[ 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: 315 KB, 800x1013, Marx.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814364 No.13814364[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>Dude all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated
>dude same with the state, we'll make a giant global all-encompassing state which will then disappear, trust me.
>Everyone will be able to work voluntarily on anything he wants, there wont be any forced work anymore. Who's gonna do all the dirty jobs and who will organize the work? No clue desu!
>Sex will be free and anyone will be able to get sex as easily as getting a glass of water. The family will wither away as well, this will make people happier, trust me.
>WHAT THE FUCK WHY ARE YOU CALLING ME A UTOPIAN REEEEEEEE
How was he not a fucking utopian? There's nothing scientific about this.

>> No.13814456

>>13814364
>Dude all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated
How is that not scientific? Crime doesn't appear out of nowhere. It has its causes.
>dude same with the state, we'll make a giant global all-encompassing state which will then disappear, trust me.
States don't appear out of nowhere and they're not sustained by solar energy but only by constant reproduction of specific social relations.
>Everyone will be able to work voluntarily on anything he wants, there wont be any forced work anymore.
There will be compulsory labor until compulsion is no longer needed.
>Who's gonna do all the dirty jobs
Depends on the dirty job.
>and who will organize the work
Administrative organs of society.
>Sex will be free and anyone will be able to get sex as easily as getting a glass of water.
Where did Marx write about this?
>The family will wither away
Yes.
>this will make people happier
No, not in itself. Can you quote where Marx says this will happen?

>> No.13814467

>>13814456
How can you have compulsory labor without money unless there's an arm guard behind your back forcing you to work?

>> No.13814470

>>13814364
t. Person who hasn't read Marx

>> No.13814488

>>13814470
>You can only criticize this outdated 19th century ideology if you have read all of his work, as well as required Hegelian logic and numerous commentaries by later Marxists up until Lenin.
inb4 getting mad that i call Marxism an ideology, when it obviously is.

>> No.13814490

>>13814467
You can be refused access to the social product if you don't work.

>> No.13814496

>>13814456
>How is that not scientific? Crime doesn't appear out of nowhere. It has its causes.
It has its causes doesnt mean that it'll just disappear when capitalism disappears as well. That's utopian thinking. Serial killers will continue to exist, as will rapists, acts of random violence, etc.

>> No.13814507

Marxists are bound by their code that says they aren't allowed to speculate at all on what communism even will be like, even though marx did sometimes, which is why they aren't utopian according to them.

>> No.13814509

>>13814364
you haven't read a work of Marx and no one cares about your dumb beliefs.

>> No.13814512

>>13814456
>The family will wither away
>Yes.
fuck off all the communist counties were pro family

>> No.13814513

>>13814456
state as merely an instrument of class power is such a laughably crude characterization

>> No.13814515
File: 29 KB, 300x360, you_have_got_to_be_kidding.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814515

>>13814488
>don't read material
>wants to talk about material and refuse to be called out when lack of knowledge abut material shows
do you realise how retarded you sound?

>> No.13814520

>>13814496
>Serial killers will continue to exist, as will rapists, acts of random violence, etc.
Nobody says that there will literally be zero violence. Does it feel good to argue against the most retarded strawman possible? I don't see how it could feel good.

>>13814507
You can speculate, but your speculation must be based on the knowledge about how the world works and what's future is possible. It's only utopian if it's divorced from that.

>> No.13814530

I've read the communist manifesto and all three volumes of das kapital but like most books I've read I forgot most of it.
I just remember the labor theory of value and the transformation of capital into a product and how England taxed trade on India to make up for the trade deficit.

>> No.13814535

>Dude all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated
Yeah right. This won't stop pedophiles from wanting to fuck kids. This won't prevent crimes of passion. What an idiot.

>> No.13814544
File: 31 KB, 324x500, 94605a8859856d572970c12e5392cbdb-d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814544

>>13814513
Yes, it's a fucking one-liner. If you want it less crude then you can have 700 pages more.

>> No.13814545

>>13814509
Marxists always say this whenever people call them out on the fact that their entire philosophy is nothing more than a critique with no idea how to run society (because muh "not an ideal to which reality must bend, but the real movement that abolishest things") and people have also noticed that whenever Lenin did try to run a society that way, it was a massive fucking disaster. It's a very valid and very common point of criticism. It's no surprise that whenever Marx had to offer any practical alternatives, he came up with dumb shit like a voucher system that'll totally not turn into a currency.

>>13814515
Capital is mostly outdated for modern capitalism. Not entirely, but large parts of it are just relevant to a particular part of 19th century economics and nothing more. Grundrisse is more relevant.

>> No.13814547

>>13814530
The key to the gate of Marxist thought really is Hegel and dialectics, I know its a meme but it is central to building a materialist perspective and analysis on the world. Look at all the faggots in this thread who haven't read a word of Hegel or Marx, they make wild straw man claims about a Utopian communist society no-one has ever argued for and then pat themselves on the back because of how ridiculous their assertions sound.

>> No.13814554

>>13814520
>You can speculate
many Marxists refuse and call it idealist to try
>>13814544
tldr on this?

>> No.13814558

>>13814545
Marxism is a form of analysis and school of thought, not a guidebook to governance and revolution. You can critique the problems of praxis all you want, Marxists do it more than anyone else, but pointing at the voucher system and then trying to connect it to a refutation of dialectic materialism is an embarrassment.

>> No.13814574

>>13814558
>Marxism is a form of analysis and school of thought, not a guidebook to governance and revolution
Except marx did just that. Of course he failed quite hard here, as it's so much easier to just critique things than actually suggest what to do elsewhere. But even if you were to just criticizing ad infinitum, how do you think this will allow you to run a society?
>dialectical materialism
So you're a tankie, but at the same time you're trying to cover your bases by saying that Marxism is just a form of critique.

>> No.13814577

>>13814558
what the fuck do you mean it's armchair analysis and not about doing the damn revolution? is this the party line of marxian academics so they fly under the radar or something.

>> No.13814579

I'd like to read an example or examples of economic analysis from a marxist perspective.
For example, what do marxists think about the trade wars between the US and China?

>> No.13814580

>>13814545
>whenever Lenin did try to run a society that way
What way? All Lenin had time to do was institute some capitalist reforms that a typical bourgeois revolution institutes at an early stage of industrial capitalism.

