/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17616647]

Was Marx just a lazy NEET?

[Anonymous No.17616653]

yeah

[Anonymous No.17616661]

He died of obesity in a dingy London apartment.

[Anonymous No.17616679]

>>17616647
Yes, he mooched off of his parents, emotionally manipulated them to finance him, and tried everything he could not to have to work a day in his life. His relationship with his direct family was a train wreck as well.

[Anonymous No.17616800]

>>17616647
Guy was studying for hours everyday and wrote thousands and thousands of pages. Meanwhile the people that are going to attempt to shit on him in this thread can barely read a few pages without checking 4chan and have trouble writing a 10 page paper.

[Anonymous No.17617064]

>>17616800
Most of that was written by Engels or are just letters.

[Anonymous No.17617078]

>>17616647
He wasn't a NEET. He was a writer, political activist and journalist.

[Anonymous No.17617105]

>>17616800
We're not all like you, anon, stop projecting
>>17617064
This too, Engels was the real powerhouse
>>17617078
So a neet, a neet and a neet. Got it. None of them real jobs by the way.

[Anonymous No.17617163]

>>17617064
>>17617105
here comes the cope

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.17617180]

No.

[Anonymous No.17617187]

>>17617163
You didn't address >>17616679 though

[Anonymous No.17617193]

Yes and I don’t know why more of you don’t listen to him

[Anonymous No.17617203]

>>17617187
just more lies and cope. nothing to address.

[Anonymous No.17617214]

>>17617180
Why are you the way you are?

[Anonymous No.17617216]

>>17616800
>have trouble writing a 10 page paper.
Do /lit/ fags really do this?
I write regular 25-35 page lab reports (5000 - 7500 word range), around 6-9 times per year so far, for my undergrad STEM subject. That's not all "real" writing, obviously, since things like graphs and tables take up space/words. But still. Aren't you pol-sci and /lit/ fags supposed to be writing more?

[Anonymous No.17617235]

>>17617216
As for Marx, he's actually an interesting thinker, had extremely high productivity. If he was a lazy NEET, then the rest of us are fucked.

[Anonymous No.17617242]

>>17616800
There were definitely fewer distractions at the time, and bloviating endlessly doesn't make you correct.

[Anonymous No.17617244]

>>17617203
They're all correct. From his and Engels' personal letters, and those of his parents. Sounds like you're the coper.

[Anonymous No.17617356]

Reminder that Marx was a pseudo-intellectual, similar to JBP and shamelessly ripped off Proudhon and others without giving credit. He was also wrote luciferian poetry (lolwut) and worked backwards from his apocalyptic fantasies of a doomsday to produce his retarded political ideology.

He wasn't a NEET. But he was a pseudo which is enough of an insult.

[Anonymous No.17617371]

>>17617356
t. Never read Marx, but watched a Jordan Peterson/Molymeme strawman video about him

[Anonymous No.17617402]

>>17617356
>Reminder that Marx was a pseudo-intellectual
If I disagree with somebody they must be a pseud
>similar to JBP and shamelessly ripped off Proudhon
He wrote a book long refutation of Proudhon, how is that ripping him off?
>He was also wrote luciferian poetry (lolwut) and worked backwards from his apocalyptic fantasies of a doomsday to produce his retarded political ideology.
Sounds based

[Anonymous No.17617414]

[Anonymous No.17617431]

>>17617356
Marx wrote an entire book refuting utopian socialists

[Anonymous No.17617432]

>>17617371
JBP and Molyneux are pseudos as well

[Anonymous No.17617437]

>>17617431
That's not setting the bar very high now is it

[Anonymous No.17617549]

>>17617437
Marx engaged with every major political and economic thinker of his era. He read Ricardo, Adam Smith, Malthus, all of them. Not really sure why contards are so obsessed with shitting on him without actually reading him, if Marx was a lazy NEET, then so is every intellectual in human history.

[Anonymous No.17617638]

>>17617549
I'm just shitting, I've read (parts of) his books and he's not dumb as some make him out to be but he's also not some kind of genius intellectual. His narrowmindedness regarding materialism says enough, even though most of his criticism of capitalism is decent enough. In his private life he was a degenerate asshole though.

[Anonymous No.17617675]

>>17617402
>a person who wants to be thought of as having a lot of intelligence and knowledge but who is not really intelligent or knowledgeable.
>>17617431
>Marx wrote an entire book refuting utopian socialists
>He wrote a book long refutation of Proudhon, how is that ripping him off?
Scientific socialism was a term Proudhon came up with to describe a society administered by justice and reason. Marx appropriated this term without credit and commies later on used to describe their dogmatic totalitarian shitholes.

