[ 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: 61 KB, 320x480, Adam-Smith-The-Wealth-of-Nations.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6882950 No.6882950 [Reply] [Original]

>tfw you realize he was right about almost everything

>> No.6883057

>>6882950
yep

>> No.6883081
File: 53 KB, 500x372, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883081

>>6882950
>yfw Max Stirner did the most important translation of Wealth of Nations in German

>> No.6883095

>>6882950
can you give a tl;dr of it, so i have an idea what i'm getting into

>> No.6883101

>>6883095
Economics 101

>> No.6883109

>inb4 Marx fanboys blow up this thread

>> No.6883111
File: 71 KB, 250x306, Groucho demands an explanation for this.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883111

>>6882950

>> No.6883146

>>6883095

The free market is more effective at improving the lot of ordinary people than anything else so far devised.

Also the price of grain is incredibly complex and our schools suck

>> No.6883157
File: 24 KB, 384x384, das-kapital.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883157

>>6882950
You seem to have posted the wrong picture, OP. It's okay, let me fix that for you.

>> No.6883182

>>6883157
>posting gilded bourgeoise consumer goods designed to impress bourgeoise sex partners on your bookshelf but never to be read

Pleb.

>> No.6883203

>>6883146
That's not quite accurate. Smith only believed in free markets under conditions of perfect competition because in his eyes perfect competition would lead to perfect equality.

Smith was against free markets without perfect competition as they would just lead to huge inequality.

>> No.6883212
File: 60 KB, 599x787, qt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883212

>>6882950

I agree with most of his claims, but he was blinded by his enlightenment optimism. A completely free-market economy, with no government intervention, does not always improve the well-being and wealth of every single member of society. The invisible hand does not benefit everyone.

>> No.6883220

>>6883212
>>6883203
>>6883146
>free market

Do you also still believe in unicorns ?

>> No.6883225

People should read Theory of Moral Sentiments. Smith was certainly no Ayn Rand like the politicians who only took EC101 pretend he was.

>> No.6883235

>>6883220

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

Let me rephrase it then: a free-market based economy.

>HURRR, free-markets aren't 1000000% pure because there always will be some form of government

>> No.6883238

>>6883212
Who is this ejaculate prelate?

>> No.6883249
File: 3 KB, 97x94, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883249

>>6883238

if only I knew anon, this semen demon haunts my dreams

>> No.6883251

>>6883220
>Do you also still believe in unicorns ?
No and I don't believe in free markets either. I was just correcting the other person. Smith only believed in free markets under perfect competition. That needed to be pointed out.

>> No.6883254
File: 185 KB, 703x885, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883254

>>6883157
"They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship—their dictatorship, of course—can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up."

—Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchism

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

>> No.6883266

There is no economic system that improved the life of average men than the free enterprise system. commiefags will never refute this

>> No.6883280
File: 72 KB, 601x601, 5079-986-coin-bank-kapital-2-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883280

>>6883157
This one is more hilarious. Got one in my bookshelf.

>> No.6883362
File: 48 KB, 460x307, xu_lizhi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883362

>>6883266
>people work more than ever under authoritarian capitalism
>people are alienated from their work
>people are alienated from each other and from culture because of a narcissistic and solipsistic economy
>attempts to improve the quality of human life and fix this are met with hostility by a knee-jerk reaction to defend the status quo and unlimited consumption/production
>the environment is forever fucked
>education is fucked beyond all belief
>government and democracy is irrelevant aside from a springboard for corporate hegemony

it might be better to be a wage slave than a slave in ancient greece, but for the average greek citizen life is improved how?

>> No.6883507

>>6883362
This argument is so fucking try hard and nonsensical. The quality of life within western civilization today is without a doubt more comfortable than ever before. We do have our issues, most of them mental in nature, but modern medicine and technologies afford us luxuries that kings and queens would have lost their shit over 1000 years ago. This isn't to say that under capitalism a huge number of people aren't worse off than before. There are indeed modern slaves whose lives are pretty much shit, but there were also people who lived pitiful existences before capitalism. The more accurate and relevant argument against capitalism at this point is related to this:
>the environment is forever fucked
Namely, that our FUTURE is completely fucked if we don't figure out an alternative to our ways of living RIGHT NOW, which albeit rather comfortable is decadent to a fault.

