/sci/ - Science & Math

no
>>>/lit/

no

>>11238499
no, but it's pretty juicy, not gonna lie.

>>11238609
>>11238602
>>11238554
Why no?

Why do they call it the immortal science?


Why can't any of you refute it then?

>>11238499
No , fuck off commie

>>11238650
marxists hype up marxism as the ultimate answer to everything. imagine my surprise when they car it "immortal science."
>refute
nah. >>>/lit/ thread already had too many replies. /sci/ is a free market board.

>>11238650
You don't use the scientific method. It's philosophy, not science. Whether or not it's an accurate description of history is irrelevant to whether or not it's science.

No.

>>11238669
>t. STEM major
It is not even Philosophy, it is crazy ideology created by mentally ill people (Marx was most likely depressed) that try to pass itself off as Philosophy but never will be, just like Feminism and Freud in general

>>11238499
What is it in Dialectial Lmaolism that stroke you as scientific?
You obviously never read Hegel (where all Marx's schizo attacks come from), otherwise you wouldn't have asked this question

How do Tankies deal with the fact the vast majority of soviet industry was actually built by the capitalist west?

>>11238693
why are they winning the culture war then?

Humanities and economics are not sciences.

>>11238826
marxism isnt liberalism

>>11238695

"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"

>>11238770

"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them"

>>11238884
cringed

>>11238873
>>11238884
How do y

also anime isn't communist, it's bourgeois and would be banned under socialism

How the fuck do you deal with the fact the majority of soviet industry was built by the capitalist west?

You cultist bootlickers need to kill yourselves lmao

How the fuck do you deal with the fact the majority of soviet industry was built by the capitalist west?

also anime isn't communist, it's bourgeois and would be banned under socialism

You cultist bootlickers need to kill yourselves lmao

>>11238669
>the scientific method
That's not a real thing. Read Feyerabend.

>>11238884
>>11238873
Socialism is a massive cult and it's pretty pathetic.

>>11238903
>read some dumb European philosopher to learn about science
no thanks

>>11238873
>>11238884
How the fuck do you deal with the fact the majority of soviet industry was built by the capitalist west?

also anime isn't communist, it's bourgeois and would be banned under socialism

You cultist bootlickers need to kill yourselves lmao

>>11238909
"you can't learn about science reading philosophy" is a philosophical statement, not a scientific one

congrats, u just played urself

>>11238934
Neat. Ill continue not reading bullshit.

>>11238943
Why?

>>11238499
Your safety is not as important as black peoples feelings.

rebranded determinism that thinks the only important thing is economics and everything is economics.
also it's cyclical history theory but with more steps to seem more legitimate and scientific.
>"bro it's primitive, feudal, capitalist, socialist and communist at the end because history is so obvious, predictable and linear!"
i still forgive marx though because he gave us deleuze and land

Politics is just bread and circus and communists couldn’t even supply bread

>>11239059

They supplied plenty to the West to buy industrial machinery in massive quantities.

>>11238499
Well, what is "scientific"?
Do you really think these newbs ever even contemplate the worries that autistic germans solved 240 years ago starting from Kant to Fichte, Jacobi, Schelling, Hegel?
The very notion of the noumenon is incomprehensible to their natural sciences oriented world view. How oculd you then try to help them understand that Hegelianism is more what "science" means that what their stumbling phenomenological guessing amounts to?

>>11238826
Because you’re against them, and everytime you lose you feel it heavier than you feel wins. That’s pretty well known, but it’s good to remind.
But they are indeed winning. The problems are possibly:
1 - people are more emotional than they are rational
2 - women have more power now
3 - they are evil, so no there are no moral constraints for them
But I don’t fret, as the Chinese fascists will eventually take over and make the west crumble

>>11238650
>Why do they call it the immortal science?
never heard this

>>11238499
Yes, marxism is the most accurate study of humankind.
Once we get rid of fascists and build a marxist society then we'll be finally free.

>>11238693

So how is this an argument against him tho? It doesn't really refute anything he said relating to class conciousness or captalism's contradictions.

No, its an ideology trying to masquerade as science.

>>11240109
>what is Leninism

If what you are all saying is true, why do NONE of you scientists or skeptics EVER call out or "debunk" marxists?

You just let them run wild because you think they're an effective counter to "le ebul nazis"

Holy fuck the entire scientific community is pathetic.

>>11238499
No, but historical materialism has some merits. Thats not exactly because Marxism was right but just because it makes sense to look at economic conditions and ask the qui bono question in history. Anyway >>>/his/

>>11238987
>thinks the only important thing is economics and everything is economics.
It is. The SJW invasion of vidya or whatever meaningless tripe is not relevant to history.

>>11240876
>why don't people whose interest is science bitch about something unrelated to science all the time on a board that is meant for the discussion of science

>>11238826
They aren't, "neo-Marxism" is just Anglophone Progressivism that superficially adopts a Marxist veneer, the underlying worldview isn't the same. Progressivism is about guaranteeing personal autonomy, equality, and inclusion.

>>11240967
>>why don't people whose interest is science bitch about something unrelated to science
Your right, we should let flat earthers, climate skeptics, religious nutcases all run wild and NEVER challenge their dumb theories.

Marxism CLAIMS to be science, yet you don't refute them

>>11241008
>Marxism CLAIMS to be science, yet you don't refute them
I also don't waste my time refuting flat earth and electric universe bullshit and teslafaggots and UFOtards all the time.

>>11241018
>I also don't waste my time
okay then, it's your fault marxism is growing and so confident

you science fags used to have some edge

remember dawkins? remember the youtube atheist skeptics from 2008-2014?
They're all gone down and laughed at

all we have now is irrationality

>>11241018
>electric universe bullshit
do you know a good break down of this? I can't seem to find one good enough.

>>11241031
I'm very skeptical you have any interest in science beyond politics
>it's your fault
lolno faggot. fucking dumbass.

>>11241032
just type it the youtube search engine to get hundreds of hours of literal nonsense. there is no "breakdown" of bullshit.

>>11241045
that would explain why it's so hard to find a singular breakdown

How is the electronic universe theory propagating itself?

>>11241098
memes

>>11238499
Complete pseudoscience

>>11238826
There's a world beyond Twatter and Plebbit, you know.