Marx's """revolutionary""" discovery of surplus value was actually Proudhon's. Iain McKay who wrote an explanatory book on Proudhon's What is Property? writes;
>“It was Proudhon who first located surplus value production within the workplace, recognizing that the worker was hired by a capitalist who then appropriates their product in return for a less than equivalent amount of wages” (pp.66)

Marx actually praised Proudhon in his earlier writings such as this passage in the Holy Family (1845);
>“Proudhon makes a critical investigation — the first resolute, ruthless, and at the same time scientific investigation — of the basis of political economy, private property. This is the great scientific advance he made, an advance which revolutionizes political economy and for the first time makes a real science of political economy possible. Proudhon was the first to draw attention to the fact that the sum of the wages of the individual workers, even if each individual labour be paid for completely, does not pay for the collective power objectified in its product, that therefore the worker is not paid as a part of the collective labour power.”

So we know Marx was reading Proudhon and adopted his ideas and terminologies. So what happened between them that led to a divergence? Proudhon disagreed with Marx's dogmatic cult ideology and that made Marx really mad.

This was Proudhon's reply to Marx's invitation to join his cult;

>“Let us seek together, if you will, for the laws of society, the manner in which these laws are manifested, the progress of our efforts to discover them. But for God’s sake, after having demolished all a priori dogmatisms, let us not in turn dream of making our own, of indoctrinating the people; … let us show the world an example of learned and insightful tolerance, but since we are in the lead, let us not set ourselves up as leaders of a new intolerance; let us not be the apostles of a new religion, one that makes itself a religion or reason, a religion of logic. We should welcome and encourage all protestations. Let us get rid of all divisiveness, all mysticism. Let us never consider a question exhausted, and when we do get down to our last argument, let’s start again, if need be, with wit and irony! I will join your organization on that condition—or else not!”

1/2

[Anonymous No.17617726]

>>17616647
>Marx (equivalent of University of Phoenix online/correspondence degree mill doctorate)
>& Engels (Warburg ‘German speaking Js’ Anglo-Industrialist)
Bakunin was right on him. The Tribe of Dan is at the center of the World Island geopolitical Gordian Knot. Marx didn’t finish volume four of Capital because he appreciated the cosmic depths of his fraudulence — ‘German’ Fabianism is in the ascendany everywhere since the world wars, and central banking has to be excised from the life of nations in order to move toward anything remotely libertarian and/or socialist.

>>17617675
This. Political Economist equivalent of Einstein in physics.

[Anonymous No.17617747]

>>17617675
based mutualists

[Anonymous No.17617783]

>>17617675
>>17617402
>>17617431
Also regarding Marx's refutation of Proudhon's ideas, it was heavily layered with strawmans, cherrypicking quotes and distortions. This is McKay's summary of it;

>“While, undoubtedly, Marx makes some valid criticisms of Proudhon, the book is full of distortions. His aim was to dismiss Proudhon as being the ideologist of the petit-bourgeois and he obviously thought all means were applicable to achieve that goal. So we find Marx arbitrarily arranging quotations from Proudhon’s book, often out of context and even tampered with, to confirm his own views. This allows him to impute to Proudhon ideas the Frenchman did not hold (often explicitly rejects!) in order to attack him. Marx even suggests that his own opinion is the opposite of Proudhon’s when, in fact, he is simply repeating the Frenchman’s thoughts. He takes the Frenchman’s sarcastic comments at face value, his metaphors and abstractions literally. And, above all else, Marx seeks to ridicule him.”

>When Marx writes that, “property turns out to be the right, on the part of the capitalist, to appropriate the unpaid labour of others or its product, and the impossibility, on the part of the worker, of appropriating his own product” (Capital, vol. 1, quoted in McKay 66), he is repeating what Proudhon wrote 27 years earlier in What is Property? (McKay, 70-71)

Marx was so butthurt by this guy that he even decided to support Germany's war against France in order to supplant Proudhonism in the Euro socialist movement. Here's a letter he wrote to Engels on the eve of the Franco-Prussian war;

>“The French need a thrashing. If the Prussians win, the centralisation of the state power will be useful for the centralisation of the German working class. German predominance would also shift the centre of gravity of the workers’ movement in Western Europe from France to Germany, and one has only to compare the movement in the two countries from 1866 till now to see that the German working class is superior to the French both theoretically and organisationally. Their predominance over the French on the world stage would also mean the predominance of our theory over Proudhon’s, etc.”

tldr; Marx was a pseud, a man who postured as an intellectual when in reality he was schizo midwit who plagiarized from others and had doomsday apocalyptic dreams from which he worked backwards from to create a depraved political ideology.

2/2

[Anonymous No.17617852]

>>17617783
>had doomsday apocalyptic dreams from which he worked backwards from to create a depraved political ideology.
That sounds like some schizo pseud shit that an American contard would say

[Anonymous No.17617884]

>>17617852
it's true and i'm not american nor a conservative

[Anonymous No.17617897]

>>17617064
which is basically the 19th century version of what we are all doing now. shitposting. sometimes serious, sometimes not. i bet i could fill>>17616800 with my collective shitposts and regularposter over my life.

[Anonymous No.17617902]

>>17616800
Tbh there wasn't much you could do to distract yourself at that time besides booze and sex, so he could be considered a NEET for his era

[Anonymous No.17617942]

>>17616647
If that is the case then every writer should be considered a "lazy neet"

[Anonymous No.17617951]

>>17617216
>lab reports
they are also uncreative

[Anonymous No.17617960]

Lazy, retarded leech just like his followers.