>>13814545
How can a voucher that has your name on it turn into a currency?

>>13814554
Who the fuck is "many Marxists"? There's a whole lot of retards who call themselves Marxists and they together hold every possible view as well as its negation.
The ones that are correct don't refuse and call it idealism on principle just because it's a speculation, but only because it's not based on the correct understanding of real world.

>> No.13814583

>>13814580
or at least a typical bourgeois revolution in the imperialist period*

>> No.13814596

>>13814467
>without money
it's another ”I've never read Marx but let me tell you what I think" episode

>> No.13814600

>>13814574
Please point to Marx' writings on how to organise a revolution and govern a transitional state before reaching communism. Please do.

>implying the use of dialectic materialism is proper to Stalinism
this is getting dumber by the minute

>> No.13814603

>>13814580
Hurr only my strain of Marxism is THE correct undisputable scientific form of Marxism. It has accomplished nothing whatsoever, but hey. Leftcoms are almost as bad as tankies, i swear.

>> No.13814604

>>13814580
>Who the fuck is "many Marxists"?
Your comrades on this board and Engels and so on. So where's your cutting edge scientifically informed positive vision of communism then? You've all had a long time to articulate it, with massive intervening progress in all relevant sciences since Capital was published. I'm all ears.

>> No.13814606

>>13814364
your mom is pretty scientific tho

>> No.13814609

>>13814577
Well, I've actually read Marx, in contrast to you, so I can actually confidently speak on the content of his work- analysing social relations through the lens of economic interests and developments. Throughout his entire body of work, you'll barely find anything describing a communist society or the machinations of revolution, he declared it was the necessary step and the praxis aspect is what the marxist left has been arguing about ever since.

>> No.13814612

>>13814600
"dialectical materialism" was coined by Stalin IIRC, show me where Marx ever said it.

>> No.13814617

>>13814364
i know that the Marxpill of realizing that you, and eveybody you know is a whore is a hard pill to take

>In capitalist society, creative activity takes the form of commodity production, namely production of marketable goods, and the results of human activity take the form of commodities. Marketability or saleability is the universal characteristic of all practical activity and all products. The products of human activity which are necessary for survival have the form of saleable goods: they are only available in exchange for money. And money is only available in exchange for commodities. If a large number of men accept the legitimacy of these conventions, if they accept the convention that commodities are a prerequisite for money, and that money is a prerequisite for survival, then they find themselves locked into a vicious circle. Since they have no commodities, their only exit from this circle is to regard themselves, or parts of themselves, as commodities. And this is, in fact, the peculiar "solution" which men impose on themselves in the face of specific material and historical conditions. They do not exchange their bodies or parts of their bodies for money. They exchange the creative content of their lives, their practical daily activity, for money.

>As soon as men accept money as an equivalent for life, the sale of living activity becomes a condition for their physical and social survival. Life is exchanged for survival. Creation and production come to mean sold activity. A man's activity is "productive," useful to society, only when it is sold activity. And the man himself is a productive member of society only if the activities of his daily life are sold activities. As soon as people accept the terms of this exchange, daily activity takes the form of universal prostitution.

>> No.13814621

>>13814603
Reply to the correct post next time you stupid cuck.

>>13814604
>So where's your cutting edge scientifically informed positive vision of communism then?
folded into a roll, in your moms cunt

>> No.13814622

>>13814612
>The term was coined in 1887 by Joseph Dietzgen, a socialist who corresponded with Marx, during and after the failed 1848 German Revolution.[6] Casual mention of the term "dialectical materialism" is also found in the biography Frederick Engels, by philosopher Karl Kautsky,[7] written in the same year. Marx himself had talked about the "materialist conception of history", which was later referred to as "historical materialism" by Engels. Engels further explained the "materialist dialectic" in his Dialectics of Nature in 1883. Georgi Plekhanov, the father of Russian Marxism, first used the term "dialectical materialism" in 1891 in his writings on Hegel and Marx.

This is the intellectual equivalent of saying Plato never wrote the Allegory of the Cave because those are English words and he spoked ancient Greek.

>> No.13814634

OP is a whore selling his life away to an employer in exchage for a fragment of the product that he himself has made and its too much for him. OP is a bluepill faggot who want to wake up in his bed and believe what he wants to believe

>The sold creative power, or sold daily activity, takes the form of labor; labor is a historically specific form of human activity; labor is abstract activity which has only one property; it is marketable; it can be sold for a given quantity of money; labor is indifferent activity; indifferent to the particular task performed and indifferent to the particular subject to which the task is directed. Digging, printing and carving are different activities, but all three are labor in capitalist society; labor is simply "earning money." Living activity which takes the form of labor is a means to earn money. Life becomes a means of survival.

>The sale of living activity brings about another reversal. Through sale, the labor of an individual becomes the "property" of another, it is appropriated by another, it comes under the control of another. In other words, a person's activity becomes the activity of another, the activity of its owner; it becomes alien to the person who performs it. Thus one's life, the accomplishments of an individual in the world, the difference which his life makes in the life of humanity, are not only transformed into labor, a painful condition for survival; they are transformed into alien activity, activity performed by the buyer of that labor. In capitalist society, the architects, the engineers, the laborers, are not builders; the man who buys their labor is the builder; their projects, calculations and motions are alien to them; their living activity, their accomplishments, are his.

>> No.13814640

In exchange for his sold activity, the worker gets money, the conventionally accepted means of survival in capitalist society. With this money he can buy commodities, things, but he cannot buy back his activity. This reveals a peculiar "gap" in money as the "universal equivalent." A person can sell commodities for money, and he can buy the same commodities with money. He can sell his living activity for money, but he cannot buy his living activity for money.

The things the worker buys with his wages are first of all consumer goods which enable him to survive, to reproduce his labor-power so as to be able to continue selling it. And they are spectacles, objects for passive admiration. He consumes and admires the products of human activity passively. He does not exist in the world as an active agent who transforms it. But as a helpless impotent spectator he may call this state of powerless admiration "happiness," and since labor is painful, he may desire to be "happy," namely inactive, all his life (a condition similar to being born dead).

>> No.13814643

>>13814621
I did reply to the correct post.
>folded into a roll, in your moms cunt
The ideologue's final resort when he has to face that he is just perpetuating ideology.