>>11241251
>Complete pseudoscience
proof?
Das kapital is a pretty long complex book, SURELY there must have been a complete point by point refutation to this very day?

yeah didn't think so

>>11238499
Funny thing -- there was a Notices article in 2013 about the Soviet attempt to force mathematicians to push dialectical materialism in their work.
https://www.ams.org/notices/201311/rnoti-p1448.pdf
And now they (and the AMS in a larger sense) have gone batshit for "diversity and inclusion".

>>11241303
> The Bible is a pretty long complex book, SURELY there must have been a complete point by point refutation to this very day?
You fucking tard, the entire theory rests on a set of axioms. If I disagree with your axioms or they're just plain out wrong, I don't need to disprove the whole shitship of s*cialist 'philosophy'. Marx had undoubtedly interesting economic insight, which has been subsumed into mainstream economic theory, but the rest of the shit he said can be discarded.

>>11241389
lol the axioms havent even been proven wrong

do you even know what dialectical materialism even is?

>>11241397
Give me the axioms and I'll give you a point by point refutation and citations.

>>11241403
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/d/i.htm

>>11241397
axioms cannot be proven correct or incorrect, dumbass. do you even into logic

>>11241406
>"It is an eternal cycle in which matter moves, a cycle that certainly only completes its orbit in periods of time for which our terrestrial year is no adequate measure, a cycle in which the time of highest development, the time of organic life and still more that of the life of being conscious of nature and of themselves, is just as narrowly restricted as the space in which life and self-consciousness come into operation. A cycle in which every finite mode of existence of matter, whether it be sun or nebular vapour, single animal or genus of animals, chemical combination or dissociation, is equally transient, and wherein nothing is eternal but eternally changing, eternally moving matter and the laws according to which it moves and changes.
Christopher Langan tier nonsense. Ken Wheeler tier rambling bull.

>>11241389
>rest of the shit he said can be discarded.
True dat but is there anywhere I can donate to help your retardedness?

>>11241413
>Christopher Langan tier nonsense. Ken Wheeler tier rambling bull.
so basically you can't refute it

gotcha

>>11241413
Wow!!! You sure knw your nonsense.

>>11241407
I don't mean axioms in the sense of Eucledian geometry, economics is as much of a social science as it is a 'sicence'. The political theory rests on postulates that are most analogous to axioms.
>>11241406
That's a glossary, not a set of axioms / postulates.
>>11241414
no u

>>11241418
Nigga, there's like 140 fucking words there, FOR WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A DEFINITION, and yet there is only 2 (two) full stops. The string of words that follows the first full stop isn't even a fucking complete sentence despite being ~50 words long.

>>11241423
>That's a glossary, not a set of axioms / postulates.
it just explained DM and quite clearly I might add


yet you cannot refute it
hmmm

>>11241429
No it's not, list them.

>>11241428
not an argument

>>11241432
read the link, holy shit this is pathetic

>>11241449
>read the link
>to find WORDS WORDS WORDS WORDS that dont even amount to complete ideas or sentences, just vague descriptions and philosophical jargon

>>11241449

>>11241303
i doubt it's that complex, the state of 19th century economics was pretty rudimentary

>>11240881
It has as much merit as Hegelian dialectics, that is, 0, it is a joke, a gag, a stunt.

This offtopic trash should just be deleted. Jannies do your work.

A simple picture of Karl Marks brings all the /stormfront/ cucks to the yard to [REEEEEEEE autistically]. And the next thread over, they whine about leftist subversion, and the irony will be lost to them. Not because they necessarily don't notice it, but because they're constitutionally dissimulated.

>>11239059
Yeah, about that, pic related.

>>11238987
For all their faults, knowing Deleuze and Land already puts you ahead of the vast majority of /pol/tards. That said, saying Marxism is deterministic is proof positive that you either haven't read the source material or didn't quite grasp what you read.

>>11241389
>s*cialist
ayy le Mao

>>11241523
It doesn't take much to understand the notion of climate change either, yet here we are, with the world's most powerful people denying it as everything burns around them. Literally so, in Australia's case.

>>11241624
>MUH CLIMATINEN CHANGE
bullshit the world has always been burning

>>11238499
No, is closer to a religion or sect than anything else. Is based in belief, not accurate data or interpretation of the world.

>>11241303
You don't need a "complete point by point refutation" when its very foundation (the labor theory of value) is obviously bullshit.

why was communism forced on the russian people by a murderous banker funded elitest coup?

>>11241694
because the germans really, really didnt want to lose the Great War so they shipped Lenin back to Russia

>>11241699
And trotsky?

>>11239059
>Politics is just bread and circus and communists couldn’t even supply bread
Based

>>11241406
>>11241413
Holy shit, do some people really take this stuff seriously?

>>11241413
sauce

>>11241624
Marxism is pseudoscience and their predictions will never come true.

Capitalist companies build MOST of soviet industry.

https://capx DOT co/soviet-communism-was-dependent-on-western-technology/

https://archive.org/details/AnthonySuttonTriologyOfWesternTechnologyAndSovietEconomicDevelopment1917To19301930To19451945To1965/page/n1259

Food consumption was LOWER in the ussr than the capitalist west.
https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/


Why do you marxists even exist? You're basically the flat earthers of politics.

>>11241624
>during massive political crisis and economic reorganization there was slightly less food

WHOA marxists are geniuses

>>11241624
>Deleuze and Land
more pseudo-intellectuals that larping religious fundamentalists actually believe

Requisite "I don't argue for a return to yadda yadda yadda" disclaimer.

>>11241881
That's a genetic falacy. Should they have reinvented industrialization from the steam engine forwards? As for post-WW2, it's a whole other topic. The USSR signed its death warrant when it decided to forego cybernetics in managing the economy.

>https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/
I think ol' Nintil he means well, but his sources are another matter. The sole one here is Igor Birman, a Soviet refugee. It's funny how, despite Soviet sources always being suspicious, dissident ones are assumed to be bonafide.

Table 5.4 "reftects not only the quantity of food and its caloric content but other qualitative characteristics". Pegging quality to a number is iffy, doubly so if mixed with actual quantity numbers, but let's look at it. He arrives at a "total value of food consumption" by comparing food spending, which is red flag (in a bad way) 1. He does so by comparing rubles-converted-to-dollars with dollars, rubles with dollars-converted-to-rubles, and calculate the geometric mean between them to get the values in the 5th column, and such a Byzantine calculation is red flag 2. The fact that these values are different at all means he's not using an exchange rate (corrected or not) and whichever data was used to make these conversions is relegated to "Chapter 2 of Birman's book", which is red flag 3. A handwave later, Soviet people consumed 53% of what Americans did. 53% of what, however, isn't stated, and that's red flag 4. In table 7.1, he refines this to 43% ?s of consumption. It's very well thought misdirection. He piled several tricks in a cascade to increase the false veracity.

