/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18388957]

How can any well read person still be a capitalist?

[Anonymous No.18388960]

>>18388957
I like money

[Anonymous No.18388962]

Cope afflicts more than the plebs

[Anonymous No.18388968]

...is what someone who has read The Communist Manifesto once would say :3

Good job OP. Neither me, nor Butterfly, nor almost anyone on this fucking site is a Marxist Communist. That is a retarded, outdated philosophy which had some good points to make regarding economics.

[Anonymous No.18388972]

>>18388968
>>18388957
You know, the future is in making the world a better place. Not in violence or war or aggression. :3

[Anonymous No.18388975]

>>18388968
Op here. Yes, marxist communism is outdated. I'm just a marxist.

[Anonymous No.18388979]

>>18388960
Unless you're an actual bona fide capitalist, then it doesn't make sense to support capitalism and "like money."

>>18388968
I'm in the middle of Vol. II of Capital right now. I'm not advocating for Marxism. I'm just stating that it is illogical for someone to be pro capitalist if they are well read and not actually part of the bourgeoisie.

[Anonymous No.18388989]

>>18388979
What do you mean by 'pro capitalist'? :3

[Anonymous No.18388992]

>>18388972
Im trans btw

[Anonymous No.18388993]

>>18388957
I won't share my belongings with you.

[Anonymous No.18388996]

>>18388992
Nop :3

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389102]

>>18388993
Under capitalism you cannot afford the “belongings” that the non-capitalist world would give.

[Anonymous No.18389110]

>>18388957
if I was a roman I wouldn't be supporting carthage.
if I was greek, I wouldn't be rooting for persia
I'm in a capitalist society at the height, just before it all crashes and burns
how could I not be a capitalist?

[Anonymous No.18389115]

>>18389102
>>18389102
Poorfags are so cute!

[Anonymous No.18389124]

>>18389110
I was being unironically ironic with this last post

[Anonymous No.18389129]

>>18388957
I’m an anti-commie precisely because I’m well read. Just read literally any history book on communism by any respected historian.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389145]

>>18389110
These don’t work. What are you saying? If you were Roman would you want the empire or the republic back?
If you were Greek would you want Athens or Sparta?
But being in a capitalist nation doesn’t mean you’re a capitalist. You have to be one of the owners of a business or land you extract rent from

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389164]

>>18389124
Oh, okay.

>>18389129
You haven’t grasped what’s been going on this whole revolutionary period, anon.

[Anonymous No.18389193]

>>18388957
Anon, Capital is an outdated economic treatise that no real economist takes seriously. My micro prof read all three volumes in the original German and said it was 95% bullshit. Capitalism is objectively the best and most prosperous system we have, but of course it’s not perfect so we have some regulations and government spending. With all that said, being “well read” has little to do with what your ideology is. You can read all the books in the world but an ideological person will still reach the conclusions they want regardless if it’s true or not. The average economist is more well read than the average marxist anyway.

[Anonymous No.18389215]

>>18389193
>capital is bullshit because someone else told me so
brainlet

[Anonymous No.18389270]

>>18388957
Every well read person is a conservative. Marxist just larping "ooo mucho texto I read everyday".

Yeah if so why you didn't read critique of Marxism? Ontology? Economy? Postmodernism?

Marxism is massive cringe at this point

Read some classics also

[Anonymous No.18389293]

>>18388957
The more Marxists I read, the less of a communist I became. It's just endless idealism, analysis, and rhetoric with no practical ideas for how society should be run.

[Anonymous No.18389327]

>>18388957
by selling pics of my bussy on onlyfans and making 6 figures while reading Marx

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389330]

>>18389293
How disingenuous. No practical ideas?

>>18389270
>Every well read person is a conservative
>Rush Limbaugh
>Ann Coulter
>Abigail Shapiro’s brother
>Jordan Peterman

[Anonymous No.18389333]

>>18389102
>that the non-capitalist world would give
Uh huh.
Capitalism if anything provides an abundance of shit you don't need for cheap.
This is still a problem (see the obesity crisis) but a direct opposite to the one you're claiming, which was an outdated complaint in the West a century ago and why non-capitalist ideologies never took hold.

[Anonymous No.18389337]

>>18389330
Name one way you have advanced your gay little revolution, outside of shitposting

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389361]

>>18389337
I’m a lowly working class gal trying to read up on what I can do. What I have done is classified.
Hope to do more.