>> No.13814653

>>13814634
>OP is a whore selling his life away to an employer in exchage for a fragment of the product that he himself has made and its too much for him. OP is a bluepill faggot who want to wake up in his bed and believe what he wants to believe
Even if that were true, it wouldn't make Marxism any more scientific. You're confusing the wants with what is, while Marxism claims (falsely) to just be a science. It's like accusing physicists who believe in the heat death of the universe to be pessimists, when the concept is entirely outside the realm of what people want.

Good for you to expose that you are, in fact, trading in ideology, and not anything scientific.

>> No.13814654

NO! NO! M-..MARX .... NO..... IT CANT BE REAL!!! IM NOT A WAGE WHORE SELLING MY LIFE AWAY TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING!!!! IM,,, IM AN entrepreneur!!! YOU HERE ME?!?!?! AAAAAAAA IM NOT A SLAVE!!!!!!!!!!!

By selling their labor, by alienating their activity, people daily reproduce the personifications of the dominant forms of activity under capitalism; they reproduce the wage-laborer and the capitalist. They do not merely reproduce the individuals physically, but socially as well; they reproduce individuals who are sellers of labor-power, and individuals who are owners of means of production; they reproduce the individuals as well as the specific activities, the sale as well as the ownership.

Every time people perform an activity they have not themselves defined and do not control, every time they pay for goods they produced with money they received in exchange for their alienated activity, every time they passively admire the products of their own activity as alien objects procured by their money, they give new life to Capital and annihilate their own lives.

he worker alienates his life in order to preserve his life. If he did not sell his living activity he could not get a wage and could not survive. However, it is not the wage that makes alienation the condition for survival. If men were collectively not disposed to sell their lives, if they were disposed to take control over their own activities, universal prostitution would not be a condition for survival. It is people's disposition to continue selling their labor, and not the things for which they sell it, that makes the alienation of living activity necessary for the preservation of life.

The living activity sold by the worker is bought by the capitalist. And it is only this living activity that breathes life into Capital and makes it "productive." The capitalist, an "owner" of raw materials and instruments of production, presents natural objects and products of other people's labor as his own "private property." But it is not the mysterious power of Capital that creates the capitalist's "private property"; living activity is what creates the "property," and the form of that activity is what keeps it "private."

>> No.13814656

>>13814643
epic, now go back to rddit

>> No.13814662
File: 123 KB, 1080x1012, Crying Soyjack.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814662

>>13814634
>>13814654
NOOOOOOOOOO IM SCIENTIFIC! MY SCIENCE WILL RULE THE WORLD. NOOOO DONT COLLAPSE, COMMUNISM, THAT'S UNSCIENTIFIC. AAAAAAAAH HUMANITY HAS FAILED MARXISM. THE UNIVERSE HAS FAILED MARXISM!

>> No.13814671

>>13814656
The only redditor here is you

>> No.13814678

Are there any decent critiques of Marxism, either left wing or right wing? I dont wanna fall into the 'human nature' trap.

>> No.13814681

>>13814671
>no u
literally rddit: the post

>> No.13814683

>>13814653
nigga fuck you "scientific" shit. you are a slave you idiot. you brush your teeth before a job interview, YOU SELL YOUR SELF! YOUR TIME! you think you need to be a scientist to know that?! who the fuck are you kidding ?!!?!?

YOU ARE A WAGEKEK, WE ALL ARE!!! WE ARE NOT FREE AND YOU CANT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT

For labor to create Capital, the value of the products of labor must be larger than the value of the labor. In other words, the labor force must produce a surplus product, a quantity of goods which it does not consume, and this surplus product must be transformed into surplus value, a form of value which is not appropriated by workers as wages, but by capitalists as profit. Furthermore, the value of the products of labor must be larger still, since living labor is not the only kind of labor materialized in them. In the production process, workers expend their own energy, but they also use up the stored labor of others as instruments, and they shape materials on which labor was previously expended.

This leads to the strange result that the value of the laborer's products and the value of his wage are different magnitudes, namely that the sum of money received by the capitalist when he sells the commodities produced by his hired laborers is different from the sum he pays the laborers. This difference is not explained by the fact that the used-up materials and tools must be paid for. If the value of the sold commodities were equal to the value of the living labor and the instruments, there would still be no room for capitalists. The fact is that the difference between the two magnitudes must be large enough to support a class of capitalists--not only the individuals, but also the specific activity that these individuals engage in, namely the purchase of labor. The difference between the total value of the products and the value of the labor spent on their production is surplus value, the seed of Capital.

In order to locate the origin of surplus value, it is necessary to examine why the value of the labor is smaller than the value of the commodities produced by it. The alienated activity of the worker transforms materials with the aid of instruments, and produces a certain quantity of commodities. However, when these commodities are sold and the used-up materials and instruments are paid for, the workers are not given the remaining value of their products as their wages; they are given less. In other words, during every working day, the workers perform a certain quantity of unpaid labor, forced labor,

>> No.13814689

>>13814622
So you actually have no vision then? Thought not.

>> No.13814694

>>13814678
Terry Eagleton's "Why Marx Was Right" looks at the most dominant arguments made against Marx from both left and right and examines their weight and validity in good faith.

>> No.13814695
File: 26 KB, 713x611, 1565976016897.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814695

>>13814683
>fuck you "scientific" shit
So there ya have it, folks. Marxism is scientific until the commie has to go to work. "Cant someone else do it"?

>> No.13814697

>>13814689
meant for >>13814621

>> No.13814701

>>13814689
great rebuttal bro

>> No.13814709

>>13814697
I have vision on your moms bare back.

>> No.13814710
File: 90 KB, 510x680, EDU_Ar6U0AE61vV.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814710

>>13814662
listen little dude. you were born into a hell world where everybody is a whore selling themselves to one another. i know its hard to accept but that where we are right now.

you and me are nothing but white plantation niggers. this is whats up. we are not our own human beings. we are whores, zeks, we wake up and we make profit to a boss, we have no future.... we're fucked!!! our generation is fucked. we need to start thinking and organizing little man...


Who am I?

I am a member of the poorest generation since those who came of age during the Great Depression. Born to the “end of history,” we watched the ecstatic growth of the Clinton years morph seamlessly into the New Normal of Bush and Obama.

We have no hope of doing better than our parents did, by almost any measure. We have inherited an economy in secular stagnation, a ruined environment on the verge of collapse, a political system created by and for the wealthy, skyrocketing inequality, and an emotionally devastating, hyper-atomized culture of pyrrhic consumption.

