/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13785175]

>Here we shall merely allude to the material conditions under which factory labour is performed. Every sense organ is injured by the artificially high temperatures, by the dust-laden atmosphere, by the deafening noise, not to mention the danger to life and limb among machines which are so closely crowded together, a danger which, with the regularity of the seasons, produces its list of those killed and wounded in the industrial battle

Is there a greater contributor to political economy than Marx?

[Anonymous No.13785188]

>>13785175
Sounds like the wingeing of another autistic jew who hates working for a living.

[Anonymous No.13785204]

>>13785188
>Sounds like the wingeing of another autistic jew who hates working for a living.

the current state of /lit/ lmao

[Anonymous No.13785233]

>>13785204
>giving a shit about marx
Pseud philosophy by another ivory tower jew who had nothing to do with the working class, and anything his followers touched turned to shit. Now fuck off.

[Anonymous No.13785246]

>>13785188
>>13785233
Fascism emerged from Marxist revisionism, goy. You owe your precious little Hitler to Marx!

[Anonymous No.13785259]

>>13785246
I'm fine with that. Also, hitler was replaced with a kike double in 1940, so fuck off.

[Anonymous No.13785274]

>>13785175
and yet he was enthusiastic about applied science and railroads

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL78Ujnz35A

[Anonymous No.13785307]

You know in science when a theory has been proven wrong they move on to another theory.
The fact that philosophers can't get past a theory that has been shown to be a failure proves that philosophy itself is a failure.

[Anonymous No.13785324]

>>13785307
The human experiment is a failure.

[Anonymous No.13785430]

>>13785307
if positivism is so great, why are there countless problems that are unsolvable in it's framework?

[Anonymous No.13785433]

>>13785188
Hello boomer

[Anonymous No.13785440]

>>13785233
Americuck

[Anonymous No.13785459]

>>13785307
So why haven't we abandoned capitalism, since we're literally all going to die from climate change because of muh free market?

[Anonymous No.13785466]

>>13785440
Why do you idolise murderous totalitarian regimes? Even Lenin didn't want Stalin as his successor.

[Anonymous No.13785480]

i dont agree with karl marx on everything but i think that the minimum wage should be $15 an hour.

[Anonymous No.13785576]

>>13785188
>assblasted american shares his brilliant insight on marx

[Anonymous No.13785775]

>>13785259
First time i hear this. Wouldn't be surprised. It seems fake people are a pretty old thing.

[Anonymous No.13785794]

>>13785175
Funny how fast this thread turned into shit, and particularly how four of five different species of shit have already appeared within the first 15 posts.

That aside, it's interesting to note how working conditions have changed (in Europe and the US at least) compared to what Marx describe. it's still shitty for a lot of people, but deaths are much less common, there are more legal recourse, and perhaps above all it is not considered normal by the society at large.

If you point out people are getting cancer from working in a factory (again, in the West) there will be a shitstorm. Still, it has to be pointed out.

I wonder what would Marx say about the current development of capitalism. On the one hand, things like the 2008 housing price crisis sound like textbook late capitalism. On the other hand labor in the West has been (and still is) under a kind of profound transformation Marx hadn't envisioned.

>>13785307
Almost nobody is a classical marxist anymore, philosophy has moved on. Contemporary marxism is getting more niche and also changing to reflect changes in society. It happens even to scientific theories (do you think Newtonian physics did look exactly the same in Newton' time as they did in Hamilton's?).

[Anonymous No.13785807]

https://twitter.com/osama_bongladen/status/1157866307578212352

[Anonymous No.13785818]

>>13785794
>On the other hand labor in the West has been (and still is) under a kind of profound transformation Marx hadn't envisioned.

Well, I'd argue he did envision it, and as early as Communist Manifesto at that:

>The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.

>The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere.

>The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country.

[Anonymous No.13785829]

>>13785175
That's honestly pretty great writing.

[Anonymous No.13785838]

>>13785307
Das Kapital is as fundamental in political economy as algebra is to math. Its methodology is as useful as the very facts it tries to explain and this methodology is what Mrxist thinkers use to build upon Marx's own omissions and, most of the time, they hit pretty damn close.

Also
>You know in science when a theory has been proven wrong
source?

[Anonymous No.13785847]

>>13785807
>i drink paint thinner
It shows.

[Anonymous No.13785852]

>>13785847
are you talking to the twitter user linked in that post

he can't hear you, man. this is 4chan

[Anonymous No.13785869]

>>13785852
Did I hurt your feefees, anon?

[Anonymous No.13785926]

>Marx
Economics has moved on. Read something up to date.

[Anonymous No.13785942]

>>13785869
What the fuck

[Anonymous No.13785946]

>>13785942
Yep, sure did hurt them, I'm sorry.

[Anonymous No.13785951]

>>13785188

t. wagecuck

why someone would be proud of needing to work for a living is beyond me. you might as well brag about being a peasant.

[Anonymous No.13785983]

>>13785926
Such as?