[Anonymous No.18389365]

>>18389102
>tranny has a mental breakdown when the community doesn’t need her to work as an astrologist/gender studies professor and is instead sent to the salt mines with no iPhone

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389376]

>>18389333
The Soviet Union, anon....
have you seen pictures of China lately?
But again, that’s not what we mean when we talk about this “communism” thing. Read News from Nowhere, or Mikhail Bakunin and Kropotkin

[Anonymous No.18389387]

>>18389376
Butterfly, China is not really a great example of non-capitalism. They have nothing but Gucci and Michael Kors stores downtown in their big cities. :3

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389418]

>>18389387
It is an example of what the Communist Parties of state-socialism have been trying to do. The USSR was unsuccessful and let the neoliberals whack their kneecaps. But China played their long game cool. They won’t let neoliberalism in, they’re twisting its arm.

I don’t appreciate the tankie game, but you have to understand that we are telling you people the truth when we say *that wasn’t real communism*

[Anonymous No.18389431]

>>18389418
So more Gucci and Michael Kors stores than America is what the Communist parties of state socialism are trying to do?

I'm just trying to make sure I understand you right.

And also, how do you feel about Hong Kong? The cost of living there is higher than anywhere else. I suppose that's because it's in the administration of the state? Well why then is there a separate class of people governing others? Would not this lead to nepotism.

China, in its current state, is a great example of exactly what happens when you say you're Communist: more crime and more luxury stores and nepotism/crime in government. :3

[Anonymous No.18389432]

>>18388957
Because they weren't reading garbage.

[Anonymous No.18389453]

>>18388957
Only thing worth a damn in Marx is his critiques against renting. Which the neolib says is preferences based upon long/short term time preference but Marx is right that people that have short term preferences are too stupid for their own good and need to be forced into not being dumb and not rent.

Otherwise dialect materialism, LtoV, and his ideas on class relations are 19th century drivel and is not worth a damn for someone with half a brain. Even people in Marx's time could have and did shit on him for these stupid ideas. All of them are intuitively stupid and can be shown to be even more stupid in today.

[Anonymous No.18389458]

>>18389361
>I've done nothing and I plan on continuing to do nothing
Godspeed

[Anonymous No.18389466]

>>18389361
How do leftists expect to unite and coordinate some mass scale revolution when they can’t even get along on Facebook?

[Anonymous No.18389469]

>>18389453
The anti-rentcucks are the most retarded people on the planet. Mortgages aren't that hard to get if you are employed, if you think you're being robbed when you rent then just take one and buy yourself a house or a flat. Hell, think about this - even if you don't want to live there forever, in all likelihood there will be inflation in the future, so your debt will decrease in value even if you don't pay it off(while the place you've bought more likely than not has increased in value) and you can join even the forces of darkness and become a landlord when you decide you'd rather move somewhere else. So buy your place right now!

[Anonymous No.18389472]

I am actually writing an althistory of a Communist Western European NATO. As an avowed anticommunist, I believe my perspective is as levelheaded as it gets on this topic.

[Anonymous No.18389473]

>>18389466
They are the facebook.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389479]

>>18389466
>leftists
Well, I hope the novelty of fb wears off most people soon, but regardless, we need everybody to get on board for the replacement. There’s a diverse array of people that would respond quite positively to what I have in mind.
But I’m not looking for leaders here.

[Anonymous No.18389485]

>>18389469
Geoism is a legitimate philosophy. Anyone saying otherwise is retarded.

Simply being able to afford something doesn't make it right :3

Geoism even has more ground today due to the fact that everyone rents capital and land prices is getting ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.18389488]

>>18388957
How can anyone think that all literature is anti capitalist?

[Anonymous No.18389529]

>>18388957
Who's this?

[Anonymous No.18389537]

>>18388957
Because power should never be in the hands of the average person.
Socialism is the ideology of innocent children that trust the world too much

[Anonymous No.18389538]

>>18389485
Get a job and buy your own place.

[Anonymous No.18389552]

>>18388957
>How can any well read person still be a capitalist?
By monopolising the means and tools of production, hiring labour power, and extracting surplus value.

IT IS IN THE FUCKING BOOK

[Anonymous No.18389579]

>>18388957
A capitalist is someone who owns capital.