The most recent economic collapse has hit us the hardest. According to a study by the Pew Research Center, the median net worth of people under 35 fell 55 percent between 2005 and 2009, while those over 65 lost only a fraction as much, around 6 percent[iv]. The result is that if you calculate debt alongside income, wealth inequality is today increasingly generational. Those over 65 hold a median net worth of $170,494, an increase from 1984 of 42 percent. Meanwhile, the median net worth of those under 35 has fallen 68 percent over the same period, leaving young people today with a median worth of only $3,662[v].

Despite cultural narratives of laziness and entitlement, this differential is not due to lack of effort or education (my generation is the most educated, as well, and works some of the longest hours for the least pay). The same Pew Study notes that older white Americans have simply been the beneficiaries of good timing. They were raised in an era of cheap housing and education, massive state welfare and unprecedented economic ascent following the creative destruction of two world wars and a depression—wars and crises that they themselves didn’t have to live through.

And the jobs that older Americans hold are not being passed down to us, though their debt is. When they retire, the few remaining secure, living wage and often unionized positions will be eliminated, their components dispersed into three or four different unskilled functions performed by part-time service workers. The entirety of the job growth that has come since the “recovery” began has been in low-wage, temporary or highly precarious jobs, which exist alongside a permanently heightened unemployment rate.

>> No.13814712

>>13814364
It's obviously complete fucking nonsense, and people only believe it because it feels nice to think we could live in an utopia, while also liking the academic and cultural cred that comes from claiming to have studied Capital and subsequent marxist texts in depth.

>> No.13814721
File: 13 KB, 224x224, download (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814721

>>13814662
In the long term, this means that, after having been roundly robbed in almost every respect by our parents’ generation, our own future holds nothing more than the hope that we might be employed in two or three separate part-time, no-promotion positions in the few growth sectors, such as healthcare, where we can have the privilege of being paid minimum wage to wipe the asses of the generation that robbed us.

It is no coincidence, then, that every time we hear a fucking baby boomer explain how we’re so entitled, and how they worked summers to pay for college, we contemplate whether or not disemboweling them and selling their organs on the booming black market might be the only way to pay back our student loans.

>> No.13814724

>>13814701
>>13814709
i'm not the one fighting for a black box i'm forbidden from describing

>> No.13814727

>>13814678
in my humble opinion the problem lies on how to get people to work.
How would a bureaucracy go about measuring quality work and what would be the punishment of someone who fails.
Given that quality work is subjective it'd be hard to quantify.
Like the old soviet saying used to say "they pretend to pay us so we pretend to work.

>> No.13814748
File: 57 KB, 645x729, Bottomless.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814748

>>13814710
>>13814721
>tfw you get to fight a commie revolution
>tfw the capitalist dogs are finally replaced by the people's industrial planners (who look suspiciously like them, but hey)
>tfw now i can finally enjoy the fruits of my labour
>tfw i get convicted to slave labour in a 5 minute shock trial
>tfw get to work as a slave for 15 years in a people's gulag
>then die and get dumped in a mass grave
so this... is what true freedom feels like... whoa!

>> No.13814749

>>13814727
The soviet joke is kinda dumb once you realise production rose exponentially under the Soviet Union compared to Tsarist Russia. A lot of soviet jokes, even though I admit they are funny, seem to stem from bourgeois whining about loss of privileges, like this one comes to mind (paraphrasing)

>A girl tells her grandmother that the Communist Party promised Communism within 20 years: "We'll be able to have anything we want! Food, Items, everything!"
>"Ah! Just like under the Tsar!", the Grandmother exclaims

Meanwhile 95% of the population in Tsarist Russia was illiterate and living an essentially medieval lifestyle under the mercy of cruel nobility. These kind of quips show the true face of the jokers

>> No.13814755

>>13814749
>anyone who hated the USSR was bourgeoise
I thought the USSR was a worker's state. Where's the bouergeoisie? You're not telling me that communism just degenerates back into a capitalist hierarchy, right? That's unscientific!

>> No.13814763

>>13814727
>How would a bureaucracy go about measuring quality work
Quality control already exists.
>and what would be the punishment of someone who fails
You get taken off from the more desirable work and assigned more hours of some less desirable work. For example.

>>13814755
There was never communism in the USSR. It started as an early industrial capitalism and split up when it was a developed industrial capitalism.

>> No.13814774
File: 2.98 MB, 854x480, Gorilla finger.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814774

>>13814763
>the USSR was great, only filthy bourgies hated it
>also it's not real communism but filthy capitalism so dont use it as an argument against communism

>> No.13814781

>>13814694
I'll read it, but when im looking for critiques of Marx i would want something more critical than a book titled "why Marx was right"

>> No.13814783

>>13814763
you're just like a christian lmao

>> No.13814787

>>13814774
No, it wasn't great.

>>13814783
wow how will I ever recover

>> No.13814791

>>13814787
You wont, the USSR is fucking dead

>> No.13814793

>>13814783
>>13814787
also
>ur like reLIEgion. and this bad. because reLIEgion bad.
is this still the same reddit dude from earlier or are there two of you now?

>> No.13814798

>>13814793
Im not saying religion is bad, i just think it's very interesting how communists adopt a religion-like mentality surrounding their supposedly scientific beliefs.

>> No.13814800

>>13814793
Religion isn't bad, basing political regimes on the premise that the Second Coming is just around the corner is bad.

>> No.13814804

>>13814793
>b-but it's reddit to insult my religion
period?

>> No.13814811

>>13814755
>anyone who hated the USSR was bourgeoise
did I say that? Or did I say that a lot of classic soviet jokes seem to stem from those who missed the Tsarist Regime, i.e. those privileged enough to not have been literal serfs? Its always telling how anti-marxists feel forced to create straw man whenever one engages with them

>> No.13814812

>>13814800
>predicting future based on present and past is literally christianity

>>13814804
it's very reddit to be a fedora-tipping retard, yes

>> No.13814816

>>13814364
>>Dude all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated
This has been a well accepted belief since Plato; suffering is born of scarcity. If you just don't think scarcity can be practically eliminated then that's another matter.

>>13814535
I guess that's why the idea comes from the greeks.

>> No.13814817

>>13814781
Literally judging a book by its cover. Smart.