>> No.6883534

>>6883507
Good thing we have medicine to deal with all our stress and posture and cardiac and respiratory problems caused by the absolutely corrisve life in the XXI century

>> No.6883690

>>6883146
*a free market that is tightly monitored by the government to prevent monopolies, unions, and guilds.

>> No.6883713

>>6883182
You're spot on, but it gets worse when you realize that all voluntary reading is bourgeoise.

>> No.6883733

>>6883212
Smith never advocated for completely unregulated markets, but mandated that there should be no monopolies either natural or legislated. An unregulated market quickly becomes a plutocracy, which undermines the workings of a "free" market.

>> No.6883790
File: 223 KB, 340x255, Oops.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883790

>>6883362
Do you mean modern Greeks? It sounds more like they were mismanaged, which would barely be possible with Smith's market as almost nothing is managed.

>yfw Greek unions helped fuck the economy
>yfw plutocrats helped fuck the economy
>yfw Adam Smith warned that unions and plutocrats do just that
>yfw Adam Smith specifically argued against economic hegemony from any quarter
>yfw authoritarian capitalism is an oxymoron
>yfw the world is knocking down the door of every "capitalist", democratic, secular country.

>> No.6883828

>>6883254
What didn't Bakunin get that the dictatorship of the proletariat was the institution of the working class as the deciding power of society?

>> No.6883874

>>6883238
>>6883249
https://twitter.com/gracevcox

https://instagram.com/gracevcox

>> No.6883888

>>6883111
>>6883157
You realize the only fundamental disagreement between Smith and Marx is their conclusions, right? The Wealth of Nations and Das Kapital don't contradict each other all that much.

>> No.6883892
File: 46 KB, 592x754, 1398820032792.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6883892

>>6882950

>mfw he even advocated for some form of a basic income

>> No.6883926

>>6883888
More or less, but Wealth of Nations theorized capitalism, while Kapital described capitalism as it is. Basically, Marx is more-right than Smith was, but Marx had the benefit of being born later.

>> No.6883971

>>6883892
Well, yeah. Otherwise how is the Worker supposed to be free to take his labor elsewhere?

>> No.6883981

>>6883534
Gotta thin the herd somehow. It's easy to avoid these ailments with half a brain and some self discipline.

>> No.6884011

>>6883926
He also very much stood on the shoulders of Smith.

>> No.6884124

>>6884011
May as well say Marx stands on the shoulders of Ricardo and every other writer he's read. Unfortunately for them Marx is far greater than the sum of their parts.

>> No.6884137

>>6883892
How you gonna have a free market with fair wages without some competition?

>> No.6884168

Smith believed that the invisible hand would ultimately cause unhappiness because people would never be satisfied with their condition.

>> No.6884191

>>6883926
Marx thought Smith was dead right. Smith himself warned that uncontrolled capitalism would morph and become horrendous for society.

>> No.6884226

>>6883926
>Marx is more-right than Smith was
>retarded ass labour theory of value
>right
kekked

>> No.6884286

>>6883892

Negative income tax is superior to all forms of welfare

>> No.6884303 [DELETED] 

Anyone against free markets is likely a beta poorfag. Try developing marketable skills and actually getting a job, lol

>> No.6884768

>>6883254
You do realize that the first Russian translation of Marx's Capital was by Bakunin right?

>> No.6884782

>>6883266
Most smart communists don't refute that at all. In fact, communism is only possible given the socialization of labor and massive increase in productive forces that capitalism brings about.

But the material rearrangements and productions of capital fall sway to the dictates of value. A society in which all activity is centered around the accumulation of value is self-destructive.

Communism is realizing the forces unleashed by capital but rearranging social activity so as to abolish work as exploitative, alien, calculated labor and value as the law which guides production.

