Monthly Marxism Thread

[Anonymous No.5564792]

Here's a thread for all things Marxism and neo-Marxism.

>Post articles, essays, book or even just observations of your own.
>Also, we can discuss general Marxist and neo-Marxist concepts.
Post any Marxist concept you can think of, even if only to inform others.

Non-Marxists are of course welcome, but let's not let this descend into a pissing contest where Reaganomics is pitted against Stalinism. Marx is not a religion for the majority of us - just a great thinker of the modern age.

>I'll start:

A great concept I've been reading about more recently is "false consciousness." A well-known term, but someone may not know it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness

Books:
I've been reading a lot of Gramsci's prison essays recently.
Also, I went back to Raoul Vanetigem's "The Revolution of Everyday Life" recently after about 6 years. It's so good.

[Anonymous No.5564804]

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.5564817]

>>5564804
How am I /pol/?
/pol/ fucking hates Marx.

[Anonymous No.5564853]

>>5564792
>Marxism and neo-Marxism.
>not political subjects

this is a literature board, take your shit to the appropriate place

[Anonymous No.5564865]

>>5564853
Moron. Marxism is the foundation of critical theory.

Get off this fucking board if you're so dumb.

[Anonymous No.5564877]

>>>/pol/
Marx isn't modern, by the way.

[Anonymous No.5564878]

>>5564853
Tell me, what did Marx do? Didn't he publish books?

Are you some kind of retard?

Also, I said that we weren't going to get in an economic debate. I want to talk about Marxist concepts and for people to link essays or articles.

Christ.

[Anonymous No.5564880]

>>5564877
Stop samefagging.
Marx is a philosopher who has had his biggest impact in the late modern period.
Please go back to /pol/ and stop trying to shut down discussions you disagree with.

[Anonymous No.5564887]

>>5564817
Get your off topic bullshit to the politics board with the rest of the shitposters, faggot

[Anonymous No.5564891]

>>5564792
Ignore shitposters.

I'm still learning about this Marxism thing. Is Neo-Marxism just the New Left?

[Anonymous No.5564893]

why doesn't /lit/ like adorno?
i don't know much about him besides what some friends told me and he seems cool enough.

[Anonymous No.5564894]

>>5564878
There are books about everything. Get the fuck out.

[Anonymous No.5564898]

>>5564894
If there can be Lena Dunham book threads, there can be anything.
Marx is of literary merit. He is responsible for all critical theory and everything from Situationism to Post-Structuralism.
Now go back to /pol/ and cry to your stormbabbies.

[Anonymous No.5564905]

>>5564898
I can't believe marxists are actually this self-unaware that you are actually defending a politics board on the literature board, and telling me to go to the politics board. How are you actually this fucking stupid? Why is every marxist so fucking retarded as to appear satirical?

[Anonymous No.5564914]

>>5564905
Politics thread**

[Anonymous No.5564916]

>>5564891
Yes, but it's not just everyone on the "left". The "left" in the US is so ridiculously broad that it includes Obama, of all people.

Neo-Marxism includes people like Debord, Vaneigem and Adorno and movements like critical theory, structuralism etc.

>>5564893
I love Adorno. I thought /lit/ liked him somewhat. I've started threads about critical theory and Adorno and Hork and had good numbers of responses.
I still quote Adorno in papers on a regular basis. There's always stuff to be found in his stuff that hasn't been rendered banal by others that have come after him.

[Anonymous No.5564938]

>>5564905
>I can't believe marxists are actually this self-unaware that you are actually defending a politics board on the literature board, and telling me to go to the politics board.
You're just willfully ignorant. I explicitly wanted this to be a book and essay thread, as well as conceptual. Critical theory is a mainstay of this board.
Also, /pol/ is not a "political board" you plonker. Everyone knows it's a containment thread for stormbabbies. They all stay in there and confirm each other's biases. No debate takes place.
>How are you actually this fucking stupid? Why is every marxist so fucking retarded as to appear satirical?
Your bad syntax is giving me a headache.
You just gave yourself away, anyway. Stop trying to make yourself feel better about being exploited in society. You're a white Uncle Tom.

