[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 86 KB, 725x733, Charles_Bukowski_Quote.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5636669 No.5636669 [Reply] [Original]

Working class/poor people books and authors?

>> No.5636672

>>5636669
Philip K. Dick

>he was poor as fuck

>> No.5636674

>>5636669

Karl Marx

>> No.5636678

Knut Hamson
George Orwell - especially Down and Out in Paris and London
Henry Miller
Louis Ferdinand Celine
Pedro Juan Gutiérrez

>> No.5636679

>>5636672
So were most successful authors.

>> No.5636681

>>5636674
>/r/communism

>> No.5636685

I really, really dislike Bukowski.

>> No.5636686

Pretty sure Charles Dickens wrote Oliver Twist with his youth in mind

>> No.5636692

>>5636685
That quote sucks, but he has some great ones about waking up fucked from drink/drugs.

>> No.5636693
File: 397 KB, 1600x1200, 1357939724799.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5636693

>>5636685
wrong answer. Go and listen to bluebird ten times on youtube.

>> No.5636701

>>5636685
he's kind of an edgy faggot and his fanbase in palahniuk tier, but his stories are sometimes entertaining. i liked post office. people get hung up too much on "what the author was trying to say, maaaaan" instead of just sitting back and enjoying the trainwreck/beauty/hilarity/whatever a given author was portraying

>> No.5636703

>>5636678

Seconding Orwell - and you should also look at Clergyman's Daughter and Road to Wigan Pier.

Also, Jack London had a book where he basically did his own version of Down and Out. For a while I thought Orwell's description was very British-morbid and exaggerated, but J-Lon, an optimistic American, described the exact same milieu so similarly to Orwell that I started to believe it.

>> No.5636707

>>5636703
>Clergyman's Daughter
Do not read this unless you intend to sleep.

>> No.5636709

The Jungle

>> No.5636710

>>5636703
>Jack London
Isn't he a children's author? I thought he wrote Lassie or some kids book about a dog.

>> No.5636714

Oscar Wilde - Picture of Dorian Grey

>> No.5636721

CAConrad -- The Book of Frank

He's totally prole. Also an amazing poet.

>> No.5636722

How can Bukowski not understand the subjectivity of enjoyment?

>> No.5636723

>>5636710

Sure, and a bunch of essays, and a book on the harrowing life of the London poor at the turn of the 20th century.

You know, the usual.

>> No.5636724

bukowski is a fucking hack

i mean it, hes really bad

>> No.5636729

Bukowski is a fucking genius

I mean it, he's really good.

>> No.5636731

>>5636710
White Fang. Yes i's popular with young reader, but I would't necessarily describe it as a children's book.

>> No.5636733

Bukowski is 4 teenz

>> No.5636737

>>5636733
so is 4chan. Perfect match.

>> No.5636796

>>5636724
Why he's still on the recommended reading list is still anyone's guess

>> No.5636817

>>5636796

Because if you've never read Bukowski you wouldn't have that opinion, essentially.

He's a one trick pony but he does that trick pretty well. He's a huge influence.

>> No.5636855

>>5636669
Alasdair Gray

>> No.5637535

>>5636669
Robert Tressell nigga

>> No.5637549

>>5636796
Every once in a while I LIKE to read garbage just so i can be reminded that there's bad lit out there. Bukowski is very good for this.

>> No.5637550

>>5636669
Some stories by Charles Dickens, I guess.

>> No.5637562

>>5636669
This guy seem more like a cunt, then disillusioned. It is not like people are not getting paid, and then complains about having to take care of himself, goddamn.

>> No.5637576

>>5637562
>It is not like people are not getting paid,
Capitalist enabler

>> No.5637582

>>5637576
I just don't care. What does he want?, he could live in the forest. What he just said was that he doesn't like to work.

>> No.5637584

>>5637576
sheltered teen detected

we live in a capitalist society sport, what are you gonna do, freeload off your parents as a means of protest?

