/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13288974]

ITT: writers who were never refuted

[Anonymous No.13289065]

>>13288974

[Anonymous No.13289111]

>>13289065
A stateless society where you can be a fisherman in the morning, factory worker in the midday, and writer in the evening, where everyone gets paid the same yet still are incentivised to spend years of their life in rigorous study to become a doctor or a scientist when they could just do menial labour and reap the same benefits, is impossible. There, refuted.
>>13288974
Stirner was a literal anarcho capitalist who thought might makes right and that poor people are just as responsible for riches as rich people are for poverty. If you point out the flaws in the power structure of an anarcho capitalist system he would just say that power justifies itself and if poor people deserved not to be oppressed they would simply overthrow the rich. This is obviously ridiculous. Refuted.

[Anonymous No.13289127]

>>13289111
Factory work is more boring than science work.

[Anonymous No.13289128]

>>13288974

[Anonymous No.13289146]

Aristotle
St. Thomas Aquinas

[Anonymous No.13289147]

>>13289127
Doctors and scientists have to spend years of their life in intensive study. The idea that people would subject themselves to that when they could just go fishing or working in a factory or plowing fields and get the same pay is ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.13289149]

>>13289128
How seriously will he take me if I respond to him directly?

[Anonymous No.13289154]

Daily reminder that Stirner was literally a cuckold.

[Anonymous No.13289159]

Any anti-foundationalist writer (like Stirner or Derrida or later Wittgenstein) was never refuted, any foundationalist was.

[Anonymous No.13289161]

>>13289149

[Anonymous No.13289167]

>>13289111
This is one of those "refutations" that make it clear you don't understand Marx.

[Anonymous No.13289172]

>>13289167
Marxism is foundationalist, foundationalism is refuted. Still lots of insight to take from Marx though.

[Anonymous No.13289177]

>>13289167
No my friend that was Marx's sincere proposal:
>“For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.”

He believed in communism, a stateless society.
He believed in communism, a socioeconomic theory where everything is free (meaning everyone gets paid the same).

Tell me exactly what I got wrong you slimy cretin.

[Anonymous No.13289179]

>>13289161
I wasn't sure how busy he was

[Anonymous No.13289209]

>>13289179
he's pretty busy. your best means of contact would probably be by entering the facebook group, there's also some kind of patreon q&a thing

[Anonymous No.13289212]

>>13289111
>This is obviously ridiculous
go on exblain

[Anonymous No.13289222]

>>13289209
Jfc the absolute idea of his personal discord

[Anonymous No.13289317]

>>13289111
>everyone gets paid the same
Listen kiddo, if you haven't read Marx stop talking about him. You are embarrassing yourself.

[Anonymous No.13289331]

>>13289154
YAWN, you're not making any good points you fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.13289341]

>>13289317
Everything being free is effectively the same as everyone getting paid the same.

[Anonymous No.13289374]

>>13289341
Not true. Some people are smart enough to make the same pay go much further.

[Anonymous No.13289396]

>>13288974
me, duh

[Anonymous No.13289428]

>>13289111
Read Marx AND Stirner.

>>13289177
>But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement.
>This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege.
>It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored.
>Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on.
>To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875

[Anonymous No.13289613]

You can´t refute writers that don´t make a point

[Anonymous No.13289955]

>>13288974
read Popper

[Anonymous No.13289979]

>>13288974
Wouldn’t the willing egotist take the form of a moral individual in a fair society?

[Anonymous No.13290145]

>>13288974
The best thing about Stirner was how buttmad he made Marx and Engels and how much time they spent trying to refute him.

[Anonymous No.13290661]

[Anonymous No.13290694]

Stirner is compatible with communal-level/primitive communism.

[Anonymous No.13290742]

>>13289428
That quote from Stirner is not endorsing socialism. He literally talks about how the poor are just as culpable as the rich for their predicament. He talks about competition between labourers and owners and says that if the labourers wanted they could drive up wages to meet that of the owners but that fundamentally whoever is more powerful is in the right. This means that a society ruled by an anarcho-capitalist corporation which uses its militia to suppress dissent and keep workers in line is just as Stirnerian as a society where workers seize the means of production and distribute everything equally.

[Anonymous No.13291358]

>>13290145
>trying
cope

[Anonymous No.13291370]

>>13289428
Are you claiming that under communism everything will not be free? Pretty sure I read Marx saying that somewhere.

[Anonymous No.13291680]

>>13289065
stirner and bakunin shat on him

[Anonymous No.13291705]

>>13291370
it means that people will not be "paud the same" since they have different needs. someone with no legs is in need of transportation more than someone with legs, for example.

>>13291680
imagine thinking this. other way around in stirner's case

[Anonymous No.13291709]

>>13289111
Stirner isn't an ancap. He just wants people to do solely what they want.

[Anonymous No.13291734]

>>13291709

Actually, he doesn't even want that- he's very careful to state that his musings and philosophies are applicable to him alone, are not meant to be utilized as the definitive philosophy of how to live one's life, and that if his philosophy is used at all, it should be as a temporary tool to alleviate oneself of their current situation.

[Anonymous No.13291758]

>>13291705
Okay but this type of pedantry is irrelevant. Marx unironically thought that people would spend years of their life studying to be a doctor when being a doctor reaps the exact same benefits as being a fisherman or musician under communism.

[Anonymous No.13291790]

>>13291758
doesn't seem that crazy. there are many doctors motivated by altruism rather than money.
regardless, many people spend years studying things because they find it interesting, not because of extrinsic rewards. philosophy, for example, pays like shit and requires intense study for a decade. and yet there are many philosophers

[Anonymous No.13291814]

>>13291758
Not conforming to 21st century middle class consciousness doesn't invalidate Marx. On the contrary.

[Anonymous No.13292006]

>>13289111
jordan peterson fanboy who has never read marx spotted

[Anonymous No.13293063]

>>13291758
and here too and nevertheless people study

[Anonymous No.13293433]

>>13291758
Became a MD, now studying philosophy, not intending to practice. It just takes 6 years before you can start working, also most people weren't after the money (which honestly isn't as good in Euroland, the job security is) but did it out of duty (family tradition) or other spooks (prestige, moral obligation...). It's not hard to imagine that most of the same retards would become MDs in a communist society as well.

[Anonymous No.13293441]

>>13291734
>if his philosophy is used at all, it should be as a temporary tool to alleviate oneself of their current situation

Yeah no, he never states that. We're to do whatever we want with it.

[Anonymous No.13293455]

>>13291709
Yes which logically leads to anarcho capitalism. If the state was dismantled today who do you think would take power? The corporations. And for Stirner this would be fine because he thinks that might makes right.

[Anonymous No.13293465]

>>13288974
What is there to refute, exactly? "No u" is not an argument.

[Anonymous No.13293486]

>>13288974
>doing what makes you happy makes you happy
WOOOOOW WHAAAAT
STIRNER
IS
A
GENIYUS

[Anonymous No.13293499]

https://vocaroo.com/i/s1nD6eX1NgLg

ER... never to be forgotten

[Anonymous No.13293511]

[Anonymous No.13293520]

>>13293465

it's an argument winner

[Anonymous No.13293537]

>>13289065

[Anonymous No.13293746]

>>13293537
this is a plus of communism

[Anonymous No.13293853]

>>13289147
Medical school is a different beast, but outside of earning a math PhD people aren't drawn to the sciences for money.

[Anonymous No.13294271]

>>13289065
rent fucking free.

reminder that the only engels work anybody gives a fuck about in 2019 is a sketch of stirner that he doesn’t even get credit for.

NEET and his paypig BTFO yet again