without going into /pol/ memery what do you guys think of

tldr desu

File: 386592659843765789.jpg (25KB, 432x289px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 432x289px

check out this meme I found on /pol/

Totally misunderstood Hegel.

>>7642152

yeah he died on social security

oh wait that was ayn rand

>>7642190
He never mentioned Rand. You're strawmanning now.

Granted, Marxism is still retarded. Come back to me when you fix the price calculation problem.

>>7642139
He's a genius. I mean that has to be why we're all Cultural Marxists and commies. We're the most left board on 4chan.

>>7642139
The recent trend of blaming "marxism" for otherkin and other outlying crazy groups is interesting.
Especially how people will spend hours venting on "marxism" (and the relation to the frankfurt school) without even reading any work relating to the subject.

GOAT

>>7642190
That argument against Rand isn't very good. The idea was that she put her money into the "broken" system, so she just reclaimed what was hers.

File: 4602.jpg (463KB, 1920x1152px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1920x1152px

his ideas must be doing something right

>>7642384

everyone hates maoism

>>7642297

this

so fucking dense. engels makes way more sense and doesn't try to make your head explode. don't read marx without engels; you deserve better things in your life, like suicide.

the people who talk about the cultural marxist meme have never read anything by marx

File: spooks.jpg (31KB, 480x400px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 480x400px

stirner is better

>>7642152
That meme is dumb and Marx did have a job. Why are people dumb?

File: image.jpg (115KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 640x1136px

Kropotkin>Marx

On a side note, what are your thoughts on Bookchin?

>>7642152
He wrote for and managed a newspaper

It's irrelevant anyway. You don't judge an ideas merit by its source. And if you're going to, people like Ayn Rand and Rothbard were even more welfare babies so I guess that makes them wrong

>>7642685
Bookchin seems alright to me but not like anything extraordinary. Social ecology is an interesting concept.

>>7642651
This

>>7642139
Swine.

File: 076ff46ec7ecc94eb2609b1a84fc0eeb.jpg (113KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 600x600px

>>7642628
But only jealous plebs hate socialism with Chinese characteristics.

>>7642628
maoists don't, family

I like him and his writings. I'm not a fan of thinkers and/or schools influenced by him, or "neo-marxism" in general.

I do wonder if there is any truely modern "marxist" thinker or movement, taking the possibility of a post-scarcity world into consideration.

>>7642685
His book on the Spanish revolution was good

>reading the written Jew

>>7642812
Ayn Rand is wrong.

>>7642227
We're not.
>>7642297
Aspects of Marxism are responsible for much of the "equality" movement today.
>>7642654
Marxism has evolved past Marx.

>>7642139
He cared too much for the people and people pretended too care for the people under his ideas and they took advantage of the people.

>>7642139
His journalism is pretty good, and his philosophical essay 'Critique of Hagel's Philosophy of Right' is sort of interesting. His political writings are garbage.

>>7644073
>His political writings are garbage.
Care to elaborate?

>>7644171
The first thing you should know is his politics comes out of his philosophical studies, and he was a Hegalian. The core of Marxist theory is the dialectical model of progress. But where does Marx take it?

The celebrated Communist Manifesto is just an attempt to build a strong anti-thesis to battle the thesis of industrial capitalism. What's the synthesis? Marx said it was Communism, and that would be the end of history. Which doesn't work, because the state of Communism is itself a thesis by being a synthesis.

So either Marx wasn't looking forward very far, or he did not really think Communism would be the next stage in human society. We no longer have industrial capitalism, we have a sort of state capitalism, so what use is Marx anymore? None.

Besides, with increasing automation of the workplace, we are not going to have a communism of the proletariat - but what might end up becoming a communism of consumers like some sort of technocracy. Marx's writings are now functionally useless, and may have been just rabble-rousing trolling to begin with.

The guy would have loved /b/.

>>7644207
>thesis, antithesis, synthesis bullshit
>industrial capitalism has nothing to do with "state" capitalism
Did you skim like one article of a liberal summary of Marx and come out with this?

>>7644222
No. Care to elaborate on what you mean, because what I wrote is supported by Marx's own writings.

>>7644222
Not understanding his post isn't grounds for insulting it.

never read him but love reading about deterritorialization and psychogeography and the simulcrum and all that good shit, if you're depriving yourself of all the fun-as-heck lefty crit theory because of some 'cultural marx' bogeyman you're honestly missing out

>>7644225
His post misinterprets Hegel's dialectic with the typical mis-branding of "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" thus leading to a bad and generalized reading of Marx. You must differentiate between early Marx and later Marx, first of all, where he doesn't uphold an "end of history" or anything like a necessary "dialectic" such as thesis-antithesis-synthesis. You also have to separate Engels from Marx, and everyone afterwards.

File: 1449547171082.jpg (15KB, 211x203px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 211x203px

>>7642660
Nigga seemed really up his own ass with the ego and his own.

Cursory knowledge of natural selection and genes renders a lot of his opinions nonsensical in their application to human life.

He's like a reductionist who gives himself a clause of exception for his ability to apply the label to others.

>>7644261
And also, did neither of you see the most basic and vital aspect of the critique of capital being the emergence of abstract labor that is externalized (alienated) and re-appropriated in private property?

>>7644261
I think you are right to point out it's not as complicated as a single dogma. So then there is no Marxism, there is just Marx's writings, saying different things at different times?

Where does early Marx end (and what does it contain) and where does late Marx begin (and what does that also contain)?

>>7644261
Also (I'm this anon >>7644282) how have I misinterpreted Hegel's dialectic?

>>7644299
You said Marx was a Hegelian, a preface that leads into Marx's use of the Hegelian dialectic which you seem to have characterized as the basic "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" version which is from Fichte's work. Have you read Hegel?

>>7644311
That question at the end was not meant to be facetious.

>>7644311
Yes - though I'm guessing now I've not read enough of him. I didn't say that the dialectical model was Hegel's. As I understand it, Hegel's use of the dialectic was in epistemology? Took on a materialist interpretation later with Fichte?

>>7644328
Adding t this, wasn't Marx's use of the dialectic materialist - like in his materialist conception of history? So the original anon was right?

>>7642139
>without going into /pol/ memery
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>7644265
>He's like a reductionist who gives himself a clause of exception for his ability to apply the label to others.

rekt

>>7642139
I've only read his writings on British India and they were pretty astute and the prose was beautiful. The guy was inspired all the time. It comes across in his writing.

>>7642865
but even other marxists hate maoists

>>7643685
Well obviously, reread my post in context and figure out what I'm saying

>>7642152
>I can't judge and value a work by it's own merit therefore I have to shitpost about the author's life like it matters until I'm right.