/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6766039]

How can I maintain my Marxist principles without being poor?

Book publishing is just marketing of a commodity now.
School-teaching exists to perpetuate capitalist ideology.
Media is homogeneous culture control

What do?

[Anonymous No.6766052]

>What do?
Grow a brain and stop being a marxist.

[Anonymous No.6766055]

>>6766039
You don't be a Marxist.

[Anonymous No.6766065]

>>6766052
>>6766055
Sorry man, I've tried. I find Capitalism inherently repulsive. I might be wrong, but I can't shake this. It's not even a cultivated hatred, I've always felt this way, even before I knew what Socialism was.

[Anonymous No.6766069]

>>6766065
Why are you either an atheist or a Christian?

[Anonymous No.6766075]

>>6766065
>I find Capitalism inherently repulsive.
Why?

[Anonymous No.6766076]

>>6766065
I would suggest reading a book about how it works and why it works well. It's easier to accept an idea if you understand it. If you want something easy to understand you could read Basic Economics by Sowell.

[Anonymous No.6766080]

You have to play the game, you're placed right into it. It is not your choice. Be pragmatic and try to get as high as possible in society; this is how to create change when class consciousness is non-existent and reactionary politics are on the rise.

Best of luck, comrade.

[Anonymous No.6766083]

>>6766069
I'm atheist because England is largely a secular country and my family aren't religious.

>>6766075
I guess because I figure that for every guy who made it big, there are a hundred more who didn't through no fault of their own; our circumstances are determined.

[Anonymous No.6766106]

>>6766080
I've considered adopting this state of mind, and I honestly think you're right, but I can't hide my contempt. I went to an open day at a UK publishers and a representative said the following:

"When you buy a book, you're buying into a brand. This is why, as publishers, we have to push merchandising to maximise sales."

before proceeding to show a slideshow of The Fault in Our Stars T-shirts et cetera.

[Anonymous No.6766108]

>>6766083
>I guess because I figure that for every guy who made it big, there are a hundred more who didn't through no fault of their own;
Jesus, what pleb thinking

>hurr durr life is unfaaaair

Are you 12? Go read a book or something

[Anonymous No.6766125]

>>6766108
I'm not sure how what you've said counts as a rebuttal. Smarter men than you or I believed in Communism; ditto for Capitalism. It's not a question of being pleb or patrician, just a belief system. Either one can be correct to the individual.

[Anonymous No.6766135]

>>6766076

Marxists don't deny capitalism "works" (crises theory aside, because many crises theorists don't necessarily believe in a totally destructive crises, but an endless series of crises like the business cycle). The world of human society is clearly continuing to exist, and things are being produced which are consumed. That doesn't mean it is optimal.

It's frequently called "the socialist project" because it is a search for a different organization of production.

[Anonymous No.6766138]

>>6766039

Alternative media. You'll still be poor, but you can make a living.

[Anonymous No.6766139]

>>6766125
>I'm not sure how what you've said counts as a rebuttal
I'm just saying your viewpoint is extremely simplistic, and is usually found among angsty teenagers.

> Smarter men than you or I believed in Communism; ditto for Capitalism.
Appeal to authority.

>It's not a question of being pleb or patrician, just a belief system
And people criticize me when I say that communism is like a religion.

>Either one can be correct to the individual.
No. Stop this shitty relativism.

[Anonymous No.6766145]

>>6766135
But why? We have no other known way of allocating resources well.

[Anonymous No.6766147]

>>6766083
Now, why are you a Christian?

[Anonymous No.6766164]

>>6766039
What does being poor have to do with Marxism?

[Anonymous No.6766166]

All the things you've mentioned go under the simple banner of "ideology" which was also true in Marx's time and that didn't stop him from living well and engaging in capitalistic activities, including playing in the stock market.

So what you should probably do is actually read Marx instead of just assuming you already know what he says and grow out of this idea that Marxism is about engaging in a quixotic struggle against THE SYSTEM, maaaaaaaan.

[Anonymous No.6766168]

>>6766039
Is this a meme? Being a socialist doesn't mean you live any differently than is usual from someone in your position in society. Just make sure you educate, agitate, and organize. For everything else you just go on about your life.

[Anonymous No.6766175]

>>6766145

We have no known way of effectively travelling through deep space, but that doesn't mean we become dogmatically settled on current tech. The why is just answered by being unsatisfied with aspects of capitalism, so there is the desire to problem solve.

It's for that reason I'm not much of a revolutionary though. Reformism seems to generally be more effective in creating positive changes that last. Plus I think the revolutionaries tend to be more dogmatic Leninists or Council-Communism types that feel like there IS a system that has been created that already works, it just needs to conquer another country and be applied correctly this time. I actually think some mainstream economists that try to make "market-socialist" models of tampering with the way prices work are more promising as regards moving the world in a socialist direction.

[Anonymous No.6766187]

>>6766139
Look, I tried to phrase it simply because this thread isn't supposed to be a debate surrounding Marxism, but a question as to how a Marxist can operate in a Capitalist society. If you want to debate Marxism and throw around petty generalizations, make another thread. My explanation is simple, but not simplistic: Determinism governs our lives; property is a ridiculous concept, and so an equal distribution of the world's resources is the appropriate response. I'm not an economics expert, and neither are you, but if you want to play the intellectual on an anime image-board, do it elsewhere.

>>6766147
Because I'm not

>>6766168
ish pure mashturbashion

[Anonymous No.6766204]

>>6766175
I have very large doubts there will ever be a better economic model. Trying to defy the laws of economics are like trying to defy the laws of nature. Any artificial interference or attempts to "fix" it will make it a less effective way to allocate resources. Humans would have to behave in some extraordinarily different ways for any other economic system to work.

[Anonymous No.6766207]

>>6766187
>Because i'm not

My seat is loaded. I don't know which second coming to wait for.

[Anonymous No.6766218]

>>6766204

what do you mean by a *better economical model*? You think capitalism is a laissez faire model or something? lel

[Anonymous No.6766233]

>>6766187
>Determinism governs our lives
What do you mean by that. That we depend heavily on our environment? True, but every individual can do whatever he wants (in a free society that is).

