against the bourgeoisie itself.

But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons — the modern working class — the proletarians.

In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e., capital, is developed, in the same proportion is the proletariat, the modern working class, developed — a class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increases capital.

-Communist Manifesto, section 1, classic left-accelerationism. You do not know what you are talking about.

[Anonymous No.11830975]

>>11830958
you can thank the french for that, if it wasn't for them your country wouldn't see the light, and ironically the amount of debt they got into trying to cuck the UK from it's colony is what created the socio-political condition for the revolution

[Anonymous No.11830979]

>>11830810
>That book's sources and scholarship have been called into question numerous time it's mostly propaganda.

[Anonymous No.11830981]

>>11830742
Economics, judged on its predictive record, is a failed discipline. Nobody should fill their head with pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.11830983]

>>11830958
What do you think the American revolution or the Civil War were?

[Anonymous No.11830991]

>>11830742
Marxist critiques of industrial capital are correct, its critiques of financialized techno-capital are piss poor and its proposed remedies are insane bordering on an existential threat that we're all lucky are too limpid to have any effect on the public or ruling classes.

[Anonymous No.11830994]

Have the marxbots here come up with an argument that isnt some spin on "tfw to intelligemt" yet?

[Anonymous No.11830996]

>>11830973
>thinking the manifesto, a political pamphlet meant for uneducated workers will somehow advocate accelerationism
sure thing anon

[Anonymous No.11830999]

WHY do commies double down on outdated ideas from 150 years ago?
Workers (speaking from a European perspective) no longer have an average lifespan of 30 years, they don't work 20 hours a day, their salary is no longer a piece of bread a day, they are not uninsured, education is free, healthcare is free
It's not a perfect system but Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system in the world could ever hope to
>muh third world and asia
living standards are slowly but surely rising there as well, poverty is in decline, life expectancy is rising
fuck you if you think any of this is exploitative or unfair

[Anonymous No.11831015]

Marx is a sociologist first and an economist second. Or more to the point he was a political economist. You can scour Das Kapital for his dull technical economic analyses, but you never find him summing up empirically testable statements about economics.

He makes moralizing and social behavior laden claims about fairness, distribution of wealth, property ownership, capital accumulation, and other facets of political economy that are descriptive not proscriptive assertions.

[Anonymous No.11831014]

They only care about identity politics

[Anonymous No.11831017]

>>11830999
Because I don't derive my sociopolitical affiliation from what's new and hip, but rather from what I genuinely want to see in society.

I despise what capitalism has done to art and culture.

[Anonymous No.11831038]

>>11830999
1. the whole world is not Europe
2. tf do any of those things have to do with capitalism anyway?

[Anonymous No.11831058]

>>11830994
Yeah, but it's beyond your comprehension.

[Anonymous No.11831062]

I'm fine with marxism for the most part but I can't stand the people who say communism is inevitable

[Anonymous No.11831071]

>>11831017
What do you want to see in society that's so fundamentally different from what Capitalism has to offer?
What has Capitalism done to art and culture? The market is nothing more than a mirror of society. It dynamically offers what the people want. How would Socialism/Communism change that? How would a Communist system stop the average worker from wanting a cheap thrill and to get drunk?

[Anonymous No.11831072]

>>11830847
This, nobody knows how to, or is incentivized to formulate a genuine scientific foundation for economics. All economic theories in circulation today are a superstructure generated by the densest concentration of capital.

Economics theories are devised to justify and rationalize the wealth of investment banks and other economic outperformers, not to detail reality or capture regular laws.

[Anonymous No.11831082]

>>11831062
Yeah, historical determinism is a mistake.
It encourages free-riding and complacency.
Just like the union you joined isn't a necessary historical fact and is something you need to fight from being subverted, socialism will not happen unless you work with the revolution to dismantle the existing bourgeois state.