[Anonymous No.5564941]

>>5564905
I don't have an issue with Marxism, so long as it doesn't degenerate into a debate about how the USSR wasn't Real Communism, or why capitalism kills so many people, or any other plebeian talking points. As long as the discussion is kept strictly rational, it's good. If there be any Marxist vs. capitalist shit, for the love of God have it done in intellectual terms by people who have actually read both capitalist and Marxist works.

[Anonymous No.5564944]

>>5564941
>As long as the discussion is kept strictly rational, it's good.

Are you the arbiter of rationality?
Fuck me, you're a conceited prick. How hubrisic can someone be.

[Anonymous No.5564992]

>>5564944
There are several rational systems of argument in philosophy, if you don't use one, you're pleb.

[Anonymous No.5564993]

>>5564804
>>5564853
Marx wrote books bruh

Also, Marxist literary critique

And this board discusses philosophers all the goddamn time and Marxism is philosophy

[Anonymous No.5565003]

>>5564941
>>5564941
>so long as it doesn't degenerate into a debate about how the USSR wasn't Real Communism, or why capitalism kills so many people
>As long as the discussion is kept strictly rational
I see we're going to use this thread to show the virtue in Marxism via showing how bad capitalism/liberalism is.

[Anonymous No.5565007]

I really thought /lit/ was above all this shitposting.

[Anonymous No.5565010]

>>5565003
Showing how bad capitalism/liberalism is, is nearly the exclusive practical use of Marxian analysis.

[Anonymous No.5565031]

>>5565003
If you're so glaringly uneducated as to what Marxism is, why do you feel the need to chime in?
Posting isn't compulsory.

Marx and Engels' theories came about as a result of the exploitative nature of capitalism. I bet you'll deny that capitalism has ever been exploitative, though.
Social Darwinists make me laugh.

[Anonymous No.5565075]

>>5565031
Does the cheetah exploit the gazelle or is that not the natural order of things

[Anonymous No.5565175]

>>5565075
Says the gazelle.

I love how all conservatives think they're the cheetas.

[Anonymous No.5565183]

>>5565175
everybody is both gazelle and cheetah anon

[Anonymous No.5565215]

Today is not princes and princes' mistresses who haggle and bargain over state borders; it is the inexorae Jew who struggles for his domination over the nations. No nation can remove this hand from its throat except by sword. Only the assembled and concentrated might of a national passion rearing up in its strength can defy the international enslavement of people's. Such a process is and remains a bloody one

[Anonymous No.5565233]

More like daily. Fucking worthless commies, sell your religion somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.5565236]

>>5565233
Please follow your own advice

[Anonymous No.5565272]

I hope the somewhat recent last couple of decades of SJWs dies away soon so we can get back to the marxist project.

[Anonymous No.5565298]

>>5565272
The Marxist project needs to step up and cure movementism >seriously using "es-jay-dub" of its liberalism, show them social justice is possible only under the project of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

[Anonymous No.5565311]

>>5565298
I for one just want to believe what the fucking zeitgeist-movies tell me. I really want these robots making my bed and preparing ecological vegetables.

[Anonymous No.5565375]

>>5565298
>>5565311
i think we can take from those old marxisms, and hopefulyl post-scarcity/automation is made to work for us and not capital in the next couple hundred years.

[Anonymous No.5565386]

>>5564792

Marxism is to Economics as Astrologists are to Astronomy.

[Anonymous No.5565397]

>>5565298
The average marxist, everyone. Nothing but speweing buzzwords and smarminess. PROTIP you will never cure the issue because you are all special little retarded snowflakes.

[Anonymous No.5565401]

>>5565386
Insignificant in the grande scheme of e'ra'tang.

[Anonymous No.5565404]

>>5565386
If you had just said Marx was to economics what Newton was to physics you'd at least seem reasonably well-read and not a chattering ape.