Curiously, although he did it all to say Soviets consumed fewer calories by 1976 than Americans, he did so not by claiming the former were starving, but the latter were pigging out, according to table 5.3.

>>11241887
Yeah, but a damn sight better than /pol/ mainstays like Varg, Weev and Zyklon Ben Garrison.

>>11238826
The same reason Christians did it once. A bunch of ignorant losers mistreated by their elites are willing to believe anything that promises to bring messianic times.

>>11241766
Looks like Hioshiru's style.

>>11241881
>Food consumption was LOWER in the ussr than the capitalist west.
Not according to the CIA. Soviets and Americans ate roughly the same amount, with Americans consuming slightly more.

>>11241881
The capx article was pretty interesting, thanks for sharing that

>>11238499
you are basically asking "Is philosophy science?"

>>11241573
>dialectics
read the post again you dumb cunt.

What is the medium by which electromagnetic and gravitic waves traverse space?

>>11242753
Top quality reaction pic mate. I Lold.

>>11240947
i am not against determinism and i think that determinism is the only empirical scientific answer to the question of free will but i don't believe that natural selection, survival, accumulative habits that get amplified by isolation, anthropology, psychology, hierarchies, etc count as economics nor that society is purely determined by economics. economics can't explain why gulf countries have a macho culture even though they are rich and why the Aztecs viewed women, men and homosexuals as equal and taxed the rich to give to the poor despite still having a theological primitive monarchy and sacrificing children on pyramids. in other words they didn't progress from feudal to capitalist to socialist to communist and they never had revolutions but somehow they still got the features of all those periods.
also economics can't explain any world religion at all

>>11242119
>The sole one here is Igor Birman, a Soviet refugee. It's funny how, despite Soviet sources always being suspicious, dissident ones are assumed to be bonafide.
kek what?
The sources you leftists were claiming were accurate were the CIA ones, he's refuting the CIA ones.

Soviets starved millions of their own people and even after they stopped doing this food production and the production of consumer goods was much much lower than the west.

Are you actually a marxist leninist defending that authoritarian shithole?
Why would you want to live like they do in a prison camp?

How's north korea looking these days? You people are fucking pathetic.

>>11238499
no

>>11242189
>Not according to the CIA.
Bullshit you absolute retard, those CIA numbers were widely inaccurate.
https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/
I mean even in America today we have a massive abundance of food.

Imagine defending an authoritarian police state that starved millions of people and had much less consumer goods.

>Soviets and Americans ate roughly the same amount, with Americans consuming slightly more.
wait so lol?
you're agreeing with my main point?

>>11242396
Yes and it's true and commies are SEETHING about it.

This book explains it all and uses soviet data to prove it.
https://archive.org/details/AnthonySuttonTriologyOfWesternTechnologyAndSovietEconomicDevelopment1917To19301930To19451945To1965

>>11242119
>on, survival, accumulative habits that get amplified by isolation, anthropology, psychology, hierarchies, etc count as economics nor that society is purely determined by economics. economics can't explain why gulf countries have a macho culture even though they are rich and why the Aztecs viewed women, men and homosexuals as equal and taxed the rich to give to the poor despite still having a theological primitive monarchy and sacrificing children on pyramids. in other words they didn't progress from feudal to capitalist to socialist to communist and they never had revolutions but somehow they still got the features of all those periods.
Soviet sources are almost always flawed because the country had no free press and the state was known for lying about everything and punishing dissenters.

>>11242119
the soviet healthcare system was garbage

https://artir.wordpress.com/2016/03/29/the-soviet-union-healthcare/

>>11243081
wrong quote bro

Marxism in practise is immoral even by its own precepts. Marxism claims that the working class is having its surplus labor value stolen by the capitalist class, and that by seizing the means of production the working class can gain the full benefit of their labor. However, every real world communist revolution has had another class, lets call them the "disaffected intellectuals" (of which Marx was himself a member) take lead of the revolution, and put themselves in charge after the revolution. This new class then lives off the labor of the working class in a manner similar old capitalist class, after using them as meatshields for the revolution.

>>11243230
>Marxism in practise is immoral even by its own precepts.
marxism isn't idealist nor is it a human-loving hippie movement. marx was very critical of this archetype of leftists and he was always for realistic materialist approach
>This new class then lives off the labor of the working class in a manner similar old capitalist class, after using them as meatshields for the revolution.
marxism isn't anarchist and marx believed that a strong state is needed in order to achieve communism. the only difference is that the ruling class of a communist state works for achieving communism while a bourgeois ruling class works for increasing its wealth and dominance. this caused the first communist sectarian split which still exists to this day along a fuck ton others
btw all of the USSR leaders (except the last two) lived in was less luxury than a US senator not to mention other communist countries
>muh lying revolution leaders using us for meatshields argument
this argument has been used for every single revolution and it's wrong in all of them. any power strong enough to change society needs to be organized by strong men and even if those leaders tricked people and used them as meatsheilds life conditions still improved which is good on its own

>>11238910
>also anime isn't communist, it's bourgeois and would be banned under socialism
wtf i hate socialism now

>>11243341
Im glad you admit Marxism is immoral.

>>11238650
Because Nature wouldn't publish a refutation

If he died at birth, I would still exist. If his sister did, I wouldn't. Does that make him related?

>>11239068
lel

>>11241303

>>11243379
You can’t prove anything is immoral or not so I don’t know why anyone wastes time saying something is immoral. All it tells anyone is that you disapprove. Great. Who cares?

>>11243341
>realistic materialist approach
theres nothing realistic about marxism though, it's all pseudoscience

>>11243921
marxists CLAIM bawerk has been refuted, but they're wrong

>>11243962
>Austrian school

Pseudoscience

>>11243989
>Pseudoscience
then why are they correct about everything?

Why are you people unable to refute their logic?

>>11238499
No, is trash philosophy.

>>11243989
>supportts Marx
>calls Austrian school Pseudoscience
Please take a few minutes to read this very short paper and then reply with any issues you have with it
https://tsowell.com/images/Hoover%20Proof.pdf

>>11244127
>then why are they correct about everything?

They aren’t. Modern economics took what was useful and junked the rest, which was a lot.

>>11244432
like for example?

