/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16656758]

Alright anons, listen up. I am a complete Anti-Communist and think Marx is a crackpot and cringe. BUT... I have strong criticisms of capitalism and the system we have now and recognize it is entirely exploitative.

I have enough of an open mind to absorb more information and change my mind about the Material Conception of History, Labour Theory of Value, etc.

So, in your own words, what would you say to get me to change my mind about Marxism?

[Anonymous No.16656777]

>>16656758
>I am a complete Anti-Communist
more like a complete idiot.

[Anonymous No.16656783]

>>16656777
>he doesn't agree with me
>he is an idiot
Nice one anon, a thread made in good faith gone to waist.

[Anonymous No.16656789]

>>16656758
get out of your ideology fantasies until you understand Confucius and then read marx

[Anonymous No.16656796]

i'm in the same boat, OP. maybe we should take the anarchism pill

[Anonymous No.16656797]

>>16656789
>get out of your ideology fantasies
Well, yes, that is what the thread is for. I was hoping for a bit of back and forth here before I embark on any serious study though.

>Confucius
Why tho? His theories on the structures of a healthy society?

[Anonymous No.16656804]

>>16656796
Right now I am honestly heading for the agnostic-on-all-issues pill mixed with the hermit pill. We will see.

[Anonymous No.16656822]

>>16656804
me too, but that's the bourgeois pill. i have to be against being that way even if I am that way. my biggest issues come from the fact that I think capitalism has made people into pieces of garbage so even if we did get the framework done for some so-called marxist utopia, we would completely fuck it up and be selfish.

[Anonymous No.16656824]

>>16656758
I'd say sailing the seas depends on the helmsman https://youtu.be/K4Ytv8CikWY

[Anonymous No.16656825]

>>16656758
Marxism contains useful models and frameworks for furthering your criticisms through an analytical and material approach to history. Even if you virulently disagree with Marx's conclusions it is worth looking at the world as he viewed it and using the tools he left behind. In the wrong hands they can also be misused so learn him also to protect yourself from manipulation and detect authenticity of thought.

[Anonymous No.16656868]

>>16656822
>bourgeois pill
I don't think ranting at clouds and living in a copse of trees in the park is bourgois anon.

>selfish
I think this is not really what has happened to us, but it has more likely exacerbated our already tribal and carnivorous impulses. We have likely become more wicked than ever before and more distrusting.

>>16656825
well, this is what I am trying to do, yes. Anything you see commonly misunderstood about Marx that you want to take this opportunity to rail against or tackle? It would only benefit me to hear such a debunking process.

[Anonymous No.16656905]

>>16656868
Nothing specific actually, because most of what you hear on these boards or elsewhere is basically either propaganda or misunderstandings from people who think they've "found a loophole" in Marx without reading him. It's really too many things, both large and small, for me to even want to cover it. It's like me asking you "are there any specific examples of someone getting a math problem wrong that you can tell me about"... there are simply too many and none are worth recounting.

[Anonymous No.16656929]

Marxists always just say "That's a bad reading of Marx" to any criticism of Marxism, but they never explain.
I think Marxists are full of baloney.

[Anonymous No.16656936]

>>16656822
The bourgeois is spook. Don't let your life be controlled by it. There are only individuals.

If marxism was truly scientific it would disavow of class.

Materialist analysis is usefull because possesion of materials is reflexive. Class analysis will always fall short.

[Anonymous No.16656940]

>>16656758
Just start your own business and give your employees a baller salary like the twitter ceo. Oh wait...that requires a brain and profitiable ideas.

[Anonymous No.16656948]

>>16656758
>Anti-Communist
>Anti-Capitalist
Time to take the Falangist pill Anon

[Anonymous No.16656959]

>>16656905
Okay, but I mean general criticisms like...
>You cannot plan an entire economy
>people are inherently selfish
>workers cannot simply run the economy, you would rob the more productive citizens of your nation of their business and give it to people that cannot run that enterprise and tank the economy
Or whatever other arguments you might have run into?