[Anonymous No.18389584]

>>18389538
>he thinks the reason I don't own my own place is because I don't have a job

Are we in the literal 1920s right now ? :3

[Anonymous No.18389591]

>>18388957
>tried +30 times
It will never work
>>>/pol/

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389606]

>>18389591
>Ignore China
>NOTHING TO SEE HERE

[Anonymous No.18389615]

>>18389606
https://www.forbes.com/china-billionaires/list/

[Anonymous No.18389621]

>>18389584
Oh so you don't want to own a place on your own, I guess it requires then the existence of some mid-term solution between home ownership and hotels for your housing needs. I wonder if someone figured that one out.

[Anonymous No.18389624]

>>18389606
China is capitalist heaven. Do you know how easy it is to make riches there?
I know a guy in China, his parents live in a village with no electricity, but he leases factories to produce fake designer shoes and makes a killing.
China is like a money making machine. Throw money in, get more out.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389630]

>>18389615
>>18389418
What the fuck do we mean by “tried +30 times. It will never work”?

[Anonymous No.18389636]

>>18389630
mm nice :3

[Anonymous No.18389641]

>>18388957
By being well read + intelligent

[Anonymous No.18389643]

>>18389485
Geoism is based but Marxism is not. If all the effort devoted to destructive revolutions, totalitarian governments, purges, and seething anti-capitalist activism had gone into support of Geoist or Georgist goals (which was happening around the world before Marx superseded the movements inspired by Henry George) the world would be a better place. George understood that destroying the system and starting again was completely insane, and really all you needed to do was change the incentive structure so doing pro-social and productive business was rewarded, while parasitic and idle speculation on the natural world was taxed. LVT is still unequivocally one of the best known kinds of taxation, and replacing taxes on labour with taxes on land is a no-brainer technically speaking. Politically it is not feasible, but it could be if people did not get suckered into the attractive conflict and drama and moral intoxication of the Marxist interpretations of history and the world. Alas.

[Anonymous No.18389644]

>>18389630
How is China communist if it allows for such inequality to happen? It's not a problem of formal restrictions on government, so they accept the existence of these business moghuls - or should we say, capitalists - completely willingly.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389653]

>>18389644
>I don’t appreciate the tankie game, but you have to understand that we are telling you people the truth when we say *that wasn’t real communism*
^My point

[Anonymous No.18389680]

You are putting it in a weird way. Like you need to be well read to be anti capitalism. I mean, if you define Capitalism as the system by which Capitalists (As owners of the big Capital) rules, I don't think a lot of people will define themselves as "pro-Capitalist", Mystifying anti-capitalism really hurts it, if you ask me.
>>18389537
Lmao, I guess this guy is an exception.

[Anonymous No.18389694]

>>18389653
China is communist in name only. It still have private property, wealth inequality, trade, etc. I guess the most communist thing about it is its extremely corrupt government.

[Anonymous No.18389697]

>>18388979
>I'm just stating that it is illogical for someone to be pro capitalist if they are well read and not actually part of the bourgeoisie.

why don't you, you know, substantiate your argument

[Anonymous No.18389730]

>>18388957
By being smart on top of well read.

[Anonymous No.18389735]

>>18388993
Capitalism is going to make you sell your belongings.

[Anonymous No.18389739]

>>18389641
>>18389730
Well, seems like you beat me to it.

[Anonymous No.18389741]

>>18389431
you are dumb

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389747]

>>18389694
They’re state socialist and a mixed economy, just like the Soviet Union. Communism hasn’t ever been tried yet! That’s the point!

[Anonymous No.18389749]

>>18389741
Nice reasons bud :3

She isn't even disagreeing with all the points there, and they aren't even all rhetorical questions.

[Anonymous No.18389750]

>>18388979
My gosh, are you 14?

[Anonymous No.18389764]

>>18389361
You’ll never be a woman.

[hungryman !!5BI0oSV9uvS No.18389769]

>>18389418
This is false, China invited foreign direct investment in during the ‘80s and sold a significant number of their state-owned enterprises under Mao.

These reforms were done under Deng Xiaoping and they went into effect within days of Mao’s death.

The reason was— wholly— that communism and a command economy had failed China in every. single. way. The CCP keeps communism in its name because it’s the party of Mao, not because it’s “Communist” in any way. When someone says “look to China” they are looking at its successes for market reforms.

