Why is everyone studying humanities so fond of Marxism?

Those with brains ended up in a STEM field

>>1567667
>STEM field
Also a pack of positivists and should be kept from history at all costs.

B-but I am a national-socialist. Just don't tell my colleagues.

>>1567720
>socalism in one nation plzgo hitler/stalin

Anyone who ever had a job has to atleast have a little bit of sympathy for Marxism, work is a fucking chore, you are a lucky exception if you enjoy your job, and everyone hates their boss

>>1567738
Ironically no, most of them have been cucked so well that they they think anyone who advocates Marxist or Marxist theory doesn't know how the world works. Their knowledge of Marxism is usually the USSR and absolute equality welfare.

>>1567667

>>1567401
>>1567508

>>1567714
So why does academia consider the communist manifesto to be literal truth when it is debatable at best?

>>1567747
True, most marxists are academic who never had a job. I was leftist until I started working.

>>1567738
>Anyone who ever had a job has to atleast have a little bit of sympathy for Marxism

Cringe.
It's obvious most of you who think like this are lazy and incompetent., and probably have very little experience as well.
And, no, people with real jobs and years of work would never be Marxist.

>>1567738
>and everyone hates their boss
my boss is a cool guy, so no, I don't.

>>1567763
Where do you work?

>>1567738
If you got a real job (hint: don't major in history) then maybe you would be less negative

>>1567769
Research in STEM, in Romania.
I know you probably think I'm shitposting but it's true. It's not perfect but I can manage.

>>1567783
So you have no experience of working yourself?

>>1567796
what are you talking about

>>1567796
Being an assistant researcher in a laboratory and a teacher IS working, it's not just reading books if that's what you're thinking.
Unless you mean being my own boss, then no.

>>1567807
The same could be said of Marxist professors. Are you really so naive of how the academy works that you think it is just professors reading books all day?

>>1567759
By "Marxist" you mean you believed in absolute equality and a welfare state in the US, or Sovietism in the EU, rather than Marx's critique on capital. I have no idea why working would make a person stop believing in the inherent contradictions of capitalism, unless they chose to shut it out because thinking about it is debilitating. There's non-Marxist articles on it all the time since the recession. Everyone just tiptoes around the elephant in the room because once people see the word Marx they tune out and project what they think Marxism is.

>>1567650

Not everyone, only the people studying at (((western universities)))

>>1567826
Are there any non-western universities at all?

>>1567817
I doubt he works with carcinogen compounds everyday, or works some expensive machinery or checks hundreds of calculations made by distracted students.
But, no I'm not assuming a "Marxist professor" only does some one dimensional activity, just like I don't assume this about my professors.
It's just that people here in general assume this about everyone working in some "intellectual" field.

>>1567753
Because academia held american values before the 60's and acted against those that expressed objectively shit ideas.
Then in the 60's and 70's soviet infiltrators hijacked the civil rights efforts and turned academia into what it is today.

>>1567650

To be fair, I'm studying Finance and Business and I figure we will need socialism or communism in 20 years due to automation.

>>1567851
In non-western countries.

>>1567818
>inherent contradictions of capitalism,
wwwwwwwwwwww

>>1567851
Only in every non-western country.

>>1567872
But they are all shit tbqh
>inb4 le grorious nippon just like in muh animus

>>1567870
You will need some form of welfare until the proles die out. That's different from socialism.

>>1567874
It's pretty fucking obvious.

A semi-related question:
Why do all STEM-fags buy into the whole "work hard and study and you will become rich"-meme? I've seen so many spoiled brats on this site who brags about how they will be rich engineers on this site. But you never see any rich engineers on this site either, do you?

>>1567881

We had a guest speaker in class who basically talked about ETFs who said that money managers and people who do analysis are being automated out of a job due to ETF.

Although I don't want to go into Wall Street I still fear for my job in 20 years.

Maybe this is a conversation for /biz/ though.

>>1567818
>critique
Implying

"Wah, I don't like efficiency."
"if everyone was forced to work and be inefficient, then we would all feel better and be super efficient!"
"Like I totally bet we could totally make labor 3 or 4 times more efficient if we just abandoned specialization"
"I like chairs, but I don't like people"
"Market failures only exist in capitalism"
"Central planning is definitely better. The will of a small group can definitely respond to the needs and desires of everyone better than the will of everyone can..."
"No growth is better than a growth cycle"
"What's a self regulating system???"
"I don't want to have to work, but have no money or skills... If only I could somehow be a global tom sawyer..."
"I'm sure people give a shit about the things they use when there is no reason/incentive to do so. Property is evil."
"Ofc the sub 65 IQ guy should do the same work as the savant, it's only fair"

>>1567919
Was it really necessary to put so many strawmen in one single post?

