Are all Marxists and Anarchists just losers who resent the people at the top anf just whine about it instead of putting...

I like some of what David Harvey has to say. He has very good criticisms on capitalism regarding the "capital surplus problem".

""Capitalist crisis can erupt and manifest itself in myriad forms. Underlying this, though, is a key problem for capitalism which Harvey terms ‘the capital surplus absorption problem’ (26). The logic of capital is one of perpetual accumulation – capitalists are forced, under pressure of competition, to recapitalise and reinvest in expanding a proportion of the surplus they produce. This requires constant discovery of new profitable outlets for investment so that the surplus can be absorbed and accumulation can continue. Overaccumulation of surplus capital – lack of profitable investment opportunities – lies at the root of capitalism’s crisis tendencies.""

The ‘the capital surplus absorption problem’ facilitates environmental destruction and exhaustion of resources. It has to do with how growth has limits but compound interest does not!

""The monetary system we have now is of a predatory nature, one of fiat currency issued as interest-bearing debt, created ex nihilo when banks make loans, or when central banks buy up government bonds to allow the nation to monetize its debt and spend beyond its means. It is a trap. The principle is created, the interest is not. When debts are repaid (or defaulted), real wealth is drained out of the economy. There is always more debt than money. The debt grows continuously—exponentially—through compound interest, enriching the bank, impoverishing the nations and their people. This forces governments to either take more and more extreme actions to service their unserviceable debt, or default and set off a sovereign debt crisis.

The exponentially growing debt demands an exponentially growing economy to service the debt, and this means exponentially growing demands for resources and energy. We live on a finite planet with hard physical limits. Growth has limits; compound interest doesn't.

Every fiat currency in the history of ever has collapsed into worthlessness within 50 years because of excessive printing leading to a loss of confidence in its value. The U.S. has managed to forestall the inevitable because we're backing the dollar with OPEC's oil and blowing up any country that wants to stop using it, and there's a very real possibility World War III will be over which banking system's fiat banknotes own the future.""

You're such a looser, said the loser

>Are all Marxists and Anarchists just losers who resent the people at the top anf just whine about it instead of putting in the hard work to climb to the top?
What do you mean? They are revolutionaries, that is their hard work. You seem to have an odd view of things: you think that the only hard work that counts is work from within the system, while working to bring down the system (revolution) is resentful and wrong. If the workers decide that they no longer want to hand over the fruits of their labour to the capital owners, and they take it by force, they are way closer to being an Ubermensch than workers who work within the system in hopes that one day they will get rich.

>They are revolutionaries, that is their hard work.

You mean the usefuk idiots used as cannon fodder who help to put to power a different type of elite? The revolutionary types that gets wiped out after they are not needed anymore? Or the type who gets fucked by the people they helped rise to power? Read some history kid, or some economics and evolutionary psychology while you are at it too. Get out of the buble you are now.

this is not literature

Yes, absolutely

Maybe not, but ultimately it's motivation that drives ideology. The modern left is driven by a ressentiment of the most pathetic caliber

>putting in the hard work to climb to the top
What a slave you are. Most top people worth a damn didn't work for it, they were already there. Thinkers like Kropotkin didn't waste their time doing drudgery at all.

"Look at my gay little graph. It totally proves that the global rate of profit is falling, and doesn't rely on sampling bias at all."

based retard

> people who try to change the status quo are people who don't like the status quo
My Jaw is literally on the floor from being amazed at your post. Now I have to buy a JawFixit3000™ from Amazon™ for the low low price for 31.99USD!

I wish I could make it by hard work, god I do.

Attached: D5LievNWAAAxg6I.jpg (601x508, 31K)

Why would you subject yourself to a broken system and not seek something better? Why do you insist that Capitalism is here to stay when systems have been changing all throughout history and that Capitalism is some how the end of history?

Hey, thx for bumping.

Jordan Peterson level of analysis

Based as fuck Marx fags BTFO

Nah, they're mostly guilty, overeducated, upper-middle-class people who are a little too dim for science.

Successful revolutions can and have happened.

where does the comma go here?

they're all in their 50's at least

>We live on a finite planet with hard physical limits. Growth has limits; compound interest doesn't.
Any economic theory that invokes this assumption usually has some other flawed, more fundamental premise. For Harvey, I assume that it's the contention that the value-creating component of a commodity, or "real wealth," is exclusively labor.

>to climb to the top
this is probably where most marxists and anarchists have their contention– there's an implicit assumption in your post that hierarchy is the only plausible societal model. You've chosen to see these groups as resentful simply because they don't subscribe to your own definitions of success. Also its naive to assume that the majority of those at the top made it there through their own graft, and not because of networking opportunities that have been within reach their entire life. The glass ceiling isn't so much a ceiling as it is a closed-rank social group that is incredibly difficult to penetrate without an "in" (IE. someone on the inside).

Trots are like that.

No, Marxists simply desire a kinder, more compassionate society, which is more fair for all those living under it. Nothing more, and nothing less.

I know you are but what am I.

Should I watch the FLCL sequels or nah?

Attached: ikazuchi ?.jpg (850x693, 134K)

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I wish marxists would be willing to accept that humans are not as malleable as they think and for that reason among others their ideas do not work.

topkek
>tfw more people were murdered in the twentieth century by marxists than any other political ideal

Nah many people also have a plain spite for all their shenanigans and having to put with them so they seek ways to put a stop to it. Many such people would probably also abhor the idea of engaging in such behavior and dream for a world where such behavior is unknown and doesn't exist.