>> No.5637586

>>5637584
i'm gonna overthrow the system, obviously

>> No.5637591

Cormac McCarthy and John Steinbeck

>> No.5637595

>>5637586
So you're just turning the shit wheel again. When you turn the wheel the shit just comes back. So you can spend all day spinning shit wheels, or you could get a job.

>> No.5637598

John Fante John Fante John Fante

>> No.5637608
File: 81 KB, 452x433, bucky-fuller-quote.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5637608

>>5637595
>or you could get a job.
Bukowski had jobs, you mong. Are the working class not even allowed to complain about wage-slavery now?

>> No.5637610
File: 59 KB, 640x479, 182-934x.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5637610

>>5636714
>What is 'Overrated Sleep Aids of the 19th Century'?

>> No.5637618

>>5637586
>The weakness of all Utopias is this, that they take the greatest difficulty of man and assume it to be overcome, and then give an elaborate account of the overcoming of the smaller ones. They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motor-car or balloon.

>> No.5637619

>>5637608
he claims that one in ten thousands of us can make a "breakthrough"

well unfortunately, one in ten thousands of us don't have to work a proper job

>> No.5637640

>>5637619
I don't understand your logic here. If 1/10,000 were to focus their efforts in any desired field, then what's stopping their breakthrough? Furthermore, consider what you had just mentioned:
>well unfortunately, one in ten thousands of us don't have to work a proper job

If 1/10,000 don't work, then how would the breakthrough be possible? It's that quintessential inspirational poster of the basketball court which says, "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" -- either you try and at least make an effort, or you give into your natural lethargy and amount to nothing.

>> No.5637641

>>5637608
I really just don't give a shit, actually. The worst that can happen is that I could live on the street, which in his case he would start complaining about how benches should have free pillow dispensers.

>> No.5637644

The struggle alone is enough to fill a man's heart

>> No.5637645

>>5636669
>waaaah paid work is slavery!

So go live in a jungle somewhere.

>> No.5637664

>>5637640
autism

>> No.5637666

>>5637664
>completely useless response.
>go eat your Wheaties

>> No.5637694

>>5637608
This quote is bullshit on so many levels but the one that's always bothered me the most is this notion that technological breakthroughs are somehow a work of genius. I mean what do those people think us STEMfags do? 99% of all technological advancement is just s bunch of people getting up at 6:30 and going off to do their fucking job like everyone else.

>> No.5637700

>>5637591
>McCarthy
>Working class

He was a New England private school kid, wasn't he?

>> No.5637706

Herman Bang

>> No.5637713

>>5637645

Jungles are actually calorie scarce environments believe it or not. The ratio between calories spent obtaining food to calories reaped from that food isn't great. The soil in jungles sucks.

protip calorie is a unit of measurement of energy, not a bane of your existence as diet mavens would have you believe.

>> No.5637719

>>5637694
>what do those people think us STEMfags do?
>those people
>Buckminster Fuller
>an American architect, systems theorist, author, designer, and inventor.
>published more than 30 books,
>developed numerous inventions,
>Carbon molecules known as fullerenes were later named by scientists after him
>was the second president of Mensa from 1974 to 1983.
>developed many ideas, designs and inventions, particularly regarding practical, inexpensive shelter and transportation.
>was awarded 28 United States patents and many honorary doctorates.

>> No.5637725

>>5637719
Yes even more reason for him to know all the hard work that has to be done for all of that to be possible. You'd think an architect would be aware of the necessity of a construction crew.

>> No.5637759

>>5637725
Perhaps if you read one f his many books on this subject you'd realise that you actually knew a little less than him.

>> No.5637763

>>5637700
This. McCarthy is a massive tryhard and pseud, and by extension a massive faggot.

>> No.5637768

>>5637763
Who can undoubtedly write better than you.

>> No.5637799

>>5637768
Writing good is nothing special, it's a skill that can be easily trained like any other. What's important is having something significant to say.