By the way, GINI indices show that China had a high degree of equality under Mao, the result though was that it also had famines and a horribly inefficient economy.

I don’t mean this in a harsh way, butterfly, but you are misinformed or being disingenuous if you think any of China’s accomplishments have been without market mechanisms. I can get down with some Marx, and I like some of his stuff ok, but China isn’t your shining Marxist state. They leveled their command economy mechanisms the very second Mao died and have been engaged in FDI and global trade since.

[Anonymous No.18389773]

>>18389376
>have you seen pictures of China lately?
Yes, I have seen pictures of the suicide nets, work camps, and brothels with North Korean sex slaves.

[hungryman !!5BI0oSV9uvS No.18389775]

>>18389769
*sold a significant number under Mao should be *sold a significant number after Mao.

[Anonymous No.18389801]

>>18389330
>every well read person is conservative
>therefore; every conservative is well read

[Anonymous No.18389815]

>>18389769
>Damage control

Bottom line is that China's mixed economy is ascending in the name of communism. And is going to erase the last of their poverty in five to ten years etc.
They're Marxists. Kapitalism, bby

[hungryman !!5BI0oSV9uvS No.18389825]

>>18389815
What does this even mean?

[Anonymous No.18389829]

>>18389747
Every country has a mixed economy, you fucking moron. Including the United States.

[Anonymous No.18389869]

>>18389102
>>18389145
>>18389164
>>18389102
>>18389330
>>18389361
>>18389376
>>18389418
>>18389479
>>18389606
>>18389630
>>18389653
>>18389747
>pew pew die homo
and once again socialism saves the day!

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389899]

>>18389829
>you fucking moron.
That point once again is; the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, China, are not/were not Communist

Mark your calendars.
Write down on your refrigerator notepad.
Tell all your conservative friends about this thing (((they))) were hiding from us. Goodnight.

[Anonymous No.18389906]

>>18389899
So tell us, how would real communism look like?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18389940]

>>18389906
China’s, Morrison’s? Bookchin’s?

I like Hans Widmer‘s, but mostly because it’s so malleable

[Anonymous No.18389941]

Why don't Commune-ists just make their own and stop begging the government to do it for them. It's uber trendy now and a lot of them are from wealthy families, just pool your resources, buy some land and live communally. I think the appeal of actually doing that, which would be kinda fun, isn't the motive behind their political identity at all, moreso it's the pleasure they get from perpetually indulging in the fantasy scenerio of murdering people they don't like.

[Anonymous No.18389960]

>>18389164
We need a return to the scholastic era. Everything post Hegel has been a fucking shitshow

[Anonymous No.18389964]

>>18389906
read Description of Recently Founded Communist Colonies Still in Existence by Engels
http://marxengels.public-archive.net/en/ME0121en.html

[hungryman !!5BI0oSV9uvS No.18389965]

>>18389941
Too much effort. I can generously say that 80% of the Marxists I’ve met, and that’s being generous, can’t even be bothered to read Marx. They just are raised in an oppressive suburb and get angry about it.

[Anonymous No.18389967]

>>18389330
Cart in front of the horse. I thought you better educated to make such a basic fallacy

[Anonymous No.18389989]

I'm anti-economy. We shouldn't have an economy of any sort. No to capitalism, no to communism.

[Anonymous No.18389991]

>>18389940
I was liking your posts tonight :3

Do some more for me :3

[Anonymous No.18390064]

>>18389941
>Why don't Commune-ists just make their own and stop begging the government to do it for them.

They'd starve to death and start murdering each other in no more than a month.

[Anonymous No.18390084]

You're a materialist but you don't know how to grow food or build houses, instead you just read "theory"... that's fascinating!

[Anonymous No.18390112]

>>18388957
I am a capitalist because all the anti capitalists I know have zero basic understanding of the economy. They won't even be able to explain inflation if you ask them.
Am I supposed to let those people reshape society? Fuck that.

[Anonymous No.18390133]

>>18390084
Every communist imagines themselves as some sort of financial planner, not a worker

[Anonymous No.18390136]

Nobody in the intellectual scene is actually pro-capitalism except for contrarians like JP. Global capital is an out of control beast without corporal form.

[Anonymous No.18390140]

>>18388968

Yes, the Manifesto is the singular writing on communism. That's it. The only one.