[Anonymous No.16656974]

It seems like its worth it for you to read works by Marx even if you disagree with him to give you a nice framework. You can check out Anarchists like Proudhon. Bakunin or Kropotkin if you disagree with Marx but still are attractive to a communist idea. Revisionists or Democratic Socialists like Eduard Bernstein or Rosa Luxembourg can be good to read if you like Marx's central ideas but disagree on some points. Finally, The Future of Socialism by Anthony Crosland is a good book for Social Democrats and to understand the post-war consensus.

I also recommend you look to economists from the other side to, maybe Liberal Capitalism isn't bad as you think. Read some Hayek (the road to serfdom) or Mises ('Socialism'). I also recommend reading Oswald Mosley for a unique non-leftist critique of Capitalism

[Anonymous No.16656979]

>>16656948
Funny you should mention. I flirted with it for a bit. My mother's family are Spanish. My uncles and aunts all think Franco was pretty based.

They even told my Spanish friend at a party once that things were better under Franco, and she lost her fucking shit. I trolled her after and said they probably know better than her, having grown up under it. I was not liked for some time after this.

My could friend also became sympathetic, but he read into the issue and then sent me a book (which I have yet to read) that completely turned him away from it. He came to sympathize with the Anarchists in the end.

[Anonymous No.16656982]

Any ideology that is fundamentally atheist in nature is trash.
It's also ironic because most people who identify as Marxists are the most bourgeois "citizen of the world" liberal consumers imaginable.

[Anonymous No.16656989]

>>16656758
>Alright anons, listen up. I am a complete Anti-Communist and think Marx is a crackpot and cringe. BUT... I have strong criticisms of capitalism and the system we have now and recognize it is entirely exploitative.
Oh, so you're a person with actual intellectual honesty and not a screeching pol tard? Big accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.16656991]

>>16656959
"people are inherently selfish" is an absolute landmine of an assertion. if you're running into arguments like that, you're debating in a more folk-political sphere. In any case, ask them how they know people are inherently selfish. Usually the argument dissolves itself.

[Anonymous No.16656995]

>>16656974
Thanks anon. That is helpful. I read a bit of Proudon et al in high school. Interesting stuff. Will revisit.

>Mosley
But anon... that's fascism!!! bash the fash!!
;)

[Anonymous No.16656997]

>>16656989
Why do you constantly have to screech about /pol/? What is your problem?

[Anonymous No.16657011]

>>16656982
>It's also ironic because most people who identify as Marxists are the most bourgeois "citizen of the world" liberal consumers imaginable.
Literally the biggest thing turning me off is this. I would begin fraternizing with people that I cannot stand lol.

>>16656989
>Oh, so you're a person with actual intellectual honesty and not a screeching pol tard? Big accomplishment.
This began as a nice compliment and quickly descended into a nasty remark. God bless you anon, and I hope you see how rude you have been.

[Anonymous No.16657015]

>>16656997
I think it was meant as a compliment.

[Anonymous No.16657026]

>>16656979
This is all Spanish men, in my experience.
Are you acquainted with basic Classical/Neoclassical Econ? If so, read Henry George

[Anonymous No.16657028]

>>16656758
National-Socialism is both anticapitalist and anticommunist. Gottfried's 'Manifesto for the Breaking of Interest-Slavery' and Goebbels' 'Questions and Answers for National-Socialists' would be a good start.

[Anonymous No.16657033]

>>16656991
Well this is the one I am actually most forgiving of. I would personally reply that most of human history (pre-civilization) we were probably fine sharing our stuff with our group, however stone age man would likely not hesitate to bash the other tribes head in for resources in times of scarcity.

I don't think man is inherently selfish in an individualistic sense. But I think we are very tribal. Capitalism may have made the latter into the former though, as all we have now is ourselves and maybe our family to worry about.

[Anonymous No.16657040]

One of Marx's goals was to make women equal to men. And to take away the traditional family structure.
Think about how much damage this has done.

[Anonymous No.16657043]

>>16656758
Critiques of capitalism are far from workable problems to the flaws that you see, that and any meaningful attempt to fix the problems of capitalism have failed. I realize a lot can be said about the capitalist world smothering any attempt, but I'm not going to move the goalposts because of that, it's not like the monarchs wanted to lose to liberal democracy -- it just happened.