>>1567908
It's not like you end up with a bad life having $100k/yr. Most people who make that much think the system is fine. Ironically, that $100k is only meaningful because they employ the services of people who make much less than $100k/yr, who the system is not working as great for. Then they'll turn around and say they deserve it and be proud of accomplishing what they've accomplished, and say anyone could do it if they tried.

Basically, STEMfags have been given a lifestyle well above average, and they're very happy being above average. The system elevates them and recognizes their above averages so they're happy.

>>1567650
I study history and don't like marxism as political doctrine. I mean, is important and several historians follows Marx theories, but is not for me.

>>1567667
0/10

>>1567919
>By "Marxist" you mean you believed in absolute equality and a welfare state
Yep, one of those people.

>>1567896
>things have value
>some things can't be fractioned
>value can more efficiently be assessed in terms of a divisible intermediate thing of value
I see no contradiction... Capitalism is trade and property rights.


>things have no value (no one wants anything)
>Everyone is equal in every way (they aren't)
>My feelings on a chair are more important than the chair itself
>My feelings have more value than reality
>If we all work together, we can get some amount of the things we might want
I see contradictions here though...

>>1567650
Socialism will win due to automation tbqh

>>1567949
>things have value
>some things can't be fractioned
>value can more efficiently be assessed in terms of a divisible intermediate thing of value
What does this have to do with socialism or the accumulation of capital, profit distribution between capital and labor, and the inherent conflicts of interests arising between owners and workers?

>I see contradictions here though...
Because those things aren't Marxism.

The point of Marxism is entitling the laborer to the fruits of his labor, not equality. Of course you literally can not understand this because all you know about Marx is capitalist memes and the USSR, even when you can actually read Marx's book yourself.

File: techno.png (7KB, 393x286px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 393x286px

>>1567962
technofuedalism*

>>1567937
The secret to making more money is incredibly simple.
Produce more value.

STEM is more profitable than manual labor because it makes more value.
Being a cashier pays poorly because anyone can use an automated calculator.


>Ironically, that $100k is only meaningful because they employ the services of people who make much less than $100k/yr,
>people who make much less than $100k/yr, who the system is not working as great for.
Thatcher.png
That_not_that_but_that.webm

>people who make much less than $100k/yr, who the system is not working as great for.
Ironically, they are much better off than their parents were (who likely produced and earned similar amounts of value), because of the stem fags...
They produce the same amount of value, yet live much better lives due to other people's efforts.

>Then they'll turn around and say they deserve it and be proud of accomplishing what they've accomplished, and say anyone could do it if they tried.
They do...
They can...

>>1568005
If your labor is more valuable, then you should support Marxism, as Marxism aims to entitle the laborer to the fruits of his own labor, and seeks to prevent others, (((capitalists))), from taking a cut of the value produced.

Marxism is equality is a meme.

>However, Marxism rejected egalitarianism in the sense of greater equality between classes, clearly distinguishing it from the socialist notion of the abolition of classes based on the division between workers and owners of productive property. Marx's view of classlessness was not the subordination of society to a universal interest (such as a universal notion of "equality"), but was about the creation of the conditions that would enable individuals to pursue their true interests and desires. Thus, Marx's notion of communist society is radically individualistic.
> Although Marx's position is often confused or conflated with distributive egalitarianism, in which only the goods and services resulting from production are distributed according to a notional equality, in reality Marx eschewed the entire concept of equality as abstract and bourgeois in nature, preferring to focus on more concrete principles such as opposition to exploitation on materialist grounds and economic logic


STEMfags being content because they end up in a privileged position is not contradictory with any of these.

>>1567753
In what country do you live holy shit

>>1567975
>What does this have to do with socialism or the accumulation of capital, profit distribution between capital and labor, and the inherent conflicts of interests arising between owners and workers?
an anon said the inherent contradictions of capitalism were apparent if you looked.
I posted capitalism. (I left out property because I forgot desu)

>The point of Marxism is entitling the laborer to the fruits of his labor, not equality.
You're (not trying to imply you) completely free to establish a commune under a capitalist system.
Isn't it weird how marxists/commie faggots are never willing to risk their own money/labour unless they are able to force everyone else to as well.