[Anonymous No.18390149]

>>18388957
>why don't you pick between this -ism or this other -ism
>why yes both were coined by the same Jew but... you MUST choose
how about no you fuckin false dichotomy ideologue moron. go pick rice on a collective farm and die of starvation with the rest of the 20 morons who eat ration blocks off the floor

[Anonymous No.18390164]

>>18389469
>>18389538
do you even know what rent means you absolute retard

[Anonymous No.18390178]

>>18388979
Capitalism is the only system that works because it appeals to human nature and our tendency for greed and self interest. Communism and Marxist thought simply don’t work and never will.

[Anonymous No.18390190]

>>18390178
>human nature
Hold it right there, buster.

[Anonymous No.18390200]

>>18390112
Most supporters of the liberal revolutions didn't understand how inflation work. But anyway there are plenty of anticapitalists who do, google Andrew Kliman for a quick example.

[Anonymous No.18390206]

>>18390178
Marx pretty much obliterated "human nature" in Theses on Feuerbach.

[Anonymous No.18390229]

>How can any well read person still be a capitalist?
>99% of commies can't even get through the literal pamphlet they treat as their bible.

[Anonymous No.18390239]

>>18390206
> Human nature doesn’t exist.

Every field of science except sociology disagrees with this brainlet take.

[Anonymous No.18390249]

>>18390206
>human nature is only rooted in economic materialism
That Theses is the best way to understand how pathetic of a life Marx led.

[Anonymous No.18390292]

>>18388957
Because while Marx's critiques of capitalism are correct he doesn't offer any proper solutions, and everytime some group has tried an alternative to capitalism it has miserably failed. The only option I see now is market socialism, but even that has it's problems.

[Anonymous No.18390426]

>>18389906
>no private property
>no wage labour
>products are not exchanged by the producers and therefore don't acquire value
>all labour happens because it's foreseen in a social-wide plan and not due to private initiative
>all products belong immediately to the entirety of society without any mediating exchange of an equivalent with the producer
>all products are distributed from the center either with rationing (a lower stage of communism) or without any limit (a higher stage of communism)
>division between town and country, between physical and mental labour, between personal careers -- all that is either rapidly diminishing (lower stage) or already non-existent (higher stage)
we could go on, but it's clear that all the pseudocommunist industrializing capitalist states were going in the opposite direction, with their growing cities, growing number of wage labourers, growing number of market exchanges, growing co-operative or individual private property on the countryside, and so on

>>18390239
Marx says there's "human nature in general" in Capital

>>18390249
you retards don't even understand what is meant by economic because you don't read shit. for example Engels:
>We regard economic conditions as the factor which ultimately determines historical development. But race is itself an economic factor.

>>18390292
Marx doesn't offer any such solutions because he doesn't even formulate capitalism as a "social question" to be solved. posing such questions and "solving problems" is the domain of the bourgeoisie which believes it can shape the social world according to its own plans.
the only solutions Marx can and does give are to the question of how to ease the birth pangs of a new society, and they can be summed up as: revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat

[Anonymous No.18390456]

>>18390426
>We regard economic conditions as the factor which ultimately determines historical development. But race is itself an economic factor.
>race is itself an economic factor
That is like an example in the definition of the term "Shifting the Goalposts". This guy is such a brainlet hack. How can grown adult men still take this con artist seriously lmfao

[Anonymous No.18390461]

>>18388957
i like food and not trading battleships for pepsi cause im a broke ass nigger

[Anonymous No.18390467]

>>18390426
>no private property
Nobody wants to return to pre-Neolithic times. Those civilizations got wiped out for a reason.

[Anonymous No.18390471]

>>18388979
You are the classic case of a person who read three books and thinks he has the whole world figured out.
Also, what do you even mean by ''being capitalist''?
I dislike capitalism in itself, but I think that it is the system that has been empirically shown to work best - doesn't mean everything has to be 100% privatized, but looking at economic history it is clear that a good level of economic freedom is fundamental for economic growth. Social experiments which tried to abolish the private ownership of the means of production ended up in the means of production being privately owned by people who called themselves representatives of the common will, which is to say people even worse than the capitalists, who at least are ingenious and have a little bit of sense.
Maybe you think Sweden is a model to be followed, but Sweden is capitalist too (welfare state is not the same thing as socialism which is not the same as communism, but you probably know this already).
Capitalism explores natural human selfishness in a way that can be beneficial for others. That's why it thrives. It is based on impulses which already exist, while so-called left-wing systems of social organization tend to demand a re-imagination of man according to some top-down theoretical idealization, and this is bound to fail. No 'new man' will be produced, not even with genetic engineering. In 10,000 years, perhaps, if science manages to go really far, but certainly not in our era.