>>11243053
>Aztecs viewed women, men and homosexuals as equal and taxed the rich to give to the poor despite still having a theological primitive monarchy and sacrificing children on pyramids
this line is false

>>11241710
dead

>>11244432
modern economists are scum that caused the financial crisis
austrians predicted it

>>11245867
>Being able to predict anything with an economic ideology that doesn’t use any math

Lol

>>11245875
It does use math.
It just doesn't use retarded keynesian math which doesn't actually describe reality.

>>11244432
And yet modern economists keep getting shit wrong, while the austrians just sit back and calmly watching it all fall apart again and again and saying told you so.

>>11243989
>contributed the subjective theory of value, marginalism in price theory and the formulation of the economic calculation problem, each of which has become an accepted part of mainstream economics
>pseudoscience
Don't think so, sweaty.

>>11238499
It is scientific in the 19th century sense of the word, which includes any systematic approach to study things.
Of course it isn't a science in the modern positivist sense of the word.

>>11241018
>I also don't waste my time refuting flat earth
which is funny considering flat earth is correct

>>11244432
>They aren’t. Modern economics took what was useful and junked the rest, which was a lot.
Modern economics has caused the greatest wealth gap in all of human history

>>11244432
modern economics has no predictive power, it barely has explanatory power, it is a sham

>>11244432
Why haven't we nuked the Federal Reserve yet it destroys more wealth than any other thing, it caused the great depression within 16 years of its founding
it does nothing of value except drive inflation.
bring back real currency instead of debt to the fed.

>>11245880
The Austrian school explicitly criticizes mainstream economics for using calculus to model the economy because people are discrete units.

can someone explain what "dialectics" is? Lefties on campus use this word a lot

>>11246939
so? they still use math

>>11247090
it's basically a secular religion

they're fucking retarded

>>11247090
>Lefties on campus use this word a lot
where are you seeing these people?

Is it safe to say Dialectical Materialism is pseudoscience?

>>11247090
Ir;s something to do with having two different points of view then talking it out
the reality doesn't go so politely

>>11247090
The last one. It is or can be scientific. Let us go to Albuquerque by sunrise. Would we say that we need a vehicle? Yes. Let's say my cousin has one. Do you have fuel? No. Can we trade our widgets for it? No. So, must we first obtain cash? Yes. Are you agreeing that we can't get there at the time proposed originally? I see your point. You should read Socrates dude. It's like this for a thousand pages.
>>11247101
Yes unless it can explain tulips, facebook, and beanie babies. I wouldn't even call it pseudoscience.

>>11247130
>>11247090
dialectics and dialectical materialism are two completely different things

>>11247090
Here is my under-read, grossly oversimplified explanation of Hegelian dialectics. An abstract, which is incomplete itself, passes through its negation, a process called sublation, wherein characteristics of each are preserved in a subsequent unity. It's so general that you can manipulate it into a mechanism for reaching whatever ad-hoc conclusion that suits your needs.

>>11247137
When discussing Marx, we're basically talking about a modified Hegelian dialectic.

>>11247137
Thanks but I didn't understand that as the question. I didn't address part two, except with a joke, if you would like to explain to Anon. Im cool. I have read Marx and I haven't too many nice things to say.

>dialectics
fufufufu :3.. who said the left can't meme? <(-.-<)

>>11238650
>Why do they call it the immortal science?
Heh, it's a bit of an in joke.
Anyone who thinks this:>>11238657
get a big woosh.

>>11247366
yikes
Anime is bourgeois propaganda

Communists deserve helicopter rides desu.
Just physically remove them, problem solved.

>it's a bit of an in joke
So you admit the entire thing is a joke and DM isn't real science?
Marxism is a religious cult lol

>>11247327
>who said the left can't meme?
everybody

hegel wasn't profound either, you're a pre teen if you find him enlightening

>>11247366
>marx was right
then why did basically every socialist country on earth fail? inb4 muh cia

Marxist bootlickers are peak brainlet.

>>11246853
And there's literally nothing wrong with that.

>>11247146
Sounds like word salad.

>>11247451
>Anime is bourgeois propaganda
No.
>So you admit
I admit nothing. I'm neither a scholar or an ML.

thesis: dialectical materialism is a science

antithesis: dialectical materialism isn't a science

synthesis: dialectical materialism may or may not be a science

btw people call marxism leninism an immortal science just to piss off reactionaries and apparently its working lmao

FYI Dialectical Materialism is distinct from Hegelian Dialectical Analysis

there's plenty kinds of materialist conceptions that were advanced by the hegelians

consider religious materialism. lets say for the sake of argument that the whole bible is bullshit, christ and god never and will never exist.

There is however a subset of the population who will make decisions and actions based on the presupposition that god does exist, christ is our savior and the bible is the law on earth and in heaven

in these actions and decisions, an immaterial belief takes on material dimensions insofar that it informs the aforementioned actions and decisions

Likewise, actions and decisions that are informed by ideology, dialectics and history gain material dimensions which is where we get the subjects of Ideological Materialism, Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism.

>>11247590
So because the Dialectic exists and through the behaviors of humans has a material dimension, it's really no different than say a starfish.

It's a thing that exists, and therefore scientific study of it can occur

>>11238770
>How do Tankies deal with the fact the vast majority of soviet industry was actually built by the capitalist west?

They are mindless drones , not some thinkers.

>>11247562
>No.
Of course it is. It's the result of capitalism and would be banned under socialism.

How does it feel that your authoritarian ideology will NEVER take over and the people will rise up to kill you?

>not an ML
ancoms are just as authoritarian as MLs and defend them, you're just as worse and will get what's coming to you in a civil war

>>11247574
Literally who gives a shit about dialectics, it's illogical useless garbage.

>>11247576
>just to piss off reactionaries
lol but you people are the authoritarian reactionaries that support totalitarianism and statist slavery

you will get slaughtered if you tried to take over the goverenment

you people claim DM is scientific when it's really not

kill yourself bootlicker lmao

>>11247590
>material dimensions
define this term

Marxism is a religious cult.
These people should be laughed at.
Why have they infested the university system?

Oh right because it's state supported and these parasitic marxist professors couldn't survive on their own.

>>11248059
>Of course it is.
No, again.
>your authoritarian ideology
Wut? I'm a Mutualist...

Someone want to explain what all the short hand and acronyms mean?
Ancap, ML, etc, etc?

>>11247584
No it isn't. Marx just changed the components of analysis from idea and spirit to labor and the mode of production. Stop claiming this.

