Rich man bad

Capitalism make rich man=bad

"civ" always, and without fail, CHANGES.

He couldn't replace it

Lenin and Stalin both fucked over the peasant class and the actual proletariat class was minuscule in comparison

>Capitalism make rich man=bad
No? I mean, butter, really? Inequality will exist no matter what.. :3

Marx was a neocon. He even wrote a pamphlet calling for a Jewish homeland.

>The functions performed by the capitalist are only the functions of capital itself performed with consciousness and will
How did people let him get away with shit like this while calling himself a Materialist and shitting on Stirner

Pretty sad that it’s weak enough to only take a one man job to destroy it

This is the ideal body. You may not like it, but this is what peak culture looks like.

Attached: weimar-republic-setup-and-constitution-9-638.jpg (638x479, 112K)

based and redpilled

And millions of black cocks

can marxism only work if there are enough class traitors? Working class is too retarded to actually do anything

yes it relies entirely on the backbone of people who own apple products and hang out in coffee shops.

Working class can eat its vitamins, say it's prayers, go to school, study hard, and become someone someday. Or at least it used to.

No you pit the working class against agriculture by forcing guns down the throats of the latter or attempting to collectivize them so they keep all their food at home so that the cities and industrialists get mega pissed and let the state send political bosses to the managerial positions so they can mobilize them with whatever is at the head of it, which probably doesn't have any ideas of it's own since it only cares about socializing everything together

more like a conglomerate of jewish thinkers

Marxism is a broad theory of history. I don't think it was intended to 'work' so much as it was intended to explain. Marx had his ideas on what should be done. Could they be done? Sure. Will they be done? Brother, not too likely from where we're sittin.

Money is genuinely evil. Fucking merchants using it as a middle man to power.

>Marx had his ideas on what should be done.

The problem is that he pitched those ideas not only as desirable but INEVITABLE. He had a really bizarre (but popular at the time) interpretation of history not as a record of events but as some sort of process, a machine moving according to physical laws with a single direction and an inevitable end.

In his case, he predicted that the Dickensian dystopia he saw in the 19th century was the only possible outcome of capitalism, which would deliberately and inevitably worsen and worsen conditions for its workers until things became so intolerable that a revolution would happen. And the opposite of that is what actually happened, because history is not a machine.

The whole basic idea underlying Marxism is completely wrong, and all the horrible and bloody disasters that have ensued from trying to put Marxism into practice stem from that basic wrongness.

>Money is genuinely evil.

Please propose an alternative for someone who wants to write for a living but also eat food and live inside.

Precious few farmers need a bunch of writing done.

>is a broad theory of History
It's pretty religious, Lenin was very religious about the thing and his divine right of gnosis

Non-accumulative labor vouchers.
Democracy in the workplace instead of medievalism

I am so sick of my bullshit job right now. I want to just read and write and be left to live my life

Attached: Cockshott - Towards a New Socialism.png (1147x645, 461K)

Communism

So the truth comes out butter, you just want communism because you don't like your job.

The exact same as literally 100% of all other communists (lolling @ ur life) :3

>:3
your persistent efforts have actually made me feel bad for neocaterpillar, something I didnt think would ever happen

Maybe some other time. Everyone is laughing at her, because she just admitted to not liking communism because of her... job? Ah yes, like every other communist.

You see, I take a realist stance towards economics. I believe that the government really has little to no influence in the entire matter, as far as it refrains from impacting the monetary supply, and the real woes and peaks of our economic lives come from the institutions within our society.

>Non-accumulative labor vouchers.

Awarded at what rate for what services? Will I get lots of labor vouchers if I spend weeks digging a hole in the middle of the desert, where nobody needs one? Who will decide?

How is that not money?

>I am so sick of my bullshit job right now. I want to just read and write and be left to live my life

Then improve your writing til enough people want to pay a couple bucks to read it, and there's your life.

Rich man bad me smash

Attached: CAA754F1-2829-4CA6-9902-804CF8D10C36.jpg (480x342, 20K)

>But the reason we must throw Marx out is because he pokes holes all day in the system we still labor under and threatens collective action against the few who'd rather we didn't notice.

No, the reason we throw him out is that his entire system is based of historical materialism, which is wrong. Communism is not inevitable or, it appears, even workable. Further, of course, capitalism has ended up improving the lives of the workers.