>> No.6884791

>>6884226
good trolling, maybe? Smith used an LTV as well

>> No.6884806

>>6883203
I think that more than equality, he looked for justice. In a free market society, when you respect the life projects of everyone else, obviosly there will be different results, therefore inequality will always be a reality, but there will be more justice.
Sorry my bad english

>> No.6884810

>>6884782
how can work ever not be alien? even in a communist shithole, someone needs to pick up the trash. not every job can be some self-fulfilling passion you have. that's as deluded as capitalism's Follow Your Passion spiel.

>> No.6884825

>>6884810
Alienated work means that work is separated from social activity.

You going to your day job, having no say on what the goals are or how the environment is run, reaping none of the productive benefits of your labor, and detaching yourself from it so as to keep it in a realm separate from your "real" life is alien labor.

You engaging in productive activity with your community as intentional social activity and deciding on what you do and how you do it as a group is non-alienated.

Alienated does not mean boring or menial work.

>> No.6884859

>>6884825

>reaping none of the benefits of your labor

How about a fucking wage you turboautist? You earn money that be exchanged for anything your heart desires

>> No.6884913

>>6884859
That's not reaping the benefits of your labor directly. Again, non-alienated labor is unmediated by time calculating work and wage compensation.

It means acting as a member of social whole whose orientation towards labor is based on the needs of that social whole, not on the law of the accumulation of value.

The difference is working for strangers with strangers to make something for strangers that is distilled into a wage that represents your labor vs. working for your community with comrades to construct a world and provides needs for your comrades that directly affects your manner of living and existing in a social world.

Work as we know it does not exist under communism. Work as we know it did not exist before capitalism. It had to be created (see the enclosure of the commons and prosecutions for vagrancy) and it will have to be destroyed.

>> No.6884926

>>6883212
>Commenting on things you've never read

>> No.6884928

>>6883828
Because the working class are brainwashed by bourgeois lies. They need someone who understands Marxism and has integrated it into his very being to lead them. Someone to act as a (temporary) voice of The People and to help The People decide what they need. But of course they cannot be allowed to make their own decisions as again there are wreckers and brainwashed people amongst them.

And just like that you've turned "Everyone owns everything" into "One man owns everything".

>> No.6884950

>>6884928
muh vanguardism

>> No.6885499

>>6884913

what the holy fuck are you on about m8? the economic marketplace with wages and prices has existed since the dawn of fucking civilization. soldiers and laborers have been paid in silver since ancient greece

>> No.6885505

>>6884913

it makes absolutely no sense for everyone to provide his own needs directly. that is breathtakingly inefficient. I make nails and you make grain. we're each good at what we do, but exchanging nails for grain is clumsy and wasteful. you might not need any nails, and then what do I have to give? that's where capital comes from; it is labor in the abstract. money allows us to purchase the labor of other people and secure our own wellbeing.

>> No.6885551
File: 77 KB, 320x320, 1289949057834.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6885551

>>6882950
I'm crossreading this and Civilizations and its Discontents right now

>> No.6885662

How can anyone subscribe to the LTV when many luxury goods do, and long have, sell for prices vastly in excess of their labor and material input without consumer complaint?

I'm just recently studying Economics so I concede it may not apply as generally as I presume.

>> No.6885674

>>6885662

because labor and material input are not the only determinants of price

scarcity
perceived exclusivity or prestige
general demand
etc

>> No.6885678

>check it out guys it's like... it's like... a big... hand... but it's invisible. seriously XD

>> No.6885682

>>6885674
I'm aware, the existence of those factors should preclude the Labor Theory of Value being theorized however.

Or does it simply mean to present the "ideal" or "objective" value of something removed from "intangibles?"

>> No.6885687

>>6884825
>>6884913
10/10 posts. Good job anon.

>> No.6885698

>>6883874
>https://instagram.com/gracevcox

>grace cox
I wish she would grace my cock with her vag

>> No.6885714

>>6884928
>Because the working class are brainwashed by bourgeois lies.
This is true though.

>> No.6885723

>>6885499
>>6885505
I'm not sure you two are really getting at what the other poster is talking about

(not same, just a curious lurker)

>> No.6885731

>>6885687
Seconded, I liked reading that.