[Anonymous No.17617964]

>>17616647
Yeah, and that's a good thing.
It's in my self interest to work less and do more stuff I enjoy, like reading.
The ultimate redpill is being a Marxist because you're unashamed to pursue your self interest, not because you're a faggy ass warrior for justice and emancipation type.

[Anonymous No.17617979]

>>17617216
I admit that STEM is harder than humanities, but writing lab reports is easy as fuck when you're just reporting observations, describing experiments, etc. Creative writing is a pain in the ass.

[Anonymous No.17617998]

>>17616647
Marx was a useless lazy douche who hated jews and negros

[Anonymous No.17618017]

>>17617979
>I admit that STEM is harder than humanities,
it really depends how your mind is wired. I knew a nuclear physicist major who could barley pass a history 300 class. I'm not really convinced that if you took a normie off the streets, he'd be able to understand philosophy easier than algebra.

[Anonymous No.17618019]

>>17617964
I bet you have a butt plug too.

[Anonymous No.17618031]

yeah. every lazy neet I know has generated 1000's of published pages dissecting capitalism in its minutiae.

Why are americans SO obsessed with him? he's been pretty much irrelevant since the late 80's

[Anonymous No.17618098]

>>17617897
>fewer distractions
Not a fan of Marx but this is such a weak cope. Why wasn’t everyone in the past a prolific writer then?

[Anonymous No.17618112]

>>17616800
/thread

[Anonymous No.17618143]

Why do people who have not read Marx only look at his private life?

[Anonymous No.17618171]

>>17618143
I don't trust any fat faggot who advocates for revolution when he doesn't even live by his own philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17618322]

>>17617979
>>17617951
>but writing lab reports is easy as fuck when you're just reporting observations, describing experiments, etc.
You also have a theory and discussion section, which requires you to read the literature and apply what you read to explain the experiment and your results. Usually, you will find that there are several different theories for the same thing, but they give different results because the equations use different variables and make different assumptions. Your professors only give you the bare basics, it is expected that you do your own research. Depending on what you read, or don't read, you can come out with some different answers, or the same answer, but one that is at a higher level.
Simply explaining the experiment in the most basic terms will get you a C grade.

[Anonymous No.17618434]

>>17618171
nigga you dont know what his philosophy is

[Anonymous No.17618652]

>>17618098
I never said fewer distractions. i just said in terms of process, its a similar phenomenon. not that most any of us are better than him at it, just that the process is related.

[Anonymous No.17618865]

>>17618434
>You [headcanon]
Marx is not a friend of the working class.

[Anonymous No.17618872]

>>17616800
This.

[Anonymous No.17618895]

lol

[Anonymous No.17618907]

>>17618895
I wonder if Hegelianwife knows about Hegel's political opinions

[Anonymous No.17619279]

>>17618865
lol

[Anonymous No.17619300]

>>17616800
Based & this.

[Anonymous No.17619345]

>>17618031
Communism is an easy boogeyman to apply to literally anyone who disagrees with you, like lefties and “Nazi,” and Marx is the originator so there’s a lot of incentive for fags with Communism Derangement Syndrome to constantly bloviate about a long-dead irrelevant dude.

[Anonymous No.17619355]

>>17618907
Women don't know anything. They just "act."

[Anonymous No.17619474]

>>17619355
go outside bro

[Anonymous No.17619649]

>>17616800
>>17616647
I feel like every other thread is a repost, in the most uncanny ways. I don't know if i's déja vu or fatigue. I need to leave this place

[Anonymous No.17619690]

>>17618895
>Nietzsche
just how stupid can you fucking be

[Anonymous No.17619707]

>>17618895
Heidegger is the only accurate answer here (he wasn't technically conservative though he was a nazi) and he was a petit-bourgeois careerist hack.

[Anonymous No.17619756]

>>17616647
>Marx: "The living conditions for the working poor are atrocious and something should be done about their exploitation. Here are government statistics on how rampant pauperism and deprivation is in England."
>/lit/: "hE's LaZy AnD wAnTs FrEe StuFf!"

[Anonymous No.17619869]

>>17619756
>>/lit/: "hE's LaZy AnD wAnTs FrEe StuFf!"
This type of bullshit comes from the American milieu, specifically conservatism and libertarianism. Generally quite a common take by them, of course, none of them actually know anything about Marx or his ideas beyond some silly strawman like mud pies or some shit.

[Anonymous No.17621112]

>>17619756
>>17619869

[Anonymous No.17621191]

>>17621112
>"hE's LaZy AnD wAnTs FrEe StuFf!"

[Anonymous No.17621802]

>>17616647
Smartest most influential man in history. That's literally a fact

[Anonymous No.17621808]

>>17617356
Marx hated Proudhon dipshit lol

[Anonymous No.17623191]

>>17616647
Yes and for that, he was BASED.