WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS, JORDAN? WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS???

File: 47 KB, 1140x601, 5D2B5658-473C-4CFA-BF07-97E9D0F4C0C7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:37:23 2020 No.14552088 [Reply] [Original]

WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS, JORDAN? WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS???

>>	Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:39:05 2020 No.14552101 >cites statistic illustrating number of marxists in academia.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:42:39 2020 No.14552121 >>14552101 But give me some names! Please! Make your worst enemies famous! I would like some names!

>>	Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:43:42 2020 No.14552127 >>14552088 stay hydrated my friends

>>	Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:43:53 2020 No.14552128 >>14552088 >I'm a Candian intellectual who speaks at Ivy Leagye schools and the only work of Marx I have read is a pamphlet.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jan 16 23:45:26 2020 No.14552136 >>14552128 >I'm a Candian intellectual Peterson is the intellectual Canadians deserve.

>>	« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj Fri Jan 17 00:17:42 2020 No.14552276 >>14552136 David Suzuki is Canadas leading intellectual. Gordon Peterson is a high school sub the Koch brothers propped up

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:18:31 2020 No.14552278 >I'm a marxist >Where are the marxists? >haha owned Reading the comments was a real wake-up how far from reality these people are, or more like how wide spread it was.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:21:59 2020 No.14552288 >>14552278 What he claimed is that postmodernists and Marxists are the same which is simply not true.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:27:40 2020 No.14552314

>>14552288

jal;kdjfslkfj

No he doesn't. He claims that when the communist bloc fell, political Marxism just wasn't feasible for a period among (intellectuals and that those who applied Marxist principles to other fields of study (especially in France) founded postmodernism as a movement. He doesn't conflate postmodernism with Marxism, he views postmodernism as a new Marxism (hence neo-Marxist)

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:30:48 2020 No.14552324 >>14552314 https://youtu.be/zCWdA5XhGmY

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:31:54 2020 No.14552327

>>14552314
This. How ironic that post-modernists cant seem to 'read between the lines'. Marxists believe humans are blank slates to be programmed, Post modernists believe there are an infinite number of interpretations of literature, culture, ect. Philosophically not that far apart really.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:36:22 2020 No.14552341

>>14552088
i don't even like jbp, and i hate buzzwords like markist and postmodern, but academia is completely cucked by communism at this point. first line in the communist manifesto:
>the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles
just go read any history textbook written after the 50's and this is half of what they talk about, how da evil vassals used and abused the poor peasants and shit, or how evil the greeks were for hiring farmers and not letting women vote. sure, maybe zizek has a way more autistic definition of marxism than i do, but i don't give a fuck about some commie splitting hairs so he can still convince himself that he's edgy and hip. fuck em both though. fuck literally anyone who can achieve "success" in the 21st century, because anyone who can is guaranteed to be a total piece of shit - no exceptions. not a single fucking exception. if you're not a BTFO autist "loser," you're a piece of shit useful idiot goy for satan and his legions. having even the slightest concept of honor or virtue will exclude you from participation in this world, let alone success in it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:39:10 2020 No.14552354 Dr Peterson.. it says here that Marx was against capitalism, but, we live in a capitalist economy. Wouldn't this contradict the notion that Marxists are in power?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:42:14 2020 No.14552375 >>14552088 >>14552314 In the video What zizek said was asking where those "postmodern neo-marxist" really are, not anything like this

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:45:34 2020 No.14552387 >>14552314 >He claims that when the communist bloc fell (1989-1991) >founded postmodernism as a movement (1950s onward) >he views postmodernism as a new Marxism (hence neo-Marxist) You are making him sound even more retarded.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:49:17 2020 No.14552406 >>14552375 I think he's agreeing with Petersen that postmodernism is rebranded marxism which is retarded.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:52:47 2020 No.14552420 >>14552101 the question wasn't about "Marxists in academia"; Zizek is a Marxist in academia. The question was, where are the Marxists in the neoliberal postmodern movement that Peterson accuses of being Marxist plot

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:53:09 2020 No.14552421 >>14552406 its all just rebranded judaism in the end

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:53:26 2020 No.14552424 >>14552088 I couldn't take the first 10 minutes due to the cringey e-sports tier atmosphere. Even Zizek seemed a bit ashamed to be there. >>14552341 based. but being a NEET sucks too, what can ya do

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 00:54:31 2020 No.14552429 >>14552314 >postmodernism as a new Marxism (hence neo-Marxist) okay but the neo-Marxists are their own intellectual school who hated the postmodernists, this is the whole problem.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:04:04 2020 No.14552467

>>14552424
>what can ya do
1.impregnate some thot with low standards and raise a family extremely frugally so you don't have to destroy your soul waging. (high risk, varying reward)
2.go out in a blaze of glory (low risk[meaning it is very easy to achieve the desired outcome because its solely dependent on your own actions], but very low reward because you die or go to jail probs)
3.become a monk.(medium risk[might end up hating it after you take your vows then you can never leave], varying reward[on earth])
4.be a total wagecuck consoomer for the rest of your life
5.kys

honestly don't think there are anymore options than this

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:11:43 2020 No.14552504 File: 9 KB, 1642x91, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14552276 I was wondering why I hadn't heard from old suzy since old CBC bits as a kid

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:14:33 2020 No.14552514

>>14552467
well I don't know what to tell you since I'm not exactly enthused about this situation either, but I will say whatever you do, don't take the evola tier "fuck modernism" meme seriously bro. this thinking tends to lead people to that, and man it's still cringe.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:45:27 2020 No.14552697

>>14552327
You've decoupled the two (marxism and post modernism) and have explained that JP means that Marxism led to Post Modernism.

Zizek's question was not about this. It was directed at the JP "catch phrase" that he repeated throw into YouTube content that would imply (and at times directly say) that Marxists were post modernists. Marxists are MATERIALISTS. Zizek was trying to clarify WHO these people were, which JP had no answer too.

Sorry brainlet.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:53:20 2020 No.14552745

>>14552088
Yeah, this is where JBP, like most boomers, gets confused. Marxists ain't the problem, pal. They're powerless and even within sociology departments which are the most Marxist they don't even comprise the majority of the faculty. The real problem is the neoliberals, who JBP unwittingly supports.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 01:55:14 2020 No.14552756 >>14552314 Even if I were to concede that's his real claim, it's also wrong.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:01:17 2020 No.14552783 >>14552314 >He doesn't conflate postmodernism with Marxism >He views postmodernism as a new Marxism (hence neo-Marxist) I know he has problems accepting his own responsibility, but my God what an idiot

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:05:42 2020 No.14552804 >>14552420 If you accept that there are marxists in academia the point is already lost, politics is downstream from what is pumped out of the universities

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:09:40 2020 No.14552817 they're right here, on /lit/, babbling incessantly about Peterson

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:15:31 2020 No.14552840 >neomarxist >neoliberal yadda yadda, I don't give a shit what they call themselves, they are anti white/anti nationalist just the same

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:23:49 2020 No.14552869 >>14552354 kek

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:24:47 2020 No.14552875

>>14552288
he has stated many times that he understands that on their supposed principles they differ, while in practice, and in actuality, they both draw from the same postmodernists ontology. in other words, today's cultural marxist (not pure economic marxist that I'm sure someone tries to confound) use the argumentation given by post-structutalist where everything is subjective power struggle. ofc they both seem to suffer from myopic logic by promoting a correct narrative, while arguing same time not to have one

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:26:11 2020 No.14552881 File: 78 KB, 282x300, VNfYgsb6Pqn4xlEBpYl11534fIpOfN1XeMe7NrzgmQs[2].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Now that the dust has settled, who won the debate?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:29:52 2020 No.14552894 >>14552875 >hey both draw from the same postmodernists ontology That is objectively wrong. Postmodernism is closer to Nietzsche and Heidegger while Marxism is a modernist economic idea.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:32:35 2020 No.14552906 >>14552875 Also if you believe Cultural Marxism is a thing then there is just nothing to discuss. You can read the books of actual Marxists. They have nothing to do with "Cultural Marxism" or whatnot.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:37:50 2020 No.14552926

>>14552804
Sure, but I think the more interesting point that Zizek made was that Petersons image of these "marxists" is really a much wider category, which he holds some sort of pathological anger against. When Peterson talks about these "cultural marxists" (or whatever they are called); the word "marxist" is just attached to pander to a certain far-right audience. When actually they aren't marxist at all. Historical materialism is inconsequential to modern, even leftist, academia – marxism simply isn't that relevant to anyone but peterson. To me it seems like when he says marxist, he really means someone who likes Derrida or maybe Foucault, whom may have arisen out of a certain marxist cultural movement, but you could hardly call them marxists in any meaningfull sense of the word.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:39:58 2020 No.14552936 >>14552926 >Historical materialism There are westerners who unironically still believe in this shit?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:46:05 2020 No.14552957 >>14552936 No that's my point, there aren't. But believeing it is sort of a key feature of "The marxist".

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:47:43 2020 No.14552961 >>14552804 >politics is downstream from academia That's a novel idea, anon. Why not write a book about it?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:48:09 2020 No.14552963 >>14552936 >eats whole cake >throws up >noooooo the material nature isn't real >noooooo it was Satan >noooooo people in the past didn't eat cake it was Satan

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:50:25 2020 No.14552968 >>14552963 I'd rather believe Satan than some dialectic that thinks that it can explain all of history.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 02:51:30 2020 No.14552972 >>14552963 >"Historical materialism" is just historical materialism. Get a load of this retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:09:32 2020 No.14553226 https://youtu.be/zQfEUeCZt8M Only non brainlet take on this event.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:14:14 2020 No.14553242 Peterson vs Land, who would win?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:16:36 2020 No.14553250

>>14552314
This makes no sense, when the USSR fell most of these so-called "pomo nelmarxista" were already old and had already composed their major texts. Also the whole "they had to hide their marxism under a cultura critique" talking point makes no sense: when Foucault and Derrida were writing their major texts communism was mainstream all over Europe. Had they really been marxists, they would not have had to dissimulate their real allegiance.
This whole narrative makes no sense unless you're historically illiterate

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:17:55 2020 No.14553254 >>14552504 holy fucking based

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:37:40 2020 No.14553295 >>14552936 On 4chan, yes. In the real world, no. Weird.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:52:40 2020 No.14553329

I think the point Zizek was trying to make was insidious. :3

Ever since The Hollywood Five, Marxism has been in the media, politics, and especially academia more frequently than any other aspect or religion.

