/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17743054]

i want to be vehemently anticapitalist and just destroy capitalists in debates what should i read?

[Anonymous No.17743062]

Atlas Shrugged.

[Anonymous No.17743065]

>>17743054

[Anonymous No.17743068]

>>17743054
>>17743054

[Anonymous No.17743075]

>>17743054
Mein Kampf

[Anonymous No.17743087]

>>17743075
isnt fascism entirely congruent with capitalism in all but a strictly economic sense, being inundated with hierarchies if only different ones?

[Anonymous No.17743119]

Aristotle. He hated money.

[Anonymous No.17743121]

>>17743054

[Anonymous No.17743125]

>>17743054
Buy a gun and start a cult

[Anonymous No.17743170]

>>17743087
Capitalism means private ownership of goods and a respect for the property rights of the individual. Individuals have no rights under fascism.

[Anonymous No.17743251]

>>17743062
>>17743068

It's exactly the other way round. Rand vindicates the goodness and fundamentally correct form-of-life which is atheistic capitalism, and when you read that Tiqqun garbage properly it only makes you hate women even more than you did going in.

[Anonymous No.17743275]

>>17743054
anyone who starts off from a position of simply wanting to "win" against others intellectually is an idiot and likely to stay one. you just decided to follow talking points to justify disliking people in your life/who you see on tv. you didn't start from a place of passion in your ideology. even if you had you would have found out that ideological loyalty devoid of self sacrifice is hollow and pointless.

you're so many layers down from being genuine that even presented with tons of primary sources you wouldn't retain it in any meaningful way. just follow talking points you see in online articles and save yourself some time. eventually you'll get tired of picking fights with middle aged right wingers for no reason and in a panic over the time you've wasted will shift into some other pursuit you find meaningful at the time and start the cycle over

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.17743279]

>>17743121
Are you ISO or something?

[Anonymous No.17743285]

>>17743054
All you need is 'read marx' and 'lol that's liberalism not leftism retard'

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.17743301]

>>17743285
Really? You mean I’ve been wasting my time reading up on all this?
Doofus

[Anonymous No.17743310]

my stenographic stream of consciousness interpretation of the medieval poetry work name piers plowman desu

[Anonymous No.17744577]

>>17743054
>vehemently
>debates
You're under 18, aren't you, champ? Come on, you know the rules, back to twitter.

[Anonymous No.17744692]

You can't be anticapitalist without being a fucking bug person. Capitalism is just individualism applied to economics. If you want to destroy something, go after consumerism.

[Anonymous No.17744714]

>>17743054
>i want to be vehemently anticapitalist
>what should i read
You don't

[Anonymous No.17744884]

>>17743054
What is property? - Joseph Proudhon

[Anonymous No.17745717]

>>17743054
Yes.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.17745746]

>>17744692
Capitalism drives this culture of “consumerism”.

The accumulative properties of the currency is the problem. It motivates greed, therefore only the most sociopathic become successful and placed in leadership positions.
Your description is laughable btw, bugman.

[Anonymous No.17746539]

>>17743054
just have simple common sense

[Anonymous No.17747078]

>>17744577
i'm 23 lol, person who thinks only teenagers debate and only teenagers use the word vehemently

[Anonymous No.17747089]

>>17743054
>"his" idea of being vehemently anticapitalist is epic "CAPITALTARDS DESTROYED BY FACTS AND LOGIC" compilations
"People" like you are the reason the capitalists are winning. Kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.17747107]

>>17747078
Another 23 yo here, you sound like you're 13 so begone, fag.

[Anonymous No.17747174]

>>17743054
How did you come to have that opinion before you even read any anticapitalist theory you absolute fucking midwit? Good god fuck off.

[Anonymous No.17747185]

Klaus Schwab, The Great Reset

[Anonymous No.17747195]

>>17743054
read marx lenin mao fanon sakai

[Anonymous No.17747220]

>>17743054
No book needed, just reason and knowledge of a few questions, not even their answer.
> How much money is there in the world?
> How much does that make divided fairly amongst everyone?
> If you wanted to do that, how much money would immediately disappear because it is virtual wealth built on the very inequalities of the system?
> How much would that, once again, leave per individual if divided fairly.
If this is a honest debate or you are speaking with your friends who are on the fence, then just ask these questions and let them come to their own conclusion themselves. The figures will vary a lot because people evaluate the amount of virtual wealth differently but in the end they will almost assuredly realize how fucking fragile and unfair the system is.

[Anonymous No.17747349]

>>17747220
>Will people remain as productive when the relation between work and income is removed?

>What does the history of socialist systems tell us in this regard?

[Anonymous No.17747365]

>>17743054
Mein Kampf

[Anonymous No.17747367]

>>17743251
Rand didn’t even understand how capitalism worked in the first place. The money speech from Atlas Shrugged was so bad and such a misrepresentation of capitalism it’s not even funny anymore

[Anonymous No.17747380]

>>17747220
>> How much money is there in the world?
>> How much does that make divided fairly amongst everyone?
Like 5,000$
lol

[Anonymous No.17747495]

>>17747380
kek holy shit this is true, are communists communists because they're just really bad at math?

[Anonymous No.17747672]

>>17747380
$171428.571429
Depending on how you evaluate virtual wealth that amount shrinks down to about 13k once that is accounted.

[Anonymous No.17747682]

>>17747672
Definitely define virtual wealth here, because that's not a fucking side note if it's the difference between $170k and $13k.