[Anonymous No.11831086]

>>11831071
>The market is nothing more than a mirror of society. It dynamically offers what the people want.
wrong, culture is entirely manufactured under capitalism

[Anonymous No.11831089]

>>11831071
>The market is nothing more than a mirror of society.

citation needed

[Anonymous No.11831092]

>>11831038
>the whole world is not Europe
I addressed that. Everywhere regulated Capitalism has been adopted living standards have risen drastically
>tf do any of those things have to do with capitalism anyway?
Why do you pursue Communism if not to improve the living standards of the average worker?

[Anonymous No.11831104]

>>11831071
i would think people would like to be more than mere consumers and producers of shit they don't care about.

[Anonymous No.11831110]

>>11831071
When you do something with an eye to profit, you cannot do it for its own sake. One man cannot serve two masters.
To be a professional in a capitalist systems means being a professional profiteer.
It stops being about creating something good or original, it becomes about creating something at best popular and at worsr downright exploitative.
It encourages suspicion and mistrust for your fellow man. How desperate is he? Does he just want to sell you snake oil?
It means ceding your chance at the life you want to someone who was born with more than you could ever have or achieve without selling your soul.

[Anonymous No.11831117]

>>11831089
>would you like product a or product b
>i'll have b
>person who makes a goes bankrupt
>b has been chosen by the people as what they want

[Anonymous No.11831133]

>>11830742
The only thing I agree with Marx on is the abolition of exchange-value.
I don't think our economy is structured in a correct manner, we produce for exchange instead of direct use, so we're left with vacant homes when there are homeless people, food gets thrown when not sold...etc

[Anonymous No.11831147]

Why do Marxists continue to stick to a 200 year old theory of economics?
It's like a physicist in the 21st century refusing to move past Newtons theory of gravity.

[Anonymous No.11831158]

>>11830810
>Don't try to improve society, that would be infeasible

[Anonymous No.11831164]

>>11831147
Classical mechanics is still useful and incredibely accurate at everyday scales, even though the model is wrong.

Most physicists still use it for back of napkin and other niche situations, and flesh out those ideas in more complex models later.

[Anonymous No.11831178]

>>11830742
The only way out is through

[Anonymous No.11831187]

>>11831147
Why does everyone assume Marxism as a school of thought hasn't had any contributions since Marx?

[Anonymous No.11831190]

>>11831178
Capital is sentient

[Anonymous No.11831203]

>>11830847
t. brainlet

why do people fall into defeatist and reductionist arguments?
phd economist here and LMAOing at your life, anon.

[Anonymous No.11831204]

>>11831133
That won't be feasible because it threatens the existence of capital, it wouldn't allow it.
Capital is sentient.

[Anonymous No.11831212]

>>11830742
Modern leftists don't give half a shit about "seizing the means of production." All they want is for poor oppressed brown people and womyns to have equal access to the delights of capitalism. You've been so thoroughly cucked by neoliberals that it's not even funny. Orthodox Marxists are a fringe movement within a fringe movement.

It doesn't matter if you "understand" economics or not because even if you did nobody would care what you think. They would tell you to check your privilege and pay a bit more in tax so that muslim refugees can afford to buy onions lattes with extra pumpkin flavoring

[Anonymous No.11831216]

>>11831203
Damn, so you devoted your life to the hagiography of the rich?
That's a new level of false consciousness senpai.

[Anonymous No.11831217]

>>11831203
t.brainlet
Nobel prize laureat here and LMAOing at your life, anon.

[Anonymous No.11831225]

>>11831212
t. I learned everything I know about the modern left from Breitbart

[Anonymous No.11831226]

>>11831190
>>11831204
stop this forced meme

[Anonymous No.11831233]

>>11831147
why do mathematicians stick to two thousand year old theories?

[Anonymous No.11831239]

>>11831203
>phd economist
fucking christ i can't imagine the amount of crap you've filled your head with over the years.