In other words, Marxism is starting to pervade most aspects of social life, we even have a self-avowed socialist running for president. His point is that you can't stop them from existing. You can't stop them from doing what they need to do. All they need to do is slowly tax the wealthy and have more incentives to spread the wealth amongst the poor through progressive taxes, something Marx mentions in Das Kapital.

The question I am at my wits end with is why? Why is this so attractive to you? I just don't understand Marxists. Could someone explain to me why you need to do this? What seems 'Good' about this? What is GOOD ABOUT THIS. EXPLAIN TO ME WHY

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 04:58:13 2020 No.14553344 >>14553329 Sorry I meant the Hollywood Ten. I don't know why I fuck that one up so much.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 05:02:09 2020 No.14553358 >>14553329 >>14553344 This is obviously a joke of a post btw. I obviously see what's attractive about it. :3 Some things are more complicated than just transferring money tho, durrrr

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 05:17:13 2020 No.14553386 >>14552088 The fact that this "debate" is taken seriously makes me depressed about humanity. There are countless youtube videos made by randoms that are more insightful than this.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 05:27:51 2020 No.14553413

>>14553329
I'd love to respond, but this post is too stupid to be dealt with. It looks like you literally don't know the meaning of any of the technical terms you're using. I might as well waste my time debating with people who thinks that gyms are fascist (yes, what you wrote is THAT worthless)

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 05:56:37 2020 No.14553480 >>14553413 >he doesn't understand that progressive taxation was a tactic utilized by Karl Marx in Das Kapital. Let me guess, like most other Marxists, you haven't even read the literature? :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:28:07 2020 No.14553559 >>14553480 There are literally no "tactics" nor any sort of prescription in DK. Not only you have not read it, you haven't even bothered to read a summary of its contents.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:38:24 2020 No.14553591

>>14553559
>There are literally no "tactics" nor any sort of prescription in DK
I believe progressive taxation was in Das Kapital, but it also worked its way into The Communist Manifesto.

Now what about Das Kapital do you want to discuss? The falsity of the premises? How it works from a false supposition of class motivations? How it incorrectly determines the value of a product to be derived from labor exploitation? What do you need to discuss, sir? Why are you so infuriated over a man's 'science' without even attempting to look into actual, scientific, economics?

:3

I think most people here always get a kick out of the Marxist retards shitposting about nonsense.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:40:06 2020 No.14553595 i have no interest in defending peterson anymore, but everyone in academia is a marxist. you don't get paid and you don't get good grades if you don't agree. zizek was being extremely dishonest

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:42:32 2020 No.14553603 >>14553595 hahahahahaha

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:43:48 2020 No.14553607 >>14553603 you know i'm right

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:44:07 2020 No.14553609

>>14553595
Excuse me sir, but that was the POINT. Are you even reading the thread?

The level of Marxist support is so intense, that by asking Peterson to name names he essentially shamed him. There's no point.

Besides that, Marxism is so intense in academia and media, he can't label it a 'specific movement' anymore. Essentially Zizek is calling Peterson out for not being a Marxist.

It's hilariously retarded how the whole schools have gone to shit. It's because of stuff like this that I'm very glad Trump won the election. I know I'll be voting for him once again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:46:24 2020 No.14553621 >>14552136 Imagine being American and calling anyone stupid.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:46:25 2020 No.14553622 >>14552926 A good majority of my professors used marxist theory in the classroom. Dancing around reality isn't helping anyone here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:49:22 2020 No.14553631 if this were a real problem the right would throw its money at a counter academy

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:50:07 2020 No.14553636 >>14553609 >Are you even reading the thread? not really, that was just a truthful shitpost to get my day started. maybe i will later

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:50:38 2020 No.14553638 >>14553631 How about all of the institutions like Rand's Mises' etc etc.? I mean you might as well be posting this shit with a smirk on your face. You know it's true, modern academia is disgustingly Marxist. :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:55:30 2020 No.14553654 >>14553638 >think tanks designed entirely to press for tax breaks hmm it's almost as if they're miserly philistines that only care about the bottom line

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 06:57:56 2020 No.14553663

>>14553591
>I believe progressive taxation was in Das Kapital, but it also worked its way into The Communist Manifesto.
It's not in the Manifesto either, and that text gives actual prescriptions (to 19th workers, at least)
>Now what about Das Kapital do you want to discuss? The falsity of the premises? How it works from a false supposition of class motivations? How it incorrectly determines the value of a product to be derived from labor exploitation? What do you need to discuss, sir? Why are you so infuriated over a man's 'science' without even attempting to look into actual, scientific, economics?
I'm not a marxist, I don't see why I should defend a theory in which I don't believe. Furthermore, even if I wanted to do so for speculative reasons, I don't see why I should discuss it with you, a guy who knows nothint about it while still pretending that he did. Again, I might as well start discussing fascism with people who thinks that gyms are fascist. A complete waste of time.
> :3
Faggot

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:01:42 2020 No.14553673 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jBzV9kb8j28

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:02:17 2020 No.14553676 >>14553622 Where do you study? Post your lectures. I don't recall anyone from my economics studying friends mentioning Marx.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:02:43 2020 No.14553679

>>14553663
>I'm not a Marxist.... even if I wanted to....

Such an obvious tell. Anyway, if you don't understand that progressive taxation was mentioned within The Communist Manifesto, then perhaps you should not be a Marxist anyway, you obviously do not understand the basic tenets of the movement.

And you're upset :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:04:22 2020 No.14553684 >>14553676 >economics Is surprisingly free from Marx. I think the humanities have been somewhat infected though. Anyone actually study moral science these days along the lines of Bentham or Mill? Isn't it just Marx?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:06:12 2020 No.14553689
File: 13 KB, 241x346, 2BD0EFF4-324D-445D-A908-9ED7C1F2A01F.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

yeah, jordie is ill-informed to equate the idpol/pomo-left with marxism, pic related is more accurate in accounting for it. does not make it anyless idiotic though, Master Zlazloj even agrees.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:06:34 2020 No.14553692 >>14552088 WHERE ARE ZHE MARGZHIZHTS ZHORDAN WHERE ARE ZHE MARGZHIZHTSHSSHTH

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:07:13 2020 No.14553696
File: 127 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Why are Americans so obsessed with "Marxists" and "communists" that don't exist anymore? The US government stopped producing "reds under the bed" propaganda 30 years ago

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:07:43 2020 No.14553697 File: 15 KB, 168x250, 2B209366-6C38-48D8-9BB9-0DBD4175BD43.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14553689 also, pic related is the redpill on the contemporary university left as controlled opposition / cultural product of late stage capitalism.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:12:58 2020 No.14553707

>>14553696
Because they are starting to adopt the principles that Marx proposed over 100 years ago.

More and more progressive taxation along the lines of the ones proposed within the Communist Manifesto have started to rear their heads.

Not only this, but the media is heavily Marxist, with a powerful bent towards the oppressed masses. We might have the media to blame, for instance, for the Baltimore riots in 2015.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:14:19 2020 No.14553711

>>14553679
>
>I'm not a Marxist.... even if I wanted to....
Even if I wanted to play devil's advocate... That's not a tell
Anyway, if you don't understand that progressive taxation was mentioned within The Communist Manifesto, then perhaps you should not be a Marxist anyway, you obviously do not understand the basic tenets of the movement.
Quote the passage that supports your thesis then. It's just 50 pages long, but if youre too lazy to do so at least tell me where he says that. (I already know you won't do it, since there's no such passage, and since you'd rather die than to admit that you were wrong).
> :3
Faggot

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:14:53 2020 No.14553713

>>14552088
Anyone that hasn't been to university and claims Marxists are there should really be flogged. It's getting stupid. Nothing but neoliberals in university and no, burgers, those aren't the same thing.

Also whilst I'm posting putting coloured people and women in your video games also isn't communism or Marxism.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:16:06 2020 No.14553717

>>14553676
It was humanities. I assume math and business related fields avoid that talk. I do see it eventually coming for them as well. College was the biggest conformist experience of my life. It felt like I couldn't have another opinion. Even the college Republicans were a bunch of pussies (Milo came to our school). Most of my professors insisted we discuss privilege in English classes and some would go on class long political tirades. After christchurch, my female professor from Armenia had a big fit and argued for gun control. Marxist theory felt like a state requirement they taught it so much. Takenone humanities class especially English and you will know.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:16:30 2020 No.14553718

>>14553684
>Is surprisingly free from Marx.
Bulk of Marx's work was in economics. The rest isn't nearly as relevant.

>>14553696
>More and more progressive taxation
Last time I checked they had regressive taxation. So Trump has placed enough tax burden on the rich to reverse the famous line from Warren Buffet about paying less taxes than his secretary?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:17:17 2020 No.14553720 >>14553711 http://laissez-fairerepublic.com/TenPlanks.html It's one of the core planks of Communism you fucking retard. You're insane.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:18:33 2020 No.14553724 >>14553711 You're a fucking retard. :3 >>14553718 Yeah but Marx wasn't a scientific economist. He was more like Von Mises, Hayek, or Keynes. Not to say he didn't have valuable contributions. But not everything he said was correct.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:19:18 2020 No.14553727 >>14553717 Can you post outlines of the lectures, please? I mean the overview of topics taught at each lecture, not sure how you call it on the western side of atlantic,

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:25:00 2020 No.14553739 >>14553720 Wait, you're not going to tell me where you've read Marx advocating for these policies? >>14553724 Keep coping

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:27:31 2020 No.14553746 >>14553739 It's number two on the list buddy. A PROGRESSIVE TAXATION. Don't tell me you can't fucking READ.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:27:49 2020 No.14553747 >>14553727 I am graduated and have them no longer. Sorry.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:28:11 2020 No.14553748

>>14553720
the ten planks were derived from the demands of the workers movement of the time. Marx didn't hold them as particularly special or of particular importance to communism. It literally says this in the manifesto if you bother to read it.

the only people that care about the planks nowadays are people that want to claim every country is communist because they have a progressive tax rate or child labor laws

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:28:41 2020 No.14553750 >>14552088 >WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS, JORDAN? WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS??? In your culture.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:29:03 2020 No.14553753

