/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14306561]

>fascism is capitalism in decay

[Anonymous No.14306570]

[Anonymous No.14306582]

>>14306561
Literally nothing Marxists say makes any sense, it's almost astonishing how many intelligent men have dedicated their lives to expounding on total gibberish that has never accomplished anything

[Anonymous No.14306592]

>economics is just capatalist theology

[Anonymous No.14306593]

>>14306582
What specific claims of marxist analysis don't make sense?

[Anonymous No.14306609]

>>14306593
number 1 that everyone is equal
number 2 that people should all be paid the same no matter what job
number 3 that rich people made their riches unfairly
number 4 that free market is a bad thing
I could go on and on

[Anonymous No.14306618]

>Despite its exceptional military capabilities, Fascism is still left with a thorny problem it can't resolve: whilst economic crisis keeps the reasons for a revolutionary upsurge continually to the fore, Fascism is incapable of reorganising the bourgeois economic machine. Fascism, which will never be able to overcome the economic anarchy of the capitalist system, has another historical task which we may define as the struggle against political anarchy, against the anarchy of bourgeois class organisation as a political party. The different strata of the Italian ruling class have always formed political and parliamentary groups which aren't based on soundly organised parties and which have fought amongst themselves. Under the leadership of career politicians, the competition between these groups around private and local interests has led to all kinds of intrigues in the corridors of parliament. The counter-revolutionary offensive has forced the ruling class, in the realm of social struggle and government policy, to unify its forces. Fascism is the realisation of this. Placing itself above all the traditional bourgeois parties, it is gradually sapping them of their membership, replacing them in their functions and — thanks to the mistakes of the proletarian movement — managing to exploit the political power and human material of the middle classes. But it will never manage to equip itself with a practical ideology, and a programme of social and administrative reforms, which goes beyond traditional bourgeois politics; a politics which has come to nought a thousand times before.

[Anonymous No.14306622]

>>14306561
Fascism arrives out of the decay of capitalism

[Anonymous No.14306631]

>>14306618
This did not make a lick of sense. Besides real fascism has never been tried

[Anonymous No.14306632]

>Yes I'm a NazBol
>How could you tell

[Anonymous No.14306633]

>>14306609
>something marxists don't say
>something marxists don't say
>correct for the most part
>value judgement

[Anonymous No.14306637]

>>14306593
The entire thing is predicated on the labor theory of value which makes no sense. I swear to fucking God if one of you reply 'Marx didn't invent the LTV' I am going to find and rape your entire family. No he didn't invent it but he explicitly outlines the concept at the very beginning of Capital and uses it as a basis for what follows.

[Anonymous No.14306639]

>>14306609

[Anonymous No.14306640]

>>14306609
>number 1 that everyone is equal
Marx's most famous quote directly discounts the idea that everyone is equal: "from each from their abilities, to each to their needs"
>number 2 that people should all be paid the same no matter what job
Marx never said this, he was about the ownership of labour
>number 3 that rich people made their riches unfairly
not all rich people, and even then it isn't the rich people's fault, capitalism will always create a bourgeois class
>number 4 that free market is a bad thing
Marx advocates for a free market actually
>I could go on and on
I suspect it would just be more tripe

[Anonymous No.14306645]

>>14306609
Everyone is equal. People should not be paid at all - goods and services can be exchanged as they are needed in a collective. Rich people's wealth is predicated on the toil of the subjugated. Every rich person profits off of hundreds more people remaining poor. The free market is ineffective at responding to demands that can't be quantified in exchange-values, i.e. the general public health afforded by a bus service.

[Anonymous No.14306647]

>>14306637
What about the labor theory of value doesn't make sense?

[Anonymous No.14306650]

>>14306631
Redpill: the USSR was a fully realised corporatist society and the most successful implementation of fascism in history.

[Anonymous No.14306651]

Fascism isn't real

[Anonymous No.14306653]

>>14306561
>Fascism is Capitalism achieving glory

[Anonymous No.14306655]

>>14306637
so you discount Smith and Ricardo in the same way I imagine

[Anonymous No.14306664]

>>14306647
Labor is not homogenous and can't be averaged as a whole as if it were gold
>>14306655
yes the entire field of economics is a meme, if it weren't it would have predictive power, which it doesn't

[Anonymous No.14306669]

>>14306609
I've only seen marxists say number 3. Where do you see marxists saying the rest?