>> No.5637808

>>5637799
>Being so bitter you massively undervalue someones achievements
Stay mad faggot

>> No.5637825

>>5637799
Well, when you learn to write 'good' and become critically acclaimed, as well as thought to be one of the greatest living writers of our time, then I'll believe the bullshit you spew.

>> No.5637827

>>5637759
Sorry I don't really care that much about 20th century borderline sci-fi technological utopia bullshit.

>> No.5637834

>>5637808
faggot detected

>> No.5637841

Emile Zola - Germinal
Dickens - Hard Times

These books are remarkably similar in many ways. Both very good.

William Godwin: Caleb Williams

>> No.5638040

>>5636685

A Bukowski phase is inevitable in the life of a middle-class white suburban boy who just found out paying rent sucks. Most people grow out of it.

>> No.5638064

No idea why, but the "brush teeth and hair" like really irritates me. It kills the entire quote.

>> No.5639521

>>5638064
Because white collars are workers too?

>> No.5639552

Irvine Welsh. especially Trainspotting; it's about A LOT more than drug addiction.

>> No.5639578

>>5639552
Marabou Stork Nightmares fits the "working class" mould too. Welsh is a good writer, I don't see him pop up here often though.

>> No.5639615

>>5637841
First time I've seen Godwin mentioned on here. I've only seriously read a portion of one of his books, but he has one paragraph that it is up near the very top of my favorite passages. He should come up more often imo, at the very least when anarchy is discussed.

>> No.5639626

Lovecraft
poor as fuck, died of malnutrition.

>> No.5639637

>>5636669
try Steinbeck.

The pearl, of the grapes of wrath.

>> No.5639671

I like Bukowski. He's not some grand fuck, but the books are entertaining and he's not up his own ass, usually. Not sure why people have a problem with OP's quote.

It sucks to have to do a shitty job and get paid shit for it. Plus, remember his time. I mean, it's bad now, with everyone saying "get a job!" and the like. Back then it was worse. You were expected to not only have a job, any job, but also to enjoy it. Enjoy working at your shit job for shit pay. I work at a shit job. I don't enjoy anything but the paycheck, and I only enjoy that because it's better than nothing. He was just saying how he felt.

>> No.5639814

>>5637763
you just said pseud unironically

>> No.5639905

>>5639671
>Not sure why people have a problem with OP's quote.

brainwashed fagoots.

>> No.5639943

>there are people on /lit/ who enjoy being awakened at 6:30 a.m. by an alarm clock, leaping out of bed, dressing, force-feeding, shitting, pissing, brushing teeth and hair, and fighting traffic to get to a place where essentially you make lots of money for somebody else and were grateful to be asked for the opportunity to do so

>> No.5640406
File: 140 KB, 1258x539, Trolls beg for me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5640406

>>5636693
>Go and listen to bluebird ten times on youtube
I don't know who you are, but I love you.

>> No.5640418

>>5637719
Bucky Fuller would have agreed 100% with OPs pic.

>> No.5641802

>>5637713
Jungles are full of easy animal protein.
People have been surviving in jungles since the dawn of man.
No excuses.

And if you don't like jungles, go to any of the countless other areas of the world that are desolate but can sustain human life.

>> No.5641824

>>5639671
>Not sure why people have a problem with OP's quote.
Half the people here are NEET shut-ins whose parents take care of them, and the other half are undergraduates who have yet to taste the labor market. Only a very, very small percentage will have any idea what it's like to wake up before sunrise and spend the entire day repeating a hand motion on a production line.

>> No.5641825

>>5636674
Remind me again what job Marx had?

>> No.5641883

>>5641825
>Remind me again what job Marx had?
IIRC mooching off Engels, smoking himself sick, and reading everything the British parliament produced.

>> No.5641898

>>5641824
and some of then that have tu wake up before sunrise, are content sheeps.

>> No.5641904

>>5641883
Yea he was just another capitalist. Biggist fraud in all of history.

Ever noticed how all child molesters are smokers? Just saying. Would have been a lot easier back than not to get caught.