>> No.13814819
File: 320 KB, 1280x873, ujpc73vk2y5z.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814819

>>13814748
i dont give a shit about the USSR all i know is that whats going on in the world is UNIVERSAL PROSTITUTION. you get that right? you get that you wake up when your alarm clock rings, that you spend your time working in a dead environment glued to a screen like a fly in a glue? that some fucking boomer son of a bitch can tell you to fuck off at any moment, that the natural world is dying, that the world is in deep, deep, i mean DEEP shit, right? like, you get that shit? you understand that if everything was fine we wouldn't be seeing shit like that right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-Al3R9HmwQ

or like that, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAfxIfxu6Co

you do understand that we need to rise up or be written down in the history books as just another whore-generation that didnt do shit and lived under the boot right?

why is the police getting militarized?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zt7bl5Z_oA

WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD, NEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0gZmzqr1Mw

>> No.13814824

>>13814812
>how many memes can I put into one line

>> No.13814828

>>13814812
>it's very reddit to be a fedora-tipping retard, yes
you're bleeding just like your flag

>> No.13814840

>>13814817
Im also judging it by the fact that it's written by a Marxist and therefore obviously has a bias. Not to say that im against bias since bias is inevitable, especially in political philosophy, but i dont trust anyone to give a completely accurate and fair overview of their opponents views and arguments.

>> No.13814846

>>13814840
>but i dont trust anyone to give a completely accurate and fair overview of their opponents views and arguments.
haha wow better not read books then

>> No.13814848

>>13814816
>This has been a well accepted belief since Plato
It absolutely hasnt, the belief that man is innately non-violent or criminal is absolutely not uncontroversial, especially in light of neuroscience into psychopaths.

>> No.13814877

>>13814846
Obviously i'll read it, but it'd be retarded to have the only criticism i read to be filtered through the lens of someone who's openly pro-marxist. Especially since many Marxists are so touchy about anyone who dares to criticize him.
Like if you were to ask somoene for criticism of capitalism, and someone would recommend you a book called "why capitalism is right" by a capitalist economist, you wouldn't just stick with that either? You see how stupid that would be, right?

>> No.13814885

>>13814840
Once again, he examines the biggest arguments against Marxism in good faith and offers concise and salient rebuttals. The fact that an educated and respected political theorist like Eagleton is Marxist speaks in favour of Marxism and not against his work.

>> No.13814899

>>13814877
just admit you got exposed for being a fucking retard and falling for the title

>> No.13814903

>>13814877
Well Mises argues that socialism is unpractical because of the economic calculation problem.
He claims that lack of prices within a market causes shortages of goods.

>> No.13814913

>>13814848
>It absolutely hasnt
It absolutely has, are you the guy who doesn't read? The idea comes from the greeks, Plato specifically, who had a huge fucking impact on the creation of that bible I can tell you're holding (the guilt gives it away). Man being inherently violent has nothing to do with Plato's claim. Even in the cases like rape, there are minimally two people who each want different, mutually exclusive outcomes: at least one of the desired outcomes cannot be obtained, so there is a scarcity. Only one person is getting the loot/actuality. That's what suffering is: getting the "short end of the stick." No example of suffering without scarcity could even possibly be achieved. But if you just don't think scarcity can be practically eliminated then that's another matter. As I said.

>> No.13814914

>>13814885
>in good faith
So you claim, but why should i take your word for it? Why do you recommend that work, rather than the primary sources of those arguments? Why must everything be filtered through a pro-marxist lens? Why not just recommend Kolakowski, any liberal/capitalist economist, or any of the anarchists or feminists who criticized Marx?

>> No.13814932
File: 13 KB, 235x287, camus_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13814932

>>13814914
read it or don't man, you asked for a book that engages with critique of Marxism and I named one I've personally read and find reasonable and accessible. You don't need to take my word for it, I'm just some random asshole on the internet like you, read it and then decide

>> No.13814936

>>13814913
>man wants to rape
>woman doesnt
>man rapes anyway
>this will miraculously stop when communism is achieved
>human lust will stop to be a driving force

Also no one will ever hit another in violence anymore. Nothing will ever escalate to violence. People will no longer engage in sadism or kleptomania.
atheist btw

>> No.13814946

>>13814364
The apothesis of intellectual discussion on /lit/...

Fuck this board.

>> No.13814966

>>13814936
>>this will miraculously stop when communism is achieved
If you just don't think scarcity can be practically eliminated then that's another matter, as I've said since my first post, for the third time now, Christian.

>> No.13815002

>>13814678
Kolakowski for Marxism and dialectics, he focuses msotly on what communism 'became' but also became far more criticial of marxism as a whole.
Popper criticized Marx as unfalsifiable, but this relies on his fetish for falsifiability and Popper himself is now being moved away from even in phil of science.
Most economic criticism focuses on the LTV which has been criticized a lot by many economists. You can check Joan Robinson for it but there's really a lot of work done on this subject.
Baudrillard for a marxist criticism of Marx, Bakunin and maybe Chomsky if you want anarchist criticism. Foucault also criticized the epistemic limits of Marxism but im not too familiar with him.
Steer clear of Bertfag Russell's criticisms of Marx.
>>13814932
>Marxist enjoys a 'critique' of Marxism that is openly pro-marxist and then thinks it's stange that non-Marxists want something more critical
weird world we live in huh

>> No.13815010

>>13814467
What's the difference between what that anon said and "if you don't work you starve," which is what we have now

>> No.13815025

>>13815002
Never called it a critique, can you faggots stop with the straw men for one minute in your lives? Its so boring. I said Eagleton examines and attempts to refute critiques in good faith, which he does. Read the book or don't, its not like your opinion matters to anyone.

>> No.13815033
File: 2.89 MB, 480x480, If the scatman can do it, so can you.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815033

>>13814946
OP here, i will elaborate on my plan. You see, /lit/ is full of midwits, who are actually somewhat knowledgeable on certain topics. But if you want to ask them something, you shouldn't just ask them anything. Rather, you should take a giant shit on /lit/, and then draw these people to your shitpost like maggots to a warm pile of elephant feces. So I start my thread with half-truths and very broad simplifications, and then i dont ask my real question until halfway through, when i know there are enough people ITT who have actually somewhat read Marx. I have, in fact, only made 3 posts in this entire thread (including this one).