[Anonymous No.16657047]

>>16657015
not him, but the "big accomplishment" came across as remarkably rude.

>>16657026
It was female relatives too. And my friend is a female who lost her shit, but her boyfriend is a dude and he was not on board either (although he is Catalonian, so understandable).

[Anonymous No.16657048]

>>16657028
Based. Screeching anti-pol tards will hate this post.

[Anonymous No.16657051]

Have you considered plain old democratic socialism? It has most of the benefits of capitalism, it doesn't deal with the major issues of authoritarian Marxism while correcting some of the major issues of capitalism (like people being dirt poor or the environment dying).

[Anonymous No.16657052]

>>16657011
I am thoroughly proletariat. My work has always been physical labor of one type or another.
>>16656959
These I can answer... better.
>planned economy
Honestly, it's difficult but it can be done. Modern AI coupled with human input seems to offer a potential solution
>rule by the workers
A functional democracy is difficult, I agree, but not impossible.
>the wealthy are providing a valuable service
Debunked by spending time with the wealthy.

[Anonymous No.16657054]

>>16657043
workable solutions*

[Anonymous No.16657055]

>>16656758
>Labour Theory of Value
You can believe this without being a Marxist

>>16656758
>Material Conception of History
This is reductive nonsense that gives history a grand narrative of class struggle

You can be anti-capitalism without following Marxist ideas about violent revolutions, intermediate one-party dictatorship states, etc. etc. which have proven to cause more harm than good

That's the direction the new left needs to take

[Anonymous No.16657058]

>>16656777
Based trips of truth

[Anonymous No.16657062]

>>16657055
the labor theory of value is stupid though, just like any attempt at assigning value in economic theory

[Anonymous No.16657067]

Communists and Marxists are brainlets but they're necessary for the synthesis.

[Anonymous No.16657069]

>>16657028
I have taken a cold hard look at NatSoc but I just cannot bring myself to become an Untermensch. If you had been that in 1920s Germany, fine, but to be that now is pure larp-cringe.

[Anonymous No.16657070]

>>16657047
>not him, but the "big accomplishment" came across as remarkably rude.
Leftists cannot have a discussion without being snarky and snide. That is the level of maturity these people have.
I also am including neoliberals among such people, one prominent example being the "comedian" John Oliver.

[Anonymous No.16657076]

>>16657040
Didn't Marx hate feminists and eject Victoria Woodhill from his conference?

[Anonymous No.16657088]

>>16656997
>>16657011
>>16657015
>>16657047
It was not a compliment and it was meant to be rude, yes.

This OP post was meant to act like OP is a rebel or has found a "new understanding" by stating something that is obvious and universally understood by anyone WHO IS NOT a screeching fascist LARPer or communist.

Literally everyone in the world with any amount of intelligence knows communism is bad but unrestrained capitalism is also bad and that modern society has problems that need fixing.

This is why almost every single "first world" or non-shit country today is not fully capitalist or fully socialist. This isn't new, it isn't groundbreaking, and you made this thread as though you profess some unique insight which literally a retard on the street would agree with.

Piss.

[Anonymous No.16657090]

>>16657069
Every single ideology today has a certain number of LARPfags embracing it solely due to the fact that society itself has no over-culture and so they have to find someplace else to fit in. You will never come across an ideology or movement in the modern world that is free from LARPers, as nice as that would be.
For an issue of why LARPers exist and how to deal with them, you should check out Harold Covington's 'What Have We Learned', which is pretty spot-on regardless of what you think of Covington himself. Here's a pdf: https://www93.zippyshare.com/v/npEnnZH4/file.html

[Anonymous No.16657103]

>>16657043
>>16657051
I shall reply to both these posts with the same answer, as I think it is fitting.

I think capitalism is going to spiral into some terrible position in our lifetimes. Kaczynski was right about industrial society (to me, inseparable or ubiquitous with capitalism) and maybe Nick Land when he said that Capital has an almost-sentience where it takes over the show and runs itself, therefore the plan to turn anything around or do nothing and hope for it to get better is going to end badly.

We may need a cataclysm, then follow up with a do over. So it isn't so much about "picking X" or "a meaningful attempt to fix the problems of capitalism ". It may be some revolutionary movement. I just don't know if Marxism is gonna be fitting for it.