[Anonymous No.5565408]

>>5565397

>buzzwords

Which is why they align themselves with Psychoanalysts so much. Funny how charlatans like to stick together, ehh?

[Anonymous No.5565414]

>>5565386

/thread

[Anonymous No.5565415]

>>5565397
Eat a snickers, m8.

[Anonymous No.5565416]

>>5565386
Did you read that in the comments section on TheBlaze.com.

I have been scorched by your blazing inferno of truth.

[Anonymous No.5565420]

>>5565386
Economics is to Science as Astrology is to Astronomy.

Marxism is a descriptive critique of a method of production. Anything in economics that goes further than interpreting events and actually tries to prescribe some economic system is either toeing the line between theory and pseudo-science.

Much of Marxism is valid, much of it is not, much of it is outdated.

[Anonymous No.5565423]

>>5565414
If you're the kind of person that finds that kind of glib shit enlightening, you deserve to have been aborted.

[Anonymous No.5565424]

whats the best?

marxism
neo-marxism
post-marxism

???

[Anonymous No.5565428]

>>5565386

#rekt

[Anonymous No.5565429]

>>5565424
Neo-Marxism.

[Anonymous No.5565433]

>>5565408
>no one will be able to tell I'm samefagging

[Anonymous No.5565435]

>>5565386

So you want to ignore all the successful economies built using Marxist theory? Wow...

[Anonymous No.5565442]

>>5565428
>>5565414
>>5565386
It's always sad seeing samefaggery.

Why do the Grover Norquists always invade Marxist threads?

Christ. You have your containment board.

[Anonymous No.5565443]

>>5565424

Post neo Marxism

[Anonymous No.5565445]

>>5565435

....
you guys are hopeless.

[Anonymous No.5565453]

>>5565445

>What is China

[Anonymous No.5565456]

>>5565435

Uh, what?

[Anonymous No.5565459]

>>5565420
>>5565435
>>5565445
>>5565453

/lit/ please stop talking about economics and politics and just stick to your fairy tales.

[Anonymous No.5565461]

>>5565386
You fucking moron.

Marx was so insightful in regards to certain things that Caitalists have used his theories to abuse the system, in a manner similar to how Machiavelli's Prince (a work of satire) was used as a how-to manual for dictators and malevolent politicians.

You just show your ignorance. It's plainly obvious you've never read Marx. He expanded on Adam Smith's theories, but warned against extreme inequality and exploitation as he was a fundamentally good person. Any economist will tell you that there is a lot of truth to Marxism - they've cheated the system using his insights.

[Anonymous No.5565463]

>>5565453

State capitalist.

[Anonymous No.5565470]

The reason Marxist systems didn't work is because they weren't MARXIST ENOUGH. PERIOD.

That and because Capitalists in the west constantly sabotaged them.

[Anonymous No.5565477]

>>5565470
>The reason idealism doesn't work is because PEOPLE ARE NOT ROBOTS

Wow. Such revelation. Much oppress.

[Anonymous No.5565479]

All of you are, like, fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.5565485]

>>5565386

This comment is predictable but the butt-hurt it spawned is amazing.

[Anonymous No.5565486]

>>5565463
Built on socialism with the goal of returning to socialism. Maybe you didn't know Chiang Kai-Shek's capitalist regime was sinking China until Mao's communist policy reversed course and mobilized the populace into prosperity unseen since (obviously post-Deng capitalist China is richer, but the majority of Chinese are becoming poorer and waiting for socialism).

[Anonymous No.5565489]

>>5565479

you haven't even read Marx have you.........HAVE YOU

[Anonymous No.5565496]

>>5565477
This isn't even bait, he thinks this is coherent.

[Anonymous No.5565497]

what a bunch of marxist lazy fucks,
get on the atlas shrugged/fountainhead train you bunch of leeches

[Anonymous No.5565498]

>>5565486

China was poor as shit until they adapted a capitalist mode of production heavily influenced by the state.

There wasnt anything to build on, much of Modern China was created in the last 30-40 years.