/lit/izens dont want to help, but they love to be right, and you have to exploit that. I do it all the time with thinkers like Hegel, Spengler, Guenon, Schmitt, Heidegger, Foucault, Wittgenstein, Adorno, etc. and i will continue to do so in the future. It's the only way to get to know anything on this shithole of a board, but it works really well.

>> No.13815053

>>13814545
How could a voucher system turn into a currency? You could reprint new vouchers every week so people have to spend them before they expire. People won't be able to start private enterprises with money that runs out next week.

>> No.13815078

>>13815033
>/lit/izens dont want to help, but they love to be right, and you have to exploit that
This is a decent generalization but not a universal truth. I've seen some (relatively) altruistic posts.

And to spitball, it's possible that these two things aren't different, under certain conceptions. Being right can be tantamount to what helping is, especially if we're using "right" in a broad enough sense to refer to making good/righteous decisions. It depends on how real you take morality to be.

>> No.13815110

>>13815033
read a book you faggot. you're not learning anything here, don't kid yourself.

>> No.13815114

>>13814763
Why don't Marxists prove that quality control can exist by people who work under the current government institutions.
Like for schools for example, how do you enforce quality control on teachers without competition.
Currently we have the no child left behind in the United States which is retarded.
Also god forbid you need a building permit those can take months.

>> No.13815120

>>13815078
Eh, it's just my experience. Spengler threads tend to be more 'helpful' than other threads, probably because he exudes a sense of pessimism that everybody nowadays has, so it creates a sense of fraternity.
But if i want to start something about Hegel, Adorno, or Schmitt, i'll get absolutely no responses if i dont start the thread in an inflammatory way. Nietzsche is perhaps the best one to start like this, because he's so misunderstood by the public at large, and even Nietzsche scholars themselves often accuse one another of completely misunderstanding him, or intruding their own views into his (Kaufmann), or trying to sanitize him for their own political views, etc.

>>13815110
People only post books if they want to prove you wrong. It's the only way i can get any decent recommendations here.

>> No.13815133

>>13815033
hear that?>>13815110
you can start with that one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B60grm56yvI

>> No.13815134

>>13815053
It's not the vouchers themselves that will become currency, but people can just use the goods they get from their vouchers as a bartering tool to trade with others, and create a parallel black market currency to circumvent the voucher system and recreate markets. It happens quite often when markets start to collapse, or when communist (state capitalist, really) economic controls monopolize everything and a black market starts to flourish. At that point anything can become a currency. In Venezuela, people now use Runescape gold instead of the official currency, for example.

>> No.13815140

>>13815114
>how do you enforce quality control on teachers without competition.
You test the students???

>>13815120
>People only post books if they want to prove you wrong. It's the only way i can get any decent recommendations here.
ok that's not wrong

>> No.13815149

>>13815134
why would they trade with others if they can use the fucking voucher directly?

>> No.13815156

>>13815140
this is what i mean when i say that quality work is subjective.
What if the teacher is actually good but the students are retarded?
Should the lucky teacher that got the non retarded students be rewarded more because of it?

>> No.13815191

>>13815156
but that's no longer a problem with communism specifically

>> No.13815242

>>13815149
Because people may produce more than they need or not enough, or they may simply want more.

>> No.13815257

>>13815191
I think it is a problem with communism.
They focus too much on society as a whole and not on the details.
Capitalism deals with incentives with a carrot and a stick.
If you're a low wage worker and you work you're rewarded with a home, with basic necessities and some toys to cope.
If you don't you're thrown in the street and you die.
Marxist should spend more time focusing on trying to recreate incentives and make current government more efficient without the market if they wish to prove that communism stands a chance.
For example every time the government needs to build something they rely on private contractors.
What do you think would happen if they hired contractors that worked for the government?
What would normally take a few months to build would take years.

>> No.13815275

>>13815257
The carrot fucking sucks tho and the stick is unjust. I'm only interested in material wealth up to a certain point.

>> No.13815311

>>13814364
>Sex will be free and anyone will be able to get sex as easily as getting a glass of water.
This is how I know communism is a jewish trick. This is an obvious attempt to get thirsty incels on their side.

>> No.13815322

>>13814364
>there was nothing scientific about this
Of course there wasn't. It was always about giving power to Jews so that they could take revenge on the goyim.

The Chinese realized this and so "reformed" Communism into just being Confucian Bureaucracy complete with the mandate of heaven, executed everyone who disagreed, and are now the only effective "Communist" country on Earth.

>> No.13815343

>>13815322
bait or just boring?

>> No.13815347

>>13815311
>>13815322
Not everything is about Jews anon

>> No.13815364

>>13814656
>i can't imagine your argument well enough to even start attacking it
>uhh... heh, ur reddit

>> No.13815367

>>13815364
It works surprisingly well, believe it or not

>> No.13815374

>>13815347
Communism is pushed by jews. It was invented by jews or jewish pawns.

>> No.13815454
File: 30 KB, 272x479, 1561172131476.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815454

>>13815374

>> No.13815463
File: 59 KB, 814x500, MV5BN2ViMmU4NDAtOTZmZi00ZGZkLWJlMjMtZGNiMWY0NjE1ZTVmL2ltYWdlL2ltYWdlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjkxMjM5Nzc@._V1_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815463

>>13815374
>hey dude. this world is confusing and strange and i dont know how to think so jews

>> No.13815465

>>13815374
*yawn*

>> No.13815488

>>13815465
>He was born at Brückengasse 664 in Trier, a town then part of the Kingdom of Prussia's Province of the Lower Rhine. Marx was ethnically Jewish.
Btw I didnt know he was jewish but predicted he was. Yawn indeed sheep.

>> No.13815512

>>13815488
how will he ever recover. you fucking exposed him dude. god damn maaaaan hes a jew da fuck is going on. like marx was a jew holy shit turn out selling your life for a wage is based

>> No.13815518

>>13815488
you are not an intelligent person. you really aren't.

>> No.13815520
File: 476 KB, 496x830, Screenshot_20190914-132042.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815520

>> No.13815541
File: 1.34 MB, 4621x2914, 1413177926209.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815541

>>13815512
>>13815518
PLEASE do your research before pretending to know things.