>>11248088
>Ancap
Meme. Anarchism and Capitalism don't mix.
>ML
Marxist-Leninism. 'a political philosophy and self-proclaimed science that seeks to establish a socialist state and then develop it further into socialism and eventually communism, a classless social system with common ownership of the means of production and with full social and economic equality of all members of society.' -Wiki

>>11238499
>Is Dialectical Materialism in any way scientific?

Not at all. It is a meme even as far as social science theories go.

>>11238499
I don't think so. Think what happens when you force a dick and cunt together. It doesn't magic a synthesis of dick and cunt into thin air.

>>11248104
>Anarchism and Capitalism don't mix.

Well, anarchism does not mix with anything else because it is absurd in practice. However, if anarchy is ever achieved, then it would be much closer to an Ancaptistan rather than some naive leftist utopia. Somalia rather than Sweden.

>>11240876

yes i wonder why

>>11248104

isnt it odd that anarchist like Chonsky always say we need government to protect us

>>11248123
I don't know. I'm not some big brain academic who wracks their brains over this stuff.

>>11248115
>An amarchist society free of hierarchies would be based on an inherently hierarchical economic system

>>11238770
how do capitalism supporters deal with the fact that 100% of their infrastructure, industry, and technology was designed and built by labor?

>>11238499
It's a philosophy of science which is derived from the metaphysics model that gives rise to the ethics model called Marxism. That metaphysics model which is most elegantly and fittingly called determinism. One might even say that Dialectical Marxism is a pseudonym for metaphysical materialism, or better yet just determinism. The line of reasoning on which determinism may be located, is that same line of reasoning on which marxism may be located.

In studying human behavior and cognition, it is discovered by the serious student that only two factors coalesce to result in every single behavior of every single organism. Those factors are environment and genetics. If you believe in that other metaphysical model, the one where there is some aspect of behavior which can be attributed to free will or the soul, you honestly have no place on this board, and are scientifically illiterate.
>Hurr durr determinism is a cult, only nihilistic hedonists and degenerates disbelieve in the existence of a spirit! They're stupid pseudo-intellectual ignorant cultists! Don't let them con you into believing their sinister lies! Don't let them subvert our grand American Ideals of FREEDOM and LIBERTY yahoo! Remember Wagie, communists want to make you work in inhumane conditions for less income than any person can reasonable be expected to live off of! That is inconceivable, and would never conceivably happen in this great nation of FREEDOM and LIBERTY, yahoo!

>>11248123
he's a linguist not an economist and he should stick to his field

>>11248166
the pyramids were built by freely employed workers and artisans during flood seasons

>>11248161

economic system is inherently hierarchical

>>11248166
we deal with it by efficiently allocating that labor, contrary to you commies

get back to me when you manage to solve the economic calculation problem at least as well as the market

>>11248168
>>11248168
You should get off this board and go invest the time you saved by not having schizo attacks on 4chan in studying
Also, the word in English is “freedom”, stop saying “liberty” as if it meant something different

>>11248201
>Humans can only write down a countable number of prices but an uncountably infinite number of goods exist
No thanks, I've seen the """mathematics""" you Austrians come up with. The whole thing is a smoke show.

>>11248161
Anarchism means lack of government, not lack of hierarchy, otherwise in anarchies parents would not have their children respect them by default.

>>11238903
>not popper

>>11248256

>goods
>uncountable

social science brainlet detected

is it just me or are a large portion of you /sci/ anons libertarians?

>>11248371
the individual should be held responsible for their own actions and the state should not be used as a cosh to impose the will of the most corrupt

>>11248076
>Mutualist...
you're the least dumb version of a socialist
but you still defend tankie shit so you should probably kys

>>11248104
>Anarchism and Capitalism don't mix.
Except when it actually existed many times in history and worked well.

Unlike poverty ridden ancom societies.

>>11248161
There's nothing wrong with voluntary hierarchies.
Ancoms want to use violence against people participating in mutually beneficial voluntary hierarchies.

>>11248166
>how do capitalism supporters deal with the fact that 100% of their infrastructure, industry, and technology was designed and built by labor?
totally fine with it?
>>11248256
>I've seen the """mathematics""" you Austrians come up with. The whole thing is a smoke show.
lmao coming from the brain dead marxist

>>11248371
>is it just me or are a large portion of you /sci/ anons libertarians?
yes we are because we are more intelligent

>>11248414
Laissez-faire britain?

>>11248407
>you still defend tankie shit
A poor habit.
>>11248414
> ancom
Why do you keep bring up such a specific thing?
Nobody here has vouched for Anarcho-Communism.

>>11248478
based ancaps

>>11248478
based ancaps

>>11248478
where's anarchosydicalism?

So like I'm kind of new to this I did some reading and found out nazis were national socialists, where does that fit? what is fascism then?

>>11248495
I don't know, being ignored after the Spanish civil war?

>>11248250
What would you recommend that I study, specifically?

>>11248478

>communes
lets all go back to living in small villages

>>11248478
>A poor habit.
Because you're part of their authoritarian bullshit.
You're no better than a fascist.
Eat shit.

Also ancap is the original form of anarchism before it was even a term.
Medieval ireland, medieval iceland, and the american midwest during the 1800s were ancap.

>>11248501
Can you losers just go back to being irrelevant incels?

>>11247576
>astrologists call astrology a science just to piss off reactionaries and apparently its working lmao
k

>>11248076
>LGBT anarchism
lmao

>>11248166
>things are built by work
Where was he going with this?

>>11248076
this image is cringe, literally all of these things are a dumb leftist meme

>>11238943
T. Brainlet

Most significan mathematicians, physicists, economists, etc. have contributed to and engaged with philosophy.

>>11241624

yes, we are all literally burning to death because of muh climate

>>11241624

>yes, we are all literally burning to death because of muh climate

>>11238770
>this country that was a pre-industrial agricultural feudal society into the 20th Century, and then got bombed to bits and pieces, had help from the richest nation on Earth during its early industrialization
>THIS DISPROVES COMMUNISM
>>11248820
Likely that it's built by workers but not owned by workers. You know, the point of communism?

>>11249290
Yeah I build things I don't own all the time. That's my job. What's your point?

>>11249290
>pre-industrial agricultural feudal society
wrong, the ussr was still somewhat industrialized before the revolution
>had help from the richest nation on Earth
no shit, they built most of their industry, the ussr would be a trash heap without the west

>>THIS DISPROVES COMMUNISM
lol imagine thinking communism makes sense whatsoever
you people are fucking flat earth tier
It must suck being this brainwashed.