[Anonymous No.5565499]

>>5565486

>state socialism is now the same as Marxism/Communism

Oh wait that's wrong.

[Anonymous No.5565509]

>>5565497

Marx understand economies better than anyone, y
back to >>> /pol/

[Anonymous No.5565517]

>>5565489
I'm a National Socialist, you swine.

[Anonymous No.5565518]

Zizek turned me to Communism and the Critique of Pure Ideology, really opened my eyes against how evil and destructive capitalism is.

It really doesn't work at all, it's probably the most destructive force we've ever encountered on earth---and the bad thing is we are all in denial, suprlus value is the problem and appropriation of wage slavery

[Anonymous No.5565524]

>>5565518

Yep, Marx proved in Das Kapital how the whole scheme works. what we need is a post-marxist simulacrum of abject sublugation in our economics. That's what the Right fails to understand.

[Anonymous No.5565528]

>>5565477
>Implying you have any agency in a Capitalistic system.

[Anonymous No.5565540]

>>5565528

This^
What we actually have is wage-slavery bound under the profit curve of Capital's hegemonic Klassenkampfen-- commodity fetishism at its purest! What individual where? You think this is air you're breathing

[Anonymous No.5565541]

>>5565524

>how the whole scheme works.

How?

[Anonymous No.5565546]

>>5565498
>>5565499

[Anonymous No.5565547]

as a lot of the advantages that were won under trade unionism, which I guess the capitalists knew they had to do to prevent communism, are slowly reversed I think there is hope again for communism to become more popular.

[Anonymous No.5565550]

>>5565540

Your word salad doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous No.5565561]

>>5565524
>simulacrum of abject sublugation in our economics.
What does this mean, anon-san?

[Anonymous No.5565564]

>People who are Marxists and not Market Socialists

Its not perfect, but its actually functional.

[Anonymous No.5565577]

>>5565564
I said in the outset that this thread was a Marxism/neo-Marxism appreciation thread.

Most lovers of Marx do not read him dogmatically - that would be foolish. If Marx had lived to be 200, he would've put out a dozen editions of Das Kapital.

[Anonymous No.5565582]

>>5565540
Is this water?

[Anonymous No.5565585]

>>5565547
It's possible, but we have decades on decades of Red Scare revisionism that makes anyone to the left of Bill Clinton more leftist than Bakunin.

[Anonymous No.5565593]

>>5565541
>>how the whole scheme works.
>>5565561

It begins with alienation of the means of production via commodity fetishism and appropriation of surplus value; antagonisms emerge as capital subverts the real value of goods and replaces them with further alienation until wage-slavery forms segments in society aka Klassenkampfen. Then the further extension of the natural division of labour existing in the family spreads to the nation state until commodification of the sublimate form of our fetishistic dialectic runs backwards, get it? In this moving backwards Capital subsumes the individual and turns him into a mere clog in the machine, the value under the utility maximizing curve (tangent to the reciprocal of the profit curve) becomes minimized because guess what, Capital has appropriated the area under the curve (the derivative)!! So what we get is a hegemonic false consciousness that feeds on ITSELF and spreads from nation-state to nation-state. Capitalism is really broken and Marx saw all this decades ago. Every economist gets it wrong basically.

It's pretty obvious what happens next...and where we are heading.

[Anonymous No.5565628]

>>5565593

Marxism plz go.

[Anonymous No.5565639]

>>5565628
The spectre will haunt you forever...
Boo!

[Anonymous No.5565654]

>>5565593
>It begins with alienation of the means of production via commodity fetishism and appropriation of surplus value; antagonisms emerge as capital subverts the real value of goods and replaces them with further alienation until wage-slavery forms segments in society aka Klassenkampfen. Then the further extension of the natural division of labour existing in the family spreads to the nation state until commodification of the sublimate form of our fetishistic dialectic runs backwards, get it? In this moving backwards Capital subsumes the individual and turns him into a mere clog in the machine, the value under the utility maximizing curve (tangent to the reciprocal of the profit curve) becomes minimized because guess what, Capital has appropriated the area under the curve (the derivative)!! So what we get is a hegemonic false consciousness that feeds on ITSELF and spreads from nation-state to nation-state. Capitalism is really broken and Marx saw all this decades ago. Every economist gets it wrong basically.