>even when you can actually read Marx's book yourself.
I'm lazy and I don't need to because I understand the principals. There is a reason why communes fail, and it's not capitalism or even relative inefficiency. It's the people.
And the only way that you can get it to appear to work is with force.

>Marx is capitalist memes and the USSR
#notall[insert thing here]
#Imwithher
#sovietswrentmarxists
100% totally agree. I'm the memester here for sure...

>>1568032
Something tells me a stem commune would turn out poorly.
If you managed to produce anything new of any value you would immediately leave and try to cover up the fact that it happened.
You would then make your own company producing X and make more money.

I like capitalism precisely because it lets you have the full fruits of your labor and luck.
Risk is rewarded.
A fraction of the value you produce if the price you pay for notably less risk.

>>1568043
>(I left out property because I forgot desu)
Private ownership of capital is what makes capitalism capitalism versus any other form of market economy, like market socialism. Socialism being centrally planned economies and capitalism being markets is a meme.

>You're (not trying to imply you) completely free to establish a commune under a capitalist system.
I'm self employed and own my own means of production, but some of that comes by luck. People like you are so ridiculously bluepilled by (((capitalists))) that you refuse to look at economic realities. The (((capitalist))) strings you on, dangling a carrot in front of you, and you're content as long as you get the carrot, failing to understand the reason why the (((capitalist))) has the carrot in the first place is because you just ploughed his carrot field for him.

>Isn't it weird how marxists/commie faggots are never willing to risk their own money/labour unless they are able to force everyone else to as well.
Marxism meaning equality is such a meme that even people that self-identify as Marxists believe it, but it's not what Marxism is.

>I'm lazy and I don't need to because I understand the principals.
No, you're lazy, and you let your (((capitalist))) masters interpret Marxism for you, and misrepresent Marxism when those principles you listed are not Marxist.

>There is a reason why communes fail, and it's not capitalism or even relative inefficiency.
There are actually successful co-ops, and the biggest corporations are publicly owned, and not directly managed by the shareholders. The reasons why communes fail is because anyone that calls themselves a commune is a bunch of flower-power hippies that think Marxism is equality.

>And the only way that you can get it to appear to work is with force.
No, it's by entitling them to the fruits of their labor. Unless it's capitalism, then the (((capitalist))) will only give you part of that and keep the rest, because he owns the means of production

>>1568043
>meme strawman hashtags
>hillary is marxist
>I'm the memester here for sure...
Yes, you really are the memester. Read a fucking book. Marxism is equality is a meme pushed by (((capitalists))) because they want you to stay bluepilled and not know what Marxism actually is. It's much easier to attack the absolute equality strawman and people that believe in it, than have the proles actually understanding what Das Kapital says.

File: tumblr_o5dsunIyni1qdptr8o1_500[1].jpg (136KB, 475x637px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 475x637px

>>1568097
>The (((capitalist))) strings you on, dangling a carrot in front of you, and you're content as long as you get the carrot, failing to understand the reason why the (((capitalist))) has the carrot in the first place is because you just ploughed his carrot field for him.

Is actually what you think happens? Are you five years old?

>>1567826

>dude it's all the JEWS lmao

There is no proof of a Jewish conspiracy lad, only names.

>>1567738

>work is a fucking chore

All iterations of Communism relied on mass employment and usually a hefty amount of literal slave labor.

>>1568067
>If you managed to produce anything new of any value you would immediately leave and try to cover up the fact that it happened.
The (((capitalist))) instead makes you sign a contract that says while employed by the (((capitalist))) all your ideas are owned by him.

>You would then make your own company producing X and make more money.
With what capital? By seeking capitalist (((investors))) and getting loans from (((bankers)))?

>I like capitalism precisely because it lets you have the full fruits of your labor and luck.
No it doesn't unless you own the capital.

>Risk is rewarded.
That's entrepenuerism, something that can exist in a market socialism. You're still on the Marxism is equality meme.

>A fraction of the value you produce if the price you pay for notably less risk.
That's the price you pay for not having capital.

>>1568132
>>1568097
>>1568112
>this (((autism)))

>>1568097
>Socialism being centrally planned economies and capitalism being markets is a meme.
I disagree. while definitions (that have been changed for deception) can be memes, this isn't one of those times.