[Anonymous No.16657104]

>>16656758
Have you tried a harder capitalist pill?
>exploitative
What does this mean? How do conceive it?

[Anonymous No.16657119]

>>16657088
Eh, go back to sucking farts anon.

[Anonymous No.16657130]

>>16656959
The only one of these I haven't seen a good argument by Communists are economy planning. Centralized economies repeatedly fail. Someone Marxpill me on planned economies, otherwise eeeeeh pinko it is.

[Anonymous No.16657131]

>>16657052
>I am thoroughly proletariat. My work has always been physical labor of one type or another.
Sure, but if I end up talking about this at the pub, I know that I will attract the worst types. I alright chat with them but steer clear of politics.

To play devil's advocate...
>Honestly, it's difficult but it can be done. Modern AI coupled with human input seems to offer a potential solution
We don't know what AI will bring, and we don't know if it would be effective. We can only plan with today's tech in mind. What would be the plan for now?

>A functional democracy is difficult, I agree, but not impossible.
Democracy is cringe. I am not talking about the system of government though, I am talking about any level of decision making. Can a collective of workers organize even a manufacturing plant by themselves. If the managerial staff were left in charge, then how would they then be any different to what we have now?

>Debunked by spending time with the wealthy.
I am talking about business owners. Yes, they are rich fags that do not need all their wealth, but on the other hand, factories do not spring out of the ground or fall out of the sky. Some venture capitalist funded it.

[Anonymous No.16657138]

>>16657055
>You can be anti-capitalism without following Marxist ideas
That is where I am now, but it also leaves me open minded to trying the rest of the available ideas once I have had a taste of a little of it.

>>16657067
This might be the ultimate redpill. Marx read Hegel, he should have known his contributions would be analysed and folded into the mix to make something new.

[Anonymous No.16657148]

>>16656789
incredibly based

[Anonymous No.16657152]

Anon one thing I recommend if you have the time and drive is to read some papers/articles/books by a Marxist historian specifically applying Marxist theories to understanding a particular period or event. I’m not saying all Marxist historians are created equal or that they are right per se, but I think it’s helpful to see the theories ‘in action’ and applied to real history as opposed to just in the the theoretical world of ideas.

[Anonymous No.16657163]

>>16657070
>John Oliver
I have now pushed away my food. The modern left repulses me. It is why I have not taken it further into researching the theories behind it.

Also, see >>16657088, I think you were right.

>>16657088
As for you, faggot...
>This OP post was meant to act like OP is a rebel or has found a "new understanding" by stating something that is obvious and universally understood by anyone WHO IS NOT a screeching fascist LARPer or communist.
Some people have evolving thoughts and understandings anon. But this tells me that "what I believe is so obvious, I cannot believe others disagree".

>you made this thread as though you profess some unique insight which literally a retard on the street would agree with.
Literally unfounded speculation.

You are clearly a very upset and nasty individual who cannot have a rational discussion. I pity you, very much.

[Anonymous No.16657198]

>>16657090
Thanks anon. Don't know this Covingotn, but I will look into him. That link is 403 Forbidden for me, but I will take a look for an archive or libgen or something.

[Anonymous No.16657239]

>>16657103
All I'd say is that with industrial society comes industrial war, especially when you consider the power vacuum that would be left by any revolution on a meaningful scale. If humanity does one more of those industrial wars, now having nuclear arsenals and the like, it's pretty much game over for things like indoor plumbing and most if not all of humanity.

[Anonymous No.16657248]

>>16657104
I was a super capitalist some years ago. I don't want to be the Ancap meme anymore.

>exploitative
I think that modern industrial tech and the system of ownership we have do not go hand in hand. Pre-Industrial Revolution, you were limited to the constraints of the physical world. You were rich and wanted something made, you had to get a craftsman to make it.

Now that rapid and human-free production can make those goods fly off a production line, the worker is now beholden to the owner of the factory. He competes against the machine for work and pay, as the machine always gets more sophisticated and can always make things cheaper with improvements.