>>14553724
Not him, but progressive taxation was indeed mentioned.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto
>"Proletarians and Communists", the second section, starts by stating the relationship of conscious communists to the rest of the working class. The communists' party will not oppose other working-class parties, but unlike them, it will express the general will and defend the common interests of the world's proletariat as a whole, independent of all nationalities. The section goes on to defend communism from various objections, including claims that it advocates communal prostitution or disincentivises people from working. The section ends by outlining a set of short-term demands—among them a progressive income tax; abolition of inheritances and private property; abolition of child labour; free public education; nationalisation of the means of transport and communication; centralisation of credit via a national bank; expansion of publicly owned land, etc.—the implementation of which would result in the precursor to a stateless and classless society.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:30:25 2020 No.14553759 >>14553747 They should be publically available or try courses from other unis. Otherwise your entire tirade will be classified as bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:30:42 2020 No.14553762 The entirety of the cultural studies was spawned from the primordial ooze of Marxism, and will always bear its mark no matter which superficial differences it decides to play. It is the house Mr. Williams built, and it will always be.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:31:04 2020 No.14553764 >>14553753 That's what I was saying :3 Thank you. >>14553748 I guess because everyone is jumping off a bridge we should just proclaim this as normal behavior?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:34:50 2020 No.14553778

>>14553762
>The entirety of the cultural studies was spawned from the primordial ooze of Marxism
HHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAH

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:36:39 2020 No.14553789 >>14553764 >I guess because everyone is jumping off a bridge we should just proclaim this as normal behavior? ? I'm not the person you were replying to, I was just pointing out the non-communist nature of the ten planks

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:37:47 2020 No.14553793 >>14553778 >laughing defiantly cause im deep in denial and got no arguments. Qt

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:38:01 2020 No.14553794 >>14553789 You're right, my bad, they are only from the Communist Manifesto. smdhjfc

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:40:14 2020 No.14553800 >>14552504 >>14552504 woaaaah sad for him but holy shit mad respect wheres the lie?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:40:27 2020 No.14553801 Jordan Peterson is a fucking moron that doesn't understand marxism. But marxism is still a gigantic pile of dogshit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:43:12 2020 No.14553811 File: 2.50 MB, 1884x2968, 20191227_215710.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14552906 They're all Jews just trying to subvert to Goyim either way

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:43:13 2020 No.14553810 >>14553697 >late stage capitalism Cringe You're just as retarded as those you criticize.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:44:32 2020 No.14553813 >>14553748 Progressive taxes and child labor laws SHOULD be abolished though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:44:52 2020 No.14553815 Dear :3 I've been thinking about you since the last economics thread you've been in. I'm kind of upset you skipped out on mine though >w> I'm hoping you're doing well and I hope to see you soon!

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:46:51 2020 No.14553825 >>14553810 >using arbitrary nominal moniker for current mode of production >muh cringe, cause he said CAPITALISM Dilate. I’m a con, just not bluepilled.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:46:56 2020 No.14553826 >>14553813 I think it should be analyzed from a viewpoint of 'When does a progressive tax become too much?' as opposed to just abolishing any progressive taxes. Yet child labor laws are entirely salubrious. Stop being facetious :3

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:51:20 2020 No.14553846

>>14553707
>[The workers] must drive the proposals of the democrats to their logical extreme (the democrats will in any case act in a reformist and not a revolutionary manner) and transform these proposals into direct attacks on private property. If, for instance, the petty bourgeoisie propose the purchase of the railways and factories, the workers must demand that these railways and factories simply be confiscated by the state without compensation as the property of reactionaries. If the democrats propose a proportional tax, then the workers must demand a progressive tax; if the democrats themselves propose a moderate progressive tax, then the workers must insist on a tax whose rates rise so steeply that big capital is ruined by it; if the democrats demand the regulation of the state debt, then the workers must demand national bankrupcy. The demands of the workers will thus have to be adjusted according to the measures and concessions of the democrats.
Taking just this, for example:
>if the democrats themselves propose a moderate progressive tax, then the workers must insist on a tax whose rates rise so steeply that big capital is ruined by it
it's patently clear that we're currently squarely in the realm of the policy of the democrats. This policy is calculated at preserving capitalism, at assuring the growth of the US economy, etc., whereas the revolutionary policy of the proletariat will be openly directed at their destruction.

>Not only this, but the media is heavily Marxist, with a powerful bent towards the oppressed masses.
Marxism means openly calling for the proletariat taking political power and destroying bourgeois society. If you think that's what the media are aiming at, then you're everely delusional and you should seek medical help asap.

>>14553720
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/preface.htm
>The practical application of the principles will depend, as the Manifesto itself states, everywhere and at all times, on the historical conditions for the time being existing, and, for that reason, no special stress is laid on the revolutionary measures proposed at the end of Section II. That passage would, in many respects, be very differently worded today.
The point is to use policy that will severely impede the functioning of capitalism. Progressive taxation doesn't do that on its own, but often does the reverse by reducing inequalities that otherwise would lead to social unrest and economic loss. Therefore the fact that someone proposes progressive taxation today isn't a sign that they're Marxists.

>>14553753
He also mentioned helping the bourgeoisie to defeat the remnants of the old feudal society. I guess that's Marxism too, and therefore basically everyone today except the few unironic feudalists are Marxists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:51:51 2020 No.14553848 >>14553794 feel free to read it sometime

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:55:12 2020 No.14553863 >>14553696 It's useful tool against anyone who challenges the laissez faire economics. and as it shown multiple times in this very thread, they are today's "progressives"

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:58:09 2020 No.14553874 >>14553815 Post it

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 07:59:10 2020 No.14553882 >>14552906 Agreed, just ignore reality of substitute your own. It was well documented project that has spread to literally everywhere. I wonder if you cope all this culture critique in vidya and entertainment the same way.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:04:10 2020 No.14553903

it’s the hip thing for undergraduate students at my european uni to shit on conservatives (or just people who are not lefties, or self-aware lefties even) for talking about post-marxism in academia. Meanwhile, many of them unironically like and share marxist-leninist and third-worldist propaganda on social media and organize marxist reading groups. Also, atleast a good half of my readings for my humanities degree are ‘critical theory’, ‘postcolonialism’, ‘discursive power analysis’ and ‘queer deconstruction’.

Are they blatantly suppressing the facts because of their own agenda or do they really have that much of a lack of self-awareness?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:05:11 2020 No.14553908

>>14553846
Oh boy here we go with the wall of text from the moron again.

Listen buddy, I understand you want to live in fairy tale land and pretend that the Democratic party doesn't have an avowed socialist running for president, but us here in reality understand that there are MANY people like Butterfly in academia and political life, who are constantly calling for a huge upheaval and revolution for the masses. Constantly.

Their pain pushes them forward though, not because they think it's logical, but because Marx said that the condition of the poor through underconsumption propels them towards revolution, which we know to be completely false with a simply cursory glance at biology, sociology, and just psychology in general.

Basically, I can even see what you're trying to do on this website right now too, and you've failed this past year to make even a dent. You might want to stop trying to pander to people. They aren't listening.

>The point is to use policy that will severely impede the functioning of capitalism
Like mainlining their political party and never attempting to see any other angle at all.

Look up the Hollywood Ten. Not much has changed my friend. The oppressed classes are frequently given powerful roles and any class that is in power is frequently victimized in these movies. Apparently the public are looking for a robin hood. An evil character that will illegally plunder the wealthy and distribute it to the poor. A seemingly innocuous task which will destroy the monetary unit.

I mean you have a candidate running RIGHT NOW on UBI. Come the fuck ON.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:05:32 2020 No.14553910 >>14553874 >>/lit/thread/S14372153 I put an influential Austrian Economist and a Marxist bait in the op. Why didn't you show up ;w;

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:06:14 2020 No.14553914 >>14553848 I did and I loved it. That was 5-6 years ago. I have matured since then :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:34:02 2020 No.14554029 >>14553778 It was literally created and developed by Marxists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:49:50 2020 No.14554083 >>14552088 >to the tune of "who let the dogs out": >where are teh marxists >where, where, where where

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:52:52 2020 No.14554093

>>14553908
>Listen buddy, I understand you want to live in fairy tale land and pretend that the Democratic party doesn't have an avowed socialist running for president
What this "avowed socialist" understands by socialism AT MOST is state interventionism and promoting worker ownership of the capitalist firms, which according to Marxism are within capitalism, as can be seen in:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/anti_duhring.pdf (p. 175 ff., starting with last paragraph)
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-III.pdf (p. 317, last paragraph)
and therefore don't constitute socialism.

>there are MANY people like Butterfly in academia and political life, who are constantly calling for a huge upheaval and revolution for the masses. Constantly.
Yes, Bernie is calling to revolution, and this revolution consists of... electing him. Empty calls to "revolution" are not socialist. The only socialist calls to revolution are when it's clearly stated that political dictatorship of the proletariat and the oppression of the enemy classes will follow, and that the goal is the destruction of markets, value, wage labour, nation states, and all the other basic features of the capitalist society.

>Marx said that the condition of the poor through underconsumption propels them towards revolution
No, in fact he wrote in The German Ideology that "with destitution the struggle for necessities and all the old filthy business would necessarily be reproduced". If the revolution is caused just by hunger, then it will cease as soon as the food supply improves for a next few years -- and for that socialism is not necessary.

>Basically, I can even see what you're trying to do on this website right now too, and you've failed this past year to make even a dent. You might want to stop trying to pander to people. They aren't listening.
All I've been doing is deriving perverse enjoyment from dealing with mentally unstable retards like yourself. If you think that revolution is made by shitposting on 4chan and that I'm doing serious propagandizing here, then you seriously need to read Marx (and also make sure to see that doctor and tell him all about your conspiratorial thinking).

>The oppressed classes are frequently given powerful roles and any class that is in power is frequently victimized in these movies. Apparently the public are looking for a robin hood. An evil character that will illegally plunder the wealthy and distribute it to the poor.
Because it makes middle class retards feel good an appeals to their bourgeois sense of justice. One of the ways of preventing real revolts is making people feel like they're already revolting, when in fact all they're doing is watching some dumb flick and making some producers money.