As E.O. Wilson said: ''Socialism: good system, wrong species".

[Anonymous No.18390472]

>>18390426
>products are not exchanged by the producers and therefore don't acquire value
and Western Europeans wonder why black markets flourished in Eastern Europe during Communist times.

[Anonymous No.18390476]

>>18388968
>:3

[Anonymous No.18390483]

Marxism is a religion. They even have scholars dedicated to the teachings of "Young Marx" - old pedophiles who work in universities and try to recruit young people in their "reading circles". These guys are losers.

[Anonymous No.18390488]

>>18390471
How is socialism a "good system"? It's hyper-domestication, the absolute pinnacle of eternal mediocrity.

[Anonymous No.18390569]

>>18390488
It works for ants. Don't you know who E.O. Wilson is?

[Anonymous No.18390578]

It's all a spook. The vast majority of people will support whatever system they perceive to personally benefit them.

[Anonymous No.18390584]

>>18389193
economics is a social science and cannot be trusted

[Anonymous No.18390589]

>>18389270
>Every well read person is a conservative
kek, this is some serious cope

[Anonymous No.18390603]

>>18390456
it's not an example of shifting the goalpost because they never claimed otherwise. it's an example of a bunch of retards assuming the content of a theory based on their narrow understanding of a single word because they're all illiterate 15 year olds who wouldn't even consider actually reading about things they're always ready to share their worthless opinion on

>>18390467
the technological basis outgrew primitive communism back then just like now it's outgrowing private property. also you've got your timeline very wrong: the height of primitive communism in the old world was actually around early bronze age

>>18390472
if they wonder that then they're just uninformed. black markets flourished because those were capitalist states that couldn't abolish private property and value (white markets flourished too) but tried to steer the workings of capital into promoting a still more rapid capitalist development (to catch up with the West). this had mixed results because 1) a planned capitalist economy or planning with prices is a contradiction in terms and always ultimately blows up in your face, 2) the shittyness becomes compounded when your agriculture is not even on a capitalist level but is rather fragmented into literally millions of tiny private enterprises -- good luck controlling prices there lmao.

either way this has little to do with communism, aside from the red flags. communism doesn't control prices but abolishes them. and the basis for developing communism is a centralization of production above the highest capitalist level. all the pseudocommunist states were, on the contrary, more decentralized than the Western developed capitalist states, because they were simply undeveloped capitalist states that dressed their state directed program of rapid capitalist development in a communist garb to help keep the proletarian masses obedient (and in part simply due to the historical contingency that the counterrevolution in the USSR proceeded by the degeneration of the communist party rather than by it being overthrown by another party. that other party would've had to sell the industrialization plan under a different ideology. and if that had happened, then all the latter anti-colonial revolutions that needed to ally themselves with the Russian bloc would've probably borrowed that other ideology from Russia, rather than borrowing pseudocommunism from it. all this is of course of secondary relevance, because the course economic development would've been the same)

[Anonymous No.18390611]

>>18388957
Pure Marxism is shit as well.

To answer the question though, it's just cognitive dissonance and egotism. They are too simply minded to let go of their preconceived notions of how an economy should be. If they admit they are wrong on this, they feel a great sense of unease to their sense of self.

[Anonymous No.18390613]

“When the anarchist, as the mouthpiece of the declining levels of society, insists on 'right,' 'justice,' 'equal rights' with such beautiful indignation, he is just acting under the pressure of his lack of culture, which cannot grasp why he really suffers, what he is poor in– in life.

A drive to find causes is powerful in him: it must be somebody's fault that he's feeling bad . . . Even his 'beautiful indignation' does him good; all poor devils like to whine--it gives them a little thrill of power. Even complaints, the act of complaining, can give life the charm on account of which one can stand to live it: there is a subtle dose of revenge in every complaint; one blames those who are different for one's own feeling bad, and in certain circumstances even being bad, as if they were guilty of an injustice, a prohibited privilege. 'If I'm a lowlife, you should be one too': on this logic, revolutions are built.–

Complaining is never good for anything; it comes from weakness. Whether one ascribes one's feeling bad to others or to oneself–the socialist does the former, the Christian, for example, the latter–makes no real difference. What is common to both and, let us add, what is unworthy, is that it should be someone's fault that one is suffering–in short, that the sufferer prescribes the honey of revenge as a cure for his own suffering.”