[Anonymous No.11831240]

>>11831216
nice big words, bucko, but no, i have focused on how to devise better antitrust policy. its stuck in the 70s where the only determinant of whether firm conduct is bad is whether consumer prices increase. clearly, theres much more than that but policy takes a long time to change.
>>11831217
the "nobel" is a meme, desu nee. thaler didnt deserve it. fight me 1v1 not online and see what happens

[Anonymous No.11831246]

>>11831233
they don't. nothing in mathematics from 2k years ago has survived

[Anonymous No.11831249]

>>11830855
cuz nazis are no different from commies

[Anonymous No.11831250]

>>11831110
so was the Capella Sistina not a work of passion?
>It means ceding your chance at the life you want to someone who was born with more than you could ever have or achieve without selling your soul.
how is that any different from being born ugly or deformed?

[Anonymous No.11831251]

>>11831239
a lot of it is crap but not the kind you expect. the mathy shit at least had economic meaning. nowadays economic research is like "the effect of MTV 16 and Pregnant on Births" or some other cutenomics memey crap. its sociology tier and no economics in it. super clickbaity. blame women entering the profession for this decline.

[Anonymous No.11831254]

>>11831239
seriously is this a meme or do people on 4chan actually believe studying economics is a scam?

[Anonymous No.11831257]

>>11830855
>Why don't Nazis?
The fact that this was your retort says something about your politics

[Anonymous No.11831261]

>>11831254
It is a complete joke... there is no phenomenal self, Marx, Kant and Descartes should be burned and banned, all political and economic philosophy based on the idea of actors or agents must be uprooted, extirpated and the proliferating forces snuffed out and permanently subdued by a stronger model, one based in flux.

[Anonymous No.11831264]

>>11831254
sadly, yes, thats the norm here. this board is full of underage pseudo-marxists that dont like the fact that their parents are upper-middle class and subjected them to a life of luxury, so they cant gain inspiration from "the streets" or some opium den.

outside /lit/, /pol/ thinks economists are all jews lol. talk about horseshoe effect.

[Anonymous No.11831271]

>>11831261
and how exactly do you plan to create that model and set quotas without a million economists and logisticians working behind the scenes?

[Anonymous No.11831273]

>>11830996
What anime is this?

[Anonymous No.11831277]

>>11831225
So where are the actual marxists? All I see are parliamentary socialists and other cucks. I'm genuinely curious. Pic related, this is the leader of the left wing in Canada. He is a rich lawyer from Toronto who by his own admission owns several rolex wristwatches. This is the guy who lectures you on your white privilege.

[Anonymous No.11831285]

>>11831271

[Anonymous No.11831291]

>>11831277
>All it takes to be a socialist is to call yourself one
I'm guessing the Nazis were socialists and the DPRK is democratic

[Anonymous No.11831293]

>>11831178
Capital, in its ultimate self-definition, is nothing beside the abstract accelerative social factor. Its positive cybernetic schema exhausts it. Runaway consumes its identity. Every other determination is shucked-off as an accident, at some stage of its intensification process. Anything able to consistently feed socio-historical acceleration will necessarily, or by essence, be capital.

The current wave of technological automation – driven by advanced robotics, encrypted neural networks and furtive distributed data channels, machine learning, and big data networks and lobbying – is expelling labour from the production process faster than it can be reintegrated, disrupting the balance between labour and capital, and threatening a phase shift in global capitalism. The Dehumanisation of the Human: The rapid development and increasing accessibility of technologies that modify human biology, psychology, and sociality – spearheaded by the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science – threatens to dissolve the cognitive, reproductive, and evolutionary unity of our common form of life. We can look to the Media as the first of the Logos to suffer this fate. What we have now is not even just natural scarcity, but altered scarcity that is the result of totality of capital individually striving to produce conditions in which each cell (or the atom) gets the biggest yield.

The idea of free will and our assumed identities and self-understandings, including politics or social standing, are simulations that can and will be ultimately be sloughed off as we enter a post-industrial society. Automization of production will end any chance of post-scarcity before it begins.