>I mean you have a candidate running RIGHT NOW on UBI.
UBI is just another potential idea on how to manage discontent and prevent violent eruptions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:55:23 2020 No.14554103 >>14553720 >the core planks of Communism

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:56:08 2020 No.14554104 >>14554093 Your post is a bunch of nothing, but just so you know, 'underconsumption' does not refer to food exclusively, dumbass. :3 It is a type of economic theory, and specifically, a term developed by Marx himself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 08:57:28 2020 No.14554112 >>14554103 The ten planks, as quoted on that website. Got a problem?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:00:42 2020 No.14554128 >>14552804 even if that retarded assertion is true, how does it follow from that that pomo is secret Marxism?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:04:06 2020 No.14554137 >>14552467 >[might end up hating it after you take your vows then you can never leave] You can always leave.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:06:22 2020 No.14554147 >>14554128 who gives a fuck except autistic academic leftists trying to pilpul that they don't even exist

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:08:08 2020 No.14554151 >>14554029 Moral science was neither created by, nor for, Marxists. The idea of studying culture existed long before Marx as well, so at this point I guess we're just trying to figure out what the fuck you're talking about.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:13:24 2020 No.14554171

>>14554151
The cultural studies as the discipline we know them today was created and developed by Marxists and was done for the purpose of institutionalizing the Marxist critique of culture. Stop moving goalposts. There's a world of difference between Arnold and Williams and co.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:21:03 2020 No.14554203 >>14553759 I'm not the news. Take my posts at face value or not. I'm being sincere.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:24:45 2020 No.14554219 >>14554147 apparently Jordan Peterson does he bring it up all the fucking time, he's staked his intellectual credibility on it

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:26:03 2020 No.14554223 >>14554112 see >>14553748

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:27:20 2020 No.14554230

>>14554171
>The cultural studies as the discipline we know them today was created and developed by Marxists

No it was not. The study of cultures remote has existed since people started writing on them. You could consider things like Herodotus' Histories as an attempt to catalogue all the different cultural idiosyncracies and definitions up until that point in time.

What your statement SHOULD do though is give some evidence for doubters like (>>14553759), who (for whatever reason) doesn't understand how bad things have really gotten. This person things that studying culture was invented when Marx wrote. He doesn't understand Max Weber's influence? Thorstein Veblen? No, we're going to with a man who wasn't even historically relevant until around the 1900s. Give it up for the biggest retard in the room everyone: now ask yourselves, has he even read Bentham? Has he read any statesmen in general? People who have held office?? Or does he want to go with a nobody? Some poor sap who just happened to be the center of attention due to movements in Russia and Germany?

Kill yourself. :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:28:14 2020 No.14554233 >>14554219 wow one fleetingly popular hack has made a weak point against your shit. big deal it's not like the left is immune to charlatans either. just look at the french ffs

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:29:44 2020 No.14554238

>>14554093
>and that the goal is the destruction of markets, value, wage labour, nation states, and all the other basic features of the capitalist society.
So basically it's a delusional authoritarian fairy tale that wants to destroy society and make us all slaves to the state?
You people are a religion.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:30:53 2020 No.14554243 >>14554233 if the point was JP is wrong, and you agree JP is wrong, why are even arguing? Marxism and the neoliberal "postmodern" order are antithetical to one another

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:30:59 2020 No.14554244
File: 608 KB, 1200x672, burger.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I genuinely cannot understand how anybody can look around at the modern west and say "Damn, those commies have completely destroyed society. If only we had more capitalism to fix this." It requires a level of delusion I really can't fathom.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:31:10 2020 No.14554246

>>14554093
Even if you think capitalism has crises(it doesn't, these are all caused by interventionism) the idea that communism will take over and be an actual solution is extremely fucking delusional.

You treat marx like he's your cult leader or something and never question him.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:32:26 2020 No.14554250

>>14554244
More capitalism would mean abolishing central banking, abolishing IP and copyright laws, implementing homesteading property rights, dramatically shrinking the role of government etc.

It would be much better for the working class.

I love how you leftists cope over images like this lmao.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:32:44 2020 No.14554254 >>14554244 rabid anti-Marxism is classic burgerpunk

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:33:55 2020 No.14554255 >>14554244 The reason that you can’t fathom this is because you are a materialist reductionist. Know your own presuppositions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:33:59 2020 No.14554256 >>14554250 >abolishing IP and copyright laws capitalism means taking away property rights? tell me more comrade

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:34:09 2020 No.14554258 >>14554244 Please do tell us. How would more Marxism help anything at all?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:35:22 2020 No.14554263 >>14554258 that's not at all what he said lmao are you illiterate

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:37:49 2020 No.14554272

The right needs to use another term - from a non-NeoCon/Libertardian etc. right point of view, there's really not that much significantly wrong with 'Marxism', insofar as it refers to Marx's work himself and not the teachings of any subsequent interpreters. The real problem, and terms we should be using, are the Trotskyites/Neoliberals that have corrupted and sometimes completely misinterpreted Marx's work.
We could all get so much further if we could more accurately define and rid ourselves of these degenerate elements, that equally subvert and pacify both 'the right' and 'the left' today.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:38:37 2020 No.14554279 >>14553358 Is this written by a child?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:38:40 2020 No.14554280 >>14554230 "Studying culture" isn't the same thing as cultural studies as an established and separate discipline. Maybe such a thing doesn't exist in the non-anglo world, but you have to be pretty ignorant to not get this.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:38:44 2020 No.14554281

>>14554250
>It would be much better for the working class.
If this were the 18th century I'd be tempted to agree with you, but if that happened now you think we'd be better off in the hands of the Bezos/Zuckerberg technocaliphate? I genuinely don't know if we would, this isn't a completely rhetorical question, but you can hate both capital and the state.
>You leftists
>>14554258
>More Marxism
>>14554255
>You are a materialist reductionist
Notice that one does not have to support Marxism to elicit these rabid insults, only to question the hegemony of capital. I'm a Catholic Georgist, I just fucking hate /pol/acks.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:39:11 2020 No.14554284

>>14554263
That's my point, if his solution isn't going to help us, going forward, we're simply going to continue using what's working.

How does THAT not make sense? There are various forms of socialism as well, why choose Communism? Can you answer that, either of you two?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:40:29 2020 No.14554291 >>14554284 he never presented that as a solution though you literally just made this solution up in your head

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:42:01 2020 No.14554298 File: 148 KB, 638x960, econschools.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554256 >capitalism means taking away property rights? IP and copyright isn't real property, retard

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:42:40 2020 No.14554301

>>14554281
That's right, as previously indicated within this thread, you can clearly see that Marxism is attempting a subversion of the masses through various avenues.

>>14554280
>as an established and separate discipline
What do you mean 'established'? I don't count 'established' as really anything.

When it comes to learning things, I don't think many people should care if the egregious mob of 'academia' approves of them or not. Following this logic, humanities was really 'established' 2500 years ago. Colleges just recently decided to start brainwashing people and paying departments for selling Marxism around 100 years ago. Big difference, see?

Your definition of established is exactly what they would want it to be. Good job.

>>14554279
It.
Is.
More.
Complicated.
Than.
Who.
Has.
More.
Money.
And.
How.
Much.
Of.
It.
They.
Have.

Ever heard of rhetorical irony?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:43:03 2020 No.14554302

>>14554281
>but if that happened now you think we'd be better off in the hands of the Bezos/Zuckerberg technocaliphate?
A free market would take away their power, dummy.
They get most of their money from the stock market anyway which has been massively over inflated by central bank money creation.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:43:05 2020 No.14554303 >>14554298 I agree! neither is private property comrade! but these fucking libs never listen to us

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:43:58 2020 No.14554306

>>14554291
Okay then, well lets go back to his original point.

The only solution that there is, is obviously more Capitalism, seeing as everything else that is popular is easily refuted by being aligned with Marxist Communism.

That's why Westerners do that.

Glad we settled that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:44:12 2020 No.14554308 >>14554303 Private property is real property. IP isn't real property. Understand now? :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:44:44 2020 No.14554311 >>14554306 >The only solution that there is, is obviously more Capitalism, seeing as everything else that is popular is easily refuted by being aligned with Marxist Communism wow Mark Fisher was so goddamn right it's literally painful

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:45:01 2020 No.14554313 >>14554298 Literally every single one of those forms of economics are 'ok'. :3 Based unbiasedness coming through.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:45:20 2020 No.14554314 File: 60 KB, 640x521, recessions.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554306 >The only solution that there is, is obviously more Capitalism this but unironically

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:46:03 2020 No.14554316 >>14554311 Ever heard of rhetorical irony? >>14554308 Not me, and somewhat correct but necessarily not entirely.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:46:06 2020 No.14554317 >>14552341 Unironically based

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:47:18 2020 No.14554323 >>14554313 How the fuck is that even possible!!? What are you doing with your brain where you are saying Marxism, Keynesianism, and Austrianism are all on the same level? What is this level of thinking called?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:47:28 2020 No.14554324

>>14554301
>That's right, as previously indicated within this thread, you can clearly see that Marxism is attempting a subversion of the masses through various avenues.
They seem to be doing a pretty fucking bad job of it then, because I see neoliberal nonsense every day of my life but the closest thing to secret subversive commie agitprop I get is scrawled on bathroom walls.
>>14554302
>They'll behave themselves if we remove all their oversight bro they've said they're only evil because of taxes and if it wasn't for the government they'd really behave themselves bro just trust me
Stop listening to outlets owned by billionaires telling you that billionaires need more free reign to do whatever they want.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:49:05 2020 No.14554329

>>14554238
No, it wants to free us from the slavery of markets, value relations and states.

>>14554246
>Even if you think capitalism has crises(it doesn't, these are all caused by interventionism)
Capitalism can't exist without "interventionism".
>You treat marx like he's your cult leader or something and never question him.
I treat him like he's the "leader" of Marxism to explain the positions of Marxism, because he is, it's literally named after him.

>>14554250
>More capitalism would mean abolishing central banking, abolishing IP and copyright laws, implementing homesteading property rights, dramatically shrinking the role of government etc.
No, things like copyright laws, central baking, governments, etc. played a crucial role in the development of capitalism.
>It would be much better for the working class.
Abolishing central banking and governments? Sure, sounds like some of the goals of the communist revolution.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:49:37 2020 No.14554333

I don't get this. Slavoj Zizek is a marxist academic who lives a life of a millionaire celebrity, promoted by the academy across the globe, and he sat there gaslighting mister wash-your-penis like that. If you visit any higher academic institution it is inundated with leftist ideologues. Sociology is practically just a political bureau pumping out Marxists (whether of the old variant of 'class reductionists', or new race/gender appropriations). The point is that the ESSJAYDUBLEYOOS do indeed derive heavily from Marx, but shift from class to identity politics. They don't deny class politics, but they'd say they balance it with identity issues. Zizek just sat there and wiggled around using literalist arguments that they aren't TRUE Marxists. It's funny, because if you ask these same college leftists in a positive manner if they like/identify/support Marx, they'd wax lyrical. It's only when they're confronted by members of the political outgroup (their enemies) they perform this ridiculous gaslighting nonsense.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:49:57 2020 No.14554334

>>14554324
>>They'll behave themselves if we remove all their oversight bro
Holy shit you retards have no idea what a free market even is.
Read Mises you brainlet.

