/lit/ - Literature

>I own a flour mill
>the mill requires 4 people to operate it
>I hire 4 people and pay them 8 shekels a week
>I sell the flour at market for 80 shekels
>32 goes to my workers, 38 goes to mill maintenance and raw materials, 10 goes to me because I incur risk by owning the mill
So according to Marx, everything that doesn’t go to my workers is “surplus value” (to my limited understanding) derived from “surplus labor”. Does this mean that Marx envisioned a system where 100% of profit goes to the laborers? If so, how does the mill continue to operate without the farmer just giving it the wheat for free? What incentive does the farmer have to give up his surplus crop if he isn’t compensated? Or would the mill workers use a portion of their profits to collectively buy the surplus wheat from the farmer? Wouldn’t this make the money that they use for this purchase “surplus value”? And wouldn’t the farmer be a capitalist because he owns the land that he grows the wheat on? Would his surplus crop be considered the product of “surplus labor/value”?

Furthermore, would the laborers seize the means of production by collectively owning the mill? If so, then what about the original owner who presumably built it? Wouldn’t they be profiting off of his labor? Would they all collectively incur the risk of ownership that the original owner did? If one worker worked harder than the others, would he be entitled to a greater percentage of the profits than his comrades under communism?

>>20417075
The Communist Manifesto

>>20144183
>The bourgeoise bourgeoised my bourgeois in my bourgeois.

the collective can oppress the minority. which is why you need a focus on the individual over the majority. for all the leftist in here, a fine example is gay sex marriage. all the states that voted, by democratic vote, to ban gay marriage. what protected the gay sex was #1, freedom of speech, #2 the system of checks and balances with the court, #3, representation. america was never a true democracy. its been a democratic republic since its birth. gay sex people were able to have people to represent them. a voice was given to the minority. the only reason why communist scream "democratic socialism / communism" because they think being able to vote for dear leader to fuck you in the ass will magically fix everything. communism / socialism / all that school of thought is just collectivist ideology.

collectivism is inherently oppressive because it puts the majority over the minority and promotes mob rule. it abolishes private property (you can live in this collective house comrade, but you don't own it, you just have permission to dwell in it, its personal property comrade, don't forget that), it promotes large centralization of rule and control, it rules by mob decree, it limits checks and balances because check and balances reduces the power of the collective, it nearly abolishes any forms of separation of powers because separation of powers reduces the power of the collective, it expands authority because the collective needs to strip people of private ownership and make sure no pesky person sells goods to ensure goods are "redistributed (under their authority of course)," etc. and then they wonder why communism / socialism always ends up so tyrannical.

no, "anarch" collective communes won't fix anything either. you are just splitting everyone up into mini states with the people living in those collectives being oppressed by the collective. and humans are tribal, humans will always end up creating some form of ruling board. there is no such thing as a "stateless" commune. its impossible. you'll just end up recreating feudalism from it. this is the reason why "real" communism can never be achieved. why the state can never be abolished. but

some people think they can reform marxism by tossing "democracy" on it. but its just used as a trojan horse in the end. so they toss it in front of their disgusting ideology to make it seem "good." see, communism isn't bad! its democratic communism! you vote for the leaders who will murder your family for owning their own farm and selling their grain they harvest instead of handing it over to the collective. with the rest tossed into the gulag system for free slave, eternal labor. but comrade, work under communism won't be the same as under capitalism! it will feel different! now dig the hole. all communism / socialism / marxism does is take a private sector monopoly and make it the de-facto authority. its like coca cola ruling your life and redistributing the goods. communism is the evil it warns about.

What is the fascist equivalent of this book? Mein Kampf sucks.

>>19178897

Marx is to Luther as Engles is to Erasmus. Repudiating some aspects of capitalism, rightfully so as Luther & Erasmus did for some aspects of Catholicism they all released a inherently destructive hysteria first within the German people and then internationally, at great cost to the civilized world.

Discuss.

Favorite work of Science-Fiction?

>>18992834
It´s literally just a madman ranting about capitalist jews for 700 pages in his apartment while his homies write it down and badly so, Marx already sound like he took meth while ranting about it. Did they smuggle meth into the country? This is just ridiculous.

I don’t see you can even be communist as an American since we are the bourgeois. We’re in charge of industrial labor. The people who makes our goods are the Chinese so does that mean that as a communist American you want the working class of China to control our entire economy? That’s kinda stupid.

Anyway, what other origin books are there are politics. Written by the creators of said beliefs. Such as the free market and capitalism, just for a different perspective

Is there historical evidence that bourgeois are Jews and it was just a big antisemetic rant on how Jews ruined the world. Also this book sucks. He literally admits in the book that the the bourgeois makes technology less skillful and difficult as society progresses. And somehow that’s bad because it means women can work now? Absolutely based

>>15332004
Only flies fly on the freshest trash OP.

>Books on self victimization
here you go, bro

>>14225802
>Has any one book BTFO a group of people more than pic related?
Yes

Read this Felix don't listen to /lit/, they cant handle it.

>>10738320
Think you meant to post

Happy Birthday!

How could he be so right, yet so wrong at the same time?

>>10685439
This is better book to use.

ITS DA BEST

Why do people like this garbage book.
It's just bitching and moaning and is like intentionally edgy and poorly written.
It reads like an edgy teen whose trying to scorn his parents.
Waaaaa my struggle
Waaa it's the capitalists fault
Waaaaa fuck everyone that's not me.