This new system pits the worker against the machine, and thus the Capitalist benefits by marginalising the worker. He has him over a barrel, and can demand he slims down his own benefits and pay to "bribe back" the Capitalist into letting him work in the factory. The Capitalist does this temporarily until the machine yet again outdoes the worker, then the demands begin again to do the impossible, to outperform a monster of a machine. Then the worker concedes to give up a slice of his benefits or pay just so he can stay in a job.

This cycle continues. What was once a fair exchange can only happen when goods are made scarce by the need to have them produced by those that can produce them. The more you introduce mass ownership of production (think huge mega-factories over smaller workshops), and the more you accelerate technology, the more vicious the relationship becomes. And he that does not own and only produces, always loses out, because it is the producing that has been replaces by machines, and not the owning.

[Anonymous No.16657255]

>>16657239
Don't anon, I can only get so hard.

I also took the Linkola pill

[Anonymous No.16657269]

>>16657152
YES, this is what I need anon! I am stuck with theorists who are purely in that world of ideas. "the USSR killed millions/but that wasn't real communism!" for example. Just pure argumentation over, paradoxically, the cold facts of history and wild esoteric theory about tru-marxism™ at teh same damn time.

Can you recommend any names?

[Anonymous No.16657273]

>>16656758
Well to start off realize that Marx infact wrote very little about communism, most of his work is a thorough criticism of capitalism. What better way is there to criticize capitalism then through a materialistic empirical lens, idealism/mysticism/metaphysics whatever is just circlejerking. Labour theory of value is valuable because it puts human labour, our relationship to this whole socioeconomic system, at the front of our analysis of the whole system.

[Anonymous No.16657275]

Explain why the destruction of class is good. Why is hierarchy not desirable?

[Anonymous No.16657286]

>>16657273
>idealism/mysticism/metaphysics whatever is just circlejerking.
The absolute state of r/literature

[Anonymous No.16657302]

>>16657255
I promise you that you don't want to be a hunter gatherer again, if you inawoods before this all goes down with a lifetime supply of MREs and reliable ways to grow food/collect water, you *might* be ok. But then why would you want it to happen at all?

[Anonymous No.16657320]

>>16657286
I mean it's nice to tackle and a mindbogglingly experience to push yourself through, there is valuable lessons to be learned. However there is a reason why science has brought us so many discoveries and technologies, since it kinda sidesteps all the mental traps and tries to see what's out there in the material world.

[Anonymous No.16657328]

>>16656959
>people are inherently selfish
Marx literally refuted this, this argument is 150 years old lmao

[Anonymous No.16657333]

>>16657273
I actually ordered your pic related, and it arrived, but not started it yet.

>Labour theory of value is valuable because it puts human labour, our relationship to this whole socioeconomic system, at the front of our analysis of the whole system.
Explain more pls. It is not just a statement of "worker is vital" but a whole construction of how pricing works etc, is it not?

>>16657275
I am actually at this stage now, hence the thread, I wish to understand a radically different system of belief to mine. I think Hierarchy is necessary, but that does not necessitate class as we understand it. Or even if it does, can we take on Marx 90% but reject his idea of demolishing class, and just keep the critiques of capitalism?

>>16657302
I think they lived rather well actually, but you cannot go back, as you have to have been raised from birth like that to be suited for the lifestyle. I would need the MREs, but 10 generations of my children's line away from now and they might be fine.

It is not that I desire it, it is that it might be inevitable. If we experience a collapse of this rickety economic system or a shortfall in certain resources, we may see the whole planet exhausted of our resources or our society collapse before then.

I don't think we are nearly as smart as we imagine.

[Anonymous No.16657339]

>>16657328
okay, well could you elaborate? The whole thread is made for self educating on this topic.

[Anonymous No.16657349]

>>16657248
Sounds like the technological system is not so beneficial.

Mayhaps a certain writer foresaw this...

[Anonymous No.16657361]

Explain the monarchy and feudal system of Medieval Europe was not the peak of civilization.
You can't.