>> No.5641914

>>5641904
>Biggist
I don't see how his personal life in anyway related to the validity of his argued ideas.

>> No.5641916

>>5641898
It's the new contrarianism of the young. As we live in an age where it's rapidly becoming mainstream to question capitalism, amongst a generation more alienated and facing a total systemic crisis, the standard young peoples' urge to rebel can't be satisfied by talking about revolution or political and economic alternatives - so these poor kids 'rebel' via the defense of capitalism instead.

>> No.5642021

>>5637694
I don't see how the quote excludes this fact. Yes some people work their asses off for other people to benefit from their invention. I don't understand what you are getting at

>> No.5642052
File: 33 KB, 500x434, 1413648555935.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5642052

>>5642021
>yes some people work their asses off for other people to benefit from their invention

some of them dont feel like "work their asses off", and sometimes dont even care if people benefit. They just like what they do, some people like to do poetry, others like to discover shit.

>> No.5642096

>>5642021
>Yes some people work their asses off for other people to benefit from their invention.
The quote says this somehow wouldn't be necessary.
While the truth is that without wage employment, much of technological advancement would become impossible.

>> No.5642099

>>5642096
>While the truth is that without wage employment, much of technological advancement would become impossible.
Unsupported claim constructed as "everybody knows."

>> No.5642107

>>5642099
Lol.
Technological advancement requires massive amounts of labor to produce equipment, provide raw materials, build infrastructure, transport tons of directly or indirectly related shit, take care of administration, provide food, electricity, heating, ...

>> No.5642113
File: 37 KB, 550x257, Optimized-abb-great-wall-motors.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5642113

>>5642107

>> No.5642118

>>5642113
>robots will do it!
Maybe in the future, this is now.

>> No.5642119

>>5636731
The Call of the Wild is what you mean, plebwad.

>> No.5642120

>>5642096
>muh tech advancement.

>> No.5642122

>>5642120
What about it?

>> No.5642124

>>5642122
is like your fetiche.

>> No.5642125

>>5642124
You probably meant to reply to >>5642113

If not, pls explain because I'm not seeing it.

>> No.5642127

>>5642118
>Maybe in the future, this is now.
The entire car production line can already (and has in a lot of cases) bee automated.

>> No.5642128

Britfag here:

Alan Sillitoe
Walter Greenwood
Kingsley Amis
John Arden
Stan Barstow
Edward Bond
John Braine
Michael Hastings
Thomas Hinde
Stuart Holroyd
Bill Hopkins
John Osborne
Harold Pinter
Alan Sillitoe
David Storey
Kenneth Tynan
John Wain
Keith Waterhouse
Arnold Wesker
Colin Wilson

>> No.5642130

>>5642127
So?

That's just an infinitessimally small part of the entire creation cycle of a car.

The totality of which requires massive amounts of human labor.

>> No.5642140

>>5642125
it was for you.

>While the truth is that without wage employment, much of technological advancement would become impossible.

You may be right or not, but if you are right, is that a tragedy?.
Maybe your grandparents were happier than you, in the end that's what matters.

>> No.5642141

>>5642130
>That's just an infinitessimally small part of the entire creation cycle of a car.
It's a huge, huge part of the process. Other, smaller things are the automated mining of ores, the machine refinement of ores, the automated smelting process, every PCB in a car is made via wave soldering SMT components so nobody has to sit by hand with a soldering iron...

The fact that you are overlooking, Anon, is that a business profits greatly from replacing a team of humans with a machine that is more efficient and can do 100 times as much work. And that is why, if you look at any sector in the production of a car, you will usually find machines and sophisticated tools instead of a human doing it by hand.

>> No.5642148

>>5642140
Then you're missing the point in a big way.

The quote here >>5637608
talks about how technological advancements are possible without wage labor, which isn't true.

>>5642141
A bunch of it is automated, but today the entire creation cycle of a car requires tremendous amounts of human labor.

Just look at the employment figures for any car manufacturer.