I beg you, read Marx.

>Marxists seek to create a society of utter pain, cruelty, and fear for the heck of it
This is your brain on the cronyist rhetorical Kool Aid which is ironic all things considered.

Marxists are often dicks just like any political group. gaining political power is highly correlated with being a dick

Go innawoods then if you can't stand civilized society that much.

You're ironic, but the Cheka weren't. Some were "only" hitting their death quotas, but many were in it for the power-rush and pure sadism.

what is the purpose of this post, it's just true that the powerhungry are often dicks, and theyre the ones who typically end up with power.

I dont mind society, it's imperfect but it's whatever, I am massively flawed as well.

yeah, pretty much

No different from welfare queens, PMCs, bounty hunters, debt collectors and all sort clandestine mobster that unregulated enterprise breeds.

idk about welfare queens being attributable to unregulated enterprise. A Fascist state would make those people work on something

Ironic for you ask considering the post it replies to lacks much purpose or meaning for that matter.

Epic takedown bro, libs owned epic style XDDD

you just know this guy has a reddit tab open

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
—Benadingo Mozzarelli

The guy implied it was a strawman to see marxists as nihilistic sadists when a great deal of them historically were. They do not have a good track record at all. Fascists dont either, wouldn't you agree?

Im not a centrist either if youre going to throw that at me, I think that the Right is usually right on almost all issues. There have been genuinely benevolent kings but I cant think of a single revolutionary that wasn't animated mainly by desire for power.

Nah man I'm 110% a chamber XD
Revolutions just put other people in power XD
Me? I'm a Nietzschean ubermensch libtard

That is agreeing with my post m8. They dont just hand out welfare they make you go out and work on some national project.

multiple reddit tabs open
now fuck off

nope

#
>there hasn't been a single monarch or emperor animated by desire for power
le eye roll.jpg

That describes nominally communist states better actually as reactionist societies would actually exclude people from even participating in certain societal roles.

I didnt say that, surely you understand the difference between saying 'there exists x in class y, but not x in class z' and 'all of class y is x'?

i was thinking about Hitler's national projects when I said that about Fascism. Communism also did a great deal of that though, which I think is a positive aspect of it actually. I think a state that would allow free enterprise alongside that would be better.

Most Marxists and Anarchists that I've seen are corporate cucks.

Jesus, this post has literally nothing to do with literature. Is this what the mods find acceptable? Take this shit to /pol/. Saged and reported.

edgy enough to be a rebellious teen, not edgy enough to actually get into a confrontation

Pretty much

Attached: Spengler.png (1017x306, 74K)

Insufficiently regulated enterprises erode and undermine state authority.

I dont see why you think that conflicts with what I wrote. Letting capitalists run amok is a feature of democracy and republics where authority has no clear seat, right wing states regulate and control, less than communism of course, but still in a very real way.

No. You're a dunce in you think so

free en·ter·prise
/ˌfrē ˈen(t)ərˌprīz/
noun
an economic system in which private business operates in competition and largely free of state control.

>it’s mostly upper middle class teens and early adults, college kids who identify with these ideologies as an opportunity to revolt against their parents. it’s nice to hold to ideas of solidarity with ‘the people’ as an abstract ideal, it gives you something when you don’t have any connection to an actual community in the classical sense. in reality they don’t give a shit about real working people though, they mostly find them vulgar and will have no quarrels destroying their lives to larp out their frustrations.

Attached: This2.png (446x305, 7K)

>we marxists just want to make the world a better place
>yep, 40% of the population are boojewouis, SMASH EM KILL EM STOMP EM EXECUTE THEM THEY AREN'T HUMAN

It's a matter of degree is it not? The state will interfere to a certain degree, I think the Right wing state will interfere to a proper degree, whereas republics and democracies will not. Communists try to eradicate the institution entirely.

It's the middle class, it's the youth, it's the elites, it's minorities, it's lazy slackers, it's the poor, it's pseudo-intellectuals, it's college students and professors, it's Strawman!

it's not the poor

Who even gives a fuck about self-proclaimed socialists, stop talking about them, ignore them. They are just feminized white empaths who repeat what Noam Chomsky says because none of them can think for themselves. EVERY socialist thinks with their heart, which is why they are the champions of mental gymnastics and are able to convince themselves of insanity...

Socialism is a historical term and should be retired. The only “socialists” countries that are left like China are just pragmatists that call whatever they do socialism. Socialism in the West is just a shitty religion that gay little atheists use as a cope from suicide...

idk OP why don't you ask yourself. You're literally anime shitposting on an anonymous faggot forum, pretty low on the hierarchy if you ask me.

I'd imagine more people were murdered by or under capitalism systems than Marxism. BOOM.

You seem pretty mad
Almost as if you
got
owned
EPICSTYYYYYLEXDDDDDD

>Corporatism is a political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, scientific, or guild associations on the basis of their common interests
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism
He's not talking about enterprises, but about guilds and syndicates

Yes

Don't ruin the chapocels day with facts, man.

>try to improve the condition of those less fortunate?
>nah they must be SEETHING lol xD resentment they want to be rich LOOL

Attached: 1458258366335.jpg (200x146, 6K)

I wonder who could be behind this post

Yes.
But if they're middle class they're champagne socialists who know nothing of a hard day's work as the working poor.
And if they're rich they just want to grab power.
Basically if you're a socialist at any income bracket there's a self motivated answer for why you are one.