>>11249362
fun fact, when the bolsheviks took over they killed most of the trade unionists, the very groups that were supposed to be helped by a socialist revolution
the whole thing was an elitest banker funded coup under the trappings of socialism

>>11238499
>Is Dialectical Materialism in any way scientific?
No, Marxism is to economics what creationism and intelligent design is to evolutionary biology.

>>11248161
free market is the only unhierarchical economic system anon

>>11248798
>ancap is the original form of anarchism

>>11248798
>societies pre-existing capitalism being ancap

If this is true, than anarcho-capitalism isn't even capitalism, but something closer to market-based anti/post-civilization anarchism.

Not the same mutualist as the other poster, but I do get along with some ancaps- not that I consider anarcho-capitalism itself anarchist (Murray Rothbard himself even claimed that his ideology isn't anarchist at one point and said it was more "nonarchist," lol), but I do feel like that there are still "anarchist" ancaps who are just confused mutualists. It comes down to whether or not you can realize the fact that capitalism has historically been a statist system and that voluntary-exchange via free-markets is not exclusive to capitalism. Anti-capitalist "freed"-markets are a thing you know....

>>11240873
Completely distinct from classical marxism as far as I understand it as someone with no stake for or against.

>>11248076
>LGBT anarchism
>anarchA feminism
>everything else in the bottom file

It seems like lefties are just autistic liberals after all, with their little color coded MTG looking icons.

>>11249751
it's true, Medieval ireland, medieval iceland, and the american midwest during the 1800s were ancap.

>>11250060
>but something closer to market-based anti/post-civilization anarchism.
MY point is that these places were market based and capitalism would have naturally evolved in these places if the technology had improved past a certain point

>Not the same mutualist as the other poster, but I do get along with some ancaps
You mutualists are alright.
I would totally start an anarchist society with you people.
I would never start one with the stinky ancoms though

>>11249378
>fun fact, when the bolsheviks took over they killed most of the trade unionists
source?

>>11248523
Math, to form critical thinking

>>11238650
Because it's a materialist religion, Theyve invested too much into it emotionally to ever challenge it

>>11249302
That workers shouldn't have to cuckold themselves to the parasitic owning class

>>11243069
>>Not according to the CIA.
>Bullshit you absolute retard, those CIA numbers were widely inaccurate.
Is it bullshit or were the CIA just wrong? You can't have both.
>you're agreeing with my main point?
If your main point is that the average citizen of both nations consumed in excess of 3k kcal a day, with USSR citizens consuming marginally fewer, then sure. But your point is that the USSR citizens were starving because they ate marginally fewer calories than Americans, which is silly.

>>11247460
>inb4 muh cia
What's two plus two? inb4four

>>11250691
>Is it bullshit or were the CIA just wrong?
the CIA was inaccurate
https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/
The ussr had slightly less food than the USA.
Also they had massively less consumer goods and services and their healthcare system was much worse than USA cheap free market system at the time.

>But your point is that the USSR citizens were starving
No, they starved BEFORE though. The mass famines weren't necessary, they were just statism. Economically free countries didn't have famines.

>>11250696
Are you implying every single socialist country on earth failed due to CIA intervention?

Are you honestly this retarded?
Plenty of them had no or minimal CIA involvement.

>>11250509
Anthony C Sutton I forget which book, they killed off most of the trade union leaders.

>>11250683
we agree on the rentier parasites, but these parasites would not survive in the actual free market for labour.

>>11249378
I'm not one to defend Bolshevism, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to argue against what I find to be a bad argument.

>>11250875
>Anthony C Sutton I forget which book
god he's so fucking based, his works need to be mainstreamed more

>>11250883
explain

>>11250683
Just because I build something for someone doesn't mean I own it, you stupid retard. We had a mutual agreement that I would build something and get paid for it. End of story and none of your business.

>>11238650
Who is "they"?

>>11251498
>Just because I build something for someone doesn't mean I own it, you stupid retard.
Yes, I know how capitalism works.
>mutually agreed
So you enjoy being a cuckold? That's fine, but most people do not and that "agreement" is only agreed upon via threat of force due to the capitalist class having seized control of all the resources.

>>11251609
How does building stuff and getting paid for it make me a "cuckold"? Do you have brain damage?
>is only agreed upon via threat of force
No it isn't, you stupid retard. If I don't want to work with you or viceversa, you can fuck right off.

>>11251609

So what, in a socialist society, everything you make is owned by the government. Every crop harvested by farmer goes to the state granary.

>>11251609
jesus why are communists so fucking stupid lmao

>>11251622
Jesus was a communist.

>>11251635
proving my point

>>11250936
You aren't forced to work for one employer unless there's a state enabled monopoly, you can just find a better job.

>>11250527

Nice projections, mathlet, but there's nothing in >>11248168 to suggest academic immaturity.

>>11251635
Yeah I’m sure he was a bloodthirsty psychopathic thief who wanted to line up and shoot people for gibs.

>>11251635
Difference was he fed people.

How do you end socialism for the rich and corporations?

>>11251735

rich and corporations already pay most of the taxes

corporate profits are taxed twice, once as corporate profit and taxed again as income tax when the profit is distributed

>>11251735

So you see corporate tax cuts are good because corporation can reinvest profit to create more jobs and economic growth, then the profits are eventually distributed to workers, management and shareholders and taxed by income tax.

>>11251693
Braindead retards who don't know how to flip the pages of a book don't belong on /sci/, at least not in theory.

>>11251755
Why are american companies given the same rights as humans?

>>11251793
why did the US taxpayer have to bale out the overleveraged banks that knew they could get away with it because the taxpayer would have to pick up the tab, even using the ill gotten funds to lobby washington to bail them out

>>11251801

Because corporations pay taxes, if an entity pays taxes, then it basically has the right of a citizen

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

>>11251609
>the capitalist class having seized control of all the resources.
but the workers taking control of the means of production won't benefit them or allow them more goods or less working hours


>>11251735
Implement free markets.
ABOLISH CENTRAL BANKING

>>11251635
>Jesus was a communist

>>11246673
This, although I'm not sure about how relevant subjective theory of value is to modern economics

>>11238499

>>11251735
How do you abolish the class system for the capitalist class? By abolishing the capitalist class.

>>11251643
You're welcome.