>property is a ridiculous concept
Why is it ridiculous? If you find is so ridiculous, feel free to live as a hobo.

>and so an equal distribution of the world's resources is the appropriate response.
How do you distribute "the world's resources"? Who gets to determine who needs what? How will that affect the incentive of people to better themselves if they are guaranteed a piece of the pie.

You see, this is why I said that your viewpoint is extremely simplistic and naive. Think things through before trying to live the "marxist lyfe"

>I'm not an economics expert,
That's what I thought
>and neither are you
You have no way of knowing that ;^)

> but if you want to play the intellectual on an anime image-board, do it elsewhere.
This is a literature board. Discussions here tend to be intellectual. This is not your fucking blog where you talk about your life you fucking nigger faggot. Now fuck off back to plebbit or another shithole more befitting to your intellectual capabilities.

[Anonymous No.6766250]

>>6766218
A proper capitalist model is not 100% laissez-faire (most regulations having to do with protecting 3rd parties). Although I think the point you're bringing up is that nobody designed capitalism, but it is still a model. Intellectuals distrust capitalism because they didn't explicitly design it.

[Anonymous No.6766264]

>>6766233
>What do you mean by that
How about you read up on Determinism

>Why is it ridiculous? If you find is so ridiculous, feel free to live as a hobo
Blatant misunderstanding of basic property critique; hurr durrh wher do u live if thers no property.

>How do you distribute "the world's resources"?
Collectively. Read up on anarcho-communism. Personally I believe in a government that would lay the foundations and then, voluntarily or involuntarily, dissolve.

>the "marxist lyfe"
You're picturing me as some scruffy undergrad with a Che Guevara shirt. That's okay, you're entitled to your assumptions, but you're very wrong.

>You have no way of knowing that ;^)
Considering your posts are all vague personal attacks with no real defense of Capitalism...

>Discussions here tend to be intellectual
XXXDDDDD

[Anonymous No.6766312]

>>6766264
Your ideas seem really bad, guy

You want humans to all play nice and work together, are your eyes closed to the world we live in?

A system that encourages a serve yourself model is best, because that's just human nature. You should start by changing human nature if you want your system to be successful

[Anonymous No.6766315]

>>6766312
This anon gets it

[Anonymous No.6766318]

>>6766065
>I've tried. I find Capitalism inherently repulsive. I might be wrong, but I can't shake this. It's not even a cultivated hatred, I've always felt this way, even before I knew what Socialism was.
>I've always felt this way
>nothing can change the choices I've held onto since being a child, because muh feels
Manchild.

[Anonymous No.6766320]

>>6766312
>that's just human nature
Ooooohhh, man, he actually said it! Great argument, bud. Definitely not reductive!

[Anonymous No.6766330]

>>6766312
Dumb dumb dumb

[Anonymous No.6766337]

>>6766039
Nice try OP.

Only a capitalist would use the word poor.

[Anonymous No.6766338]

>>6766264
>>How do you distribute "the world's resources"?
>Collectively. Read up on anarcho-communism. Personally I believe in a government that would lay the foundations and then, voluntarily or involuntarily, dissolve.
You know this really isn't an answer, right?
I'll ask a slightly different question than that anon. How will you distribute resources and assign costs more efficiently than a market can?

[Anonymous No.6766349]

>>6766338
>costs
This nigga really don't get it, do he?

Note to the rest of the summer overspill: read up on communism and anarcho-communism before asking stupid questions

[Anonymous No.6766351]

Muh Fukuyama

[Anonymous No.6766370]

>>6766349
>This nigga really don't get it, do he?
You think you can remove costs simply because you don't want them? Do you realize that cost can refer to any resource, not just monetary?
And still haven't answered the question:
How will you distribute resources and assign costs more efficiently than a market can?

You're literally a negroid, aren't you?

[Anonymous No.6766371]

If you want to genuinely help people, step 1 is to focus on moral development. You need to war against the selfishness, decadence, resentment, conformity, idolatry, vindictiveness and hatred in your own soul, before you can be certain that your Marxism or Christianity or Buddhism or whatever you believe in is actually sincere and not just some type of conformism you've fallen into because the cool kids are into it. You may even wish to curb your Marxism... Sometimes Marxism can be a form of idolatry, and idolatry is usually accompanied by other vices.

[Anonymous No.6766372]

i think the western world is significantly more marxist than people realise. the hegelian aspect of marxism where you are essentially subservient to 'the state' is pretty widespread.

[Anonymous No.6766385]

Property actually does exist but not the liberal/capitalist definition of it. Property is what you control, not what you have legal title to. If you can keep other people from possessing something, and you possess it yourself, you effectively 'own' it. But this is not a right, it's a phenomenon of power dynamics, quite different from what libertarians and AnCaps think.

[Anonymous No.6766391]

>>6766372

It's "crypto-Marxist" in many ways, but Marxism isn't a monopoly ideology, at least not yet. Some aspects of liberalism such as the "rights" narrative are still extremely strong.

[Anonymous No.6766395]

>>6766338
>How will you distribute resources and assign costs more efficiently than a market can?
The price system is horribly inefficient for managing resources, pretty much any form of distributed social accounting would end up being more efficient. Ever notice the powerful corporations the market breed end up internally operating like planning agencies?

There is a built-in tendency for capitalist markets to create new techniques that actually generate externalities. Entrepreneurs need to minimize relative costs and cost-shifting is the best way to accomplish this. It's profitable for a firm under capitalism to lay off employees but ends up being costly for society. If you take Hayeks "The Use of Knowledge in Society" seriously it ends being a pretty good justification for some form of market socialist work-place democracy dominated type of economy.

