/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18017054]

What's the leftist version of this?

I want to be exposed to both sides but economics is, for me, an auxiliary subject.

[Anonymous No.18017064]

>>18017054

[Anonymous No.18017082]

>>18017064
/thread

[Anonymous No.18017110]

Capital in the 21st Century, also The Origins of Political Order. Btfos modern Trump worshiping retardisn that is American conservatism.

[Anonymous No.18017137]

>>18017110
>Trump worshiping retardism that is american conservatism
Conservatives don't like trump. It's only fascist brain-rot that suckles his teets. George Will left the Republican Party over Trump, and explicitly excluded him from his book The Conservative Sensibility.

[Anonymous No.18017176]

>>18017064
Oh cool. I actually have that but have yet to read it. Thought it was more 'third position' or conspiratorial.

[Anonymous No.18017180]

>>18017110
>randomly seethes about Trump

Yikes.

[Anonymous No.18017183]

>>18017137
The Republican Party worships Trump. They fall over themselves to defend every retarded thing he says. They all started repeating the zero evidence fraud claims because he did.

At best they will caveat with "voters are concerned about voter security so we need new voter laws" but it's still letting him do his lies.

McConnel grew balls for a day and said Trump was responsible for the Capitol riot and is already back to drinking down his loads and saying he hopes he runs again.

To be Republican now is to swallow Trump's jizz. If you didn't leave back in 2016, you're retarded.

[Anonymous No.18017206]

>>18017137
This post is a joke right? The republican party isn’t conservative anyway.

[Anonymous No.18017211]

>>18017137
Only conservatives out of power are speaking up about Trump. Sure, you get Boehner and Ryan, and McCain but only on his deathbed.

The entire ideology is now continent on spreading your boipussy for the Orange Man whenever he has a change of whim.

[Anonymous No.18017215]

Blumpf is a retard anyway. He should’ve crossed the rubicon but he wasted his chance.

[Anonymous No.18017225]

>>18017176
It's more historical than actual economic theory. For that just read capital. It's a great read nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.18017247]

>>18017054
Sowell is an inside job by the lefties to make rightist economics look retarded.
idk how /lit/ takes this negro seriously, he is basically illiterate.

[Anonymous No.18017256]

>>18017225
Capital is essential, you really can't get anywhere in left-wing economic analysis without it.
Lenin's Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism is also vital.
Would also recommend both the Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR and the Critique of Soviet Economics, but with these you really do need all of the foundational stuff leading up to it to grasp it.

[Anonymous No.18017273]

>>18017183
>the republican party is conservative
there's nothing conservative about supporting trump. The neocons are all in the democratic party now.

[Anonymous No.18017287]

>>18017256
those are 20th century texts. did OP mean contemporary, or what?

[Anonymous No.18017292]

You should read The Art of the Deal. It’s a brilliant work about an absolutely ingenious business mogul.

[Anonymous No.18017302]

>>18017292
if this isn't a troll then there's no hope for this board

[Anonymous No.18017521]

>>18017110
Pikkety has been proven numerous times to falsify data to fit his narrative. Spare yourself some time and don't read anything by him.

[Anonymous No.18017580]

[Anonymous No.18017629]

>>18017215
>He should’ve crossed the Rubicon but he wasted his chance
I honestly would prefer this to what we have now.

[Anonymous No.18017809]

>>18017287
I assumed he meant basic texts, and if he wants a more contemporary one, Piketty has already been name dropped in this thread.
But really, there's not a lot you can do with left-wing economics that isn't a remix of the structure already laid down in Capital and Marx & Engel's other works on the subject without just edging into socdem, regulated capitalist models (which are not left-wing).

[Anonymous No.18017871]

>>18017054
that IS the leftist version
this is the right's version

[Anonymous No.18017896]

>>18017054
Modern Monetary Theory Dictates:
when the government gets control of the money supply, they don't need to tax anyone. if they determine there is a social program that needs funding, then they can just print the money. the only restriction is inflation, and that is why they tax the people, to take out money from circulation to reign in inflation

[Anonymous No.18018527]

>>18017137
What? Conservatives are the only ones that like him, anyone more right-leaning hates him.