[Anonymous No.16657367]

>>16657333
> It is not just a statement of "worker is vital" but a whole construction of how pricing works etc, is it not?
Kinda, also kinda not. I think that's what socialism tries to do, bring the 'prices' more in line with the amount of 'labor time'.
I think Richard Wolff can bring some clarity here:
https://youtu.be/kyepUAtHAL4

[Anonymous No.16657373]

>>16657361
*Explain how

[Anonymous No.16657377]

>>16656979
Based cuñados

[Anonymous No.16657386]

>>16657349
Mayhaps he did... one might also say that... INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY AND ITS CONSEQUENCES HAVE BEEN A DISASTER FOR THE HUMAN RACE

[Anonymous No.16657391]

>>16657361
OP here, I actually think it was. But industrial capitalism has now supplanted it, so what can we do? Such is life.

[Anonymous No.16657397]

>>16657386
based

[Anonymous No.16657399]

>>16657367
thanks anon, will look into this.

[Anonymous No.16657413]

>>16657399
Here is another video, a bit longer but here he gives some more context:
https://youtu.be/k0ClwYFUHXU

[Anonymous No.16657421]

>>16657386
It's like he saw right into the future.

[Anonymous No.16657448]

>>16657047
I don't know about the women, probably the older women yes. But in Andalucia, amongst the young men "Podemita" (which refers to members of the leftist party) is literally a slur synonymous with "retard". To be fair, Andalucia is a bit of a shithole. I've heard "Viva la Falange" more times than I can count.

[Anonymous No.16657476]

>>16657448
Yes, they were all in their 50s, so the women were older too.

They were also Andalusians, which was my first criticism my friend threw at them. "Uhhh, you pig farmers from Andalusia would like him, you don't know anything, you aren't real Spanish anyway" She is a Castilian liberal and university educated. I understand Andalusia is a dump and all, but I can't stand the snobbishness. Constantly telling me and my family we aren't "real Spanish™".

[Anonymous No.16657506]

>>16657448
>>16657476
Is it true that there are some people in Spain who could still pass as Germanic/Nordic looking because of Visigoth ancestors

[Anonymous No.16657512]

>>16656929
>Plato said that eating children alive was good
>No he didn't read Plato
>LMAO you discord tranny shill dildo pillpull always say that i will tweet about this.

[Anonymous No.16657525]

>>16656783
>gone to waist
based retard

[Anonymous No.16657541]

>>16657506
Yeah, sure. There are a lot of Celtic looking types there. Lots of red heads and dark blondes about in the north.

[Anonymous No.16657596]

>>16657541
Celtics are different from Nordics desu

[Anonymous No.16657621]

>>16657596
I know, but I mean there are some visually similar types to the ones you are asking about. I don't know about legit genetic background or anything.

[Anonymous No.16657633]

>>16657131
>follow up on AI
We don't but I have already worked with several companies that used algorithms to schedule and plan labor. There is no reason communism couldn't use the same tools.

[Anonymous No.16657652]

If Stalin didn't like Jews then why did he take charge of a system that was created by Jews?

[Anonymous No.16657702]

>>16657148
I don't get this picture. So basically Hegel saw the world spirit in classic liberalism and modern hegelians see it in technocratic corporatocracy?

[Anonymous No.16657709]

>>16657702
*the world spirit of his time

[Anonymous No.16657740]

>>16656758
ignore >>16656948 and take the agorist pill instead. As long as there is government companies will try to influence them so we should just get rid of the government as peacefully as possible.

[Anonymous No.16657764]

>>16657652
More importantly, if Stalin didn't like Jews, why was nearly his entire administration Jews?

[Anonymous No.16657767]

>>16657333
We aren't smart, but usually because self interest gets in the way of our intelligence, in this case self interest will synergize with our intelligence. It might not be enough to outweigh the consequences of our prior inhibiting self interest, but the institutions we have are far from rickety and all they need to maintain themselves are statesmen with just above average amounts of foresight.

[Anonymous No.16657772]

what do marxists think they would get out of a marxist nation?
what would change?

[Anonymous No.16657781]

>>16656758
Capitalism is the most moral and perfect system we have, it's literally impossible to refute or discredit. When you take away private property and money things turn pretty quickly into the goulash archiplego

[Anonymous No.16657782]

>>16656758
It's all cultural you dimwit

[Anonymous No.16657790]

>>16657633
Would it make more sense to simply say that local organization can organize their own labour base, a town let's say, with a local mayor overseeing things, than it would be centralized at the nation's capital level or higher?