Imagine being gullible enough to think these interventions(most of which were created by corporations) are put in place to "oversee" and "regulate" corporations.

>Stop listening to outlets owned by billionaires telling you that billionaires need more free reign to do whatever they want.
Billionaires hate the free market, but they love the central banks you people support.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:50:01 2020 No.14554335 >>14554324 >I get Ahhhhhhhhh I can see the problem with your mentality. :3

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:51:38 2020 No.14554343

>>14554329
>slavery of markets
Why are you pretending freedom is slavery?
People having the freedom to buy and sell things is freedom.
Having a state monopoly completely dominate their lives is slavery.

>Capitalism can't exist without "interventionism".
LOL Capitalism existed and was much BETTER back when we had extremely minimal to no intervention. You're completely fucking clueless if you think central banks are a part of capitalism.

>I treat him like he's the "leader" of Marxism to explain the positions of Marxism, because he is, it's literally named after him.
You people also rarely ever question him.
You're just like scientologists.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:52:37 2020 No.14554345

>>14554333
>I don't get this. Slavoj Zizek is a marxist academic who lives a life of a millionaire celebrity, promoted by the academy across the globe, and he sat there gaslighting mister wash-your-penis like that.
Zizek rejects postmodernism though. Peterson is talking about postmodern neo-Marxists.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:52:39 2020 No.14554346

>>14554329
>No, things like copyright laws, central baking, governments, etc. played a crucial role in the development of capitalism.
Who gives a shit about "capitalism".
We want free markets, not the controlled markets we have today that are fucking over the working class.

>Sure, sounds like some of the goals of the communist revolution.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Marx literally supported central banking and every single socialist state in history had a central bank.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:54:41 2020 No.14554355 File: 58 KB, 533x439, w3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554329 >slavery of markets I'm so glad people like you will never take power.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:55:43 2020 No.14554361 >>14554343 >Having a state monopoly completely dominate their lives is slavery. Don't worry, it's not a state monopoly, it's the "people's" monopoly so that makes it totally okay.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 09:56:15 2020 No.14554366 >>14554345 yeah zizek the lacanian who comments on derrida and deleuze and so on is totally not a postmodernist! he's a german idealist which is totally different! who does this kind of sectarian hair splitting convince

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:00:55 2020 No.14554391 >>14554366 experts in philosophy for one you know the most famous critics of pomo are Marxists right? Jameson wrote a whole book dismantling postmodernism, that doesn't make him a postmodernist by association you mong

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:04:58 2020 No.14554415 >>14554334 >Real capitalism hasn't been tried. All the failures of My System are actually the fault of injections of That Other System ruining it. This sounds... Vaguely familiar...

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:05:12 2020 No.14554417 >>14553609 imagine being so indoctrinated by red scare rethoric

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:06:50 2020 No.14554421

>>14554415
>Real capitalism hasn't been tried.
Nope, it was tried several times and was extremely successful.
This is where we differ from the socialists.

Our system isn't utopian, it existed before and worked extremely well.

>All the failures of My System are actually the fault of injections of That Other System ruining it.
True, government intervention, like central banking etc are the main thing distorting markets and making everything shitty for everyone.
You'd have to be a complete retard to think we have free markets now.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:07:21 2020 No.14554424 >>14554417 I'm open to talking about socialism, just not Marxist communism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:07:53 2020 No.14554428 >>14554417 The Red Scare was mostly legitimate. McCarthy did nothing wrong for the most part. Communists are insane delusional authoritarians and they must be rooted out and destroyed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:08:29 2020 No.14554431 >>14552121 All the denizens of hell are anonymous. Communists don't have names.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:09:36 2020 No.14554439
File: 632 KB, 2000x1270, A-utopia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

What are marxists going to do in 100 years when capitalism creates this, we all barely have to work and can just do what we want?

Are they THEN going to finally shut the fuck up and kill themselves or what?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:09:58 2020 No.14554442 >>14554391 does he even criticize pomo thinkers? it looks like he's criticizing the postmodern condition which would make him a pomo philosopher

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:10:58 2020 No.14554448 >>14554424 socialism is a dictatorship of the prolitariat, a totalitarian state owning and regulating the means of production. Marxist communism is a philosophical theory about the movement of history being related to material forces.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:11:57 2020 No.14554454 >>14554448 >a totalitarian state owning and regulating the means of production Why the hell would ANYONE support such a terrible thing?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:12:32 2020 No.14554457 >>14554442 read the book you moron

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:13:18 2020 No.14554464 >>14554457 lmao did you? >ctlr F derrida no critiques

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:14:22 2020 No.14554466 >>14554454 because the state would be dictated to by the prolitariat (supposedly). this is why you should distrust socialist and embrace communism

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:14:25 2020 No.14554469 >>14554448 Funny, that's not how anyone at all ever defines those two terms at all, ever. That's odd.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:14:37 2020 No.14554470 Is it me or JP got BFTO so hard by Zizek that he dissapeared from the public eye?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:16:35 2020 No.14554477

>>14554466
>supposedly
yeah, that's the think, it's only a symbolic representation of the "proletariat", when in reality it's just an authoritarian government monopoly

>This torture chamber is the people's torture chamber, that's why it's good they're enslaving me
Marxism is a religious cult.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:16:48 2020 No.14554478 >>14554464 yes and by read I don't mean ctrl-f'ing lmao

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:17:37 2020 No.14554482 >>14554470 I hate Peterson and Zizek and I hate marxists. But I really wish actual anti marxist academics would debate zizek.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:17:40 2020 No.14554483 >>14552136 Charles Taylor is actually good.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:17:41 2020 No.14554484 >>14554478 post quotes of his substantive criticism of pomo philosophers

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:17:50 2020 No.14554485 >>14554469 Except some literal who named Karl Marx

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:19:01 2020 No.14554489

>>14554421
I think capitalism would be viable with the accountability and reasonable limitations of small communities centuries ago, but in an age of globohomo, unfathomable technological progression, and rootless deracination, it is too dangerous to be left alone. The reason the 20th century was so obsessed with finding some alternative on both the left and right side was because some people saw this coming. The Milo Minderbinders of the world had started to take root by the late 19th century and the writing was on the wall. I really, genuinely don't know what the best alternative is going forward, but I know that retards like this:
>>14554439
are wrong and have been proven wrong. We were supposed to be there long ago, and with our current levels of tech we COULD be there. There are, for example, more vacant homes in the US than there are homeless people, there's more food thrown in the trash every week than it would take to feed the starving for a year, etc. But western countries are still stagnating, still hopeless, more drugged and obese and docile than they've ever been. We aren't going to use capitalist progress to improve your life or my life, we're going to use it to demolish our wellbeings for the Jews or capitalists or whatever scapegoat for the cutthroat elites you want.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:20:14 2020 No.14554494

>>14554485
In the grand scheme of things he is a literal who somewhat.

There isn't too much that has happened since he influenced The Communist Manifesto that has been GOOD for society, so I suppose we will wait it out and hope and pray that his name dies out into obscurity without instilling some other foolish revolution that will perish, or if it is accomplished, lead to a genocide. :3

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:22:21 2020 No.14554502

>>14554489
>We were supposed to be there long ago
Yeah but government intervention/central banking kind of fucked us didn't it?

Either way, we have made massive increases in living standards over the past 150 years. Living standards are going to keep improving until we reach some sort of utopia.

>with our current levels of tech we COULD be there
Uh no we can't.

>more vacant homes in the US than there are homeless people
Thanks to central banking and government intervention, yes.

>there's more food thrown in the trash every week than it would take to feed the starving for a year
lol you people always massively misrepresent these statistics, it's too much to get into here, but no, food waste is a fucking meme

>But western countries are still stagnating, still hopeless
I know, that's why I support abolishing central banking.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:23:00 2020 No.14554505

>>14554439
>It'll be great and we'll never have to work again
This sounds much more like the "fully-automated luxury gay space communism" delusion than I think you intended
On the path laid out now, one century from now there will be about a thousand people living like this and about thirty billion mulatto slaves working themselves to death being whipped by genetically-engineered chink Rich Pianas

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:23:22 2020 No.14554507 >>14554489 >globohomo Oh I see, you're a retard. Carry on then.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:23:48 2020 No.14554509 >>14554448 >>14554454 >>14554466 samefag

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:23:52 2020 No.14554510 >>14554485 This nigger thinks Karl Marx invented Communism. Jesus fucking Christ.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:24:37 2020 No.14554514
File: 12 KB, 602x209, 2020-01-17 10_24_22-Window.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>14554505
>This sounds much more like the "fully-automated luxury gay space communism" delusion than I think you intended
But replace free market with communism and you're 100% correct.

>>14554509
nope

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:25:42 2020 No.14554518 >>14554514 >But replace free market with communism and you're 100% correct. Meant to say replace communism with free market* I can't delete my post now lol

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:25:47 2020 No.14554519

>>14554502
Why are you going through the thread accusing others of religious devotion and still pushing that one single alteration to capitalism will fix it and usher in the shining city on the hill? Please tell me what the fuck you think will happen when central banking is abolished that will solve everything all at once and why it would currently be impossible.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:26:10 2020 No.14554520 File: 20 KB, 416x416, 416x416.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554505 it's communism except the bourgeois liquidates the proletariat everyone gets a private island

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:26:19 2020 No.14554523 File: 76 KB, 1080x438, Screenshot_20200117-072515.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554509 good try anon

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:26:41 2020 No.14554526

>>14554343
>Why are you pretending freedom is slavery? People having the freedom to buy and sell things is freedom.
It is apparent freedom, but in reality it means that people's lives are under control of market forces. The real freedom would be human species exercising rational control over production and distribution of its means of living.
>Having a state monopoly completely dominate their lives is slavery.
And capitalism is closer to this description than socialism, since in the latter is stateless while the former is not.
>LOL Capitalism existed and was much BETTER back when we had extremely minimal to no intervention.
The situation of the industry was so spiraling down, the health of the workers deteriorating so quickly in England, that some of the capitalists were themselves asking the government to put a limit on the working day, on the employment of children, to increase inspections, to support education for working children.
And of course the English capitalism wouldn't have developed like that in the first place if it weren't for the military and colonial power of the British Empire, which created necessary markets for British products and prevented competition from developing (for example in China).
Capitalism without the organizing power of the state can't develop and can't ensure its long-term survival. That's why this organization exists.
>You people also rarely ever question him.
You wouldn't know, because you're mostly ignorant of any details of the things he's said. The only thing you know are the bare basics, so it's no wonder that Marxists generally agree with all of those (which is not even really true with most of today's self-styled Marxists, but let's forget that for a moment).