>>11245880
>keynesian math
keynes didn't use any math you tard

>>11246006
austrian is a joke, pure whataboutism

>>11247463
I'd tear your liver out with a corkscrew and there's nothing wrong with that.

>>11252808
not a counter argument

Economics always fail because humans are not robots. Humans are animals that crawled its ways up from Darwin's 4 billion year death pit.

>>11251793

>>11252029
The subjective theory of value is foundational to modern economics. It's why trade exists at all.

>>11241690
>labor theory of value

There's not a single mention of it in Marx's work.

>>11253018
Actually it is a mix of both. Large private capital is required for a healthy economy. And so is adequate taxation.

>>11253018
>I see, I counter a logical rationalisation of tax cuts with this m e m e

>>11253018
>muh strawman
>muh buzzword

>>11253021
A rose by any other name...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_value

Isn't there any other more modern socialist economist like Marx? It like still studying Adam Smith's theory.

>>11253027

>>11253021
Marx still distinguishes between "exchange value" and "use value", and states that the exchange value of a good is regulated by the amount of socially necessary labour time (practically just an averaged, idealised form of labour time, the cornerstone of LTV). So Although Marx didn't explicitly mention LTV, he still used many of its flawed axioms.

>>11253018
>>11253039
>muh trickle down economics meme
go here and read Sowell's brief exploration of the subject >>11244413

>>11253060
>After the 1920s tax cuts, it was not simply that investors’ incomes rose but that this was now taxable income, since the lower tax rates made it profitable for investors to get higher returns by investing outside of tax shelters.
I've got another idea: go after tax avoiders and tax havens instead of pretending the politicans' rich buddies are as untouchable in the Cayman Islands as they would be if they were storing their money in matresses on Pluto.

>>11247463
>t. shlomo shekelstein

>>11238654
>>11238657
>>11238693
>>11238873
>>11238905
>>11238934
Itt retard burgers who think communism and dialectical materialism are the same thing.

Dm is literally “the wealthy group wins”
You could survey historical events to evaluate this hypothesis. It’s not proper science but it’s certainly not the realm of untestable hypotheses like philosophy.

>>11253332
The majority of philosophy*

>>11253154
or take out the fed

>>11251666
Kek hath spoken through you, truly brother.
Praise be

>>11252880
austrian school is crackpottery and completely irrelevant, nobody takes it seriously and has no influence both academically and politically. no reason to argue with a nobody

>>11238499
I hate how /pol/ has turned this thread into a shitfest. Let me make a probably futile, yet hopefully valiant attempt at getting it back on track.

First, dialectical materialism is not the same thing as Marxism. It is a tool he devised and used, but it's only a tiny part of his corpus. Neither Marx nor Engels ever actually used the term.

Second, "scientific" does not mean "correct". I will use Popper's definition of science to mean "that which is falsifiable by way of experiments or samples of the real world" (my paraphrasing).

Third, dialectic is for Marx a *method* of understanding processes. Like diagrams or equations, it's not so much an assertion of how things are (that's historical materialism, another related subject), but an idea about how to study them. Purely a formalism. The same conclusions may be reached by any other coherent mode of analysis, and indeed some Marxist schools claim to have done so.

Thus I think, dialectical materialism is *neither* unscientific or scientific. It's ultimately isomorphic to any other materialist study of history, and thus the only questions one can actually have about it, is whether it's coherent (a conclusion generated by the method logically follows its premises), and whether it's useful (does it help us humans to derive conclusions more easily).

>>11253844
Yes the modern field has attracted a lot of crackpots and schitzos but that does not discount the model's fundamental validity. Even if it can't be used for measurable predictions.

>>11253844
What is the Chicago school?

>>11238650
>why can't you refute it
that's the point, it's not falsifiable

>>11253844
>has no influence both academically and politically
You must be getting desperate because your lies are getting easier to refute, see >>11246673

Calculation problem is a falacy because most people dont calculate anything and there's nothing rational about the outcome.

>>11254020
>(((central bankers)))
I mean Vudvig von Mises was born Jewish so I'm pretty sure he would have known

>>11253937
If it can't be used for measurable predictions, it's useless, and not science. A mathematical toy problem at best.

>>11238499
Science uses logics.
Religions use dialectics.

Economics is not a science.

>>11254041
yet it produces testable hypotheses

>>11254042
dianetics*

>>11254020
kek, this is great.

>>11254044
It happens that Marx thought aswell and called a big part of his work "Fundamentals of Political Economy Criticism", all this because he wanted to create a scientific approach to history. He didn't quite succeed but historical materialism is still relevant and the effort is commendable.

>>11253962
not austrian

>>11254013
oh yeah 19th century austrian economics was part of the marginal revolution. that's it. modern austrian is crackpottery

>>11254621
Oh, so we're playing that game again.

>>11253844
Yes, you're right, we should listen to the people that engineered the financial crises instead of the people that predicted it.

Fucking retard.

>>11253916
>it's not so much an assertion of how things are (that's historical materialism, another related subject)
Historical materialism is also pseudeoscientific garbage.

All marxism is garbage senpai

>>11254020
LOL Dude keynesian economics is based on flawed math.

The dude couldn't even do basic math right.

>>11254028
>most people dont calculate anything
Wow this is a dumb strawman.
You have no idea what the economic calculation problem even is, it doesn't mean everyone calculates everything. It means rational calculation cannot occur without a pricing system.

Marxists hate the consumer and freedom of choice, they need to be thrown from helicopters.

>>11254093
>historical materialism is still relevant
No it's not, it's complete fucking useless garbage and makes no logical sense.

>>11254624
imagine thinking only the mainstream ideologies are the ones that are correct
imagine being this fucking stupid

If you don't support Austrian economics, you're basically a bootlicker.

>>11255016
Historical materialism is simply the hypothesis that humans act according to what they believe is their self-interest, and that history is the result of these decisions. That's it. A perfectly scientific hypothesis, and almost conventional today. It believes history can be better explained by resources and power than it can be with religion and ideology, just as evolutionary theory postulates that the attributes of organisms are better explained by natural selection than the intentions of some intelligent designer. That's it. Purely scientific, and purely falsifiable.

this thread will die soon and that's a good thing

>>11255102
>Historical materialism is simply the hypothesis that humans act according to what they believe is their self-interest
uh no. That description fits many other ideologies as well.
HM claims that all human action is the result of economic forces. This isn't true whatsoever and completely ignores genetics/instincts
>That's it. A perfectly scientific hypothesis
You people are the scientific equivalent of flat earthers.
>It believes history can be better explained by resources and power
There are no laws of history, none of this is science.
>Purely scientific, and purely falsifiable.
Do you know why scientists laugh at you people?

