The older I get, the more I agree with him

The older I get, the more I agree with him

Attached: download.jpg (207x243, 8K)

Yes i too used to be a commie in my teens

I'm 26

lel

Same

Attached: 1553600748626.jpg (1200x774, 154K)

Give some short stuff to read before starting with the capital my man

the older I get, the less I agree with him

The nose knows.

I like Marx's critiques of capitalism but I dislike how many leftists have taken these ideas and run with them as if it's a religion to proselytize. Like when you talk to a person that's REALLY into Marx, it all ultimately comes down to capitalism, even though it's clear that there are other corrupt forces out there at work that have nothing to do with an economic incentive.

Honestly it’s pleb as fuck but just watch a few videos that give you an overview of his ideas (historical materalism, class conflict, LTV). It greatly enables you to contextualise his words as you read them.

Also read wage, labour and capital.

that's the actual point of marx.

lmao@urlife

Vast majority of those corruptive forces can be traced back to capitalism. Or maybe just the material excess and peculiar way of distributing that exceess, hard to judge from the Eastern block perspective.

user you might want to get checked for dementia

Is there a Marx chart?

underrated

>it's clear that there are other corrupt forces out there at work that have nothing to do with an economic incentive.
like what?

jews, queers and queer jews

what's their motive? it's capital

You're probably the oldest person on Yea Forums. Tf are you even doing here?

capital is just jewish conspiracy to provide for peoples wants and needs.

have you ever heard a hardcore jewish zionist or mossadnik talk about israel?

Marx makes a few solid points, but he’s far from the most profound or “correct” philosopher. I recommend trying to rid all preconceived notions before reading his stuff

even jewish leftists and lgbts are obviously more motivated by tribal interests than by economics. lmao marxists thinking they are the real materialists when they stop at economics and daren't look the least into biology.

gigacringe

marxism is an economics philosophy and marx wasn't a biologist.

28 here and an anarchist. I know what you mean. As I got older I stopped being a reactionary retard and started actually being empathetic. Don't pay attention to the lumpens who laugh at you or anything. They're most likely Americans and burgoids get shot in basements.

marxism also ignores game theory when really you look at cold war geopolitics, you look at bureaucratic politics within nominally 'socialist' organisations and it's all modelable using game theory and rational self interested actors, you look at how biological evolution operates at a micro level and it's selfish genes playing game theory. Leftists are wrong, not on a historical or a moral level, but on a fundamental ontological level, they keep in despite of all evidence denying the fundamental nature of reality. capitalism means keeping it all in the open, Hayek's defense of the market was actually quite tragic, augustinian in its pessimism and view of man's fallen nature, grounded on a profound understanding of information theory.

Yes, I too am starting to agree with him.

Attached: 18m5h4sep7s93jpg.jpg (388x318, 20K)

That’s not how Game Theory works. People are not interested solely in selfish motives under Game Theory. Game Theory is a means to describe human behavior. Very little of what you engage in is explicitly a zero sum activity, for example. Almost always the exchanges are a series of positive net utilities.

The enemies to comprehending almost anything worth comprehending are people like you. Who ascribe meaningless Darwinism to something so much more complex. I hope you understand that, again, exchange is more than a zero sum activity. Every actor gets a benefit.

This is more than nice people vs. bad people, this is drifting into scientific territory. I’m not defending social Darwinism when I explain Game Theory, I am helping you understand a theory which explains the motives of ‘charity’, ‘mindfulness’ and even ‘socialism’ if you look at socialism as a two party game, with one set positive linear utility for society and a ‘dummy’ set linear utility for negativity or discomfort.

Obviously this game is completely solved and thus determinsitically implies all actions within the system (which is why it’s a problem), but it is not impossible to be comprehended within Game Theory. This is an important point to recognize, assigning motives or principles to Game Theory is like assigning motives to Physics, which is actually possible from a phenomenological point of view, but from a purely materialistic view it is impossible to do this completely :3