>>14554346
>Who gives a shit about "capitalism".
Capitalism is the present socioeconomic system, so pretty much everyone except for basement dwellers like yourself, who do nothing but sit there and entertain false abstractions instead.
>Marx literally supported central banking
Marx supported the abolition of value and therefore of money, you dumb faggot.
>every single socialist state in history had a central bank.
Because they were capitalist. Socialist economy doesn't have banks, because market transactions and the money that's required for them are replaced by direct distribution without the return of an equivalent.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:27:10 2020 No.14554527 >>14554523 >good try anon >two of them are him You weren't the brightest bulb in the bunch were you?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:27:22 2020 No.14554528 >>14554510 I said that's how Marx defined them, how did you get "invent" out of that?

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:27:44 2020 No.14554530

>>14554448
>socialism is a dictatorship of the prolitariat
No, socialism is classless, so it doesn't have a class dictatorship. The dictatorship of the proletariat is a political means of transition from capitalism to socialism.
>a totalitarian state
That's the dictatorship of the proletariat, but not socialism. A state can only exists in class society.
>owning and regulating the means of production.
The dictatorship of the proletariat only exists for as long as all the means of production are not yet under the control of society, until classes still exist, until the transition from capitalism is not complete.
>Marxist communism is a philosophical theory about the movement of history being related to material forces.
Communism describes the doctrine of the liberation of the proletariat, the movement of the proletariat for its liberation, and its the final goal -- a socialist society.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:28:22 2020 No.14554536 >>14554527 he was replying to my comment and I responded, that's not samefagging it's a conversation

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:28:45 2020 No.14554539

>>14554526
>Marx supported the abolition of value and therefore of money, you dumb faggot.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I'm sure all the Europeans agree: they can tell when the Americans wake up. Both sides of this debate become retarded. I'm sorry for my retarded American bretheren.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:29:41 2020 No.14554546 >>14554505 But that sounds based as fuck

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:29:48 2020 No.14554548

>>14554519
>one single alteration to capitalism will fix it and usher in the shining city on the hill?
Because it legitimately worked in the past.
I rely on empirical evidence while communists rely on utopian delusions.

>Please tell me what the fuck you think will happen when central banking is abolished that will solve everything all at once and why it would currently be impossible.
The economy would crash and then restructure on solid ground. Capitalists would have to actually focus on production instead of gaining free money from the wall street casino. The value of wages and savings would constantly increase as production increases. Homeownership rate would increase.
Recessions wouldn't happen anymore etc etc

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:29:57 2020 No.14554551

>>14554329
>I treat him like he's the "leader" of Marxism to explain the positions of Marxism, because he is, it's literally named after him.

Not any of those guys, but while I understand studying Marx if you advocate for that kind of thought, having an almost 200 years old as your main beacon to shed light over today's Worlds problems sounds very silly. The problem is that the guy is called Marx and he has an ideology named after him.
I mean, in all other sciences, old scientist are respected, but they do not often use their works as all the basis for their theories.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:30:06 2020 No.14554552 >>14552875 >cultural marxist That's an oxymoron, brainlet.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:31:11 2020 No.14554558

>>14554428
The only solution is to test individuals for communistic tendencies, graft leather from the shoes of police onto the tops of their mouths and the snouts of pigs onto their faces, and give them to blacks as slaves as reparations for injustices don't to their answers. It's a win-win for all decent people.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:35:34 2020 No.14554573

>>14554526
>It is apparent freedom
It's legitimate freedom.
>but in reality it means that people's lives are under control of market forces.
No, their lives are liberated by market forces.
The only alternate to market forces is a government monopoly where the choices of individuals are restricted.
>The real freedom would be human species exercising rational control over production and distribution of its means of living.
Yes, done voluntarily through a decentralized market.
>latter is stateless
LOL Communism is impossible first off all, it's a delusional uptopian ideal.
Marxian communism requires an extremely authoritarian state to control everything and thinks that this will somehow magically result in the state "withering away"

>The situation of the industry was so spiraling down, the health of the workers deteriorating so quickly in England, that some of the capitalists were themselves asking the government to put a limit on the working day, on the employment of children, to increase inspections, to support education for working children.
I was referring to gilded age america, where real wages constantly increased as the workweek shrank and child labour went away.
The industrial revolution, while shittier than how we have it today was a massive improvement from the past. Living standards for workers were much higher than when they lived under feudalism.

>prevented competition from developing
Jokes on you, this only hurt them. If both china the west had free trade, it would have massively developed both places higher than what they ended up being.
>because you're mostly ignorant of any details of the things he's said
Nah, I've read some marx, argued with marxists etc. It's just a delusional religion

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:36:47 2020 No.14554576

>>14554548
You cannot put Pandora back in the box and bring back idyllic 18th century life with a planet of 8 billion people. This shit was already getting dangerously unstable by the goddamn French Revolution, read some Zola to see that it was already horrifying the public. I wish I could live in a tight-knit community of people who held each other accountable and were not at all beholden to speculating interests from outside, but that ship has sailed. Maybe we can nuke ourselves to hell and get another shot at maintaining that for as long as possible.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:38:09 2020 No.14554581

>>14554526
>Capitalism is the present socioeconomic system
No it's not, this term is vague and useless.
Many countries have different types of economic systems, different laws etc all which cause radically different effects.
>basement dwellers like yourself
You're a fucking marxist lmao

>Marx supported the abolition of value and therefore of money, you dumb faggot
Marx supported central banking in the communist manifesto. Marx supported socialism first before communism, which YES means central banking. All socialist states had central banks.
>Because they were capitalist.
Yet you still support most of these places.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:39:14 2020 No.14554585 >>14554576 >and bring back idyllic 18th century life with a planet of 8 billion people Why the fuck not? Why do you want to be enslaved to central banks forever? They're causing so much death, poverty, destruction and war. We can live without them.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:47:50 2020 No.14554619

>>14554585
I don't want them around either, if you started bombing them I'd help regardless of your ideology.
My point is that regardless of your idealized supply-and-demand-curve idea of what capitalism was, this is what capitalism is. It's like saying that animals aren't evolving anymore because evolution is actually a system for creating the perfect yeast, and the best way to fix the myriad problems of modern multicellular organisms is to reapply the selection pressures for yeast and ensure we have all the materials for fermentation readily available so it can kick back off and we can be the best yeast we can be.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:48:08 2020 No.14554620

>>14553595
>but everyone in academia is a marxist.
Spent awhile in finance and economic departments of academia and never heard the name Marx, not even from a labour economist. In sociology, philosophy and literature courses though I'll grant you, you probably can't escape the fucker.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:49:21 2020 No.14554622 >>14553718 >Bulk of Marx's work was in economics. And the bulk of it is irrelevent and not taught.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:50:34 2020 No.14554625 >>14554619 >this is what capitalism is not really a free market would look radically different to the current system

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 10:54:58 2020 No.14554644 >>14554620 >Spent awhile in finance and economic departments of academia and never heard the name Marx You might hear it in things like IR in some places. I've heard Marx mentioned more in IB firms.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:01:17 2020 No.14554667 >>14554625 Capitalistic democracy is not just 'free marketism' you dumb American. I've literally had conversations with someone who believed in no government intervention whatsoever. :3 It's getting really bad.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:01:51 2020 No.14554669

>>14554625
>Bro I'm telling you, fill a bathtub with sugar water and sit very still for a few days and it'll be just like 300 million years ago
Capitalism perfected the creation of gigantic multinational firms with no loyalties to communities, nations, employees, or even consumers. It selected for this. This is the end result.
The problem was that this was what capital was working towards from the very beginning. The people involved in facilitating it mostly didn't realize it, they were focused on making the best choices for them and their immediate environment at the time, but the system is entirely built to incentivize the liberal capitalism we're inundated with today.
>Well let's set the clock back on the system to when it was less bad
A stalling tactic and one we couldn't even implement.
Radically changing the system to something that incentivizes other values is the only way forward, but it can't happen until things get much more desperate, and I honestly think the system has gotten too good at doling out the occasional treat to allow that. It is a very, very well-optimized beast.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:06:39 2020 No.14554693 >>14554669 This is just equally as retarded, however. :3 (like I said, really bad :3)

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:08:00 2020 No.14554699

>>14554667
>apitalistic democracy is not just 'free marketism' you dumb American.
I never said it was...?

>I've literally had conversations with someone who believed in no government intervention whatsoever
I believe in extremely limited government intervention outside of basic free market law.

>>14554669
>>Bro I'm telling you, fill a bathtub with sugar water and sit very still for a few days and it'll be just like 300 million years ago
What the fuck are you talking about retard?

>Capitalism perfected the creation of gigantic multinational firms with no loyalties to communities, nations, employees, or even consumers.
But they aren't doing that at all.

>This is the end result.
This is just your feelings, not reality.

>but the system is entirely built to incentivize the liberal capitalism we're inundated with today.
What system?
Why do you pretend this late stage central banking dystopia we live under has anything to do with free markets?

>A stalling tactic
No, a complete and radical change.

>Radically changing the system to something that incentivizes other values is the only way forward
I agree, that's why we need to imprison communists and interventionists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:09:41 2020 No.14554705 >>14554669 lol dude we all know the current system is bad, but how the fuck is socialism a solution to our problems in ANY way? central planning and authoritarianism don't work

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:10:24 2020 No.14554709 >>14554620 he basically founded sociology but I never read Marx once getting a philosophy degree at a super left wing uni, never read any postmodernist either. (read a bit of Foucault for a poli sci class once)

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:11:12 2020 No.14554710

>>14554699
>I believe in extremely limited government intervention outside of basic free market law.
At least you believe in government intervention. That's a somewhat reasonable stance?

Do you at least believe in the government setting up monopolies in certain circumstances? Hayek did :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:12:24 2020 No.14554717 File: 117 KB, 728x632, EI32jDlXYAUxwte.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >:3 Please don't do this.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:13:30 2020 No.14554723 :3 Butterfly thinks its cute

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:17:05 2020 No.14554737 >>14554710 >Do you at least believe in the government setting up monopolies in certain circumstances? What specific circumstances? Banking? Absolutely not.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:17:18 2020 No.14554740

>>14554699
All of my points have been made already. Go back and reread them and try to grasp what a metaphor is.
>But they aren't doing that at all.
You aren't paying attention.
>>14554705
The post you are replying to literally says there isn't a feasible solution.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:18:51 2020 No.14554745 >>14554740 >there isn't a feasible solution. why don't we just try what worked in the past before? (ie. free markets)

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:21:20 2020 No.14554755 >>14554745 Capital outgrew them, and it has plenty of safeties in place to prevent you from domesticating it again.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:21:30 2020 No.14554756

>>14554737
The Federal Reserve is simply a functional part of the economic organism assuming a fiat, non-backed, currency. Surely you realize that without the Federal Reserve operating, we might be fucked.