>> No.13815550

>>13815520
>rereading
Yeah right

>> No.13815562

>>13815488
thanks for telling me you really redpilled the fuck out of me, like here is was being a wage cuck for amazon running like a pet squirrel running between shelves having panic attacks and turns out marx a jew, holy shit if i knew this back in the day while i waggied at Starbucks drawing foam smiley faces in one time cappuccinos cups for boomers while trying to pay off my student debs and and trying not to go homeless, popping Lexapro. you really helped me here with telling me marx was a jew, dude, now everything makes sense, like, yeah, this is normal, its just the jews playing with my mind

>> No.13815582

>>13815562
refute:
>>13815541

>> No.13815615

>>13815582
>loss of religion
are you religious?
>mass immigration
because of cheap labor
>budget deficit
because of republican tax cuts
>replaces scientific method with critical theory
the scientific method is still there
I could go on but whatever, nice fox news meme chart.

>> No.13815640

>>13815582
dude! holy shit!!! like this chart.... jesus... where were you all my life... why didnt you posed this before... everything makes sense now... my one room room without a kitchen that i pay 5K for... my 70K student debt... my amazon cagiewagie job... its all clearing up for me... this shit here is paradise. capitalism is the garden of Eden while marx the jew is trying to make me eat the forbidden fruit and throw rocks at cops and shit... what the fuck is going on... fuck... anon thank you for this chart now im gonna suck my bosses cock and continue to work hard and climb the ladder, i will start a business, i will invest in the stock market after i pay all my debt, my debt are my faults, why was i not responsible for capitalism? jesus anon you wont belive what happened just right now, white brother, i lifted my self by my bootstraps so hard that i touched lord Bezoses sweet holy balls. you saved me anon!!!! MARX WAS A JEW MARX WAS JEW MARX WAS A JEW!!!!!!

>> No.13815656

>>13815640
t.ranny

>> No.13815668

>>13815640
lol
>>13815656
Not everyone who disagrees with you is a tranny. They are just a little less gullible and susceptible to conspiracy theories.

>> No.13815719

>>13815242
>Because people may produce more than they need
How is that a reason? How is the society producing more than they need suppose to lead to individuals trading, according to you?
>or not enough
If you don't have enough then you'll consume everything. Nothing will be left to trade.
>or they may simply want more
If they want more but don't get more, then there isn't anything more to get. So again, no possibility of trade.

None of this came close to answering my question.

>> No.13815725

Paul Crockshott wrote a book called towards a new socialism and has youtube videos that explain concepts of marxism pretty well.
Its kind of sad that his videos only get a few thousand views.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI01-5zhwdA

>> No.13815754

>>13815725
Paul Cockshott is a dumb retard just like all the other western "Marxists" from the generation that was in their 20s in the 1960s-70s. I don't know what happened to those people but they ended up severely mentally handicapped. It was probably Maoism or something.

>> No.13815771

>>13814512
yea but pro extended family as it should be. i.e. your clan.

>> No.13815775

>>13815025
Did you even read the post you were originally responding to?

>> No.13815796

>>13815775
yes? He said I called Eagleton's book a critique of Marx, which I didn't, because it isn't.

>> No.13815802

>>13814512
all "communist countries" were offshots of stalinism, which is closer to typical nationalism (which includes being "pro family") than to communism

>> No.13815812

>>13814512
>fuck off all the communist counties were pro family
Maybe because it wasn't communism.
The nuclear family won't wither away because Marxists are evil, it will wither away because it won't be necessary anymore.
Today without a strong family you are seriously fucked.
If tomorrow, without family, anybody can live a happy life, what's the point of having strong relationship with family? Of course it doesn't mean that people won't have privileged relationship with their father, mother and sister, it will mean that they won't depend on them in order to survive, like today.
By the way, nuclear family is already a very weakened version of the old extended family. So traditionalists are defending an already weaker version of the original family.

>> No.13815819

>>13814580
>The ones that are correct

Correct according to you. And you are wrong according to everyone else.

Yeah.

>> No.13815838

>>13815819
wow good job discovering than any person might be wrong you must be really proud of yourself now

>> No.13815865

>>13815838
The point is that you made the ''no true Scotsman fallacy''.

>There's a whole lot of retards who call themselves Marxists

They are as Marxist as the ''correct ones'', just like St. Francis was as much a Christian as King Sebastian of Portugal.

>> No.13815870

>>13814535
It will probably greatly reduce pedophilia and crimes of passion. Pedophilia in the elite are people drunk on power. On low socio professional categories, it's often people suffering from drugs and alcohol, because they have unsatisfactory living conditions.
Crimes of passion are often related to the fact that people in traditional societies tend to bind love and material assets through marriage. The jalous husband don't kill his wife because she is fucking the fitness coach. He kill his wife because he is slaving his life away, 60 hours a week, all his life, for his wife, and when she fucks someone else, he totally loose it.
In an "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" society, if your lover cheat on you, of course you won't be happy, but you won't get so angry because you didn't literally give her your whole life.

>> No.13815887

>>13815870
>The jalous husband don't kill his wife because she is fucking the fitness coach

The fact that you'd enjoy it doesn't mean other people don't get ''jalous'' and kill each other over it, you imbecile with zero knowledge of human nature.

>> No.13815910
File: 113 KB, 455x675, laughter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13815910

>>13815887
>human nature

>> No.13815950

>>13814456
>all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated

This is true. But we have to consider the following. What is a "material base" for crime? Is it only poverty and hunger? Are crimes committed only by the poor? Do rich people not commit violent crimes - - ever?

What is a material base? Consider "action" a material base? What comes before action? Thoughts and feelings, that's what. So that there are no bases for criminal action, we must also erraficate the causes for violent beliefs.

If I believe my violent behavior against you is justified by any variable, then I have a violent belief system. This is where violence begins.

Read violence as the "initiative for aggression". If someone tries to violate you, you're within the domain of your rights when you defend yourself by means of physical force.

Now, when we try to solve the woes of the world focusing only on the material conditions, we're trying to solve tuberculosis by taking cough syrup. We're not treating the root cause.

If you try to solve the material plane through the material plane all you will have is chaos.

>> No.13815961

>>13815887
If you are sane and if you live in a sane society, you don't kill someone because he/she is fucking someone else. Angry, possibly physically violent, but you don't take a knife and open her/his torso.

I didn't say it won't ever happen in a sharing society, i said it would be less likely.

Fortunately, in current Capitalism i will NEVER marry. So i'll probably never be angry enough to kill my wife in case of a divorce. Stupid traditionalists are in favor of marriage, putting young people in a possible future disaster.