Give this a read: https://www.scribd.com/doc/44657733/Time-on-the-Ledger-Social-Accounting-for-the-Good-Society

[Anonymous No.6766420]

>>6766039
found a corporation and issue shares to all new employees

[Anonymous No.6766462]

>>6766395
>The price system is horribly inefficient for managing resources
[citation needed]

>It's profitable for a firm under capitalism to lay off employees but ends up being costly for society.
Laying off employees is profitable? Damn, everyone has been doing buiness wrong this whole time.

>inb4 muh strawman

[Anonymous No.6766477]

>>6766462
Cringe cringe cringe

[Anonymous No.6766484]

>>6766395

Ugggh this absolutist crap is so annoying.

I think empirical evidence shows that gov't is better at distributing some shit, corps better at distributing others.

Gov't: essential social services, energy, infrastructure, high level scientific research, etc

Market: arts & entertainment, consumer goods, food, "end level" scientific and engineering processes, architecture, etc

[Anonymous No.6766486]

>>6766330
>>6766477

[Anonymous No.6766493]

>>6766462
Karl William Kapp's "The Social Costs of Private Enterprise". If you google it you will find the PDF on the first page of google.

Also if you want a real classic look into "The Theory of Business Enterprise" by Thorstein Veblen. It's in the public domain since it was published in 1904.

[Anonymous No.6766501]

>>6766204
Two things. The first would be that capitalism has a wide variety of its own models. While I do respect Capitalism's efficiency in many cases we can't even tell which of the capitalist models is optimal, let alone completely new variations.

Secondly it is a dangerous game comparing economic laws to the laws of nature, and I think Hayek might even call you out on it. Capitalism is messy and human, while physics is finely tuned. If you try to see the economic system as a predefined set of laws you will be left behind as different circumstances destroy your universalist notions.

[Anonymous No.6766504]

>>6766486
I like it rough

[Anonymous No.6766506]

>>6766039
>How can I maintain my Marxist principles without being poor?

The Orthodox response is that being poor isn't enough. One has to be an active participant in the revolutionary struggle. Marxism is the unity of proletarian revolutionary activity and the theoretical consciousness of that activity, at least according to Lukács, Korsch and the other exponents of 'praxis'. Without that unity, the doctrine becomes mere ideology. You're asking how you can maintain a sort of Marxist religious faith.

>Book publishing is just marketing of a commodity now.

Why does that even matter? Marx's works were sold as commodities too. Everyone in capitalism is subject to commodity relations whether they like it or not.

>School-teaching exists to perpetuate capitalist ideology.

To an extent, yes. You'll find, however, that language and mathematics do not possess a class-character.

>Media is homogeneous culture control

Homogeneity in class society is impossible. Of course there is ideological hegemony in media, but it does not have a total monopoly.

>What do?

Marxism isn't Christianity. The working-class doesn't need you to give up all of your possessions and follow it. However, there's no reason you can't do like so many other communist intellectuals have done: study capitalism and criticize its worst effects. That might not sound very revolutionary. It isn't, but it's the best you can do given your situation.

[Anonymous No.6766516]

>>6766075
Because you pretend not to know

[Anonymous No.6766521]

>>6766484
You're setting up a false dichotomy between state run industry and corporate enterprise. There are third way paths

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_democracy

[Anonymous No.6766545]

>>6766312
>falling for neoliberalism this hard

[Anonymous No.6766561]

>>6766545
Trash can *sniff* *pulls shirt*

[Anonymous No.6766562]

>>6766080
>"I'm gonna bring this sucker down from the inside!"

Most people in the radleft swing of things either get into academia or get mediocre jobs that just allow them to slide by. There are also those who are straight up working yuppie jobs and partake in the muck of it day in and day out and still go to demos and study groups. I don't really understand those people.

[Anonymous No.6766567]

>>6766312
How can you distinguish between human nature and human artificiality?

[Anonymous No.6766574]

>>6766168
Gross.

I don't understand people like you.

[Anonymous No.6766575]

>>6766338
You know efficiency is basically an ideological buzzword, right?

[Anonymous No.6766591]

>>6766574
Socialism isn't a religion, buddy. If you treat it like one, maybe that's your malfunction.

[Anonymous No.6766592]

>>6766575
Efficiency is the task of economics.

[Anonymous No.6766594]

>>6766574
Elaborate.

[Anonymous No.6766600]

>>6766574
They're in too deep. Redpill won't work on them. Ideology was too strong. Rip in preach

[Anonymous No.6766602]

>>6766562
almost all politicians, radical or not, who want to change something are like that nigga
do you think nazis just kill niggers and jews?
do you think anarchists stay all day shitposting on 4chan (some do)?
No, they all "infilitrate" in the system and try to change it.

[Anonymous No.6766610]

>>6766575
>>6766592
>implying efishinc isn't the 1 tru god

[Anonymous No.6766611]

>>6766039
You don't have to live like a monk just because capitalism is bad. You're allowed to exist within the system just like anyone else.

[Anonymous No.6766617]

>>6766592
What kind of efficiency?

[Anonymous No.6766625]

>>6766039
OP if you think politics is like religion then you are dun goofed
Traditionalist don't go all day dressed as fucking Marjahana Ashoka or behead people to ensure the Kali Yuga happens.

[Anonymous No.6766626]

>>6766594
Being able to live your life in such disunity that you could believe yourself to be allied to the destruction of the state and capitalism while spending 40-60 hours of your week at some capitalism 2.0 office job.

>>6766602
All the anarchists I know have shitty jobs and live for study groups, cheap beer, and breaking windows.

Not some dreamworld where you could get into middle-management and somehow bring the whole system down from the inside.

[Anonymous No.6766633]

>>6766617
Economic efficiency, where every resource optimally allocated to serve each person in the best way. In a fully efficient economy any changes made to help one person would hurt another.

[Anonymous No.6766638]

>>6766626
Mind you, I don't think anyone who engages in the market or sells their labor power is dubious.

But people who work dubious jobs to live dubious lifestyles populated by dubious consumption and general yuppery are the most dubious of them all.

You can easily get by through education jobs, non-profit stuff, etc. that let you live comfy lives while still maintaining a distance to the most crushing aspects of capital.