[Anonymous No.5565668]

>>5565593
what's our fetishistic dialectic? Also what do you mean by backwards? Like from sublimation to conflict? Sorry it has been a while since I read Hegel

[Anonymous No.5565669]

>>5565386

Glorious. Anyone with a lick of common sense knows that Marxism is economic and social retardation. All of those hierarchical regulations, bureaucracies, and taxes only serve to cripple the economy and prevent it from moving goods and services efficiently. If businesses can't be nimble, the people have less resources, and when they have less resources, they starve.

[Anonymous No.5565721]

>>5565669
I must read your book when it comes out.

You American Libertarians are the worst. European Libertarianism offers you total freedom, but protects you from abuse of the system by employers. You Yanks just wanna be fucked in the ass by big, unregulated monopolies, and to just let them pay you pittence while they pillage the land for resources.

You deserve everything bad that happens to you.

[Anonymous No.5565731]

>>5564938
thank you for that

[Anonymous No.5565752]

>>5565424
What's the difference? I admit I'm ignorant, I came here to learn.

[Anonymous No.5565774]

>>5565497
Oh, wait... you mean insulting social welfare for most of my life and then going ahead and jumping on the gravey train anyway once my BS fails to support my mean-ass? Sounds pretty good.

[Anonymous No.5565779]

>>5565517
So, a fascist? Ew...

[Anonymous No.5565794]

>>5565721
Not all yanks are this retarded, plz don't heap me in with that, I don't want this....

[Anonymous No.5565825]

>>5565721
>big, unregulated monopolies, and to just let them pay you pittence while they pillage the land for resources

a pittance is fine, we aren't materialist whores who feel entitled to 1000% of our earnings like communists.

Sharing is caring.

[Anonymous No.5565868]

>>5565486
And then sank the country even further with the cultural revolution and famine. I can't believe how people are making the same mistake Sartre did in the past of trying to justify Maoism as a push forward. If any of you guys were in Mao's China you would basically be fucked since it was entirely an anti-intellectualist state. The only reason China is still relevant is because of Zhou Enlai.

>The first casualty of Mao's anti-intellectualism was to be found, interestingly enough, in the field of Marxist studies. When, after fifteen years of revolutionary activity, the party finally felt the need to acquire some rudiments of Marxist knowledge (at that time virtually no work of Marx had yet been translated into Chinese!), Mao, who himself was still a beginner in this discipline, undertook to keep all doctrinal development under his personal control. In Yan'an, like an inexperienced teacher who has gotten hold of the only available textbook and struggles to keep one lesson ahead of his pupils, he simply plagiarized a couple of Soviet booklets and gave a folksy Chinese version of some elementary Stalinist-Zhdanovian notions. How these crude, banal and derivative works ever came to acquire in the eyes of the entire world the prestige and authority of an original philosophy remains a mystery; it must be one of the most remarkable instances of mass auto-suggestion in the twenthieth century. (Simon Leys, The Halls of Uselessness)

[Anonymous No.5566188]

Have any academic economics undertaken the project of reconciling Marx and Keynes? I am fully aware that Keynes would not want to be reconciled with Marx, but there are too many similarities in the formal systems they each introduced to completely ignore them. More specifically: are there any treatments of quantified exploitation as essentially a Keynesian "reverse multiplier effect," and the Marxist "tendency of the rate of profit to decline" as the result of demand shortage from capital accumulation?

Somebody in one of these threads in the past directed me towards "Capital as Power" by Nitzan and Bichler, which was fantastic, thank you for that whoever did that. Does anyone know economists who have explored the above question? Steve Keen's and Randy Wray's work come the closest I've seen but I'd like to see an even more explicit "translation."

Kind of taking a shot in the dark here, but hopefully some Marxists or semi-Marxist post-Keynesians can help me out.