[Anonymous No.14306670]

>>14306633
>>14306640
>>14306639
>>14306645
>b-but thats not true communism!
Cope, you are basically just a parody of the meme at this point

[Anonymous No.14306684]

>>14306670
They're right though. Marx himself says that people are not naturally equal and never could be. Likewise communism seeks moving to a moneyless society, no one would be "paid" anything because wages wouldn't exist.

[Anonymous No.14306693]

>>14306670
READ THEORY YOU ILLITERATE PLEB

[Anonymous No.14306700]

>>14306670
>"The elimination of all social and political inequality,” rather than “the abolition of all class distinctions,” is similarly a most dubious expression. As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions of Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen. The concept of a socialist society as a realm of equality is a one-sided French concept deriving from the old “liberty, equality, fraternity,” a concept which was justified in that, in its own time and place, it signified a phase of development, but which, like all the one-sided ideas of earlier socialist schools, ought now to be superseded, since they produce nothing but mental confusion, and more accurate ways of presenting the matter have been discovered.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm
Not that a letter by Engels is the be all end all of Marxist theory, but you should maybe familiarise yourself a little with any ideology you want to criticise before criticising it.

[Anonymous No.14306707]

>>14306664
>Labor is not homogenous and can't be averaged as a whole as if it were gold
Sure it can. My wage and your mother's wage are both dependent on the quality and quantity of the labour we do, and yet they can be exchanged into a single currency and then compared in any way we want (including averaging).

>>14306633
>>14306640
>>14306645
>>14306669
>>14306700
>falling for the bait

[Anonymous No.14306713]

>>14306592
it is for at least a portion of libertarians

[Anonymous No.14306746]

>>14306592
90% of the pseuds banging on about le economics when pressed will cite only Austrian schoolers that are taken even less seriously by mainstream economists than Marx is.

[Anonymous No.14306748]

>>14306609
clearly hasnt read marx

[Anonymous No.14306753]

Communism will never work because the few limp wristed sissies that actually understand Marxism wont be in charge after the "revolution", some dumb proles with an ounce of testosterone will take the leading role, and come up with yet another totalitarian nightmare state

[Anonymous No.14306759]

>>14306707
That doesn't make labor homogenous, money is just an abstraction used to exchange goods/services in a market

[Anonymous No.14306761]

>>14306746
>mainstream economists opinions matter at all
Source: reformed mainstream economist

[Anonymous No.14306766]

>>14306753
>He thinks Marxists still believe in "revolution"
Read theory past the 1910s

[Anonymous No.14306773]

>>14306748
it is however a good summary of what communists actually believe

[Anonymous No.14306804]

>>14306759
It makes abstract labour homogeneous, and it makes different kinds of concrete labour reducible to abstract labour. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to express wages of software developers and prostitutes in the same currency. Unless the particular character of a concrete labour has no impact on the wage of the worker.

[Anonymous No.14306806]

>>14306766
>read the never-ending ad hoc rationalizations of a failed economic theory
yeah sounds very useful

[Anonymous No.14306814]

Why yes i do let my boss suck out all my surplus value, how did you know?

[Anonymous No.14306823]

>>14306804
abstract labour doesn't mean anything. There are actually existing industries that produce things, the labor within them is a real, specific thing that contributes to the whole.

You may as well say that cars and potatoes are the same thing because both can be given a price

[Anonymous No.14306832]

>>14306582
>Literally nothing Marxists say makes any sense

I agree.

[Anonymous No.14306833]

>>14306766
My point is that it doesnt fucking matter what educated marxists believe because they're ineffectual and won't play any significant role in the real world

[Anonymous No.14306836]

>>14306823
socially necessary labor time sweetie

[Anonymous No.14306860]

>>14306833
>Won't play any significant role in the world
>The second most powerful country on the planet is run by a communist party

[Anonymous No.14306868]

Are you denying that it is capitalism or just that its decay

[Anonymous No.14306882]

>>14306860
>All of a sudden it IS real communism
You tankies are so embarrassing

[Anonymous No.14306908]

>>14306561
I love this literature related thread. I love the good work the moderators put into maintaining quality discussion. I love when people discuss off-topic topics outside of their respective boards. I love the fact that off-topic politics are accepted everywhere outside of >>>/pol/ regardless of their relevancy to the board. I love how the mods patrol people for announcing sage but refuse to ban people who shit up this board with off-topic threads. I love how newfags, migrants and tourists persistently bump this shit. I love how this thread will remain in the catalog until it reaches the 300 reply bump limit. I did NOT sage or report this thread. Again, I DID NOT SAGE OR REPORT THIS THREAD. I have broken no rules in my current post.