[Anonymous No.6766642]

>>6766626
>All the anarchists I know have shitty jobs and live for study groups, cheap beer, and breaking windows.

I mean those who really want to change the "system". Not those stay all day smoking weed.

[Anonymous No.6766647]

>>6766626
You do realize many people have responsibilties and have to take care of/look after people besides themselves right?

[Anonymous No.6766648]

>>6766642
I'm sure you're gonna be able to dismantle the state apparatus by being elected into office or working for Xerox.

[Anonymous No.6766649]

>>6766233
Not even OP, but calm down dude.

[Anonymous No.6766653]

infiltrate the popular front by pandering to the petty bourgeoisie and make millions from dumb downed class struggle narratives told in the form of the hero journey and wait for norms to slowly change.

[Anonymous No.6766656]

>>6766039
Commit suicide. It's easier than living.

[Anonymous No.6766657]

>>6766626
>>6766638
>>6766642

The fuck you on about, mate? How did you get any of that from 'educate, agitate, organize, but don't forget to live your life'?

[Anonymous No.6766658]

>>6766039
>not being an accelerationist

Do whatever is the worst for the proletariat. Get those cunts riled up enough to revolution.

[Anonymous No.6766666]

>>6766648
I'm sure you're going to be able to dismantle the state in your little forest anarchist circlejerk completly alienated from the concerns of regular working people.

Stop being a moron.

[Anonymous No.6766668]

>>6766658
The left is not ready for the revolution. I'd rather wait for some new manifesto.

[Anonymous No.6766671]

>>6766666
>66666
>6
>6
>6
>6
>6
checked ;__;

[Anonymous No.6766673]

>>6766648
those who really want to change something engage in politics instead of shitposting all day in 4chan
>>6766657
not the same guy

[Anonymous No.6766676]

>>6766671
Stop being a moron.

[Anonymous No.6766678]

>>6766668
I think you're overly optimistic about your capabilities as an accelerationist. It will still take a long time anyway.

Now start being as horrible as possible to the proles and be sure to vote in favour of the free market.

[Anonymous No.6766679]

>>6766658
Insurrection isn't revolution. If the working-class lacks the organizational and cultural level required to seize power and keep it, we're back in the Soviet Union hailing Stalin and the new, 'red' bourgeoisie. I don't fancy dying in the great purges—do you, mate?

'The worse, the better' is just giving up the gains already made.

[Anonymous No.6766685]

>>6766658
I'm not really so sure about accelerationism...

How would you deal with the industrialists directing all of that proletarian anger into some form of class collaborationism?
Fascism is just as real a possibility as revolutionary socialism when the power structure is threatened and trying to re-solidify it's power, especially when you look at historical examples of revolution

[Anonymous No.6766686]

>>6766673
>those who really want to change something engage in politics instead of shitposting all day in 4chan

This is why I'm not so opposed to gulags.

[Anonymous No.6766689]

>>6766686
You should be perfectly satisfied with the current system if you're a champion of concentration camps.

[Anonymous No.6766693]

>>6766187
>an equal distribution of the world's resources is the appropriate response
Do you actually believe this? Not everyone is going to agree to that system, so the only way to achieve is is through a government that forces individuals to give up property. Also who does the dividing? You're giving a lot of power to someone in this scenario.

Also Marx was alive before labor laws and regulation of any kind. People use to work for around 16 hours a day every day of the week for barely any pay in dangerous environments. If he saw how we're living under (somewhat) well regulated capitalism I think he would reevaluate some of his ideas. I know many countries still have shitty labor laws, but I think that's going to start changing.

[Anonymous No.6766695]

>>6766679
You are completely right tbh.

[Anonymous No.6766751]

>>6766506
>Marxism isn't Christianity.

Actually it basically is. It's Christianity for the new millennium. Look at the tone of this discussion... Obsession with "orthodoxy," etc.

[Anonymous No.6766766]

>>6766312

There is no such thing as human nature.

For anything you could point to as a 'natural' human value, or a 'natural' human personality trait, there will exist or will have existed a society or culture which exemplified contrary behaviours.

All such things are learned, they can be and are changed intergenerationally

[Anonymous No.6766807]

>>6766676
>>6766667
i would if i could ratdick

[Anonymous No.6766831]

>>6766666
Only on /lit/ would digits of this calibre go unchecked.

Checked.

[Anonymous No.6766861]

>>6766751
It is not. All the less so, as the particular doctrine specified is completely absent from Marxism, yet essential to Christianity.

Christian doctrine is contemplative and passive; it rejects the world of material things and makes absolute the separation between the material world of man as a physical being on the one hand, and the soul of man and spirit of God on the other.

Marxism is a philosophy of praxis: it's whole basis is the primacy of the material needs of mankind; the dependence of consciousness ('spirit') upon socioeconomic existence; and the need of the 'new materialism' not merely to contemplate the world as it is, but to change it.

It barely requires to be said that the content of each doctrine is completely distinct. The similarities in abstract form are no more than the similarities between almost any two ideologies.

[Anonymous No.6766878]

>>6766204
>thinking it's about allocating resources
capitalism is morally wrong

[Anonymous No.6766887]

>>6766861

I'm not talking about doctrine I'm talking about psychology.

They're both creeds that require you to accept some dude who promises you a better future totally uncritically... They're both philosophies of "my man" so to speak... The key to both of them, at least insofar as Marxism is interpreted in Marxist-leninist fashion, is to accept some fucking dickhead "leader" as some kind of deity beyond criticism and to that extent they're the same thing. Buddhism is another thing in this category. The opposite is Judaism, where even the prophets are considered fallible, even contemptible, open to criticism.

I hate Marxism, I hate the idolatry of it, I hate its lack of self awareness, I hate its propensity to produce dictators, I hate the fact that all of its followers are conformist, mindless dickweeds, and I'll NEVER STOP SAYING IT. If you little shitheads eventually get to the point where it's illegal to criticize your BULLSHIT ideology I'll go to the gallows happily, because you're full of shit, you know you're full of shit, and I hate you.