>>11255015
many economists saw that recession coming, the amerimutt infatuation with the hands-off approach and disdain for proper regulation and gov intervention is what prevented policy makers from heeding the warnings.
austratards, on the other hand, predict total economic collapse every other year, and their mentally challenged predictions of hyperinflation and currency devaluation never materialize, because their doctrine just can't grasp the idea of liquidity preference

>>11255025
yes you're very stupid. austrian is crackpottery and irrelevant, sorry libertariantard your ideas will never have any importance in the real world nor in academia

>>11255102
so it's a way to rationalize history (kinda like the theory of evolution is a way to rationalize the diversity of life forms), neither can be used to make predictions about the future tho

>>11255350
>the amerimutt infatuation with the hands-off approach and disdain for proper regulation and gov intervention
Absolutlely incorrect.
You are a brainwashed moron.
You don't even know what central banking is.
Central banks pumped trillions into the stock and housing markets creating a bubble which popped.
Government intervention is what caused the problem.

>austratards, on the other hand, predict total economic collapse every other year
Completely wrong.

Leftist bootlickers are beyond redemption.

>>11255357
lol
>believe the people that caused the financial crises and ignore the people that correctly identified the problem
I'm glad our the elites hate our ideas.
Kill yourself bootlicker.

>>11255357
But marxism has no importance in the real world or academia.

>>11255445
>You don't even know what central banking is.
>Central banks pumped trillions into the stock and housing markets creating a bubble which popped.
oh i'm laffing. please share with us in detail what central banks do in general and what and how they pumped trillions into the housing market, or you think that pumping trillions into the housing market is the main central bank function?

>>11255449
marxism was extremely influential in the 19th and early 20th century profoundly shaping economic relations and changing the course of history. his criticism (at list some of it) of capitalism had some merit and had to be addressed. i don't know if you noticed but modern day capitalism and economic thought is much different from 19th century heyday capitalism

>>11255141
We accept that science can help explain and predict all kinds of things, including many things that only happened once, like various astronomical observations. So why are people (or at least you, specifically) so recalcitrant at considering that human history is also subject to natural laws, which can be studied and enumerated? Is it hubris? A desperate desire to cling to the notion of unlimited free will?

And including genetic impulses in a study of history does not conflict with HM, but enhances it. Resources are important because of the evolutionary drive to survive and multiply, which takes resources. As someone else put it, "All conflict boils down to two monkeys and one banana."

>>11255373
Natural selection actually can be used to make predictions, which can be either validated by further discovery, or with experiments on fast-evolving organisms like bacteria. Both have been done before.

>>11255357

>never have any importance in the real world nor in academia

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1974/hayek/facts/

>>11255759
>So why are people (or at least you, specifically) so recalcitrant at considering that human history is also subject to natural laws, which can be studied and enumerated
I am a materialist though, I don't believe in free will.
I just don't believe in marxist economic determinism because its pseudoscience garbage that denies human instincts.
Imagine being dumb enough to think marxian classes mean anything.

Dumb flat earthers.

>>11254020
>vindicated after 2007 financial collapse

>>11254028
>Calculation problem is a falacy because most people dont calculate anything
Possibly the dumbest post in this thread.

>>11254624
>>11255357
>this coming from a socialist

>>11255473
>profoundly shaping economic relations and changing the course of history
For the worse? Definitely.

>>11254020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

>>11255759
>make predictions
more like """predictions""". can the theory of evolution tell you the next form humans will take? or whether chimpanzees will evolve to be as intelligent as us?

>>11255925
>i'm a socialist
>>11255929
oh yeah workers being able to afford living in their own apartments instead of crowded slums or gaining better workplace safety standards are all terrible things

>>11255965
>oh yeah workers being able to afford living in their own apartments instead of crowded slums or gaining better workplace safety standards are all terrible things
What does that have to do with Marxism, you blithering retard? Marxism worsened living conditions, not improved them. How stupid are you?

>>11256010
right, trade union were famously inspired by the works and ideology of laissez-faire capitalism

>>11256067
Fucking retard. Increases in standards of living are fundamentally caused by the accumulation of capital (tools, factories, machines, technology, etc.), entrepreneurship and organizational capital, and natural resources. All thanks to capitalism. Bargaining is only possible after the fact, not before. Did you think these things materialized out of thin air? Read a book for once and learn where societal wealth comes from.
>laissez-faire capitalism
The more laissez-faire, the bigger the increases in living conditions. Really makes you think.

>>11256103
>libertariantard can't into market failures
maybe you should read a book or get an education

>>11256142
>literally only capable of throwing around buzzwords and posting incomplete thoughts
Elaborate, you clown. Why can't you say anything substantive? Are you out of your depth or something?

>>11255832
Do you just like watching yourself type? The question was, is the proposition that human history proceeds according to material causes, a scientific claim? This is a matter of definitions, not what you personally believe or think is objectively valid. Does item A belong in category B? Yes or no?

>>11256153
>buzzwords
so i was correct in my assessment that you should indeed get an education. does all of your econ knowledge come from reading mises.org and reason mag?
anyways i have no interest in typing out and summarizing decades of economic research, i'm just content with knowing your bs dogma has no standing in the real world and never will. i'm out, got better things to do, you can keep having fun (as i know you will) with your impotent autistic screeching here alone. have fun ;)

>>11256103
THIS

>>11256142
>>libertariantard can't into market failures
Bootlicking leftists are so fucking indoctrinated by the elites they don't understand central banking and government intervention are what cause the boom and bust cycle.

>>11256235
Seething bootlicking leftist.
I hope the US dollar collapse is fun for you sycophants.

>>11256235
>>11256235
>No response.
>Doesn't even explain what point he was trying to make (if there ever was one).
Yeah, that's what I thought.

>>11256235
>typing out and summarizing decades of economic research
research on what? do tell, you've been leaving us hanging.

>>11256235
>*tucks tail and runs away*
Bahahaha. Beautiful.

>>11256268
>>11256277
>>11256308
>gish gallop

>>11256634
>i'm out, got better things to do
>...
>ughhhhh i can't leave this thread looking like a fool
>i MUST make one more vapid post
And to this day, no argument or explanation was heard.