[Anonymous No.14306911]

>>14306882
Neither the USSR or China were ever actually communist societies. They were both capitalist societies led by communist parties. No communist society has ever existed nor probably will exist for many centuries.

My point is not that China is communist. My point is that China literally is run by educated Marxists as is their academia.

[Anonymous No.14306914]

>>14306860
>China
>Communist
Did you just wake up from a thirty year coma?

[Anonymous No.14306918]

>>14306823
>abstract labour doesn't mean anything. There are actually existing industries that produce things, the labor within them is a real, specific thing that contributes to the whole.
The fact that you can even write this means that you're already thinking abstract labour or labour in general, which is the same thing. If you weren't thinking labour in general and industry in general then you wouldn't be able to say "there are industries with labour", but only "there is footwear industry with shoemaking, there is software development with programming", which of course wouldn't even be sufficient for you to make your point.
So you definitely do know what it means.

>You may as well say that cars and potatoes are the same thing because both can be given a price
No, I may not. They're concretely different, just like the concrete labours that made them, but they both share the property of being products of human labour.

[Anonymous No.14306920]

Fascism is actually modernism and liberalism in decay but tomato tomatoe

[Anonymous No.14306922]

>>14306609
>>14306670
Hook line and sinker

[Anonymous No.14306926]

>>14306908
you are the cancer killing this board

[Anonymous No.14306932]

>When /tv/ knows more about Communism than /lit/
>>>/tv/125302896

[Anonymous No.14306995]

>>14306932
>When Jordung Pebblestone spends his entire career bitching about Marxism but the first time in his entire life he even bothered to read anything by Marx was the day before his debate with Zizek.

[Anonymous No.14307006]

it's just one of their buzzphrases like "first as tragedy then as farce". they're cultish pseuds that's why they all repeat simplistic mantras like this.

[Anonymous No.14307014]

>>14307006
Hegel was the one who said that and he was just going off the Greeks

[Anonymous No.14307021]

>>14306561
Capitalism and Communism are two heads of the same JEWISH coin.

[Anonymous No.14307036]

>>14306932
/lit/ is actually garbage for literary discussion. I have had literary discussion on /adv/ that was 100x greater than anything I've had on /lit/ in the past half-year. I think the people who are serious about literature are disgusted by all the shitposters and low IQ pseuds so they gave up on putting effort into discussion.

[Anonymous No.14307039]

>>14307014
i thought it was from 18th brumaire of napoleon bonaparte

[Anonymous No.14307053]

>>14306926
>Boohoo we need every board on this entire website to be about politics. You're not allowed to have a hobby unless your hobby is obsessing over imaginary political enemies.
I did not sage this post and I have broken no rules.

[Anonymous No.14307116]

>>14306918
You can't abstract it. The labor involved in flipping burgers can't be converted into the labor involved in engineering aircraft. Just because you can string words together doesn't mean you're actually referring to something.

Furthermore you can't understand any industry by just looking at labor, which is only a part of what creates the products involved. Resources and the social structures involved are also as responsible

[Anonymous No.14307135]

>fascism is retarded

[Anonymous No.14307144]

>>14307116
>Furthermore you can't understand any industry by just looking at labor
Actually, you can.

[Anonymous No.14307158]

>>14306670
This is the power of what not reading looks like.

[Anonymous No.14307213]

>>14307116
You yourself are abstracting it in thought, and it also functions as a real abstraction in the real world, because otherwise labour wouldn't be able to be transformed into wages.
>Furthermore you can't understand any industry by just looking at labor, which is only a part of what creates the products involved. Resources and the social structures involved are also as responsible
I agree with this.

[Anonymous No.14307244]

>>14307116
>>14307213
Or rather shouldn't say that you're abstracting it yourself. It already has been abstracted in the real world with the division of labour and general exchange of commodities, and then it got reflected inside your head.

[Anonymous No.14307258]

>>14307244
> abstracted in the real world
> then it got reflected inside your head
hegelian mumbo jumbo
you aren't even really materialists

[Anonymous No.14307306]

>>14307258
This hasn't got much to do with Hegel. While I can at least begin to understand you taking issue with the first one (although it's still undeniable that incommensurable labours get abstracted into something that lets their derivatives be expressed in money form), the second one is completely innocent, and if you think that one is mumbo jumbo then that might be just my poor wording (t. slav).
All I had in mind was something akin to the difference between seeing the words "red, blue" on a sheet of paper and then abstracting that into "color" in your own mind, and seeing the word "red and blue are colors" already written down and just taking that in. That's about the least mumbo-jumbo thing imaginable.