[Anonymous No.18018543]

In capitalist society, creative activity takes the form of commodity production, namely production of marketable goods, and the results of human activity take the form of commodities. Marketability or saleability is the universal characteristic of all practical activity and all products. The products of human activity which are necessary for survival have the form of saleable goods: they are only available in exchange for money. And money is only available in exchange for commodities. If a large number of men accept the legitimacy of these conventions, if they accept the convention that commodities are a prerequisite for money, and that money is a prerequisite for survival, then they find themselves locked into a vicious circle. Since they have no commodities, their only exit from this circle is to regard themselves, or parts of themselves, as commodities. And this is, in fact, the peculiar "solution" which men impose on themselves in the face of specific material and historical conditions. They do not exchange their bodies or parts of their bodies for money. They exchange the creative content of their lives, their practical daily activity, for money.

As soon as men accept money as an equivalent for life, the sale of living activity becomes a condition for their physical and social survival. Life is exchanged for survival. Creation and production come to mean sold activity. A man's activity is "productive," useful to society, only when it is sold activity. And the man himself is a productive member of society only if the activities of his daily life are sold activities. As soon as people accept the terms of this exchange, daily activity takes the form of universal prostitution.

[Anonymous No.18018549]

>>18018543
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/perlman-fredy/1969/misc/reproduction-daily-life.htm

[Anonymous No.18018553]

>>18017302
What? His bump stock ban was gayer than aids but the book is phenomenal and he was a brilliant real estate investor, economist, and diplomat. Should be all time beat seller. More enlightening than the bible or mein kampf even

[Anonymous No.18018581]

There aren't two sides. Economics is a science. There is an important distinction in economics between "positive" and "normative" economics. "Basic Economics" has both. But you should read it anyway since it explains the basic theory behind Neoclassical economics very clearly. And it is extremely important to understand Neoclassical economics if you want to understand economics, because all other economics is either a criticism or defence of Neoclassical economics. Also, Neoclassical economics generally holds in the long-run empirically.

Don't listen to anyone who says otherwise. Economics is not about "left" and "right". That is politics.

[Anonymous No.18018606]

>>18018581
>Also, Neoclassical economics generally holds in the long-run empirically.

Joan Robinson proved why that's a nonsensical statement, but she also called Kim Il-Sung a god

[Anonymous No.18018615]

>>18017215
The fact you thought he would ever entertain such a thing means you're retarded

[Anonymous No.18018636]

>>18018606
She didn't "prove" anything. You dont know anything about growth theory.

[Anonymous No.18018671]

>>18018636
She proved proved neoclassical economics isn't formally coherent, even Paul Samuelson eventually admitted she was right

http://theme.univ-paris1.fr/M1/hpe/HPEM1-TD4.pdf

[Anonymous No.18018775]

>>18017054
>Thomas Sowell
>right wing
Stop

[Anonymous No.18018798]

>>18018581
>economics isn’t politics
You want to know how I know you’re retarded?

[Anonymous No.18018913]

>>18017896
taxes are a means to create demand for currency

[Anonymous No.18018925]

>>18018581
.my far-reaching policies for total social transformation aren't political
>it's just what the market wants
>no you can't vote on it

[Anonymous No.18018956]

>>18017137
Technically true but leads us to a messy situation when people who call themselves conservatives suddenly don't count as conservatives.

Aside of that there are a some real conservatives (TM) that love him due the Israel dicksucking.

[Anonymous No.18018968]

>>18017247
Or he's a coon for the rightwing to make them look less racist.
>>18018798
>>18018925
He isn't wrong though. There is a scientific aspect to economics that's divorced from politics. It's just that politics can't be divorced from economics.

[Anonymous No.18018994]

>>18018956
that's because there's a split between paleoconservatives and reaganite conservatives. the first group led the party into the wilderness with goldwater, the second did it with the bubble economy and the war on terror. the second group is still pretty much discredited among regular voters (though not with donors or the media establishment) which is why paleos made such a sudden comeback in 2016. trump himself was a conservative populist which is what made him so dangerous both to the reaganites and the post-clintonite corporate dems. that's the option neither can all open for voters. even declared socialist bernie sanders was considered less dangerous than conservative populism establishing itself

[Anonymous No.18019002]

Laissez faire economics is leftist.

[Anonymous No.18019022]

>>18018968
that's just divine right warmed over for technocrats

[Anonymous No.18019129]

>>18018913
that too, you're not wrong

[Anonymous No.18019273]

>>18017064
>>18017082
>>18017176
>>18017225
>>18017256
Since when do you need to be a leftists to understand that economic supremacy can be used as a tool of control and to wage total war against nations?

You just need to understand that markets are darwinian zero sum games contrary to what market proponents tell you.
All the other leftists shit of united workers of the world and transexuals being normal human beings is inane and retarded.