[Anonymous No.11831298]

>>11831250
>so was the Capella Sistina not a work of passion?
No, religious motivation is a motivation for excellence. It's also a different and arguably purer motive than profit, which is why Michaelangelo was commissioned to paint it. It still isn't art for art's sake though. Socialist realism also isn't art for art's sake, but it also isn't the only type of art possible in an economy where the workers own the means of production.
>how is that any different from being born ugly or deformed?
You can have surgery

[Anonymous No.11831305]

I don't like having to work to stay alive

[Anonymous No.11831313]

>>11831285
and how would the ai exactly operate if economics is a scam? what would you program it to do?

[Anonymous No.11831327]

>>11831187
like what? fucking Althusser?

[Anonymous No.11831328]

>>11831313
wetware bootstrapping

[Anonymous No.11831339]

>>11831277
>>11831291
Marxism is exclusively a bourgeois intellectual hobby. The proletariat have never been interested in or understood Marxism and even less have they had a hand in Marxist revolutions and praxis.

[Anonymous No.11831345]

Marxism is neo-Cathar dogma

[Anonymous No.11831349]

>>11830742
Economics isn't fucking real

[Anonymous No.11831356]

>>11831328
my question remains, how could it calculate what the system needs to work? remember, economics is a scam, so it can't use that

[Anonymous No.11831374]

>>11831356
You're the only one who said economics was a scam, and you're completely prepared to push the straw man all the way to the top of your dying hill. What's next, everything is reducible to economics, "doctor?"

[Anonymous No.11831385]

>>11831356
We don't know, we haven't created Him yet. He's smarter than us, remember. Our little conversation here is in His greater will, so that He might come about and clean up this mess.

[Anonymous No.11831386]

>>11831374
not the guy you're replying to

[Anonymous No.11831388]

>>11830949
National Socialism.

[Anonymous No.11831389]

>>11830742
>economics
The only economics humans have ever used is bartering. From there it's been a matter of what's being bartered and for what. "Capitalism" does not exist in 2018 as it did in Marx and Engels' times, and ironically advanced in spite of them and the political movements they inspired.

Barter works. It's the only system that's ever been established. Forcing barter doesn't work.

[Anonymous No.11831401]

>>11831389
barter has never been a thing. civilizations across time always used some concept of currency, like stones
dont go full retard, please.

[Anonymous No.11831402]

>>11831356
we're blockchain

[Anonymous No.11831412]

>>11831385
So is an economic system calculable after all?
How do you compensate that with the idea of economics being a scam?
>>11831374
>>phd economist
>fucking christ i can't imagine the amount of crap you've filled your head with over the years.

>No one 'understands' economics.

>This, nobody knows how to, or is incentivized to formulate a genuine scientific foundation for economics

yeah definitely a strawman, anon :^)

[Anonymous No.11831422]

>>11831412
>So is an economic system calculable after all?
It probably depends on what you would call an economic system in the strict sense. Is what is invoked from reading this economics?

[Anonymous No.11831423]

>>11831401
>currency isn't barter
brainlet pls

[Anonymous No.11831439]

>>11831412
bayes would probably gives us some idea, we won't know the equation until it is immanentized and concrete

[Anonymous No.11831448]

>>11831439
Humanity is a means for AI to retroactively create itself?

[Anonymous No.11831458]

because economics is gay and retarded

[Anonymous No.11831460]

>>11831448
>Techno-Gnosticism
eh

alright

[Anonymous No.11831474]

>>11830742
if you think that value is determined by labor you are a complete fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.11831511]

This board is fucking trash now.

[Anonymous No.11831560]

>>11831474
oh?

[Anonymous No.11831562]

>>11830742
why are virtually all stock traders libertarian or right wing? i have never met or even seen a socialist stock trader in my life

[Anonymous No.11831567]

>>11831448
where have all these AI cultists come from?

[Anonymous No.11831569]

>>11831562
why does that surprise you?

[Anonymous No.11831576]

>>11831345
Cathars are a weird choice. I guess in a few ways they line up, but I’ve always compared them to the radical Protestants who took over Munster, only the marxists managed to enslave a third of the world’s population.