>The fact that you are overlooking, Anon, is that a business profits greatly from replacing a team of humans with a machine that is more efficient and can do 100 times as much work.
I'm not overlooking anything, just pointing out to you that we're still a long way from replacing any and all human wage employment with robots.

>> No.5642150

>>5642148
>Just look at the employment figures for any car manufacturer.
And that's without counting the indirectly related elements like food, infrastructure, energy, security, transportation, ...

>> No.5642161
File: 57 KB, 525x294, shanghai_maglev.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5642161

>>5642148
>talks about how technological advancements are possible without wage labor, which isn't true.
It could just as easily be talking about the breakthroughs being used as a method of mass escaping wage labor.

>Just look at the employment figures for any car manufacturer.
That's the point. Did you not understand the "inspectors of inspectors" metaphor? We can automate more and more of the car manufacture process every day, but for what? A suitable counter breakthrough would be city-wide maglev, solar-powered, driver-less trams, in a system that didn't have everyone driving to work in a car.

>> No.5642163

>>5642161
>It could just as easily be talking about the breakthroughs being used as a method of mass escaping wage labor.
He is talking about that.
And it is happening.
It's just not at that level yet. Obviously.

>>5642161
>That's the point. Did you not understand the "inspectors of inspectors" metaphor? We can automate more and more of the car manufacture process every day, but for what? A suitable counter breakthrough would be city-wide maglev, solar-powered, driver-less trams, in a system that didn't have everyone driving to work in a car.
Because trains always drop you off within walking distance of your destination right?

The fact is that robots are a long way from taking over wage labor.

>> No.5642166

>>5642161
>cars exist
>people still want them
>cars get built

>> No.5642176

>>5637725
Shut the fuck up and 3d model me some engine parts.

>> No.5642211

>>5642163
>The fact is that robots are a long way from taking over wage labor.

even if robots are able to take over wage labor. Do you think that the people that have the power would let that happen ?

I mean having people people to work for you is some way to hold power. Maybe Im just paranoic.

>> No.5642216

>>5642211
>having people people to work for you is some way to hold power
Not really, the workers tend to align with their unions AGAINST their employers.

>> No.5642217

>>5642211
Read Marx, please fucking read Marx. Value Price and Profit.

>> No.5642227

>>5642217
I have read that, now what?

>> No.5642257

>>5642216
thats an issue indeed.but still the owner holds power.

>> No.5642265

>>5642216
>>5642257
I mean, the robot will take the capitalist out of the equation. I dont know how to explain this.

>> No.5642267

>>5642227
So why do you hold a construction of society based in the volition of the elite? Their interests are not eternal nor absolute, but negotiated and contingent.

>> No.5642268
File: 54 KB, 1024x696, grrmyoung.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5642268

>>5636669

>> No.5642271

>>5636669
maybe wake up an hour earlier, dumbass

>> No.5642289

>>5642267
>Their interests are not eternal nor absolute, but negotiated and contingent.

thats the question.
How is the game is going to change. What will the elites do?

Will they try to keep the status quo somehow?

will they try to privatize knowledge since money will loss relevance?

>> No.5642301

>>5642267
>So why do you hold a construction of society based in the volition of the elite?
Lol, in my European country socialists have been the only party to be in the government non-stop for a quarter century.

>> No.5642344

>>5636669
am I the only one who gets really irritated at the "brush teeth and hair" bit? it's such an awkward phrase

>> No.5642360

>>5642301
Well these 'socialists' obviously support the value-form.

>> No.5642362

>>5642360
If you say so.

>> No.5642378

>>5642362
So you've not read Value Price and Profit?

>> No.5642601

>>5637584

American IT drone detected.

>> No.5643040

>>5639943

americans.txt

>> No.5643060

>>5639943
Some people enjoy the security and predictability of that lifestyle.

And those who don't aspire to do something else.

That's the beauty of capitalism.

>> No.5643116

>>5637799
If you've something important to say, what are you doing here?