[Anonymous No.18019289]

>>18018581
>Economics is a science
It's modern day astrology. It has no experiments, no control, and zero predictive power. It's completely unreproducable.

[Anonymous No.18019303]

>>18018994
> the second group is still pretty much discredited among regular voters
Are they really when they also give some soundbites to the reaganites? Conservatives generally seem loyal enough to the party to tolerate either side; it's why their turn out seems to vary a lot less than from democrats in the last 20 years, constantly going up.
>even declared socialist bernie sanders was considered less dangerous than conservative populism establishing itself
Well, he objectively was. For one, there was a very high chance he'd get cucked by the congress but even aside of that, his most radical ideas are basic conservative position in civilized countries and wouldn't change much for the elites beyond costing them a couple bucks. With Donald it was a total gamble of what the fuck he'd actually do and how it would be taken by the voters. Thankfully for the overlords, he did give them their taxcuts.

[Anonymous No.18019318]

>>18017054
Naked Economics. It actually does what this book claims to do, but it lands Keynesian, because most economists lean Keynesian. It's the dominant approach

[Anonymous No.18019371]

>>18017292
This. Excellent work.

>>18017302
Trump is based. He is the embodiment of strength and righteousness. Trust in Trump and be made great again. You, on the other hand, will never be a woman.

[Anonymous No.18019383]

>>18018581
>Also, Neoclassical economics generally holds in the long-run empirically.
This is why everyone hates people economics degrees

[Anonymous No.18019495]

>>18019383
> In a long enough timeline every plausible assertion could theoretically happen

You need to love the guts of these cheeky motherfuckers.

[Anonymous No.18019558]

>>18017137
>his "economic ideology" says a country can support an unlimited number of migrants from dissimilar cultures and values
>calls people who disagree "fascist brain rot"

I put "economic ideology" in quotes because you don't actually care about the economy, you just want to commit genocide

[Anonymous No.18019565]

>>18017183
>zero evidence
It's funny, there's a lot of evidence for it being "zero evidence." Refusing to hear evidence doesn't make it go away. I'm not explaining it to you either, you failed the test and need to go

[Anonymous No.18019567]

>>18017054
Leftists are financial illiterate (hence why they are leftists in the first place) so don't expect a good equivalent.

[Anonymous No.18019580]

Reminder: only ethnonationalists are conservative. If your highest loyalty is to anything but your people, whether you worship the "free market", some god, etc, you're a liberal

[Anonymous No.18019691]

>>18017137
Trump is based
""""Conservatives""" are a fucking joke

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18020065]

>>18017054
>>18019567
There’s no basics about it. They’re about as basic as Abrahamic religion. Sowell is just saying Calvinism is it and that all there is. And you swing to say Eastern Orthodox are illiterate.

[Anonymous No.18020071]

This, remember that both this boos are more centered on economics in a common sense way in the day by day world , if you really want to learn economics in a scientific way, you will need to read a lot of boring textbooks

[Anonymous No.18020629]

>>18020071
I began learning about economics so I don't feel like a brainlet reading books like Tragedy & Hope. Don't really care about all the theories and stuff without context. I was vague so as not to skew my recommendations, but maybe it wasn't for the best.

With "leftist" I just meant how Sowell constantly harps planned economies being retarded, etc. so I thought there must be counterpoints by 21st century people who still believe in them. I was interested in seeing these counterarguments without reading dozens of boring 1k page books, when I could use that time for what interests me a whole lot more.

Everyone's recommendation made in earnest, is appreciated

also everyone talking about trump is a faggot

[Anonymous No.18021296]

There are no leftist economics, there is leftist demagoguery, sophistry and masturbatory nonsense so leftoids have been forced to face reality and accept a neoclassical doctrine in the form of socialistic keynesianism/monetarism/mmt. In fact, the very book you've posted is a primer on such economic thought.
(Yes marxian faggotry has been dropprd even by leftist, my boy Bawerk utterly BTFOd classical economics in the vein if Ricardo and Marx out of the orbit of the Earth)

[Anonymous No.18021909]

>>18018581
There aren't two sides, there are way more than that.
>Also, Neoclassical economics generally holds in the long-run empirically.
fucking kys econ pseud

[Anonymous No.18023017]

>>18019002
lol
>america unironically believes this

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18023183]

>>18021296
>There are no leftist economics, there is leftist demagoguery, sophistry and masturbatory nonsense
>Posts Ted
Nothing you say is right.