[Anonymous No.13785988]

>>13785175
>Is there a greater contributor to political economy than Marx?
He solved a lot of the factory worker's aches and pains when his (((followers))) shot most peasants and workers in the back of the head.

[Anonymous No.13785990]

>>13785926
>Economics
meme field

[Anonymous No.13786004]

>>13785990
If economics is a meme field then how come the Chinese have been able to apply keynesianism successfully?

[Anonymous No.13786013]

>>13785818
Interesting, it does seem prescient. But wasn't Marx focused on the underclass of industrial workers (the proletariat), as opposed to the peasantry and people in administrative office? Nowadays the West is all about services and techno-managment, and people working for heavy industries are dwindling in numbers. What would Marx say to a working population that has less than 5% of factory workers for instance (not saying we're there, but we could in 50 years)?

[Anonymous No.13786014]

>>13786004
because it literally doesn't matter. we already produce enough yet we keep producing while causing a shit ton of problems 10 years down the line

[Anonymous No.13786017]

>>13786004
Not him, but you have to admit the Chinese civilisation has developed the ideal culture for allowing state economic intervention to flourish. It's like a 5000 years large-scale experiment on slowly raising a people into obedience.

[Anonymous No.13786032]

>>13786014
Enviromental problems are being solved slowly but surely.
Countries that used to rely on coal power are switching to nuclear power and plastics will probably be replaced by biodegradeable plastics.
People are also having less children.
Well all end up eating cricket flower bread and everything will be overcrowded and shitty at some point but well have advanced virtual reality to cope.

[Anonymous No.13786038]

>>13785274
Without railroads there is no real way to have non port cities.
Heck there is no real way to move the city core away from the ports.

>>13786013
Not a lot, because there is a lot of trends that continues.
I.e corporation itself is hoarding IP and the profit, while the workers have little to no job/wage security beyond trying to monopolize negotiations.
"Seize the means of production" might be a little harder to spot, but its still exactly the same.

At the same time you need some form of industrial base to run society. The west is risking externalizing the monopoly of production to somewhere else, and that could bite the west pretty bad some time in the future.
I.E USA is currently running its bare minimum steel/transistor/heavy industry needed in case of WW3, which also means that sector of the industry is not profitable due being run on fumes. Which could turn out to be a huge problem if there is a WW3.

At the same time China is trying to monopolize resource extraction of rare earth metals by undercutting the marked long term. Its basically "seize the means of production", but without any of the flaws a corporation would have like limited economic scale or utility.

[Anonymous No.13786060]

>>13785233
>Pseud philosophy by another ivory tower jew who had nothing to do with the working class

"A preliminary condition, without which all further attempts at improvement and emancipation must prove abortive, is the limitation of the working day.

"It is needed to restore the health and physical energies of the working class, that is, the great body of every nation, as well as to secure them the possibility of intellectual development, sociable intercourse, social and political action." (Minutes of the General Council of the First International 1864-1866, pp. 342-3.)

[Anonymous No.13786072]

>>13786013
My short answer is, go read Zombie Capitalism, it's a great read.

Longer answer: First of all, "services" is a vague and misleading term. A lot of technical work that is absolutely necessary for modern industry to function is under "services". Also, automation may have decreased the absolute number of workers when compared to, say, the 70s, but it has also increased productivity per worker (since highly automated machines still need development and maintainance). The IT guys on an automated factory are still wage slaves and as disgruntled about the system as their predecessors on steam engines were. The people moving parts of cars or smartphones around the globe for assembly are proletarians. If anything, late-stage capitalism has taken professions that didn't count as working class during Marx's time (doctors, teachers) and put them in huge conglomerates, creating surplus value out of them. Most people you would call "farmers" today are actually working on a wage for agricultural megacorps, way closer to a proletarian than to a peasant.
Plus, late-stage capitalism is still prone to all of Marx's basic predictions, TRPF, concentration&centralization, etc. One or two things Marx would surely expand upon is the role of the capitalist state and financialization of the system, as those were things that were in newborn stage when he was writing and either he didn't get to finish his analysis because death or he didn't care to address them yet because he correctly considered them secondary at the time he wrote. That he still addressed both the state and the financial sector as important, though, as small as they were back then, is to his credit and only strengthens the rest of his argument.

I think Marx would still insist on the pivotal role of the working class as the revolutionary class, because the capitalist basis of economic relations is more or less the same, it's the superstructure that has expanded.

[Anonymous No.13786090]

>>13785794
>On the other hand labor in the West has been (and still is) under a kind of profound transformation Marx hadn't envisioned.
It's called division of labour. He wrote about it plenty.

>>13785926
Economics has moved on by giving up on explaining anything and settling on description of appearances.

[Anonymous No.13786119]

>>13786038
>Without railroads there is no real way to have non port cities.
Heck there is no real way to move the city core away from the ports.

i think Moscow existed before railways.... but even if it didnt. so what?