/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.12988347]

Did they get it wrong?

[Anonymous No.12988361]

No shit.

[Anonymous No.12988392]

Yes, they most certainly did.

Marxism and Marxist theory make sense, because it is a wholesome theory in reference to Marxist worldview. One must accept it, kinda like one must accept Scientology, for it to make sense.

For example, traditionalist authors like Evola and Guénon might argue that civilizations were first led by spiritual leaders and by a sacred regality and a shift occurred to civilizations led by mere warrior aristocracies; the latter were eventually replaced by the civilization of the Third Estate. The last stage is the collectivist civilization of the Fourth Estate, all of these beings degenerative in regards to the former.

While in Marxist worldview the ushering of Fourth Estate would be the greatest achievement and the lower castes have been oppressed since the dawn of time, there is no regression of the castes (and classes), because all castes must be eliminated to achieve the final victory.

[Anonymous No.12988399]

Marx was right about almost everything

[Anonymous No.12988409]

Nope they were based and centuries ahead of their time

[Anonymous No.12988421]

they didn't foresee the shitskin problem. non-whites need forced exile before we can even start thinking of everybody as equals

[Anonymous No.12988441]

One of the few economists who had their loony ideas put into practice(over and over and over), only a couple hundred million people died.

So pretty wrong

[Anonymous No.12988508]

Very lol

[Anonymous No.12988551]

>>12988508
> not reagang
one job

[YANGGANGRISEUP !x1kaKKwOVw No.12988586]

>>12988441
care to explain?

[Anonymous No.12988598]

>>12988586
I don't bother explaining things to retards. waste of time

[Anonymous No.12988656]

They basically had no idea of what they were talking about.

[Anonymous No.12989032]

>>12988392
Interesting anon thanks any other authors you'd recommend?

[Anonymous No.12989049]

iT wAsN'T REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEaL CoMuNiSm

[Anonymous No.12989135]

>>12988421
Yes he did. At the end of the 19th century there was a chinese immigration. He wrote that the aim of capitalism was to replace one Yankee worker by 3 chinese. Chinese are not technically shitskins but you get the principle of using mass immigration to dump salaries.

He also wrote that immigration was capitalism reserve army.

>>12988586
Don't bother. Those people don't have read one single page of Marx. They make their opinion after watching video on youtube or about their highschool history program. What he says is as stupid as saying that Enrico Fermi is responsible of Hiroshima. They really should shut up about things they don't know a thing about.

[Anonymous No.12989237]

>>12988347
Depends, some Marxist theories were 100% correct, but he also got a lot wrong. For example, massive financial speculation turned out to be far worse than exploitation via labor. Labor isn't exploitation at all if a far wage is paid for the work being done. Also, his theories about capitalism causing alienation were 100% correct. Marxist-Leninism ultimately turned out to being highly inefficient at organizing a market and led to stagnation in most areas.
>>12989135
The reserve army of labor is also something he got 100% correct. Right wingers don't do themselves any favors lying about Marx or the Bolsheviks.

[Anonymous No.12989490]

>>12988347
If you think Marxism is communism you’re uneducated

[Anonymous No.12989508]

>>12989490
>>>/leftypol/
>>>/reddit/

[Anonymous No.12989733]

>>12988392
>Evola
>Guenon
Stop anon, I can only become so erect. Ride that tiger /biz/.

[Anonymous No.12989768]

>>12989733
nice meme anon

[Anonymous No.12989851]

>>12989237
The other thing would be class. I'm pretty happy to see that a lot on the Right have woken up to the reality of class dynamics. What the Left misses consistently with class is that it's frequently coupled to race or some racial subgroup. Think the Brahmin caste in India, the Han in China, the aristocracy of Europe (and of course (((others)))). It also ties into why your classic "good goy" is typically a member of the petite-bourgeois class, vainly striving to reach the status of their masters (who would never accept them as they aren't part of their group) . And of course, rejecting one group of people while ignoring the traitors in your own people that emulate them (like WASP corporate trash such as Bezos) is just foolish. So really, any complete view of society needs to take more factors than just race or class into account.
Something from critical theory (ie academic Leftism) would also be the notion of "discourse", which the Right now tends to think of in memetic terms. Same basic idea though. Like any good lie, the Leftist ideologies do have certain elements of truth in them.

[Anonymous No.12989870]

>>12989768
Tone posting thread?