>> No.13815983

>>13815887
By the way you called me a cuck, but you traditionalists are big cucks. You are cucked by exchange value, money, private property of the means of production, exploitation. delegation of power. You whole life is a gigantic cuckolding story.

>> No.13816005

>>13815865
fucking redditor spewing garbage about fallacies he overheard on the sam harris podcast
I don't believe that Jesus was the son of God and that he's coming back, but I'm as much a Christian as St. Francis because I say so.

>>13815950
just stop posting

>> No.13816216

Durkheim made a nice argument once about the impossibility to eliminate crimes in general.
On the other side, I would separate Marx's scientific work from his utopian aspirations. We all have aspirations and they're always utopian in some sense. But when writing his major work, Marx left them aside and just analyzed capitalism in a superb way. And no, the decline of the rate of profit is not the end of capitalism, but merely an explanation of its long cycles (kondratiev waves)

>> No.13816262

>>13816216
>Durkheim made a nice argument once about the impossibility to eliminate crimes in general.
FFS we never said eliminating all crimes, but greatly reducing them.
It doesn't take a genius to understand that without exchange value, most crimes won't have motives anymore.

>> No.13816277

>>13816216
>In economics, Kondratiev waves are hypothesized cycle-like phenomena in the modern world economy. It is stated that the period of a wave ranges from forty to sixty years, the cycles consist of alternating intervals of high sectoral growth and intervals of relatively slow growth
wow that sounds terrible
Where are we according to the wave?

>> No.13816365

Marxism is based on a flawed methodology, and therefore is invalid.

>> No.13816381

>>13816262
>Can't steal shit if nobody owns shit
Brilliant deduction

>>13816277
Are you retarded or do you just not pay any attention at all to current market trends?

>> No.13816412
File: 840 KB, 1200x914, 01-four-long-waves-1789-2010.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13816412

>>13816277
The end of the upcoming recession will be the end of the cycle which started in 1949.

>> No.13816414
File: 319 KB, 1263x668, ea5dc7a651fea76ffad7f64566e4d798-imagepng[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13816414

>>13816262
Fair enough.

>>13816277
In the slow growth interval. Most of the first world economies have a really low rate of growth.

>> No.13816452

>all crime will go away once the material base for it has evaporated

Imagine the absolute single digit iq points needed to believe that we can escape materialistic behavior when acting in relation to important objects is the basis for nearly all behavior, social and instinctual. things totally stop being materialistic when you take away monetary methods of portraying value sure mate

>> No.13816461

>>13816412
Long VIX then?

>> No.13816470

>>13816262
You're assuming that people commit crimes based on economic calculation. Do you have any evidence to support that claim?

>> No.13816479

>>13816412
It's a pretty stupid thing to extrapolate current or historical data into the future. There is no telling what will happen.

>> No.13816486

>>13816470
why is everyone acting like most crime is not done for money.
Yes there are a few psychopaths that like torturing kittens, that's not most people.
Look at Norway, they're socialism lite and they barely have any crime.
What a coincidence.

>> No.13816496

>>13816486
Because those 'few' people are going to give a shitload of trouble if you honestly believe that we dont need any laws or law enforcement after capitalism has been dissolved.

>> No.13816513

>>13816486
There could be other reasons for criminality. It could be a subconscious rebuke of socials norms. It could be that criminals are seeking a Hegelian recognition. It could be the realization of the Will. Why is it economic calculation and not anything else?

>> No.13816607

>>13815541
the Frankfurt school were all literally CIA agents. I don't know why anyone thinks they are supposed to be subversive. Why does nobody point out that the CIA were hiring literal kikes in order to destroy western civilization, I thought they were supposed to be white and therefore based and redpilled bros!??!?

>> No.13816705

>>13814488
Marx calls it all an ideology. You merely suffer from a false ideology sir.
Ideology is not a nasty word. The ideology that claims to have no ideology is Neo-liberalism

>> No.13816741

>>13816496
Communists don't oppose laws or law enforcement on principle, and they affirm that compulsion will be necessary in a lower stage of communism.
Maybe you mistook this for a thread about anarchism, but then it clearly has a picture of Marx in the OP, who was a communist and an opponent of anarchism.

>>13816513
>seeking Hegelian recognition
Sounds like an idealist name for an expression of alienation. Call us back when this still causes problems after private property has been abolished.

>> No.13816786

>>13814456
>How is that not scientific? Crime doesn't appear out of nowhere. It has its causes.

This so much this i they are called niggers

>> No.13816787

Karl Marx made a prediction based on his economic model.
That capitalism would collapse.
and it didnt.
Why is that?

>> No.13816809

>>13816787
I don't think you understand the concept of time very well.
Why is that?

>> No.13816816

>>13814579
>marxists
>economics

>> No.13816854

>>13814579
>For example, what do marxists think about the trade wars between the US and China?
They don't. Economic competition between state capitalist trusts is an old phenomenon. There's nothing new or interesting about this instance of it.

>> No.13817016

>>13816741
If the abolition of private property (whatever the fuck that means) would drastically reduce criminality, that means criminality is spawned from a rational economic decision. But is criminality really economic?

>> No.13817052

>that means criminality is spawned from a rational economic decision
No, it doesn't mean that.
>But is criminality really economic?
Yes, it largely is. "Economic" here of course doesn't mean the vulgar "whether some particular individual is poor or rich" (although even that plays a relatively large role), but instead encompasses the very basic socioeconomic organization of society (e.g. private property, division between city and country, etc.) and all which springs from it.

>> No.13817055

Come up with a new theory fellas communism is silly, what does the communist society even look like to you? Marx said it would be fishing in the morning and literary criticism in the evening. Is that a goal worth committing your lives to?

Come up with new ideas rather than abasing yourself before Marx's, yours might actually amount to something more than a pile of corpses.

>> No.13817057

>>13817052
for >>13817016

>> No.13817064

>>13817055
>Is that a goal worth committing your lives to?
yes, sounds based

>> No.13817237

>>13817052
can you support that claim with evidence?

>> No.13817257

>>13817064
That's totally achievable in our current system

>> No.13817293
File: 800 KB, 255x200, fried chicken black guy dance.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13817293

>every single implementation of communism has been a total failure
>people still support communism
people only want communism for free stuff
change my mind