>> No.5643151 [DELETED] 

>>5642113
are the old men working for wages to support a family supposed to just fuck off when robots create everything for us? the idea that no one should have to work for a shit wage is a great one, if you're one of a thousand that makes something of himself. meanwhile the other 999 unlucky fucks and each of their six kids are left to.. do what exactly?

>> No.5643223

>>5637608
Did he ever go on to explain these "technological breakthroughs" that can feed so many and demand so little? Or does he mean that the wealth one accumulates from developing such a technological breakthrough should be spread among those people? I'm confused here.

I can see how we're headed in a direction that doesn't demand wage labor to produce technological breakthroughs, maybe not there yet, but headed there. What I don't get is how his idea of a breakthrough is so low maintenance and ideal, that not only does it require very little human input, but it generates profit for those who have nothing at all to do with it?

>> No.5643233

>>5643223
He probably means that people can invent machines that will feed/entertain/transport/... everyone, and that those people will provide these things for free.

Also that those things don't need humans to operate.

>> No.5643249

>>5643233
How the hell is someone supposed to create and look after a machine that's making them absolutely nil? They'd go bankrupt in no time.

>> No.5643253

>>5643249
Beats me, I think it's a childish kind of idealism to believe that.

>> No.5643261

>>5643233

The idea is surely that they do need humans to operate but nowhere near as many as if it were an actual human workforce.

>> No.5643263

>>5643261
ok.. but >>5643249

>> No.5643279

>>5643261
>they do need humans to operate
Why would anyone want to do that when you get free shit for doing nothing thanks to the magical technological advancements?

>> No.5643281

>>5641914
He was a capitalist, making a living by exploiting workers. If he wanted others to live by his ideals, he should have been the first to do it.

If one wants to be some great moralist, than they need to start with themselves. Anything else is the actions of a want to be tyrant.

>> No.5643286

>>5643263
>>5643279

Surely at some point we could have a society that has moved onto something that isn't based around capitalism. At the time, nobody thought feudalism, for example, would end but it did when necessary.

>> No.5643315

>>5643286
What does capitalism have to do with this post: >>5643279
?

>> No.5643324

>>5643286
It ain't a socialism thread until someone compares capitalism to feudalism.

>> No.5643331

>>5643324
Being enslaved by the collective is better than being enslaved by the king, shitlord. Women are the majority of the collective, you hate women if you don't submit.

>> No.5643333

>>5643331
Are you drunk?

>> No.5643339

>>5643333
lol i woke up ten minutes ago, so yes.

>> No.5643340

>>5638040
I found Bukowski through Tom Waits. Then Louis-Ferdinand-Celine through Bukowski.

All in all I really like him. One of my favorite authors.

>> No.5643347

>>5641916
Spot on, mate. They also think that because the liberals of our generation support labour unions and the like that they have to be against any opposition to capitalism.

They forget people like G.K. Chesterton, Hilliare Belloc, and Pope Leo XIII were all anti-capitalists without being Marxist whoo-has.

>> No.5643385

>>5643324

It wasn't a comparison. It was just the first -ism of an earlier society that came to mind.

>> No.5643399

>>5643347
>liberals of our generation
>support labour unions

Are you having a giggle m8?

>> No.5643409

>>5643347
>They forget people like G.K. Chesterton, Hilliare Belloc, and Pope Leo XIII were all anti-capitalists
Traditionalists/Reactionaries only claim to be anti-capitalists because of the "loss" of religion/culture. In reality, they're pseudo-capitalists at most, and if we were to see another really-existing fascist state or somehow a new monarchical state, they would immediately sign themselves off to whatever capitalist aristocracy would claim them. Even Mussolini said fascism is more properly called corporatism.

>> No.5643418

>>5642378
And you've obviously never lived in a post-fascist European socialist shithole.

>> No.5643434

>>5643409
Fascist Corporatism has nothing to do with capitalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism#Corporatism_in_politics_and_political_economy

>>5643409
You DO know Chesterton and Belloc are responsible for the Distributist movement, right?