[Anonymous No.6766909]

>>6766887
nice try Popper, but shouldn't you be in your grave?

[Anonymous No.6766946]

>>6766909

I should be the most respected philosopher of science of all time, the one with the most recognition among actual scientists despite /lit/'s LAUGHABLE attempts to say that Kuhn or Feyerabend superceded me.

I got quoted by Stephen Hawking... Did any of your faggot philosophers achieve that level of recognition with a great scientist?

[Anonymous No.6766950]

>>6766887
>I'm not talking about doctrine I'm talking about psychology.

Marxism and Christianity are doctrines, not mind-sets. It is possible for believers in either one to have a similar psychology, yet it is not essential. So, no, they are not the same.

>They're both creeds that require you to accept some dude who...

No. Christ is essential to Christianity, yes, but Marxism doesn't allow of 'Great Men'. The cult of Stalin has no direct link to Marxist doctrine, nor indeed does the concept of a vanguard party fulfilling the historical role of the proletariat without its conscious participation.

>I hate Marxism, I hate the idolatry of it, I hate its lack of self awareness, I hate its propensity to produce dictators, I hate the fact that all of its followers are conformist, mindless dickweeds, and I'll NEVER STOP SAYING IT. If you little shitheads eventually get to the point where it's illegal to criticize your BULLSHIT ideology I'll go to the gallows happily, because you're full of shit, you know you're full of shit, and I hate you.

You are addressing yourself to Marxism-Leninism, which by no means has a monopoly on Marxist doctrine. You assertion that Marxists are incapable of self-criticism—I do not mean of the infamous Soviet variety—is without base. Marxist criticism of the Soviet Union and all of Lenin's ideological 'contributions' has been active since the beginning, and your pathological need to associate the whole history of a doctrine with *one* of its historical manifestations is telling.

Of course I hated the Soviet Union and of course I find Leninism to be one of the most deplorable ideologies know to history. How either of these things are necessarily linked to the Theses on Feuerbach, the Manifesto, or Das Kapital is far from clear.

[Anonymous No.6766953]

>>6766946

shoo shoo spooky ghost of Popper
Nobody took your books serious, not even the "destroyers of social sciences faggotry" like Sokal.

Enjoy being forever a shit corpse.

[Anonymous No.6766954]

>>6766887
If the extent of your knowledge on revolutionary leftism is Leninism, or if you believe vanguardism is a component of every different flavor of Marxism, maybe you should keep your mouth shut until you understand what exactly you're critiquing

[Anonymous No.6766962]

>>6766953

HAHAHAHA I AM FAR AND AWAY THE MOST CITED, MOST RESPECTED, MOST QUOTED, MOST APPRECIATED PHILOSOPHER OF SCIENCE AND EMPIRICAL REALITY CORROBORATES IT ON THE DAILY.

SORRY A HUGE STATUS INTELLECTUAL TOTALLY PUNK'D YOUR IDEOLOGY, MARXFAG!!!!

[Anonymous No.6766968]

>>6766954

Well I don't mind intellectuals taking a marxist route of criticism on certain things... What I disagree with is movements that make Marxism into a religion such as MLM, Maoism, etc.

[Anonymous No.6766978]

>1900+115

marxism is so fucking ridiculous and its even more outrageous that you faggots still believe in it in this day and age

[Anonymous No.6766983]

>>6766962
>>6766978
samefagging again, Popper?

[Anonymous No.6766985]

>>6766962
I don't get why you'd just want to go on the internet and lie like that, spaz.

[Anonymous No.6766989]

>>6766312

>bringing adam smith invisible hand this hard

>in anno domini 2015

[Anonymous No.6767029]

>>6766039
Stop being a Marxist obviously. It's a flawed incomplete philosophy.
To properly base yourself, read The Wealth of Nations followed by Das Kapital, and then draw your own conclusions about the purpose and place of capitalism. Of course you should read more, but those two should be your starting point. They really should be mandatory reading for high school, or maybe college.

[Anonymous No.6767162]

The Western/developed world is not going to have a socialist revolution without conditions changing drastically in the third/developing world. While people are becoming poorer in the West and there is greater discontent, most of the rebellious impulses of the working class is diverted to safer targets than the Capitalist system and even then, and despite living conditions falling the wealth taken from the third world is still evenly distributed enough that it is against the material self interest of much of the working class to revolt.

In contrast, the third world seeks to benefit immediately and immense from a socialist revolution, the wealth of their lands would stay there, as opposed to being extradited by the international bourgeoisie to the West. Like Dominoes, the successful and popular implementation of socialism in one third world country will likely spark a revolution in another. In a great enough number, and theoretically able to fend of Western Imperial aggression, the Western world will see it's sources of wealth cut off, the rich will make do but the conditions of the working class will sharply decline. It will again be in the material self-interest of the working class to overthrow the System.

The position of us leftists in the West is a pretty shitty one, and short giving all your life savings to the PKK and crossing the sea to fight in Rojava or with the Naxalites, our part is to reform the Left in the West, which currently is a garbage dump for cowards, eternal victims and "Social Revolutionaries". The primary aims of a new Left should be,
1) Support of Socialist Rebel groups abroad, including sending money and zealous comrades to fight alongside them.
2) Build genuine class consciousness among the working class, which means instilling in the working the class the attitude that all working people's interests are fundamentally united and indivisible and not class consciousness as "Have you accepted Trotsky into your heart?".
3) The removal of toxic individuals and ideologies
Overall, there needs to be an understanding that the Left is at War with Capitalism and that war is not being won by failing to win elections, hopping from popular protest to protest hawking your shitty newspaper or how many working class folk you can cajole into to going to your exhausting bi-weekly cadre meetings.

If that sounds implausible and difficult, your right. The situation of the Western Left is pretty bleak and most of the conditions which need to be changed are out of our conscious control. Despite this, the most important thing you can personally do is not allow the System to wear you down.

[Anonymous No.6767164]

Marxism doesn't fight for the poor, it fights for the workers.