Then we can even get into the labor theory of value which is just so sadly, hilariously wrong that it breaks my heart.

Capital has spread to encompass the globe under a single market. It determines every aspect of our lives from birth to death. Its pursuit above all else threatens our continuance as a species in the biological sphere and our right to self determination in the political sphere. And its concentration in the hands of fewer and fewer people becomes more of a problem as time passes. Not wrong there.

No philosopher has gotten everything correct, yet Marx is read with this condition that because he continues this tradition, we must throw him out completely. And how many people have died under capitalism btw? Where is that number conveniently published for rapid citation?

Historical materialism is bogus, yes. Good job. No neo Dickensien nightmare land? Well, I guess that depends where you look. But the reason we must throw Marx out is because he pokes holes all day in the system we still labor under and threatens collective action to change that system. That's why Marx is dangerous.

I would have preferred to work at something constructive all this time. Though I am an artist, I would settle with just about anything, like paving streets, if it were humanely delegated to me. That is, not made to work insane hours of my life away to enrich some scumbo.

You are a clueless little turn in tank. Just so you know.

Awarded to you for work and used one time. That's not money.
>Then improve your writing
And what about all the wars for profit, and the increased pollution of water, and the continued "austerity" imposed on the lower classes?
No. Your beloved house of cards is going to crash.

>No, the reason we throw him out is that his entire system is based of historical materialism, which is wrong.
>There's no such thing as a material world

Attached: 00.jpg (400x300, 26K)

>clueless little turd in tank
Damnit

>Awarded to you for work and used one time. That's not money.

At what rate? Does a heart surgeon receive the same voucher than a ditch digger? If I spend a day digging a ditch where there's no need for one, do I get a voucher?

Who pays me my voucher?

>No. Your beloved house of cards is going to crash.

That darn wheel of history will turn sooner or later!

I am not a communist at all, but since you have given in on your sexuality a bit I'll say this:

I am not opposed to forms of socialism. Communism, as known by Marx, is an inherently atheistic ideology. As such, it rewards no thought towards spirit or the soul. And if you recall the slightly embarrassing posts today, I did have some important things to say regarding the soul.

Have you looked into Fourierism at all? Communalism? St. Simonism? Silvio Gesell?

Read from the man first hand and save me the trouble of wading through your dippy smarm
b-ok.cc/book/459851/14a866

>read from my predisposed ideology please
READ SOMETHING WRITTEN BY SOMEONE WHO IS OKAY WITH CAPITALISM OR COMPETITION PLEASE LIKE A NON-COMMUNIST OR NON-LENINIST ECONOMIST >:3 rawr

Like I said, philosophers often are wrong. It is a perspective which in this case explains historical development. You're free to reject it. I do.

But name me a philosopher who in there writings has recreated the world as it is, or human consciousness in total. Cannot be done. I think you're confusing philosophy with dogma.

Read Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell and I will

:3?
>Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell

AHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHHAAHAHA

>I think you're confusing philosophy with dogma.

Marxism is dogma. The sort of purges that typify governments based on Marxism are exactly what you'd expect of any such religion (especially one so focused on power and material life).

>It is a perspective which in this case explains historical development.

The problem is that Marx carried it forward to try to determine the future, and claimed his predictions to be based on immutable physical laws. And he's been shown to be howlingly wrong.

IMPLYING I HAVEN'T ALREADY.

Fuck off, shithead.

You haven't.

Have you read The Wealth of Nations? Keynes? Have you read Hayek?

I remember being poor and frustrated too. I was lucky enough to come across Basic Economics, and to have been intelligent enough to decide to read it with an open mind.

I'm glad that I did. It caused me to realize that, in fact, the problem in my life was not the uncaring machine of global capitalism grinding humanity into a bloody pulp in the psychopathic pursuit of stolen profit, but actually that I wasn't producing anything that was in demand enough, well-crafted enough, or unique enough for people to want to pay well for (or for a lot of people to pay a little for).

So, I started trying to write (produce) what people wanted to pay for, and to get good at it. Suddenly I was getting a lot more money, and I'm now making a comfortable living doing what I like, instead of being poor and angry while doing something I hate.

I learned that money is how society ranks the value of the goods you produce and the services you provide, based on how rare it is and how much people want it.