[Anonymous No.17747690]

>>17747672
The population of Africa is going to quadruple over the next 80 years though.
And again:
>>17747349

[Anonymous No.17747696]

>>17747672
Wealth is not the same thing as money.
>>17747682
>because that's not a fucking side note if it's the difference between $170k and $13k.
lel, this too

[Anonymous No.17747709]

>>17743054
Move to a country that isn't capitalist.
If you don't die in the first year only then you can start arguing that capitalism isn't great.

[Anonymous No.17747711]

>>17743054
Disregard all the anons who recommended Marx and communist theory. Marxism leads to more capitalism. Communism is nothing but a worse version of capitalism, and we are already under communism. Read Evola, only a traditionalist worldview can demolish the abomination of capitalism.

[Anonymous No.17747712]

>>17743125
This.

Buy a manual on how to clean and maintain firearms. Start a cult, execute all glowies.

[Anonymous No.17747745]

>>17747682

Investments, crypto, shit like the value associated with brands (the Pepsi logo creates more "wealth" than either you or me will throughout our lives) or with real estate developments.

[Anonymous No.17747746]

>>17747380
Even then
>Shit costs more or less depending on location
>Therefore some people have more
>If everyone has the same and it's evenly distributed, the first give or take makes people unequal
>If you want to avoid this, then get rid of money
>But if you get rid of money, then what's the point
>Try instead to redistribute wealth
>A starving African gets 5 shares of a tech company that will soon cease to exist
Wealth redistribution doesn't work, ever. And this is assuming everyone is a good boy and doesn't just take back what was taken from them.

[Anonymous No.17747755]

>>17747745
Alright I see what you mean. So no, it absolutely doesn't count. If we're doing wealth/money redistribution, that shit goes down the drain before it even hits the toilet bowl.

[Anonymous No.17747793]

>>17747755

So we are talking a figure closer to the 13k.
Anyways, even if it wasn't that drastic, that's *all* you get. It isn't "the money produced" this year. It's all of it, and then the systems grinds to a halt because it is entirely reliant on this illusion of wealth it creates.
Even with 171k, we are talking 2-3 years of an very mediocre salary.

[Anonymous No.17747797]

>>17747746
You say this but despite that things like raising the min wage are ENORMOUSLY popular, even though all it accomplishes is destroying small businesses and gradually inflating the economy. Most people are too dumb to think about the nuances of a living wage, just say a bigger number than last time and say they get it, that's enough.

[Anonymous No.17747844]

>>17747746
>Wealth redistribution doesn't work, ever.
>>17747696
>>17747690
The point is not to argue for wealth redistribution (not because it is dumb but because that ship has sailed at least a few centuries ago) but to show with very simple questions no one ever ask and who'se answer challenges the view that capitalism is a strong system. It certainly *is* very resilient, but it isn't as much of an engine of wealth creation as most of us assume it is.

[Anonymous No.17747877]

>>17747797
You say this, but even as someone in favor of backhanding people who cry "BIGGER NUMBERS IN OUR WALLETS", I've seen the effects firsthand of what shit wages do. I live in a town that's been afflicted with development fever. Suburbs as far as the eye can see, condos, apartments, more apartments, more suburbs, more condos, more, more, more. This city itself only really has a famous brand of Orange Juice as it's main export, yet simply being close to a wealthier city, having an international sports college locate here, and endless marketing has led to it's people being priced out again and again. At the heart of the city is a place most people don't even know exist that's dirt poor and grows rapidly every year with it's residents being unable to save enough to move out, and making barely enough to keep going.
Not saying this is justification for giving most of these bums a bunch of unearned wealth, but there are a lot of factors beyond what an employer deems your worth work that goes into poverty. In this town, it's being surrounded by the rich.

[Anonymous No.17747885]

Suicide Note

[Anonymous No.17747950]

Why using words when you can use images? Just confront any city or town from before the modern age with a modern metropolis. The problem with capitalism is inherently aesthetic, you may live well but the fact that it's an abomination in every sense is perceptible through your own senses. Just watch the ugliness that is all around you.

[Anonymous No.17747982]

>>17747950
>Ignoring the ugliness of USSR
Things are bad all around

[Anonymous No.17747992]

>>17747982
>implying soviet communism and capitalism are different things
Why is this board so full of retards?

[Anonymous No.17748011]

>>17743054

[Anonymous No.17748023]

>>17747877
You say this as though this doesn't support my argument, based retard.

[Anonymous No.17748062]

>>17747992
idk but I'm getting pretty tired of it

[Anonymous No.17748130]

>>17743075
Unironically this, capitalism can not be disassociated from the anglo and from the jew

[Anonymous No.17748181]

>>17747992
>implying it's the fault of capitalism and not a natural waste product of any civilization with more permanence

[Anonymous No.17748197]

If you're coming from the right, read the distributists. If you're coming from the left, hang yourself.

[Anonymous No.17748208]

>>17748197
>the distributists
Who?

[Anonymous No.17748215]

>>17748197
> read my knock off version of proudhon or kys
the absolute state of zoomers

[Anonymous No.17748240]

>>17743054
>i want to be vehemently anticapitalist and just destroy capitalists in debates what should i read?

the newspaper. either you live in the real world and are anticapitalist, or you blind yourself to the evils of capitalism.

[Jesus No.17749634]

>>17743054
DSM-5

[Anonymous No.17749708]

>>17748197
What does shitributism offer netter than corporatism?

[Anonymous No.17749780]

>>17747174
i've read some, just not enough to formulate a rigorous conception

[Anonymous No.17749786]

>>17749708
You certainly sound like somebody worth talking to.

[Anonymous No.17749833]

>>17745746
Do you hold this point of view because of your lack of wealth? I don't think its capitalisms fault, I see it as a vehicle to wealth that can be used correctly and incorrectly.

[Anonymous No.17749877]

>>17749634
LMAOOOOOOOO