[Anonymous No.6767173]

>>6767162
>mfw lefties aren't even capable of implementing ideas that aren't capable of working

[Anonymous No.6767179]

>>6767162
lel

[Anonymous No.6767183]

>>6767173
>implying representative democracy isn't inherently liberal

[Anonymous No.6767189]

>>6767183
>classical liberal = liberalism

[Anonymous No.6767197]

>>6767189
Most non-democracies would consider democracy to be liberal.

[Anonymous No.6767276]

MARXFAGS ARE BRAINDEAD IDEOLOGICAL SHITLORDS HTFH!!! I LIKE ZIZEK THOUGH CAUSE HE'S ANTI-PC!!!!! HTFH SHITLORDS!

[Anonymous No.6767291]

>>6766039

>maintaining Marxist principles

>without being poor

lol

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6767304]

>>6767197
"Liberal" may mean leftist in the US, but not in the real world. Please.

>>6767183
Liberalism is primarily about free markets, capitalism. Some vein of "progressive liberalism" believes in a certain amount of socialism and social liberties, but even in the US it's all about the money.

Democracy is not about the economics. There's no "inherently" about it.

[Anonymous No.6767316]

>>6766562
>There are also those who are straight up working yuppie jobs and partake in the muck of it day in and day out and still go to demos and study groups. I don't really understand those people.

They're bourgeoisie. They live by siphoning off the productive labors of others. Why would they not try to appropriate an intellectual movement to feed own bourgeois vanity?

[Anonymous No.6767321]

>>6767173
Jake Gyllenhaal hot AF ;_; I believe he uses 4chan maybe so there's still hope for regular women °3°. I wonder if/what he likes to write.

P.S. if you ever read this, sorry that I'm fangirling. I enjoy your work & I ask you to please consider playing the protagonist in a sequel for American Psycho if you are ever offered the opportunity. I think you would be a narural in conveying BEE's dark humor. Of course, there will be no catharsis at the end of the movie or book, and the film will be popularly seen an transient parable against frivolity and urban life. Plus, the anti-hero will get flac for his misogynistic, sociopathic tendencies. However, I feel the series should receive a upgrade in film to capture the apparent diversification and actual stagnation of Wall St culture today (ie the failure of Affirmative Action quotas in business to displace the greed of venture capitalists, who perpetuate nepotism by lending only to students from Ivies)

[Anonymous No.6767355]

>>6766039
>unironically having marxist principles that you follow

[Anonymous No.6767545]

>>6767164
seriously this. It's why I went into industrial automation programming. Level-headed acceleration is our only hope as workers.

[Anonymous No.6767558]

>>6766039
Wow, you're a fucking ignorant. I think you should die.

[Anonymous No.6767573]

>>6767545
I can't help but shake the feeling that the Socialists who oppose any form of accelerationism are the same kind that don't ever want to see a revolution anyway because it might disrupt their comfortable lives.

[Anonymous No.6768143]

Did you know that Christianity is heavily anti-usury? Have you ever observed Amish culture?
Did you know that Nazism is anti-capitalist and utilizes socialist ideals (hence National Socialism)?

[Anonymous No.6768152]

>>6766039

move to NK or Cuba, if you're a communist in an industrial country you're literally the dumbest person alive.

[Anonymous No.6768685]

>>6766666
Worker fetishism won't get us anywhere, and who made you the revolutionary arbitrator? Try talking to those guys in this "forest anarchist circlejerk", almost all of them were workers in soul-crushing jobs before dropping out of society.
>>6766673
>those who really want to change something engage in politics instead of shitposting all day in 4chan
Is this what it feels like to be trolled?

[Anonymous No.6768703]

>>6766076
Das Kapital is one of the greatest analyses of capitalism.

>>6766039
OP join a workers' co-op, and become politically active, unless you subscribe to the idea that society will transition to Marxism of its own volition, then just wait. If you really wanted to live as a Marxist you could join a commune, there are many successful ones around the world and living in them is pretty great

[Anonymous No.6768710]

>>6766204
How's summer break treatin ya?

[Anonymous No.6768731]

>>6766312
>human nature
Most human activity, the greater majority in fact, stems from the environment they grew up in. Controlling the environment humans grow up in, which a Marxist state would work to do in a more productive way than capitalism ever could, does, in a sense, "change human nature". One need simply look at the Marxist communes around the globe that are self-sustaining, have no law enforcement 90% of the time, and manage to insulate themselves from any national or even global crises very effectively. It's silly watching all of you armchair economists who just finished your first high school World History course.

[Anonymous No.6768737]

>>6766338
>more efficiently than a market could
We live in and utilize a global communication network that allows us to send messages anywhere in the world within seconds. We are more than capable of automating production of resources, even agriculture is becoming automated. From there it's really a simple task to take inventory of what's available and determine where it needs to go. If you haven't noticed, the "market" is eliminating our helium supply, killing the planet, and severely crippling education, and the U.S. Stands as a caricature of the idiocy that is modern capitalism.

[Anonymous No.6768783]

>>6766108
Have you ever realized the less fortunate are never saying, "well, this is life. It's unfair. I guess I'm stuck."

[Anonymous No.6768791]

>>6768152
Why do you say that?

[Anonymous No.6768800]

>>6766312
>capitalism is "serving yourself"
>human nature

BAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.6768862]

>>6766312
>human nature
We've got another one, lads!

[Anonymous No.6768885]

>>6766312
>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.6768889]

To all, were you ever in a position where you feared poverty or at least loss of significant amounts of money, or were significantly in dept?

If so, quantify the money involved and describe your emotional state in the situation.
(I'm mostly asking because I experienced at 10k loss situation myself recently)

[Anonymous No.6768890]

>>6766312
>what is nature vs nurture

[Anonymous No.6768922]

>>6768889
First world people don't know this feel.