[Anonymous No.12989918]

>>12989237
>Labor isn't exploitation at all if a far wage is paid for the work being done.

With all due respect, you must re-read the chapters about surplus labor.

Profit is inherently made with surplus labor, which is labour performed in excess of the labour necessary to produce the means of livelihood of the worker ("necessary labour"). (wikipedia definition).

Without unpaid labor, there is no profit.

[Anonymous No.12989974]

>>12989135
>these people haven't drank poison as extensively as I have etc
Notice how Leftists always argue like women? That propertarian guy is onto something with that Gossip & Shaming theory of his. The Right likes to give specific examples of how something is out of whack and outline a specific set of actions that lead to measurable outcomes to resolve it. The Left reflexively makes appeals to social status or belittles it's opponents. It's like an overbearing & abusive mother-in-law after a few too many red wines.

[Anonymous No.12990083]

>>12989918
To an extent true. However, are you including the skill and time of the managers themselves, and the demand for their labour? And costs of equipment etc? For example, I have a number of programmers working for me - and after deducting their pay I don't make much more than they do - and the extra is due to the scaling effect since I can attempt to expand the business to bring in more profit. Now, I've been involved in attempts to do equal profit & no manager schemes in software dev (and there are working examples of that, like Valve software), but honestly, much like the hippie communes in the 60s it just doesn't work. The burden of work ends up being taken on by a few people, while others start to exploit them. Not to mention that whoever is acting as the manager is also (normally) taking on more risk and responsibility - so if it all goes wrong, they take the hit not the workers. Inevitably, some sort of meritocracy or hierarchy where harder workers and better leaders are rewarded winds up being more stable.
Of course, nothing I just said applies to "too big to fail" banks and megacorporations that buy politicians & pass laws granting virtual monopolies. What's needed is instead of singling out a single class of person (ie specifically capitalists, or governments) is a theory of parasitism in general, and focus on eradication of that.

[Anonymous No.12990897]

>>12988441
Nah it actually was around 40 billion gentiles

[Anonymous No.12990926]

They were capable of diagnosing the problems with capitalism, but mostly just came up with shitty solutions, and communist influence has largely been used as a coverup for Jews and to create bioleninism.

[Anonymous No.12990934]

>>12989851
>>12990083
yikes

[Anonymous No.12991142]

Read their dry, stuffy tomes on political economy they wrote while they were old if you're interested from a historical perspective. Don't take the Manifesto at face value, it's 2019.

They're likely responsible for as much global evil as Adam Smith; that is to say, not much, but still demonized due to attempted real-world applications done long after their deaths.

[Anonymous No.12991383]

>>12988347
The constitution provides for the common welfare. The problem is Marx and his associates were and are hypocrites, and dont practice what they preach. Marx was a terrible father who refused to work, and mooched off his friend Engels, who ran the very factories Marx so vehemently condemned.

America will NEVER be socialist.

[Anonymous No.12991466]

>>12990083
>is a theory of parasitism in general, and focus on eradication of that.

Yes i agree. During the slavery mode of production, the slaves were producing the wealth. during feudalism, the peasants were working their farmer's field, but also the field of their lord. Thus they were producing wealth for the lord. During capitalism, it is the owners of the mode of production who exploit the workers, taking the surplus labor for themselves.

People need to understand that since the neolitic revolution, some minorities, whether slaver owners, lord, or owner of the mode of production, are taking their surplus labor for themselves. Once the average joe understands that, no one would agree to work for someone else anymore.

[Anonymous No.12991547]

>>12988441
go clean your room lobster

[Anonymous No.12991850]

>>12991383
America being capitalist sounded a lot better when we weren't willingly giving up the entire US south to Mexico and cartels.

[Anonymous No.12991941]

>>12991466
Same reason I don't buy any goods or hire anyone to perform any services.

I recently learned for example that "shop owners" as they're called actually sell things for a higher price than what they themselves have paid for them. Not only that, but people like lawyers, mechanics and plumbers etc. actually charge money to do things that literally don't cost them anything to do! What the fuck!?

[Anonymous No.12992554]

>>12991941
>I recently learned for example that "shop owners" as they're called actually sell things for a higher price than what they themselves have paid for them. Not only that, but people like lawyers, mechanics and plumbers etc. actually charge money to do things that literally don't cost them anything to do! What the fuck!?

What a wonderful world you live in.