[Anonymous No.16657806]

>>16657740

[Anonymous No.16657814]

>>16657772
State mandated girlfriends and NEETbux

[Anonymous No.16657815]

>>16657781
see my post from before: >>16657248

[Anonymous No.16657821]

It's the sign of a brainlet that they only associate anti-capitalism with Marx

[Anonymous No.16657831]

>>16657782
pls explain

>>16657821
I am literally not. Hence my my original post. I said I am critical of capitalism, but not a fan of marx.

[Anonymous No.16657884]

>>16657831
Find your spine and find your Way
A witch tale from another day
Nothing new, or even old
Just the Truth
as ever told.

[Anonymous No.16657894]

>>16657652
I think you just answered your own question.

[Anonymous No.16657899]

You can have Marxian economics without the class critique. An example being a strict caste system where people are effectively designed for a certain role.

[Anonymous No.16657908]

>>16657772
when you actually manage to get them to answer this question it turns out it's just liberalism but they have high status

[Anonymous No.16657927]

>>16657908
This. Also curious how all of the retards on bunkerchan and commies in general want to be state people instead of the average worker.
Very curious. And they all don't have jobs.

[Anonymous No.16657947]

>>16657884
where is this from?
how is this related to the two posts I was referencing?

[Anonymous No.16657967]

>>16657947
An original poem just for (You) from (Me), that guy you've been talking to.

[Anonymous No.16657996]

>>16657967
that is nice anon, but what does it all mean? What are you refering to? The culture post or the marx critique post?

[Anonymous No.16658018]

>>16657996
culture

[Anonymous No.16658030]

>>16657790
It might if that question was comprehensible.

[Anonymous No.16658049]

>>16658030
It's pretty clear? If you are planning an economy, is it not better to plan it at the local level, not try and create a grand plan in the nation's capital and rely on speculative AI and the competence of central bureaucrats who cannot possibly know about the intricacies of every industry?

[Anonymous No.16658055]

>>16658018
Okay. Still don't know what you mean by it, but thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.16658057]

>capitalism
>communism
There is so much more to life than arguing how wealth should be distributed in a society. I would advice you to use your time on something else.

[Anonymous No.16658064]

>>16657740
>so we should just get rid of the government
>as peacefully as possible
oh no no no

[Anonymous No.16658071]

>>16658057
>>16658064
both based.

[Anonymous No.16658087]

>>16658055
Bitte schön

[Anonymous No.16658136]

>>16656758
The problem with capitalism isn't that it can't be reformed such that everyone under it has a chance at a good life. the problem (in my opinion) is that any ideology based in productivity and value generation as a primary motive (socialism and communism fall under this too) will inevitably lead its people to a life of complacency, cultural/spiritual death, decadence, an meaninglessness. this fundamental problem is why I find it hard to attach myself to any of the modern political ideologies (capitalism, socialism, communism, fascism). capitalism is the lesser of those evils though because it at least could be reformed to provide people with good lives more easily than the other systems

[Anonymous No.16658144]

>>16656804
take the aesthetic pill, the schiller pill

[Anonymous No.16658157]

>>16658136
>fascism
Fascism is about nation and spirituality too. It is less materialist than the others.

[Anonymous No.16658163]

>>16658144
sounds based actually

>>16658157
this

[Anonymous No.16658168]

>>16658049
Not really. Centralization means you can apply more resources where you need them.

[Anonymous No.16658176]

>>16658157
yeah, it might be the best of those, race obsession aside. don't get me wrong I think maintaining a strong cultural identity is important I just don't really care about race-mixing or whatever.

[Anonymous No.16658191]

This can be all answered with a simple statement. Capitalism and Communism are equally ideologically vapid and their existence in the mind is absolutely meaningless. To me, the system of an idea behind manufacturing culture and governmental faculties is an affair of nothingness in return. It is based on power dynamics within rationality. These rational concerns contain false promises based on the ability to create any sort of promised utopian or moral stability. In all consideration the best action or idea to take is one akin to an object like a rock. Just don't give a fuck. It is all spooky logical nonsense.