[Anonymous No.6768965]

>>6766039
Colossal economical inequality is produce a righteous offence and class envy and class fear, and a criminals, a mafia, a terrorism, a vagrants, a anarchists and some other a disease of society .
Government-state based economics also has a problems.
Economical demand is misty. So size of produce is misty too.
Machines is big part of economics of 2015 year. Machines is profitable for capital-owners. They do not want wage, they work for free, they serfs. But if there is not workers, there is not buyers, because workers and buyers is a same people. Economical-mathematical problem.
Only in computer games like C&C series state economics do not have economical problems.
Bureaucrat is often bad managers and inventors.
Also whole Earth market and people have freedom of choice of production. Economical self-castle is bad idea.
But freedom of choice of wares in some cases is bullshit, with real freedom of choice Belgium already be bankrupt, because he can not win economical products competention with Thailand for example.
Also some marxist idealogy parties prefer dictatorship of party. It is bad, but some county still do that, for example usaricans live with fictive democracy with dictatorship of two-fractional party with freemasonic roots many years and still alive.

[Anonymous No.6768971]

>>6768965
Excuse me, gentlemen's, for broken English.

[Anonymous No.6768994]

>>6766351
>Muh Fukuyama
this guy knows wassup

[Anonymous No.6769040]

>>6766039

>How can I maintain my Marxist principles without being poor?

If you're seriously asking this yourself, you haven't read enough marxism.

I guess you already know that society contains his own contradictions (anti-thesis) that shall destroy it. Contradictions like a marxist living off exploited workers' labour because that's how commodities are made.

[Anonymous No.6769074]

>>6768889
I'm $50k in debt after finishing college and although there was a brief period of oppressive dejection, it faded and now I'm indifferent as I figure I'll either pay it off at once after some miraculous gain or I will pay the monthly minimum until something happens and I no longer have to.

[Anonymous No.6769080]

>>6769074
>I'm $50k in debt
This is how they keep the less ignorant in the system.

[Anonymous No.6769178]

>>6766204
Better than what? After a certain time and maturation the costs of upholding any system grows so much that there is more money in just protecting the system than doing any actual new work. Then smart people choose to not pursue their passions any longer but rather become guardians / errand boys / whatever you want to call it. That is not a good resource allocation at all.

[Anonymous No.6769205]

>>6766656
Why should you take the easy path? Where's the challenge in that?

[Anonymous No.6769232]

>>6769178
It is good resource allocation for those whose priorities are to stay on top no matter what.

[Anonymous No.6769415]

>>6766878
>thinking it isn't about allocating resources
starving people is morally wrong

[Anonymous No.6769442]

>"If anyone is bothering you about why they gave us, I don't know, some money and so on... all that.
>Here we have to be completely brutal. For example you told me some people were complaining about the high cost, you see because we don't get that much money.
>We had the same problem in London in a conference about Communism. Some pseudo-leftists were whining "But how is it 50 dollars!"
>Well I can tell you why! Because that was a conference about Communism and not about the 'suffering of animals' and 'children who suffer'. And all these silly philanthropic themes. For the theme of Communism there wasn't any good Soros to give us money.
>Most of us paid our own way, the institution Birkebeck even gave us a bill for the room precisely because we didn't have any of these sponsors.
>We obviously didn't get any honorarium. Just for some people who couldn't, we paid their card, some hotels (I paid my own), and the lecture area of course, and so on.
>Which means, you know, we live in brutal Capitalism, and instead of paying for it, we should brutally use it.
>The problem isn't some idiot in power giving you money. Take the money! Take the Money!
>But take it without moralistic feelings of guilt.
>The next day kill him, and if he says "But I gave you money", tell him, "You Idiot, why did you give me the money".
>Here there's no room for moralism. Be brutal.
>If we live in Capitalism, then we live in Capitalism. Take the money wherever you can without any feeling of responsibility.
>They give us money not because they like us but because they think it's chic or in that way they make a spectacle and so on...
>Let them live in their illusions. That much better for us."

Our dear Slavoj.

[Anonymous No.6769451]

>>6769442
holy shit he does it again

[Anonymous No.6769457]

>2015
>Subscribing to any ideology over a hundred years old
I shig dig dig thig

[Anonymous No.6769483]

>>6769415
Yeah, but unlimited self-reproduction is morally wrong too.

[Anonymous No.6769486]

>>6769483
>implying implications

[Anonymous No.6769531]

>>6766039
Reading this thread I see a lot of debate about which economic system works best.

Human history has made it very clear that the system is as effective as the people running it. Communist or capitalist, it can work, if people remain conscientious of the impact of their actions.

Our problem today is we have all agreed to be a part of this very ignorant system which works on taking advantage of the impoverished/stupid. This continues to work and has worked for millenia, because we have always found a way to make up for the losses by finding new people to take advantage of

Now we are all being "used", smart and stupid. That is the flaw in the globalist system. Smart people can feel when theyre being used like a puppet being pulled by invisible strings, strings we call money or rewards, words, incentives, even pleasures.

Smart people cant stand to be used. But it is working for now, because we face oppression in many parts of our lives. Sexually, financially, entertainment wise, we are starved. So we can now put that energy into working.

The light at the end of this tunnel is that life is not capable of keeping up with this pace. Nature is lurching back at us, climate patterns and ecosystems world wide are shifting. Soon many smart people will find their own ways to continue progressing, while the powers that be attempt to glean potential out of the dumbed masses. That of course wont work, when the dumbed people are enlightened by war and oppression. They will join with the smart ones, and we will evolve.
OR the earth is controlled by aliens and we will continue to fuck up out of our control until earth literally becomes a living hell. A lot of people think thats the case and sometimes when i watch whats going on i think it might be more likely.

[Anonymous No.6770028]

>>6769442
/thread

[Anonymous No.6770126]

>>6769442
BASED ZIZEK

[Anonymous No.6770177]

>>6766139
>hurr durr life isn't fair get over it
>I'm just saying your viewpoint is extremely simplistic

[Anonymous No.6770200]

>>6766312
Humans are largely cooperative. Only a few are arseholes and they ruin it for everybody.

[Anonymous No.6770919]

>>6769442
>>They give us money not because they like us but because they think it's chic or in that way they make a spectacle and so on...