I'm currently getting ready to volunteer on farms, most of which operate essentially self sufficiently, not sure that really relates to all this as a society, but you talking about how work doesn't seem like work if you're really invested in the product.

Like cleaning up shit for people doesn't really seem as bad if you love them imo.

>> No.6885779

>>6885682
I'm going to do something marx called a "robinsonade", which is explain an economic concept in a robinson crusoe type of situation (which he hated). Even worse, i'm going to explain the ltov, which according to marx is a social law that only applies under capitalism, as if it applied to any situation. Sorry.

Imagine you are stranded on an island. Imagine you could produce an axe in 1 hour, and a bow in 2 hours. Suppose your axe is more useful to you. If you had to lose one or the other, which would you chose? The subjective theory of value will tell you you'd rather lose the bow, since it's less useful. But you might as well say that losing the axe is better, since you can make another one in less time.
When society becomes more complex, axes and bows are being produced constantly. It wouldn't make sense for the axe to have more value than the bow, since you can switch your labour from one to the other.
But this only applies to reproducible commodities. If you couldn't produce more bows, this law would obviously not apply. Both Ricardo and Marx are well aware of this, but they are concerned with the bigger picture.

i'm actually butchering the ltov in this post, but i think it's an intuitive explanation

>> No.6885815

>>6883507
>but modern medicine and technologies afford us luxuries that kings and queens would have lost their shit over 1000 years ago
What the fuck does that have to do with the free market and capitalism?

>> No.6885842

>>6885687
>>6885731

Check out some of the communisation stuff that's been fairly popular recently in left-com circles.

Communization and its Discontents:

http://libcom.org/files/Communization-and-its-Discontents-Contestation-Critique-and-Contemporary-Struggles.pdf

Gilles Dauve:
http://www.troploin.fr/node/24
https://libcom.org/files/Gilles%20Dauv%C3%A9%20and%20Fran%C3%A7ois%20Martin-%20Eclipse%20and%20re-emergence%20of%20the%20communist%20movement.pdf

SIC:

https://libcom.org/library/sic-i

Endnotes:

http://endnotes.org.uk/issues

>> No.6885952

>>6885687
>>6885731
>>6885842

The acoustics in here are amazing

I can hear the echoing for miles

>> No.6886056

>>6885779
I'm a marxist.
Excuses not accepted.

>> No.6886064

>>6886056
*Just kidding + I'm not that guy btw.

>> No.6886212

>Adam Smith
>not Anders Chydenius

shiggy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Chydenius#Ideas

>> No.6886225

Can someone please name one successful communist country?

>> No.6886247

>>6886225
Cuba's doing pretty well, considering it's circumstances.

>> No.6886255

>>6886247
You may be right, I just checked, Cuba has some pretty good things going. What about Vietnam?

Cuba > Vietnam?

>> No.6886282

>>6886255
Given that the US leveled the country and practically salted the earth, I'd say Vietnam's achievements are quite impressive as well.

>> No.6886286

>>6886255
Vietnam is arguably the more successful one, although their human rights track record is far from spotless.

They also get props from me for trying to get rid of the Khmer Rouge, even if it wasn't for selfless reasons. That was some BAD SHIT, no matter who you ask.

>> No.6886300

>>6884768
Bakunin had a great deal of respect for Marx, but he obviously didn't agree with all of Das kapital.

>> No.6886306
File: 45 KB, 330x240, pol pot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6886306

>>6886286
>Khmer Rouge
>That was some BAD SHIT

My Little Amerikkkan Can't Be This Indoctrinated

>> No.6886314
File: 178 KB, 347x355, 1437495091869.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6886314

>>6886306
>supporting western-planted and funded agrarianists who leaned on the monarchy for legitimacy

Sure, m8. Next you'll tell me the CIA didn't give Daesh weaponry.

>> No.6886322

>>6883081
> Bakunin did the first and most widely read Russian translation of Das Kapital
> First English translation came out in 1970s

>> No.6886356

>>6886322
>English edition first published in 1887
>First English translation came out in 1970s

>> No.6886373

Did anyone read Ricardo? He kidna come off as a smug in his writing.