>> No.5643453

>>5643434
>Fascist Corporatism has nothing to do with capitalism.

think again.

>> No.5643473

>>5643434
>Fascist Corporatism has nothing to do with capitalism.
Of course it does. Fascism opposes laissez-faire capitalism because its [primary focus is on control of culture, not economics.

>> No.5643478

>>5643434
Can you explain how Distributism isn't just welfare/reformist capitalism with the pope at the head of society?

>> No.5643483

>>5636685
>>5636692
>>5636693
>>5636701

>this guy says all the things I wish I could say on 4chan without being tipped with a fedora and called a ebin maymay

>> No.5643484

>>5636722
He had a very very rough life growing up that ruined all notion of enjoyment.

>> No.5643486

>>5643483

>anon

>scaried of being anon

holy shit

>> No.5643493

>>5643486
The creation of such maymays as the fedora and edgy find themselves in the low self esteem of people who are afraid to be themselves even when no one knows who they are.

You know the type who complain about cyber bullying? And you know how people encourage it on boards such as this? They are the most affected by cyber bullying.

>> No.5643503

>>5643478
Belloc actually draws the line around the time of the industrial revolution (as the time capitalism is implemented rather than theorized, which goes back to Adam Smith in the late 1700s).

Distributism is a call back to the middle age economics, where man was responsible for his own means of living -- he owned all of his resources, and therefore controlled his own labor and product. It proposes going back to the guild system with regards to ownership, co-opting businesses and means of manufacturing. It really has nothing to do with government, so I don't know what the fuck you're referring to when you say the pope would be the head of state -- that sounds like an offshoot of ultramonatism.

>>5643473
In that sense you're right. My mistake.

>> No.5643506

>>5643483
You don't sound sincere enough.

>> No.5643515
File: 404 KB, 640x480, stop hibari.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5643515

>>5643493
>x are the victims of everything
you just need to shut up

>> No.5643545

>>5643515
Thank you for being so utterly mortified at the truth that you have to hopelessly defend yourself.

>> No.5643558

>>5643545
Anything is included in x. People receive abuse, abstract groups that span through multiple countries and age groups thanks to the internet aren't anything.

>> No.5643562

>>5643503
>Belloc actually draws the line around the time of the industrial revolution (as the time capitalism is implemented rather than theorized, which goes back to Adam Smith in the late 1700s).
>Distributism is a call back to the middle age economics, where man was responsible for his own means of living -- he owned all of his resources, and therefore controlled his own labor and product. It proposes going back to the guild system with regards to ownership, co-opting businesses and means of manufacturing. It really has nothing to do with government, so I don't know what the fuck you're referring to when you say the pope would be the head of state -- that sounds like an offshoot of ultramonatism.

Well, I said the Pope would be the head of society, not the state. I don't know much about this idea but it seems like Catholicism and its ethics is its backbone. But anyway, the economics of Adam Smith's time was late mercantilism, correct? I don't understand how Distributivists think a return to pre-capitalist modes of production that specifically champions private property and doesn't dissolve class (and thus its antagonisms) would not simply redevelop into capitalist modes of production, especially if Distributivists aren't arguing for a global destruction of mechanical and scientific knowledge.

>> No.5643568

>>5643558
>still defending

Point still proven.

>> No.5643581

>>5643568
>if people on line answer me I'm automatically right
>I post opinions publicly to avoid interaction with others

>> No.5644832
File: 547 KB, 350x350, Recette[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5644832

>>5637576
Damn straight.

>> No.5644875 [DELETED] 
File: 7 KB, 311x294, 1330018198903.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5644875

>>5636669
>get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else

WELL WHY DON'T YOU BE SELF-EMPLOYED THEN IF YOU'RE SO FUCKING PRODUCTIVE??? OH WAIT THAT WOULD REQUIRE BUSINESS SKILLS AND THAT'S HARD, BETTER COMPLAIN ABOUT MUH WAGE SLAVERY INSTEAD