[Anonymous No.6771034]

>>6769531

Capitalism is so pervasive that a lot of people don't think they're being "used", so much as becoming adaptable to capitalism is "learning how to grow up" or "be a professional". It's taken as the only way things can be. I'd say lots of smart people probably feel that way too.

Seems less to do about intelligence, more with a certain personality type or upbringing that causes a person to get depressed by the posturing and commodification of human values. I figure a lot of artists probably become leftists for that reason. But there is also a large group of people with average intelligence who just want security and don't care about Horatio Alger pro-capitalist rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.6771159]

>>6769442
Bumping for BASED AS FUCK ZHIZHIK

[Anonymous No.6771526]

>>6766039
>How can I maintain my Marxist principles without being poor?

Easy, you live in Capitalism while you continue to push anti-capitalist values.

Fucking Engels was a factory owner, the Communist Manifesto itself spends a good quarter of it circlejerking over how awesome Capitalism is.

A Marxist knows that Capitalism is just a stepping stone in the mode of production, there's nothing to feel guilty about when you have to play by the rules of society.

[Anonymous No.6771534]

>>6769442
[TIPPING INTENSIFIES]

*snuffle*

[Anonymous No.6771546]

>>6769442
One day tovarich, one day

[Anonymous No.6771575]

>>6766145
Capitalism doesn't allocate resources well at all though.

If you want to paint say a cup, you don't pour a 10 liter tub of paint on the cup, sure the cup is painted, but it could have been painted with a few dabs.

The amount of waste Capitalism produces is insane, I was just reading about the waste at Glastonbury festival alone, hundreds of tonnes of tents, hundreds of tonnes of bedding, hundreds of tonnes of blankets and something like 3000 tonnes of waste just sent to a landfill.

How is that allocating resources well on a planet with very limited resources and Climate Change becoming a big fucking deal?

Capitalism would be 100% fine if we lived on a planet that didn't require it's own ecosystems and had infinite wealth, but we don't, many resources are hitting their peak, arable land and useable water is disappearing at an alarming rate and the ironic thing is, billions of people still live in abject poverty.

[Anonymous No.6771600]

>>6766204
>Humans would have to behave in some extraordinarily different ways for any other economic system to work.
We're on the cusp of just such a thing being possible.

[Anonymous No.6771606]

>>6766204
>laws of economics
Fucking liberals.

[Anonymous No.6771615]

>>6771575
Emissions can be taxed. All estimates that say we are running out of resources are based on models that measure resources by how much can be extracted at current market price. When a resource gets low in processed supply the price gets higher and more can be extracted. By the time we run out of resources here we'll be in goddamn space.

And saying that capitalism produces "waste" is a silly generalization you gathered from anecdotes. Capitalism encourages efficiency. If you want to read about waste read Shmelev and Popov to hear about the full retardation of the Soviet economy.

[Anonymous No.6771651]

>>6771615
>Capitalism encourages efficiency

In maximizing profit, not good management of resources.

People are not rational actors and largely don't give a fuck about the Environment.

If Capitalism gave a shit about the environment, planned obsolescence wouldn't be a thing, releasing a new slightly upgraded model based on rare earth minerals annually wouldn't be a thing.

>By the time we run out of resources here we'll be in goddamn space.

Except usable water, arable land are quickly running out along with numerous resources.
Also space mining is a pipe dream that will never happen.

[Anonymous No.6771668]

>>6771651
>In maximizing profit, not good management of resources.

That is essentially the same thing. That's the entire point.

>planned obsolescence

*tips tinfoil hat*

>Except usable water, arable land are quickly running out along with numerous resources.
Also space mining is a pipe dream that will never happen.

Yea, ok bud.

[Anonymous No.6771669]

>>6766039

> Believes Marxism is a viable economic theory.

You're fucking delusional, m8.

[Anonymous No.6771672]

>>6766666
damn anon, one digit from a get
closest ive ever seen

[Anonymous No.6772481]

>>6766065

those are not the only two options you know. both are idiotic systems.

[Anonymous No.6772542]

>>6769442
Why is he so great, lads?

[Anonymous No.6772878]

>>6766039
Join a Buddhist monastery

[Anonymous No.6772892]

>>6766039
You should create Marx monastery

[Anonymous No.6773139]

Gib moneyz to some 3rd world shithole infesting leftist rebels

[Anonymous No.6773201]

I sort of have this problem. I believe making money out of property is morally wrong but just inherited property that will make me quite comfortably well off.

But then if I got rid of it somebody else would just make money out of it, and that's how the world is. I can at least charge a reasonably low rent though.

[Anonymous No.6773263]

>>6766065
Bait
god guys its so obvious wtf lit?

[Anonymous No.6773285]

>>6766039
>how do I maintain my communist principles without being an economic and financial cuckold
You've misunderstood the basics of communism. Cuckoldry.

[Anonymous No.6775033]

Become a NEET, suck money out of the system, shoplift from chain stores, vandalize occasionally, start jaming wrenches in the gears of capitalism and see what happens.

Also I had a great teacher in highschool who would discuss the benefits of marxism and the dirty tricks employed by capitalists with the students all the time. You could still become a teacher and give children something other than capitalist ideology.

>>6766075
Not him, but coming from a working class background it's pretty hard to like capitalism. With global warming and so on, how can you actually support this system?

[Anonymous No.6775107]

If you have principles of your own, you are far from being poor. Start by overcoming Marxism with solid criticism, and learn as much from it as you can.

[Anonymous No.6775385]

>>6766312

[Anonymous No.6775776]

>>6766395
>pretty much any form of distributed social accounting
Yeah, if only there was some huge distributed computation that looks like a method of relaxation being performed on all the resources at once. But bartering would be a resource drain, so we had better assign some kind of arbitrary numerical value and then perform the relaxation. Hmm. Some people will need an abstract method of accounting for how much of said resources they have, and how to exchange them. Some kind of tokens, or something I guess.

I don't know, just brainstorming.