[Anonymous No.18390622]

I fucking hate commies so much.

How can a people so vehemently fucking stupid and not well read at all be controlling the political discussion these days?

[Anonymous No.18390633]

>>18390622
>How can a people so vehemently fucking stupid and not well read at all be controlling the political discussion these days?

is this sincerely what you believe is happening?

[Anonymous No.18390634]

>>18390633
No, but it makes for a decent bait post.

[Anonymous No.18390653]

>>18388968
>>18388972
>>18388989
>>18388996
>>18389387
>>18389431
>>18389485
>>18389584
>>18389636
>>18389749
>>18389991
xD
xD
xD
xD
xD

[Anonymous No.18390805]

>>18388957
How can anyone look at reality and the inherent competitiveness of man and not be a capitalist?

[Anonymous No.18390818]

>>18390613
this describes moralizing leftoids somewhat accurately, but is irrelevant to Marxists. while leftists complain about injustice, blame it on the vice on capitalists and plead to them that they act more virtuously, Marxists know that:

> "Justice", "humanity", "freedom", etc., may demand this or that a thousand times over; but if the thing is impossible it does not take place and in spite of everything remains an "empty figment of a dream" (Engels)

and they instead explain the historical process scientifically, the result being that capitalists are merely "personifications of economic categories" (Marx) and the proletariat has to associate independently and make its own destiny using sheer force instead of wallowing in self-pity, begging for recognition, crying for some cosmic justice

[Anonymous No.18390823]

>>18388957
is there a preferable reading order for Marx?

[Anonymous No.18390851]

>>18390823
not really. but this is roughly the order I'd currently recommend:
>Anti-Dühring parts II & III
>The German Ideology chapter I
>Value, Price and Profit
>Wage Labour and Capial
>Manifesto
>Eighteenth Brumaire
>Capital vol 1

[Anonymous No.18390857]

>>18390653
le cope

[Anonymous No.18390876]

>>18389769
>They leveled their command economy mechanisms the very second Mao died and have been engaged in FDI and global trade since.
This idea that "global trade" is incompatible with "Marxism" or socialism or whatever is a weird idea. Or FDI for that matter. I think people here have an idea that a socialist state must be an autarky, but the socialist states that were like that, from my reading of them, were like that because they were sanctioned and cut off from global trade as part of economic blockades by capitalist powers.

Or a command economy. That is useful up to a certain point (crash industrialization and land reform in underdeveloped poor countries).

When I listen to Xi Jinping here talk about globalization, this just sounds like straightforward Marxist talk:

https://youtu.be/RjNcLhaAxQQ?t=148

[Anonymous No.18390886]

>>18390613
Daily reminder that Nietzsche never read Marx

[Anonymous No.18391076]

>>18389102
I can afford prostitutes. Are non-capitalists going to give me sex or what.

[Anonymous No.18391089]

>be well read on history so you know the actual disaster that the attempts at implementing communism were
>be well read on philosophy and science so you know just how stupid historical materialism and dialectics are as philosophical outlooks of the world
>be well read on economics so you know just how Marx was about 50% full of shit, and the 50% he wasn't wrong on isn't even original to him nor was finished with him

That's how. Some type of mixed economy is the best we will achieve at the current stage of technological development.

[Anonymous No.18391096]

>>18390886
How do you know that?

[Anonymous No.18391104]

>>18390818
>explain the historical process scientifically
no they don't, Marxism is pseudo-science.
>the proletariat has to associate independently and make its own destiny using sheer force
In other words, a typical slave revolt.

[Anonymous No.18391109]

>I dug a ditch, pay me $10
>I dug a ditch with a smaller shovel so it took longer, pay me $20

The labour theory of value, people

[Anonymous No.18391130]

>>18388979
>I'm in the middle of Vol. II of Capital right now. I'm not advocating for Marxism. I'm just stating that it is illogical for someone to be pro capitalist if they are well read and not actually part of the bourgeoisie.
Most incel guys on this website who are advocating against Marx are often rich kids, or inheritards, or upper socio professional categories, who have high hopes for their future.