Of course, if they adopt Keynesian measures of economic control, that is another story entirely and I would most likely side with you.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:23:15 2020 No.14554760

>>14554539
Babby learns the basic thesis of Marxism 200 hours into arguing against supposed Marxism on the internet.

>>14554551
>Not any of those guys, but while I understand studying Marx if you advocate for that kind of thought, having an almost 200 years old as your main beacon to shed light over today's Worlds problems sounds very silly.
Yes, I can understand perfectly how that can sound very silly to an animal trained to constantly desire the newest products and to throw the ones from last year into the trash.
>The problem is that the guy is called Marx and he has an ideology named after him.
It's not an ideology, and I personally call it communism, like most other communists. The people who call it Marxism are mostly either angry right wing retards or hack academics who think it makes them sound cool but are not communists, so take your complaints to them.

>>14554573
>The only alternate to market forces is a government monopoly where the choices of individuals are restricted.
No, there's also the classless unitary society. Choices of individuals are restricted now, when they don't directly form a part of a society that controls its own fate, but figure as estranged individuals pitted against one another within society that's under the sway of anarchic market relations and other alienated creations like the state, forced by the violence of things to sell their own labour, through which they only help to further expand the force of the foreign forces they're subjected to and reproduce their chains.
True freedom is freedom from the feeling that the billions of people you share the planet with are constantly constraining your freedom.
>Yes, done voluntarily through a decentralized market.
Letting profitability of capital decide where to direct labour is not the society exercising rational control over its production, but capital exercising this control.
>Marxian communism requires an extremely authoritarian state to control everything and thinks that this will somehow magically result in the state "withering away"
State control is required only for as long as class society and real opposition of interest exist, which they do now, but not in classless society.
>I was referring to gilded age america
Which coincided with the rise of the power of the American state and resulted in a century of its interventions all around the world.
>where real wages constantly increased as the workweek shrank and child labour went away
Thanks to the proletarian movement and government legislation.
>Jokes on you, this only hurt them.
I'm pretty sure it gave them immense profits throughout the second half the 19th century, the fact that ultimately it will hurt the bourgeois society because it'll end up with communism notwithstanding.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:27:54 2020 No.14554779 >>14552314 you sir are a flaming god damn idiot watch a single cuck philosophy video please

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:29:52 2020 No.14554786 >>14554760 No Marx was not against money. You are retarded and delusional.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:36:28 2020 No.14554818 >>14552968 Why?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:37:38 2020 No.14554824 BUTTERFLY HAS DECIDED TO MASTURBATE OUTSIDE MY HOUSE ALL DAY :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:39:19 2020 No.14554837 >Where are the marxists 4channel.org

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:39:27 2020 No.14554839 >>14554824 Actually, I am cuckolding you. I am fucking the stupid fucking moth right now. She's ugly and I hate it, but I am having lots of degenerate sex with butterfly as we speak.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:42:38 2020 No.14554860 >>14554839 You wish, she is masturbating to me right now :D She masturbates like a qtpi

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:46:33 2020 No.14554884 >>14554824 >>14554839 >>14554860 shes like 50

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:49:23 2020 No.14554900

>>14554860
No, she thinks you're a mentally ill faggot, and that's coming from an ugly post-menopausal trannie, so imagine.
Between gags on my cock, she gaspingly begs me to tell you that you should never post again and should instead shoot yourself in the head with the largest caliber of bullet you can possibly get your hands on.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:51:08 2020 No.14554909

>>14554786
Am I getting baited?
>Where labour is communal, the relations of men in their social production do not manifest themselves as "values" of "things"
>It is just as pious as it is stupid to wish that exchange value would not develop into capital, nor labour which produces exchange value into wage labour.
>Money is the universal self-established value of all things. It has, therefore, robbed the whole world — both the world of men and nature — of its specific value. Money is the estranged essence of man’s work and man’s existence, and this alien essence dominates him, and he worships it.
>The mediating process between men engaged in exchange is not a social or human process, not human relationship; it is the abstract relationship of private property to private property, and the expression of this abstract relationship is value, whose actual existence as value constitutes money.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 11:56:22 2020 No.14554931 >>14554909 In nowhere in that entire string of quotes does it say he wants to abolish money

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 12:19:02 2020 No.14555035 >>14554931 It says that the point of money is to express value, and that in the society of communal labour value doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 12:24:13 2020 No.14555060 >>14555035 Nowhere does it say that value does not exist, it says that the relations of men in their social production does not manifest itself as values of things.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 12:24:41 2020 No.14555063 >>14554909 Yeah Marx is very ambiguous about the role of money in communism but he wasn't a "money abolitionist" like many socialists of his day

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 12:29:07 2020 No.14555085 Peterson may be a nerd but i never, ever heard Zizek say something worthwile. Just bla bla bla sniff

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:05:06 2020 No.14555249 >>14554756 >Surely you realize that without the Federal Reserve operating, we might be fucked. Good slave. We had the fucking industrial revolution without a central bank, you are a moron.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:06:17 2020 No.14555252 >>14554760 First off, these classes aren't real, they're just in your head. Secondly, a purely communist society is impossible. Thirdly, a post scarcity society isn't necessarily communist.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:10:35 2020 No.14555276

peterson is being a fucking knob by creating this fear of marxism when it’s just not a threat. there are real, serious issues with capitalism but it’s too good at convincing people that the current model is the only way. peterson is just stroking fear of actual change by telling people “the marxists are everywhere bro”. same shit with his completely retarded ideas on activism, apparently you can’t protest something until you sorted all your life issues out? i understand what peterson is going for but he just comes off idiotic

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:18:01 2020 No.14555307 >>14555276 Materialist philosophical positions are always a threat to a decent life Marxism is just the most prominent and dangerous.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:26:04 2020 No.14555354 >>14555307 who is at threat of marxism? it barely exist in any significant way

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:29:11 2020 No.14555376
File: 95 KB, 500x375, turn-customers-into-fanatics-products-into-obsessions-employees-into-ambassadors-65386541.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>14555307
Neoliberalism is much more prominent and much more dangerous. The only danger anyone on earth is currently in from Marxism is in its use as an ideological scare tactic by neolibs to prevent you from seeking a meaningful departure from their paradigm.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 13:33:39 2020 No.14555398 >>14555376 this neoliberalism is legitimately a cancer on modern western societies. europe has made steps towards ending it with things like representative governments and regulations, but especially in america it’s awful

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 15:42:44 2020 No.14556078 >>14555376 >>14555398 Just call it capitalism and stop fooling yourseld

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 15:46:53 2020 No.14556102 >>14552387 The only comment in this thread that gets right to the heart of the matter. Peterson's hypothesis is simply wrong and nonsensical, there is no way to read postmodernism as a cover for post-soviet marxism.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 15:57:51 2020 No.14556155

>>14555060
That's all value is according to Marx. It is the expression of "the abstract relationship of private property to private property". When there's no longer private property there's no value. Unless you're going to bring your retard impression to the next level and say that he wasn't against private property.

>>14555063
He isn't ambiguous about it at all. He writes in Grundrisse that "money is only the realization of exchange value" and that "it is just as pious as it is stupid to wish that exchange value would not develop into capital, nor labour which produces exchange value into wage labour". Are you're going to try to tell me that he's also ambiguous about the role of capital and wage labour in communism?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 16:50:07 2020 No.14556413 >>14556078 I did earlier in the thread and a dozen retards argued about how anything that isn't 18th century agrarian business isn't Real Capitalism

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 17:32:46 2020 No.14556564 File: 114 KB, 712x960, racist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14552327 imagine unironically believing that

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 17:48:34 2020 No.14556644

>>14552314
Postmodernism was a tool in the hand of the Capital from the start. In France, people like Cohn Bendit, Bernard Henry Levy, Glucksmann, are progressists, but are not for a classless society.
Capitalism promoted postmodernism to replace class struggle. They were invited on TV sets since the end of the 1960s to this day. On the other hand, hard core Marxists were just not invited on TV,
It's time 4channers have it clear in their head and know the difference between Marxism, progressivism, Bolshevism. Many anons completely mix the terms.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 17:49:53 2020 No.14556650 >>14552327 >Marxists believe humans are blank slates to be programmed, Where does this come from? Quote from Marx or Engels please.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 18:25:16 2020 No.14556815 File: 109 KB, 833x739, William Sumner.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14556564 >that subtle bell curve Nice

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:18:00 2020 No.14557063

are we really arguing that modern "identity politics" isn't an outgrowth of applied Marxism? Marx writes, for example, that the rights won by the French Revolution are fundamentally bourgeois. by virtue of the capitalist mode of production, proletarians are dependent on selling their labor to live, so they hardly enjoy "the rights of man" in practice. there's a straightforward extension of the basic idea in feminism, ethnic grievance politics, and so on.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:23:28 2020 No.14557086

>>14557063
>Marx writes, for example, that the rights won by the French Revolution are fundamentally bourgeois
and yet modern identity politics is entirely based around the idea that the acquisition of bourgeois rights for certain groups will empower them hmmm...