>across Basic Economics
You just happened to read one of the most watered down economics books known to man.

Good lord, at least go read Hayek if you're going in that direction with economics. Yeesh.

>Good lord, at least go read Hayek if you're going in that direction with economics.

We're talking to a guy who thinks money is evil and everyone should get "labor vouchers" that are totally not money

And of course falls into the usual Marxist blind spot concerning the value of ideas, but let's not traumatize him with that yet.

neocaterpillar is good

No, nor have I read Marx. I have read and heard an awful lot of economics for someone that isn't an economist.
My views on it stem from what it does to people and the world. "Free markets" enslave people. As sensible as Keynes sounds, in the even longer run we're all dead for leaving capitalism in place

Again, I look beyond economics and see that the world suffers for it.
Lets try not-capitalism for once. We'd see that it wasn't "human nature" causing the majority of it. It was the system our ancestors left us.

>So, I started trying to write (produce) what people wanted to pay for
Your art suffers.

b-ok.cc/book/459851/14a866

b-ok.cc/book/459851/14a866

b-ok.cc/book/459851/14a866

>Lets try not-capitalism for once.

That's been tried many times before capitalism and since. Feudalism sure didn't do much for the average person, and Communism was somehow even worse.

>Free markets" enslave people.

Man, I hope you never find out what non-free markets do! For example, right now, you could write a novel. I've done that! This would be difficult if the local commissar needed every available man to build a railroad across the continent. You'd be too bushed.

Friend, this is my downtime for the day before I go to bed -- I really don't have time to spend cringing at something my teenage self would've insisted I read. That me was an entitled idiot destined for a lifetime of anger and poverty because he didn't understand the basic idea of how the world worked.

Fortunately, he figured it out, and now 30-year-old boomer me is doing what he dreamed of doing.

Money is an excellent and efficient way of determining how valuable and unique your products and services are. If you are poor, I bet you that you could be replaced instantly at your job with almost no effect on how that job runs.

Gain skills if you want to provide services, or produce better things that people want, and suddenly you aren't poor any more. It is really that simple.

That's fine, don't get me wrong. It's fine. I'm not an absolutist.

You should read The Wealth of Nations, and you really should read Road to Serfdom, it's a quick read. Keynes has some good ideas, but I believe his text has some flaws.

I think that the system doesn't matter too much butterfly. You give it more importance than it really is worth. If you can, I would like you to treat me a little better also ;_; I'm talking with someone irl now so I might not respond for a sec

>Your art suffers.

No, my art was masturbation. Turns out nobody wants to pay for my wank on a page. Nobody wants to pay for yours, either.

Does this mean I don't jerk off? Of course I do! But I don't expect to get paid for it. And, I've actually grown by leaps and bounds as a writer, since I get to do it for a living now.

>Feudalism
That's money based, and statist
>non-free markets
Markets, as they are called, need regulations and protection from a state apparatus, so the term "free markets" is actually garbage. A "well regulated" market system produces a semi-satisfactory outcome. Lovely conditions in the EU, dizzying growth in China. "I hope you never find out" what a dolt.
>Muh downtime
DL it and look at it later. Hey, the guy has a youtube channel too. Watch em sometime. Very dry numbers man. A little statist for my tastes, but he explains how vouchers works.
(I prefer a shared economy, but there are too many idiots like you who would not cooperate)

>I think that the system doesn't matter too much butterfly.
You'd think wrong. The reason we have greedy sociopaths running the world is because the system rewards that kind of behavior. I don't mind self confident go-getters, but they ought not be allowed to rule us like the kings and emperors of old. This if very important.

I will make mine free (If I ever find the time to finish it up)
Money corrupts everything and art has suffered from it too.

>Lovely conditions in the EU

Haven't been reading the news much, have we?

>dizzying growth in China

This will seem even funnier next year.

Both are of course capitalist societies -- EU countries are generally capitalist with expensive welfare states, China is edging closer to a pure fascist-capitalist system every day. These are ok by you?

>That's money based, and statist

So your problem isn't with capitalism, but money.

Money isn't the problem bro -- it's just providing you with an accurate current valuation of your services to everybody else in the world. If your hope is that a different economic system would provide you more reward for such low-value services, and then extrapolate that to milions of people, you will begin to see the problem with non-market economies.

Especially since all you have to do, the literal only thing, is to think in terms of other peoples' needs when thinking about what you do to keep yourself alive. Provide more value to other people, and you'll make more money. It is a much easier thing to do than to sit around, poor and miserable, hoping that the entire world will change just to benefit you.

>I will make mine free (If I ever find the time to finish it up)
>Money corrupts everything and art has suffered from it too.

No, money just flows to things that are valuable, and value is determined by everybody else. This will never, ever change.

1. Europe was and even after austerity largely still is a lovely bunch welfare states that make the US look like the shabby hellhole it is.
But 2. it is a sliding soc-dem mess. Keynesianism only goes so far.
>This will seem even funnier next year.
>Both are of course capitalist societies
That's what I'm talking about. State centralized capitalism
>So your problem isn't with capitalism, but money.
There's no capitalism without money. Yes, at the core of it all is the phony value we place on some currency. No it is not an innocent little social tool we use to exchange goods, and without it we'll be force to go back to barter. No.
>Money isn't the problem bro
Back of the class. Go learn.

No it doesn't. What horse shit.

>You'd think wrong. The reason we have greedy sociopaths running the world is because the system rewards that kind of behavior
I think that's the nature of reality.
>. I don't mind self confident go-getters, but they ought not be allowed to rule us like the kings and emperors of old.
Okay...
>This if very important.
Yes it is, and I believe you've shown you like my personality and you've revealed your sociological stance on this situation in particular. What the hell are you doing on this site. You are so cute and so smart.

I am talking to someone very intensely about the middle east, sorry fo rhte slow reply.

>What horse shit

What's horse shit is that you don't know the basic rules of a game we're all playing, and rather than pick up a book for a couple hours, you want to change the rules for the entire world, in the hopes that you'll be more comfortable.

I hope you pick up Sowell's Basic Economics before you're too far along.

I used to be exactly like you, raging about my shit job for barely-living pay with an absolute fucking moron boss who I hated, and blaming the entire edifice of civilization for the bullshit situation I was in.

Now, I work for myself, from home, creating worlds and people and telling stories that a small but not-inconsiderable number of people enjoy enough that between Kindle, a few small publishing deals, and Patreon, my bills are paid. And I can still work on my own little projects that are just for me. And all it took was that one book and an open mind.

I hope you can experience this too. Where you are truly sucks. I've shown you the way I got out of it and I hope you take it, because my worst day writing is a thousand times better than the best day at my old job.

Also, I do like this site's interface, I just wish the userbase was a bit older :3

I cant believe im reading that post from butterfly. why is she flirting with a guy

>she
Oh no no no!

>the basic rules of a game we're all playing
Well, that's rather irrelevant. It is a GAME being played, and I am saying we need to stop. No, it is not the rules of the world. It is the rules for your dirty rotten GAME. Live in reality for once and we can make life comfortable for all, not just my creature comforts.
>I hope you pick us this coloring book before Santa finds out you've been naughty
Child, listen to me. Buying into the GAME doesn't fix anything. You're a part of the problem.

There's no flirting, ya sack of shit.

rich man set example of good things in life being slovenly leisure, intemperance and infidelity that not-rich man try hardest to emulate and attain, creating cascade of degeneracy of personal conduct, responsibility and achievement extending into all aspects of society, middle-class, or bourgeois man, epitomize degeneracy by having enough money to keep one foot on base of respectable appearances while other foot dance around in playful misbehavior as middle-class man not feel like system their responsibility, institutional religion provide comforting cushion for middle-class man to rest sinful head upon with promise of forgiveness of sin in hereafter

>Jews are a weak and destructive race
>Jews are geniuses masterminding the destruction of 'the west' (ignore that Marx was part of the western tradition for now)

That's actually a pretty good argument for communism, alienation is a pretty big part of das kapital.
Also: stop bootlicking, not liking your shitjob should be a default.

You were saying something with that comment, and I retorted by calling you cute :3 no running away

>In his case, he predicted that the Dickensian dystopia he saw in the 19th century was the only possible outcome of capitalism, which would deliberately and inevitably worsen and worsen conditions for its workers

Marx doesn't say workers conditions will only worsen. He says they may get better absolutely while still declining relatively.