>>16658144
Go beyond that, take the pill which deems the most valuable and authentic to you. Conquer both hedonism and aesthecism and become a God.

[Anonymous No.16658220]

>>16658168
I doubt someone in London in a Westminster office could possible correctly predict and address the needs of me in some workshop in the Midlands, whilst doing the same across an entire nation. I would rather they slapped a budget down in front of the county authorities, or the town authorities and let them have the final say.

>>16658176
>race obsession
>fascism

[Anonymous No.16658229]

>>16658191
>In all consideration the best action or idea to take is one akin to an object like a rock. Just don't give a fuck. It is all spooky logical nonsense.
Taking that hermit pill any day now anon.

[Anonymous No.16658244]

>>16656758
The big trick here is not to treat Marxism as a set in stone ideology you either think is based or hate.
At the end of the day Marx provided a very good political philosophical analysis of how capitalist systems work and their inherent paradoxes.
That does not mean his word is God, treat him as you would Kant or Aristotle or Heidegger.
Rethink it, talk about it with people, use it to find the things you actually want to change, and then figure out how to do it, based on your new gained knowledge of how this system works.
This does not have to include nice red communist aesthetics or joining whatever your local communist/socialist org is, they tend to get stuck in a semi-religious obsession with aesthetics and scripture.
organizing doesnt have to bear the name 'Marxism', just do shit based on political/philosophical insights you think are right.

[Anonymous No.16658282]

>>16658244
>That does not mean his word is God, treat him as you would Kant or Aristotle or Heidegger.
>Rethink it, talk about it with people, use it to find the things you actually want to change, and then figure out how to do it, based on your new gained knowledge of how this system works.
This is really the whole motivation behind the thread, to grow out and expand, and to get a new tool in the chest. It is Hegelian, really.
I will go out and read stuff, then subsume it into my world view and adapt to whatever I have gleaned from it.
Thanks anon.

[Anonymous No.16658293]

>>16658168
Resources should not go to those who need them most. Resources should go to those who make the best use of them .

The latter allows for actual advancement of society and technology. The former is a race to the bottom where the useful members of society are deprived of what they need to make society work and advance.

[Anonymous No.16658312]

Class Marxism and Communist don't matter anymore. Those are things of the past.

Now is the time for race Marxism. Every hip twitter kid is on board with it. It's the future.

[Anonymous No.16658313]

>>16658282
Godspeed to you anon, i hope you either find something of value or find a nuanced critique of it

[Anonymous No.16658320]

>>16658312
Race realism with ethno-exclusive public services?
Redistribution to the people... my people... my group?
Sounds BASED.

[Anonymous No.16658340]

>>16658313
That is what I am hoping. Thanks anon, been great talking to you.

[Anonymous No.16658345]

>>16658320
Your group?
Probably not. White people are the bourgeoisie race. All dead or racemixed into a brownie.

[Anonymous No.16658350]

>>16658345
then what are you on about?

[Anonymous No.16658363]

>>16657088
don't bother engaging with these faggots, a /pol/tard who can string together a sentence is still a /pol/tard

[Anonymous No.16658375]

>>16658363
Yikes. You're really perturbed.
You probably live in fear of these people. You think they can be anywhere at any time.
What a life.

[Anonymous No.16658659]

>>16656982
>>16656982
>>16656982

[Anonymous No.16658846]

>>16656758
have you ever actually read anything by Marx?

[Anonymous No.16658851]

>>16658846
>reading Jew crap

[Anonymous No.16659023]

>>16658363
Keep seething you marxist faggot.

[Anonymous No.16659034]

>>16656758
Socialism utopian and scientific
Condition 1844
Family private property and the state
Value price and profit
Contribution to a critique
Mandel

[Anonymous No.16659088]

daily reminder that people that say read marx never read marx

[Anonymous No.16659380]

>>16657302
I think you underestimate the psychological effects of being ruled over by nature vs being ruled over by men.

[Anonymous No.16660474]

>>16656758
i would tell you to listen to what this guy has to say and then eventually read his books https://lbry.tv/@ERTV-International:9