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:27:52 2020 No.14557111

>>14557086
the whole point was that Communism would truly fulfill the French Revolution's ideas, which could not have happened at the time because of the relative development of the productive forces allowed only for bourgeois society to take hold and overthrow feudalism. however, the idea that this would happen only through socialization of private property, union activism, etc. is, if anything, as much of a product of its time as bourgeois Rights are. it's hard to imagine Marx existing anywhere but the mid-19th century.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:32:30 2020 No.14557134 File: 76 KB, 968x726, liberia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14554483 Woah, based... I never knew.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:35:48 2020 No.14557151 >>14552697 nice petersons still correct about manhood though

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:36:05 2020 No.14557152

>>14557111
On The Jewish Question is him directly shitting on modern identity politics, there is simply no coherent way to read them as Marxist
>Above all, we note the fact that the so-called rights of man, the droits de l'homme as distinct from the droits du citoyen, are nothing but the rights of a member of civil society – i.e., the rights of egoistic man, of man separated from other men and from the community.
[...]
>Liberty, therefore, is the right to do everything that harms no one else. The limits within which anyone can act without harming someone else are defined by law, just as the boundary between two fields is determined by a boundary post. It is a question of the liberty of man as an isolated monad, withdrawn in to himself

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:39:07 2020 No.14557168 >>14552088 Stopped watching when Peterson analyzed the Communist Manifesto instead of Kapital

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:44:55 2020 No.14557191

>>14557111
>the whole point was that Communism would truly fulfill the French Revolution's idea
On the contrary, Marx ridiculed French socialists who were advocating for that, because, he says, those ideas had already been fulfilled.
>What this reveals, on the other side, is the foolishness of those socialists (namely the French, who want to depict socialism as the realization of the ideals of bourgeois society articulated by the French revolution) who demonstrate that exchange and exchange value etc. are originally (in time) or essentially (in their adequate form) a system of universal freedom and equality, but that they have been perverted by money, capital, etc. Or, also, that history has so far failed in every attempt to implement them in their true manner, but that they have now, like Proudhon, discovered e.g. the real Jacob, and intent now to supply the genuine history of these relations in place of the fake. The proper reply to them is: that exchange value or, more precisely, the money system is in fact the system of equality and freedom, and that the disturbances which they encounter in the further development of the system are disturbances inherent in it, are merely the realization of equality and freedom, which prove to be inequality and unfreedom.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:45:26 2020 No.14557194

>>14557152
That's why I said "An outgrowth of". You're like a Catholic citing proclamations against the Protestant heresy and denouncing it as non-Christian while refusing to see how it's an outgrowth of Catholicism. You might think it's an error, but it's an outgrowth nonetheless.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:48:06 2020 No.14557208 >>14557191 Even Marx hated the "it wasn't real socialism, though" guys, wow...

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:48:10 2020 No.14557209

>>14553717
>After christchurch, my female professor from Armenia had a big fit and argued for gun control
What the fuck does gun control have to do with Marxism? Marx told the working class to arm itself and violently overthrow its oppressors. You're utterly ignorant about this topic, so shut the fuck up in the future, okay?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:49:50 2020 No.14557215 >>14552314 retard

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:50:07 2020 No.14557217 >>14557191 >>>14557191 >The proper reply to them is: that exchange value or, more precisely, the money system is in fact the system of equality and freedom Marx confirmed a libertarian, based.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:50:37 2020 No.14557218 >>14557209 To be fair to him, all of the various 20th century movements sympathetic to Marx used violence or threat of violence to disarm ordinary working class people who disagreed with them or weren't completely in line with their aims.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:51:22 2020 No.14557225 >>14554755 >Capital outgrew them No, government intervention outgrew them. We could EASILY bring them back if we wanted. Abolish central banking and imprison all socialists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:51:28 2020 No.14557226 >>14557194 why don't you make an actual argument for why this is true because so far all you have demonstrates is that IdPol developed out of the same liberalism that Marx is shitting on in On the Jewish Question

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:52:24 2020 No.14557228 >>14555398 >>14556078 >>14555376 Neoliberalism isn't an actual real thing. You can tell if someone is retarded if they use the term neoliberalism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:52:47 2020 No.14557230 itt >Marx thinks x >actually, Marx was argued against x >and that means that x is Marx's fault

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:53:24 2020 No.14557235 When will class based retard theories finally fuck off and die?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:54:15 2020 No.14557244 >>14557235 Right when class society does.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 19:58:12 2020 No.14557258 >>14557244 Classes are literally all in your head. Anything can be a class. Grow up and stop believing in nonsense.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:04:37 2020 No.14557299 >>14557258 middle classes and rich people are not in my head retard.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:07:01 2020 No.14557307

>>14557258
That's not really true. Some groups like "students" can only be classes in a limited sense, because they don't reproduce themselves: a student doesn't perpetuate the student relation by giving birth like a peasant proprietor does (with the help of the institution of inheritance). As for objects, there are ones like your mom, which can only be a class in the programming sense, as she can contain many members. Others, like chairs, can't be a class in any sense at all.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:15:47 2020 No.14557352

>>14557191
Correct me if I am wrong here, but the point he's making is that the system of exchange value itself leads to the bourgeois conception of "the rights of man" as an Individual, which divorces man from his social being, and places these in contrast with the rights of the Citizen, which presumably might be realized under Communism. As far as I know Marx isn't opposed to things like freedom of the press, democracy, and so on in and of themselves. (If he was, why wasn't he a royalist?)

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:16:22 2020 No.14557357 >>14557258 >bro don't analyze material conditions it's all the same thing if you think about it naive idealist

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:16:58 2020 No.14557362 >>14557258 The distinction between a capital accumulator and a capital depreciation is black and white and objectively verifiable

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:31:21 2020 No.14557423 >>14557352 No, he isn't. I don't think that according to him it would make sense to talk about them "in and of themselves".

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:34:48 2020 No.14557442 >>14557423 He'd probably say in a long-winded way that the idea of "democracy in and of itself" is the democracy of bourgeois man divorced from his social being, blah blah blah

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 20:43:21 2020 No.14557484 >>14557307 >As for objects, there are ones like your mom, which can only be a class in the programming sense, as she can contain many members Nice.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:06:11 2020 No.14557566 >>14557228 Damn, that really settles it huh It was just pretend all along

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:15:18 2020 No.14557613 >>14554301 >What do you mean 'established'? I don't count 'established' as really anything. Oh ok so you just don't know what cultural studies are

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:16:47 2020 No.14557619

>>14552926
I think cultural Marxism is an appropriate term since applying Marxist theory to culture is the basic principle of many of what many consider “left”. It can definitely be used as a bogeyman term to don’t get me wrong, but boy who cries wolves and all.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:27:00 2020 No.14557663

>>14557619
>applying Marxist theory to culture
If baffles me brainlets still think this is a thing. Before Marx, everyone analyzed history based on race and culture. Marx was unique because he critiqued this approach and instead focused on the materialist analysis of economic classes. Now, people are just going back to pre-Marxist approaches to history, and somehow have worked it out that this is Marxist? Marx literally hated this approach which existed long before he did, there is zero Marxism in it.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:36:07 2020 No.14557700

>>14557663
Marxist=/= Marx proper. The tenants and popular sentiments echoed in the Manefesto. The pre Marx critique of history does not mirror the modern one on culture. The modern one is very much materialistic in its sentiments and models itself after the popular Marxist (again not Marx proper) portrayal of the proletariat. You have to be blind not to see this. Pre Marx had a much more idealist notion of culture as somehow inherent, saying the race of the franks are x.

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:40:01 2020 No.14557714

>>14557700
>The modern one is very much materialistic
Blame Democritis retard, Marx didn't invent materialism
>models itself after the popular Marxist (again not Marx proper) portrayal of the proletariat
sorry, in what sense? people that larp in commie uniforms? what does this mean
>Pre Marx had a much more idealist notion of culture as somehow inherent, saying the race of the franks are x
sorry, who are you referencing here? I don't know what this means either

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:54:03 2020 No.14557774

>>14557714
> Blame Democritis retard, Marx didn't invent materialism
Well, yah duh, but im referring to the flavor of materialism that developed from Marx’s want for philosophy to be practically applied apart form the high concepts of Kant and Hegel
>sorry, in what sense? people that larp in commie uniforms? what does this mean
“In a word oppressor and oppressed”. That gist. Would you like me to point to specific lodges or labor unions historically?
> sorry, who are you referencing here? I don't know what this means either
Yah, wasn’t clear. I could give a few examples, Voltaire’s letters on the English for one.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 21:56:12 2020 No.14557786 File: 4 KB, 227x250, 1566084869428.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14557258

Anonymous Fri Jan 17 22:09:00 2020 No.14557837

>>14557774
>flavor of materialism
no, this is my whole point, the "flavor" of modern IdPol is the sort of materialism Marx wrote entire books against
>“In a word oppressor and oppressed”
you know Marx cribbed this off the French Revolution right? you know, pre-Marxist, LIBERAL ideology? you can't even pretend Marx invented the idea of oppression. idk what referencing Voltaire means here, is he supposed to be representative of all pre-Marxist theories of race being idealistic or does he support that claim in the letters?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 22:49:35 2020 No.14558032 >>14557566 well yeah, insane amount of government intervention in the form of central banking is not liberal whatsoever

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 22:50:51 2020 No.14558038 >>14557357 I'm not an idealist, you people are a religious cult with the same NPC responses to everything. >>14557362 Where is capital depreciation taking place?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 23:16:19 2020 No.14558125 >>14552088 They're cowards hiding in academia. Even pretentious sniveling faggots like Harris know that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 23:31:13 2020 No.14558208 >>14558032 Then what the fuck ideology do we live under you dodgy little faggot? Central bankism? Judaism?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 17 23:52:24 2020 No.14558291 >>14555398 This is spot on, don't know why it would be considered a joke. You can see the end product of neoliberalism in Silicon Valley.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jan 18 00:25:18 2020 No.14558447 >>14552504 >We plunder southern countries to deprive them of their future leaders, and wish to increase our population to support economic growth." Unironically red pilled.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jan 18 00:45:58 2020 No.14558520 The best government is a Nordic social democracy with heavy public investments into R&D, infrastructure and education.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jan 18 06:18:58 2020 No.14559307 >>14558208 >Central bankism? of course

Anonymous Sat Jan 18 07:05:26 2020 No.14559439

>>14557774
>“In a word oppressor and oppressed”. That gist.
The Old Testament talked about the oppression of the Jews. The New Testament revealed the oppression of the individual and affirmed the sanctity of every individual soul. The liberal ideology of bourgeois revolution reaffirmed this, and showed how the third (and fourth) estates were being oppressed by the first two estates of the ancien regime. White nationalists in the US complain about how the whites are being oppressed and replaced by the minorities. Polish, Hungarian and some other European governments complain about how their nationas have been oppressed by the commies and are now being likewise oppressed by the European Union. Is that all Marxism? I don't think your daddy Peterson has thought this through properly.

>>14558520
Nordic countries have the population of 30 million, while a billion people across China, India, Bangladesh, etc. are working their asses off so that those 30 millions could enjoy their little paradise (and not for long, although there's still a billion negroes in Africa waiting to be exploited next, so maybe they've got until the end of the century).

>>	Anonymous Sat Jan 18 07:20:18 2020 No.14559484 >people ITT are our future leaders fuck me..

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature