Redpill me on Marxism. They were the good guys all along werent they?

>anti-american
Based af. I'm Marxist now.

Whats the worker really supposed to own in a mostly service economy? His computer? The programs?

respectable bait

you dumb fucking nigger, Marx actually MOCKED the "property is theft" bullshit as unscientific and self-refuting

"Organizational Capital"

It is hated by Peterson, retarded Americans, and christcucks so it must be a great school of thought

I assume the real estate + legal frameworks (licensure, legal corporate entity, etc.) + other req’d overhead (computers, software, etc.) needed to provide such services, but then again nothing is stopping the service laborer from doing all of this in the current system via 1099 or LLC. Marxists, in my humble opinion, simply want reward with minimized risk—or more specifically societally shared risk, but that brings way too many attached inseparable problems along with it.

see

Maybe im stupid but I still dont really get what Im "Owning" in most those situations. Why would licsensing even really matter anymore? Isnt this mostly a capitialist construct? Would everyone somehow own "micorsoft word" its a noce sentiment but what does it really mean or entail? Things like profit arent really in the picture anymore.

States are for cucks.

Attached: 1525501225.jpg (492x277, 21K)

Well as far as licensure, I was talking about the license you need from the state to provide a service. Want to cut hair? You need a license from the state. Want to prepare meals? You need a license. Give back rubs? License. This is a good thing because it protects customers. I still have to think about how to respond to the Microsoft Word question.

A lot of that just seems like academic credintialism or could be in any case, since there shouldnt been an "official" state or whatever.

thats an extremist cult on the same level as ISIS

>be stateless confederation of communes or whatever
>get mercilessly steamrolled by any state whatsoever that wants your shit

Is christian socialism viable?

Any sentiments at all for the conditions of your fellow man and wanting to seriously consider and analyze the system that subjugates them will lead you down their road.

>capitalism is the cancer killing culture
how? capitalism just means a system where people can have and exchange property. how does it force people to destroy so-called culture? nohow. and what’s bad with 1%? society benefits from their capital and life quality in general still increases. thats just a number which makes people emotional

So non-Marxist leftists don't really care about people? This sounds like the nonsense of an absolute ideologue.

>just means a system where people can have and exchange property.
If only. What are commodification and consumerism and global homogenization? They are necessary outcomes of the dominant economic system. They are also primary drivers of the race to the bottom of cultural objects.

Those are all important and inevitable aspects of marxism too, you just want them to happen /yourway/

It was tried in Spain and Portugal, it failed and got replaced by successful neoliberalism.

I am not a Marxist. I am pretty radically right wing.

please name times when culture was “better”

This

>be socialist state
>get mercilessly steamrolled by any capitalistic state

Yeah it is almost like that which is fittest to expand and exist actually does so.

>capitalism just means a system where people can have and exchange property
That's literally every system.
When people speak of capitalism they mean an industrial system where the majority of people subside by directly selling their labor for wages.

How does this destroy culture?
In order to raise profitability, the division of labor is intensified. Where once there was one skilled craftman making an entire object by himself from beginning to end, there are now many unskilled laborers who each contribute only a tiny portion to the overall commodity. By forcing people to do de-skilled labor as dictated by their superiors, the system stifles individual creativity at the point of production, which, in pre-Capitalist eras, used to be a central avenue of cultural expression (think pottery paintings).
Moreover, because the laborers are being unnaturally forced to work long regimented hours, they are left tired and feeling drained at the end of every workday. This means that many simply don't have the energy, mental or physical, to create in their after-work hours. It also means they are unlikely to try and appreciate more difficult works of art: Because their time is valuable (Capitalism commodities time itself), they cannot waste it or precious mental effort on anything challenging, they must use their leisure time for activities that mentally recuperate them in preparation for the next day of labor. This means digestible, repetitive and simplistic works, like superhero films, reality TV and "chill" songs.
The act of creation is thus relegated to tiny fraction of a population, where their creativity is being directed towards profit-seeking rather than self-expression. This means creating reproducible mass media commodities that satisfy the "tastes" of the public, which, for reasons stated before, are bland, simple and unoffensive. The end result is an endless gush of disposable cultural trash, designed to sedate rather than engage. This flood buries beneath it genuine cultural expression, which is only allowed to exist in the shrinking uncommodified spaces of society (e.g. Yea Forums posts, graffiti, artisan shit, subcultural communities, etc.)

Attached: 1376776306862.jpg (1600x1200, 954K)

>subside
subsist*

>usury as theft

Attached: 1516997539553.png (645x729, 93K)

Here's the redpill: You won't receive any constructive concept of "actual marxism" from marxists Because They're busy constantly moving the goalposts and redefining what marxism is saying so that it'll never be "disproved".
If You say that You read the manifesto and It's self refuting bullshit they'll say
>no shit lol It was written to convince pleb idiots to start the revolution!
If You point things in The Capital that don't add up?
>lol who reads the Capital anyway It's just philosophical busywork
If You say that the strassburgs were a mass of malignant cultural subversives?
>lol nah the alt right actually would agree with all They said If they read them lol
In short: marxists are either retarded or disingenuous. Don't talk to them.

>I just LOVE being fucked by jews

>litteraly something the whole of humanity agreed on for most of history and probably pre-history
>I'll answer with a brainlet wojack

Attached: IMG_5989.jpg (600x867, 116K)

you're right, it's not theft, it's extortion

Marxism? A conspiracy made by the super rich which benefits the super rich and serves the super rich
It was the League of the Just who made Marx the public image, he didn't create anything

thats very poor analysis. try to read real economic theory

Redpill yourself

Attached: 601d811b13562eaf431160088d201441.jpg (514x800, 86K)

I did. What was I supposed to find in there? How a shift in the investment curve creates a raise in interest rates?

adornopilled

Let's hear a better one stinky

C A P I T A L I S S E N T I E N T

retard

Gorgeous

it's awful bait. peterson tier,

Capitalism isn't bad, its just that we lost the reigns to it and it doesn't serve humanity any more. Each new major philosopher is a progression toward truth

youtube.com/watch?v=M-m_7G31yh4

Yes, we live in a clown world more than most folks know, especially the pseudo redpilled.

Attached: 1021F0AF-4872-4295-883B-F342767DE232.jpg (259x385, 18K)

What do you Yea Forumserati think of cuck philosophy? For me, he is okay I guess.

Good bait is not an intelligent response or something any decent person agrees with. It is patently false information presented in earnest to get a rise out of pedants and ideologues.

I am not familiar with this book, how does it relate to Lukács?

My Union of Egoists is stronger than any state's military, lad.

Attached: 1525501233.png (500x572, 287K)

>no Althusser
dropped

Are marxist views really popular in first world countries? I live in a post-communist country and here are still a lot of boomers and young brain-dead marxists who express ummm… doubtful anti-capitalist opinions. And when i visit popular western web resources i often read the same shit but in English. That's scary

Go to Cuba and decide for yourself.

This, don't trouble yourself with trying to argue with people on the internet, read Capital and watch Harvey's lectures.

It doesn't take a smart person to realize how a profit based society isn't the best for the majority of people. Look at /pol/, most of them are complaining about a lot of similar things with just as retarded of solutions as a lot of the left

Yes, but it's more like an Americanized derivative of Marxism than Orthodox Marxism.

Yes. Unironically capitalists are what we'd consider "bad guys." Sociopathic shits that would be driven out of early society or beaten by the community.

There is literally nothing wrong with society. Most people complaining are just poor people with bad life planning skills

>it's certain people that are the problem! not the mentality that allows it to happen in the first place

Attached: 2346457.png (478x540, 35K)

It's both. Capitalists and capitalist cucks alike deserve death.

and who is sociopathic shit after that?

Very nice b8

Wouldn't Marxist thought say that "good" is just a concept that reinforces class society?

No one.

captialism sucks but it’s the best system we got. communists are myopic brainlets with gender dysphoria

GDP capitalism is for fags since it doesn’t matter if you have a great GDP if everyone is suffering and unemployed by Amazon robots. Communism is ten times worse though. Reading about living conditions in China, USSR and even Cuba which was comparably better off and I cannot fathom how anyone would want to live like an insect. The worst aspect of western capitalism is soul crushing alienation and the worst aspect of Marxism is starvation and purging.

t. Non-American studying at UNC chapel hill

1000 genders is at the fault of neoliberal capitalism. real marxists think that it is a distraction.

Life in capitalist America isn’t actually that bad. They live in unprecedented prosperity compared to the second and third worlds. They have jobs, protections against harmful chemicals and labour protections. 99% of the bad hurt fee-fees that American leftists complain about is a result sweeping boredom and rampant consumerist individualism created by obnoxious marketing in the 90s and late 80s that causes cognitive dysphoria. Don’t get me wrong it’d be better with an NHS like ours but it’s not that bad. Americans are just sore winners. They won and now don’t know what to do anymore so they’ve fallen back on phantom enemies and their tribal identities

Google “Black Excellence” on twitter and one quickly realises that none of these current progressive movements are a result of lack of access to material wealth but instead just wanting people to give you positive attention for being black or a homosexual. For literally just existing These fags need to get a life is basically what I’m saying.

Communism is transhumanism 1.0. To quote Trotsky:

Man will make it his purpose to master his own feelings, to raise his instincts to the heights of consciousness, to make them transparent, to extend the wires of his will into hidden recesses, and thereby to raise himself to a new plane, to create a higher social biologic type, or, if you please, a superman.

It is difficult to predict the extent of self-government which the man of the future may reach or the heights to which he may carry his technique. Social construction and psycho-physical self-education will become two aspects of one and the same process. All the arts – literature, drama, painting, music and architecture will lend this process beautiful form. More correctly, the shell in which the cultural construction and self-education of Communist man will be enclosed, will develop all the vital elements of contemporary art to the highest point. Man will become immeasurably stronger, wiser and subtler; his body will become more harmonized, his movements more rhythmic, his voice more musical. The forms of life will become dynamically dramatic. The average human type will rise to the heights of an Aristotle, a Goethe, or a Marx. And above this ridge new peaks will rise.

Real marxists know a hole is a hole.

Aaaaah, we should've listened to Bakunin. He's like so epic and hates the state and the Jews. Like damn why am I not in my anarchist wonderland where we're just all haaaapyy ;____;

>>What do you Yea Forumserati think of cuck philosophy? For me, he is okay I guess.
He's much more tolerable and interesting than the majority of lefttub that I've seen
Contrapoints
Philosophy Tube
HBomberguy
Shaun
Peter Coffin

>redpill me on Marxism
it's a steaming turd made by people who hate the west?

Its part of the West

same way that cancer is part of the human body

>internet Marxists and internet anti-Marxists are impossible to extract useful information out of.
The first step on the path of autodidacticism. The hoi /pol/lit/ are for experimentation, not socialization.

>The hoi /pol/lit/
lol

>HBomberguy
This guy is a furry and a former goon IIRC.

>it's a good thing 8 dudes own as much as 3.5 billion, just don't question it

Attached: bezos cannibalism.jpg (750x500, 53K)

Can you expand on the particulars on why you think Marxism is negative?

Bezos should unironically have his lumpy head bashed in by a brick.

He's a leftist, same with Elon Musk.

You're talking like they are hoarding material wealth and keeping it under their house or something...
Most of their net worth is literally numbers on a piece of paper in the form of stocks i.e. a percentage of shares they hold in the COMPANIES THEY BUILT...

But don't you know? Marxists are useful idiots for the capitalist elite.
It's been eviscerated so many times. You're attracted to the optics of hip, cynical (but really not so cynical) academics.

Marxists have explained why the proletariate adopted bourgeoisie mentality

ok so what, can you retards just start a new nazi party and shove "leftist" capitalists into concentration camps then? you're all third positionists until it's time to face the capitalist question, then suddenly it's reagan tier boomerisms and "b-b-b-but m-muh economy"

who gives a SHIT about the economy

>who gives a SHIT about the economy
I like to burn trash for warmth as well.

Attached: trashcan_bonfire.png (350x364, 153K)

Yeah yeah the Oxfam stat is misleading, if they cashed out it would be less. Still, such massive wealth disparity is a real problem unless you're a sociopath or a moron.

He isn’t leftist.

Let me amend my doppelgänger’s remark.
Who gives a shit about THIS economy.
This economy where more and more people are keeping warm by trash cans right now

This.
>Marxists are useful idiots for the capitalist elite.
Implying the Fascists weren't. Enjoy the long knives.

You still don't get it. It's not real wealth except on an abstract level. They cannot cash it or outspend everyone else in a meaningful way... It might bother you to hear this but once you realize it you are golden: nobody is entitled to anything. They hold shares in the companies THEY built. Those companies are successful because the product is in high demand. Think how much our world is better because of Microsoft. How Windows helps hundreds of millions of people start and run their business, pursue research, and make their own money.
Bill Gates has retired and most of his money is going to philanthropy and said that he will donate all of his net worth to charities after he dies, only giving his children enough to not struggle. Warren Buffett said he will do the same. You do not need to confiscate and re-distribute their "wealth" because once you do that even the dollar will be worthless...

Then you will see how much of a real problem this "disparity" is, once it transforms to those that have, and those that have less, to those who have guns and armies, and those who are weak and few.

>Who gives a shit about THIS economy.
>This economy where more and more people are keeping warm by trash cans right now
Ok what's your proposition... we should all burn trash for warmth because we can't take care of people who burn trash for warmth
I think even if you remove the trip it will be easy to track your stupidity on this board

>Hans is off the street no longer burning marks to stay warm, he is fit, healthy, and well-fed. Instead of a hostile dog-eats-dog degeneratr wasteland, he has found a community.
>parasites are gone, and the nation is improving its standard of living
>"nuh uh but Krupp, Pfizer, and Mercedes exist and have executives that are beholden to the Nazi Party which has the consent of the people!"

it's almost like this autism over exploitation and economic systems was just counter-productive and inhibited action so the SA had to be liquidated.

I've only read parts of volume 1 of capital as part of an assigned reading for Uni, but I've heard that Das Kapital doesn't contain some important elements of Marxist thought like his views on Materialism and his idea of alienation. Is that accurate?

> this is considered good bait
Was there ever a time where we would scoff at the idea of anyone on Yea Forums could think something like this with even a shred of sincerity?

Alienation may or may not be part of marxism, see young / mature Marx hypothesis. Marx isn’t a materialist. At times he is a historical materialist.

>financed by international bankers
>has a rothschild and lets him go in exchange for shekels
third position is a dishonest recruitment tool to siphon off socialists. you have no real intention of toppling capitalism, at best you're edgy social democrats minus the democracy.

would also add that it improved the integrity of the Powers that Be in Germany
>no one is too safe or cushy in their position. Not heads of industry, police chiefs, not even the head of the SA himself.
and still then, the approximate death toll was 85. Peanuts by the numbers put up by commie purges. And most Germans were actually quite happy about it.

>Nazis beheld to the international power bankers
now you're the tinfoil hat

If no one is entitled to anything then the entrepreneurs and their children aren't either, so can the moralism.
If it all comes down to what's socially beneficial there's no reason why the incentive structure should be unlimited, and massive wealth inequality has well documented corrosive effects in spite of the admittedly noble philanthropy of some.
Further, inequality has historically resulted in violent levelling upheavals. The elite are anticipating this and so that's why freedom is being attacked from useful idiots on both the left and right. China demonstrates the idea that capitalism ensures freedom is a lie.

It's true, look into it. They got a lot of help from Wall Street at least in the beginning.

>visit Yea Forums to find some cool books
>find out it's a bunch of crying cultural marxists
was this board always this cucked or did reddit raid it?

Attached: quote-communism-doesn-t-work-because-people-like-to-own-stuff-frank-zappa-32-43-57.jpg (850x400, 60K)

>your stupidity
You’re the one trying to cram words into my mouth.
My proposition is fairly well know, but share if you’re interested.

Democracy in the workplace and a non accumulative currency.
Tall orders, I am aware.

>State capitalism doesn’t work because people like to own stuff
Fixed

A ‘non accumulative currency’ ?

I am all for limiting inheritance or outright getting rid of it all together, but the point of your life should be to work hard and build capital should it not, qt? :3

No

Why not? :3

thats very idealistic, but this hippie worldview will always be at the mercy of capital, both local and international. best you can do is move to cuba so its only international.

otherwise there is literally no chance of success and nothing to do but virtue signal about it

You’re a moron. Like one of those serf-tards claiming the church and sovereign shall rule for-ever after, amen.

We either go through with another change or we die out. Moving to Cuba isn’t an answer. Ho-geez, have you even been paying attention? You don’t believe the climate is being fucked with, do you?

It wasn't always this bad, most came here from the Zizek vs Peterson debate

>We either go through with another change or we die out.
The change butterfly is always some other minority becoming the elite oppressor. Every single time. The change is never 'and then oppression goes away and equality happens'

The fuck are you newfags talking about?

Attached: be948e6647265f79e5151fdeccf53fe4.jpg (635x826, 49K)

>They were the good guys all along werent they?
>good
whew lad

Attached: 4f26637ee6428891.png (839x590, 751K)

So why aren't you learning Mandarin?

No. We're going to have to buck that trend you see. It's a big change that's needed. It's not impossible, but you and your mindset help strangle us.
You must be pleased to know this.

Attached: 1463766687894.png (521x548, 675K)

Shocking argument. Wow.

Attached: Xtreme let down.jpg (440x722, 56K)

I am an irrelevant faggot it doesn't matter what I think or do, Im just being realistic about how history and power structures work.

You're mine. :3 NOW PUT ON YOUR COLLAR

Individually, we're irrelevant. But collectives aren't anything without individuals.
You're not being realistic, you're being pessimistic

Marxism had more of a shelf life than lots of similar socialist ideologies of its ilk for reason's that are still historically mysterious, but mostly have to do with the level of depth Marx himself invested into his research.

He is remembered for the communist manifesto, but that was a tiny fraction of his actual output, much of which is so dull and technical nine tenths of the modern readership would go into shock based on how boring they find it. Do you really want to read about the price of wheat in Belgium was in 1796? Or some other extremely dry factoid?

That's what most people don't understand about Marx. He didn't just conjure his claims from nothing, even though most of his followers treat him as if he were a magician.

He's similar to Darwin, but far more controversial and far less scientific. Marx claimed he had discovered a science of history that derived a scientific theory of economics. Except these claims are not testable, which fails the first condition of science methodology.

For whatever reasons of contingency Marx was turned into a posthumous deity and his likeness inflated to an almost ironic christlike factor, the beaded man in the portrait on the wall who saved us all. Yet at the same time, according to the suggestions of this man, or those purported to him by his interpreters, resulted in millions of people's lives being tossed around like atoms in brownian motion, tossed away like test specimens, relocated like basic resources, dissolved as if a substance of a chemistry set.

>You're not being realistic, you're being pessimistic
Every recorded society shows a small elite oppressing a majority. I am being realistic.

Butterfly, do you own a collar with my name on it or not? Be honest. :3

Funny how Communists championed atheists but see Marx as a prophet accept communist dogma, have their share of saints, martyrs, demons. They look at the Revolution the way Christians look at the Second Coming
I mean they literally think communism is heaven on earth

We can talk all day about whether it was theft or not but that argument never leaves the realm of semantics. What you need to understand is that ownership itself is such a stupid fucking concept when taken as an actual, ontic property of things (EX:That house *is* something I *own*.). As the kids call it, it's a spook. You (and others) give it power. But that isn't a particularly deep observation, what are the implications of it,however? It means that theft, too, is a spook. And you may say, "fuck that reductionary bullshit." You still believe theft is real. This would make ownership real as well. But, why then, do the workers explicitly have to own it (capital)? That's when you realize that there is nothing scientific or sensical about Marxism. Your reasoning for believing that produced value belongs to the workers is nested deeply within a larger framework related to fairness and such, one that is probably shared with most unconscious capitalists desu. It simply expresses itself through your ideology while somehow making the original wellspring (the framework) less potent. Things are no longer right (to you) because they are right, but rather because Marxism passed it on to you. At the end of the day it's just another ideology that decides that "this way" is somehow "the way" and there is no other. You and a select few are clued in but all of us "retards" are just lumpen scum. "Oh but its so much more efficient than capitalism". So is fascism and integralism, but they are in a similar boat. Just preferences formed by a neurotic interest in politics which isn't possessed by you but actually possesses you. I guess what I'm getting at is that you should come clean and say you like Marxism because (among other reasons likely unrelated to politics) it just leads to better outcomes for you and people you care about. However, please don't come post on this board acting as if Marxism is some math problem you've figured out and now believe will save the world. There are no relevant universals to your beliefs. Your willful ignorance of other ideologies is childish. You haven't even moved on from value theory into big boy stuff. Just stop kid. Being a Marxist in 2019 is like being an emo kid in 2019.

Attached: 1541515457447.jpg (500x715, 103K)

>Every recorded society
How narrow

Attached: Cra Magnon girl.jpg (1085x1646, 427K)

Butterfly just give in already. You've masturbated to me :3

Regardless of your reception to this post: thank you for not making a comment in that other thread. You know the one ;3

you can at least give credit to many modern Christians who consider their spiritual beliefs as something they arrived at through an "irrational" process quite unlike the scientific method.

Communists have more blind faith than most Christians and Buddhists do in what fat bearded German Jew guy said based on an early 19th century scientific paradigm. And without the former belief systems' beauty or hope of transcendence. Man is reduced to a pointless eating, shitting utilitarian unit in their utopia.

>many modern Christians who consider their spiritual beliefs as something they arrived at through an "irrational" process
It is necessarily irrational

Sure! But my point was so is Marxism.

I agree. I'm the one who posted

An echo chamber accusing others of an echo chamber. How Lacanian.

>Man is reduced to a pointless eating, shitting utilitarian unit in their utopia.
Isn't that what we have now? Liberals have blind faith too desu, that and arrogance.
And this is inaccurate. See We'd all become Renaissance man and beyond. It's the original transhumanism.

>ahem
>but have you met my other debunked psuedoscientist whose works I dress myself up in because I'm a worthless pseud?
Some would say communism is distinguished by its utopian nature versus classical liberalism (sidebar: who said I was one? speculating? convenient boogeyman?) which perpetually recreates itself in (theoretically) "more perfect" iterations via the shifting preferences and demands of democracy. Of course it's slow and ineffective but there are worse trash fires (every attempt at communism).

For that, ("dealing with the world as it is and not as it [supposedly] ought to be") it deserves credit for building itself on more stable philosophical footing than communism. Which is utopian.

Proposing transhumanism as a new end for communism from a Trotsky quote is fun, but even if that were so, the ideology known as communism is far from being the path of least resistance to that. Today its proponents deny basic biological facts that have emerged since Capital was published and Trotsky's death. And no, recent experiments by the Chinese don't count.

democracy doesn't actually exist today so you're peddling garbage

And yet even a facsimile of a proper democracy which may be our current state of affairs, sad as it is, is better than communism. Or more accurately: "worthless misguided turds who who will inevitably create a giant trash fire using an ideology with gaping holes in its logic, only for subsequent generations to rescind and distort every bit of its original ideology then regress into a more barbaric form of rule to maintain order" ala the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba.

the US is far more barbaric than any """communist""" state in history

Ha! Lefties actually believe this. They don't know history. Gulags, Chernobyl, planned famines, and the Khmer Rouge make the cruelty of Vietnam and slavery look amateurish by comparison.

It's an imminent, lived in fact that it's the lesser of two evils for the inhabitants of the former Eastern Bloc. Maybe get your head out of your ass and actually look at what people are saying, feeling, thinking, and doing for once.

or better yet just defect to China.

>this'll show 'em!
oh queer butterfly, you make me laugh

I'm not saying proto-transhumanism is a new end but that it was there from the start in Marx

Not me.
The angle I would take on this fake is that the state or private capitalism, or any iteration in between, can’t be excused from their atrocious records. The US/western capitalism (no, you cannot have a functioning democracy under a bribery supporting system such as capitalism) does indeed have a higher death toll (and promises to finish us all off in the generation or two) but only because it’s more successful, more powerful! Grin, your team is “winning”. The trophy is a pile of bones.

>But I will excuse "failed" iterations of communism

"Phony" is being an effete cigarette puffing Hugo Chavez-hand shaking academic who preaches a revolutionary ideology to halfwits. No one with half a brain who is also willing to soak their hands in blood for the New Jerusalem, a thousand year reich, a utopia - whatever - and bring out a green future, a transhumanist future, a world free from the current Powers that Be, is appealed to Marxism. There's no bite in it's outmoded ideology or the naive cockroaches still preaching it.

Is it any wonder that the Powers that Be find Marxists so non-threatening that its academics are, ironically, often funded by the state? If anyones in an opiate haze waiting on the sidelines, exploiting their brothers, and lying down like dogs it's them.

We should make it illegal to talk about Marxism without reading the critique of the Gotha programme

Attached: IMG_20190425_120124.jpg (321x468, 38K)

very valid moral denunciation of capitalist imperialism. but theres a reason the ussr practiced communist imperialism. your commie hippie utopia is stagnation, and short of marx's global revolution, you will always be at the mercy of capital

>explore all dead ends of our bloated ideology and become a useless unconvincing turd like its authors and myself
no ty :)
into the trash this drivel goes!

>No, I won't read an extremely short text that would make me not straw man the most important and misrepresented thinker of the last 200 years

Attached: 1555659246858.png (445x386, 205K)

>No, I can't have an intelligent discussion and verbally defend Marx in an argument.
>or just post an excerpt from it
>u just have to read the book sweaty ;)
Just stop. If you actually have a point, then why don't you make it?

My point is simple. The text is short, and it can be found for free online. Even if you fell on your head as a baby it shouldn't take you more than half an hour to read it. It's not the be all end all of Marxist theory, but it addresses some of the most common misconceptions about Marx. I would expect that people in a literature and philosophy board would engage with the source material before criticising the philosopher, but maybe my expectations are too high and this board has been overrun with two-bit morons that don't have any personal criticisms of Marx, but rather just repeat whatever their eco-chamber tells them to repeat.
You won't see me defending or criticising Marx's version of the LTV, because I have not read Capital yet. If only most people would do the same.

And what if I have read Capital and the Manifesto?
>read Gotha and come back!
It's almost like it's as simple as you not having a point to make and not wanting to have an intelligent conversation.

Then you're better read on Marx than most people here, congratulations. I still think that Gotha is very important in understanding Marx. I don't understand why this notion bothers you so.

>What do you Yea Forumserati think of cuck philosophy? For me, he is okay I guess.
He's the only breadtuber with an academic mindset (and who, generally speaking, is not a complete charlatan), most of his videos could be reworked into actual short publishable essais/reviews.

Jaysus fuck, just cite Kolakowski and fuck off if you’re not interested in an intimate hostile relationship with Marx.

Not it wasn't.

>If you actually have a point
I didn't see you making one

ok schlomo

>it's time to face the capitalist question, then suddenly it's reagan tier boomerisms and "b-b-b-but m-muh economy"
Read Ellul, the same thing happens in """""socialist"""" countries. In the end every one submits to economic technique.

Not true. It's a possible for people to be misguided or apathetic and have genuinely good intentions, as no one is born knowing everything. But when someone is genuinely curious and seeks further investigation when they notice systematic problems they might run into some in the OP pic.

I did not excuse failed iterations of “communism” they’re state-capitalism dumb dumb

There’s a variety to capitalism and there’s a variety to socialism. You make tankies just as nervous of you as you are of them. All I’m asking for is a change of system
>the powers that be
You are either trolling or are one of the most naive people

State capitalism
Read/watch Wolff. Dig yourself out of this hole of ignorance

It's gotten a lot worse since the beginning of the year. It used to be the occasional Marxist, who was at least well-read, along with some Deleuzians/Landians who were varying degrees of left, but at least well-read and capable of holding an interesting discussion.

The board mutated with the arrival of discord trannies though, they unironically complain when someone says nigger (the real crux of the issue), they are very Marxists, without having even read Marx (take for example, while clearly a Marxist, defining Capitalism as a system of wage-labor is wrong even in the Marxist standpoint, where it is really any system characterized by an M-C-M commodity relation). I'm hoping they will eventually get bored and leave, but they all still have /r9k/ to dwell in so that's probably not happening.

Attached: 1554113200763.jpg (474x347, 17K)

>they fight the eternal anglo
So theyre perfect?

Don't forget the pollacks

they are there in the retarded americans

Finally you see, my son.

Yes

Attached: DzyeUh9WsAMO1ap.jpg (1365x1960, 312K)

Deleuze was a Marxist?

No

Marxism is rife with anti-semitism. Marx, Stalin, Corbyn...the list goes on...all bigoted anti-semites.

look at all those lazy stupid jews

Yes, but don’t read them uncritically.

Is Benjamin really all that Marxist?
He's great, haven't read too much of the other guys.

Benjamin, like Adorno, end up weakening Marxism. Tenured academics sure do like them but that shows you how far removed the Frankfurt school is from real proletarians.

Communism is just the latest incarnation of the Anabaptists, Joachimites, Diggers, etc. But with 19th century sensibilities

>has been here since the beginning of the year
>thinks “Landians” are well-read
>got banned for racism when being openly racist

Do not talk to this user. Geez, what a newfag

Bump

excepts its adherents are destructive llassholes

Which Marxists do you frens recommend reading? Who are your favorite Marxists?

Rhetoric: Communism is theft. When you run out of other people's shit to steal everyone starves to death.

Dialectic: Communism eliminates the price point, which is the control mechanism for supply and demand. Without a price point you never know how much to make or not make. Without a price point you don't know what to value. Making it impossible for an economy to be planned efficiently. TL;DR Everyone starves to death.

Deleuze and Debord. That being said, I'm not really Marxist; I agree with his analysis of the problems of capital(ism) in Capital, but don't support communism or modern socialism. Going back to the point, Society of the Spectacle by Debord is a short read and very interesting. Not entirely Marxist except perhaps for chapter that has proletariat in the title, which imo is the least interesting of all chapters in the book. Nonetheless a good critique of consumerism.

Despite pic related I dislike Baudrillard, besides the first chapter in Simulacra I found the book very dull and obscurantist.

Attached: 1557349820197.jpg (535x960, 38K)

based & redpilled

Read the main books by Marx if you want to learn about it (this way, you will be further than 99.9% of the people on the internet who claim to be marxist) but ultimately it does not matter because every single thought of his is theoretical, ignoring human nature completely.

Creating an utopia in theory is extremely easy, even a 7 year old could do it. Creating a system that can be implemented realistically is near to impossible.

So were the Anabaptists.

