/lit/ - Literature

>>17221615
probably bait, but are you at all familiar with writings from around that time? Or is this your first major foray into an early modern work?

>>17221627
Only thing I can think of is the little bit of the Federalist Papers I read and I don’t remember them being like this

I'm reading Jowett's Republic right now, and I'm not hating it or anything, but it's certainly not the most easy-going exposition. Is Wealth of Nations a more challenging of a read?

I'm reading Jowett's Republic right now, and I'm not hating it or anything, but it's certainly not the most easy-going exposition. Is Wealth of Nations a more challenging read?

>>17221615
whats it about? my /pol/ detector is being set off by the cover/title

>>17221809
>he's never heard of the wealth of nations

>>17221809
>Hes never heard of WoN
>Automatically assumes /pol/
yah, probably a bunkerzoomer.

>>17221840
that's the current state of /lit/
sad

>>17221809
pls be bait

>>17221615
based

>>17221615
Adam Smith couldn't write properly himslef so he dictated his books to an scribe who wrote it. But it's verbosity isn't unusual for the time anyway.

>>17222300
I personally enjoy it, but I could definitly see it being a slog for someone not actively apreciative of the linguistic style. Its the difference between being forced to read a textbook in gradeschool and actively wanting to read about that topic on your own time.

>>17222320
The only downsides of WoN is that it can often get unnecessarily bogged down in (then) contemporary issues such as the corn laws or mercantilism.

>>17221809

>>17221809
masha'allah you are ripe for a stoning

>>17221615
Filtered.

>>17221615
Filtered

>>17221809
I hope this isn't bait lmao

>>17221809
he is a jew and out to get your white race.

>>17221809
>/lit/ have gone so insane that they see their /pol/ boogeyman in Wealth of Nations
the absolute state

>>17223366
>scotland
Adam Smith hated Scotland.

>>17221809
Bunkercucks have ruined this board

>>17221809
Really?

recalling the slob from Chapo weeping about how evil Adam Smith was

>>17221615
>reading Anglos
Read Marx. It's comprehensible and short

>>17224797
How anyone listens to those whiny weasly faggots without triggering an onset of tinnitus or offing themselves I have no idea

>>17221615
You got filtered by the 15 straight pages of corn prices didn't you OP?

>>17221809
>whats it about? my /pol/ detector is being set off by the cover/title

>>17221615
All rightoids shoudl read this. So they would be less stupid when talking about labor theory of value, unproductive/productive labor, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, or more simple how Capitalism basically works. Because clearly, they don't know. So they cover up their ignorance with retard conspiracies, memes, or Bitchute knowledge.

>>17224966
Yes and I still pushed through until the silver shit

>>17221615
Ah, to be a stupid teenager reading something over a hundred years old for the first time in his life.

>>17223296

This isn't a valid complaint, becuase his subject absolutely required him to provide concrete examples, which he did with the historical and then-current information available to him at the time. Quite the opposite, reading about how it was an absolute bitch to import and export wool because of a law passed in the Xth year of the reign of king so-and-so is part of the charm of the read.

>>17221840
>>17221857

Nine straight months of even shittier education than usual is catching up with they young. Now, they really extra SUPER don't know anything about anything.

>>17226584
Oh look another commie that only read to the second page where smith bitches about feudal era landlords once, then decided to declare that smith hates the free market.

>>17227388
Lol, the person you replied to never implied that smith was anti free market. Commies know smith is pro free market, and that his hatred of landlords is to do with them being unproductive unlike capitalists and workers.

>>17227388
so... are you a landlord or are you a cuck?

>>17227577
>Commies know smith is pro free market, and that his hatred of landlords is to do with them being unproductive unlike capitalists and workers.

You strongly overestimate the education of the average communist.

>>17221615
>doesn't understand that ideas progress like anything else, and that new ideas need a lot of explanation, and just because we get the general principle in the modern day doesn't mean people did in the past
NGMI

>>17221809

>>17228038
I'm both

lol, it induces that of great hilarity that, by which, the lot of you were R'd by such bait. You lot of niggerlovers ought to be ashamed of your selves. /stupified

>>17221809
I don't know if you're being serious or not but either way it's hilarious

>>17226584
>Labor theory of value
>2021
The absolute state of the left

>>17230125
kek, true.
These retards never learn.

>>17230125
Exactly. Just a day ago some dude on here was saying that Marx's LTV has never been refuted

>>17230137
>>17230181
LTV supporters are the field of economics' flat-earthers

>>17230198
based

You gotta respect Smith, the dude studied several hundred years worth of price fluctuations across different nations and even accounted for minute events that might affect the information, wrote a massive treatise on it, basically invented a branch social science all on his own, all for the sake of answering ETHICAL QUESTIONS. The whole thing is just a setup so he can say "now that we have the facts, what is just". Dude BTFO's 99% of philosophers in terms of actually putting work in.