Petty sophistry that does not serve anything in reality.

Meh academics fucking hate proles overall

It’s mutual.

yeah dude amish people are soooo annoying

How dare they keep to themselves, obey the law, occasionally sell cheese at the market, and have above-standard health and happiness. We should totally subvert what they're doing and inject kike ideas into their heads.

Tibetan Buddhists, you're next!

A fetish of the capitalist bourgeoise

Your last two points aren’t helping you.

The first one doesn't either.
>It's [the board's cuckness] gotten a lot worse since the beginning of the year.
Does not equal:
>I've been here since the beginning of the year

In fact, the two are pretty incompatible. Either way, it's best to not talk to tripfags.

>cultural marxists
exposed yourself there

Fitness in the sense that it is most able to expand itself as a system. But that doesn't mean the citizens of that system are the happiest.

Tell that to some factory worker or abused no-hoper

where on the internet can one find these real marxists?

Why people try to sound like an authority on an anonymous Mongolian board I don't know. Like 5 pages out of the tens of thousands speaks of a future society, which he was against talking about, which consists of just advocating for people to reach their full potential.

>which consists of just advocating for people to reach their full potential
Marxists when defending communism from critics "we want a system where people can thrive and flourish!"
Marxists when talking aobut communism among themselves "dude hedonism lmao"

In a society where money isn't an incentive, you'll just have fame and popularity doing all the negative stuff that economic incentives do today.
Culture will still be 99% shit, this is the usual marxist delusional attitude that only material stuff has this corrupting influence on society.

>the division of labor is intensified
Wouldn't this happen in any industrial society, even if it were communist or whatever? Not disagreeing but this is a function of productive technique and not capitalism.
>Moreover, because the laborers are being unnaturally forced to work long regimented hours,...[etc]
I don't think that working 2 hour days is going to have more people at the symphony, sadly, or even reading books. I think Adorno is wrong here. Mass culture isn't debased because it has to appeal to over worked people, it is debased because it has to appeal to masses at all and these are largely, well, not geniuses exactly.

I do not disagree with you absolutely but only in part. These ill features are not intrinsic to capitalism but to mass society, no matter how its economics are arranged.

Lmao too true

This is what I've been thinking of for a while. Everyone is hyper-focused on money and economical differences but I think money is the greatest equalizer that exist as it is not tied to a single attribute. There are rich people with low intelligence, high intelligence, ugly rich people, good looking rich people, introverted and extroverted rich people, etc. you get where I'm getting here.
Obviously there are patterns (like more intelligent people are more likely to take good positions or can afford treatments that make them look better) but making money is not tied to one or two attributes or a very strict blue-print.

People would not stop judging and attributing value to each other if wealth did not exist. The other two obvious ways to measure someone's worth (which is what we do today as well) is intelligence and beauty. That would be even more cruel, left less way for someone to improve and would leave even more people at the bottom.

>this boards rightwing slang has gone slightly left since the beginning of the year
This was pretty much a center left board back in the day. Complaining that it might go back to that is funny. Go back to your boards if you don’t like it.

In before
>I been here since the beginning
I have proof that I was

>Wouldn't this happen in any industrial society, even if it were communist or whatever?
It probably would, but the point is that capitalism is intrinsically tied to industrialism. Capitalism is amazing at increasing a society's productivity, and the rise in productivity is accomplished by increasing society's stock of productive (industrial) capital. It's what Marxists call a rise in the organic composition of capital.
At a certain point, however, capitalism's internal mechanisms begin actively hampering this rise in productivity, which is what we see in phenomena like financialization. Marxist theory states that at that point, society would be forced to advance to a socialist model, which is implied to be increasingly deindustrialized.

Stalinism and its derivatives attempt leapfrog from an agrarian feudal society directly into a post-industrial socialist one through a (supposedly) short period of rapid state-directed industrialization. So yes, "communist" regimes end up being as industrial as capitalist ones, but that is just one more reason why many Marxists call Soviet-style societies a form of "state capitalism".

leftypol or if you're brave enough r/stupidpol

>leftypol
deranged trots at best, crypto-fascists reading from maoist cliffsnotes at worst

There are no such "real marxists". This is just a nazbol talking point to try and divert some of the stream of disaffected white men pouring through the internet to their own political doomsday cult.
Never trust someone who claims to be a leftist and who seems a bit too passionate about class reductionism. Especially not on the internet. ESPECIALLY not on *chan imageboards.

>r/stupidpol
what makes stupidpol different from leftypol?

Good post.

>t. leftypol