>>You're (not trying to imply you) completely free to establish a commune under a capitalist system.
>but some of that comes by luck
And that is the reason why you get the full fruits of your labor. Your risk, your reward.
>carrot analogy and (((capitalist))) lizardmen
I understand, but I choose to go along with it because the potential benefits are infinite compared to finite.
You can only produce so much value yourself, but if you are willing to accept risk and uncertainty you can earn absurdly more.

>but it's not what Marxism is
You're no true scotsmanning. I get that marxism has diverged from its founding documents, but you lost the name game a long time ago.
Call yourself something else.

>There are actually successful co-ops
>and the biggest corporations are publicly owned
By private individuals...
>and not directly managed by the shareholders.
Shareholders can vote you know. There is no reason why an individual can't acquire a majority of shares and elect themselves.

>Unless it's capitalism, then the (((capitalist))) will only give you part of that and keep the rest, because he owns the means of production
He also owns the risk. If everyone is entiteled to the full fruits of their labor, then they must also own the risk and uncertainty that comes along with it.
Most people aren't willing to do so which is why most people aren't self employed.


.

>>1568112
Lad, it's called bants.
You aren't allowed to give bants and then act like a cunt for getting bants back.

>>1567650

I'm doing fine arts, and theory course is all Marxist bullshit.

They often try to lecture us about post colonialism and how art as a result has changed.

Often it's the perspectives and attitudes of artists who have faced some sort of "injustice" or who are critiquing past crimes.

What pisses me off is that they don't really like classical or modernist art, which in my opinion should be taught more.

It's very left wing politically, even in the tutorial sessions.

I remember one class we were talking about Donald Trump and the question came up "Since when was America GREAT?"

To which I replied

>well if we're talking about the post WWII economic boom, then one could make the case that that was period of time that America was great-

They then went full Carl the Cuck on AIDS Skrillex as they cut me off to which I said

>unless we're talking about the treatment of women and minority groups which is an entirely different story all together.

They all had some sort of sigh of relief after that.

Also, it should be noted that most of these students (in arts) are women, and come from public schools. They've been exposed to radical feminist rhetoric

>>1568158
>I'm doing fine arts
>>well if we're talking about the post WWII economic boom, then one could make the case that that was period of time that America was great-
You may live.

>>1568112

>blue pilled
>Jewish conspiracy

Remind me why stormfags are allowed on /his/

File: costanza.webm (1MB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x480px

>>1568165
>stormfag
>nazis in anyway other than name
>bluepill
>anti-capitalist
wew lad

>>1568163

I studied history and the Cold War, as well as communist and fascist countries.

I'm somewhat Libertarian because of that.

>>1568174

Oh so the (((((capitalists))))) you're referring to are Irish then?

And not Jewish?

>>1568187
I'm not sayings that jews don't give jews preferential treatment.
I'm saying that critique of that isn't the same as being a marxist and that defense of capitalism isn't defense of propoganda/bias.

>>1568154
>I disagree. while definitions (that have been changed for deception) can be memes, this isn't one of those times.
Yes, it literally is you bluepilled faggot. Socialism is not incompatible with market economies. What the fuck do you think "to each according to his contribution means" which is the distribution principle of socialism? It means if you contribute more you get more. The difference is Marxists don't consider ownership a contribution like capitalism does.

>You're no true scotsmanning.
If it's not Scottish by ancestry, does not live in Scotland, and not a man, then it's not a true Scottsman.

> I get that marxism has diverged from its founding documents, but you lost the name game a long time ago.
Because the current definition is literally a meme.

>Call yourself something else.
Should I call it true Marxism, or will that just trigger your true Scotsman fallacy?

>By private individuals...
Those private individuals are only needed because of their ownership, not because of any labor contribution to the company. Which is the point. They're not being rewarded for their work.

>Shareholders can vote you know.
It's very limited unless you're a majority shareholder.

>There is no reason why an individual can't acquire a majority of shares and elect themselves.
It's literally because it costs too much money.

>He also owns the risk.
Banks don't. What do you think debt and collateral are? If they're an investor, then they're claiming part of the risk. They're also claiming part of the reward, even though they're not personally putting in any work except providing capital.

>Most people aren't willing to do so which is why most people aren't self employed.
There's things like barriers to entry and economies of scale, if you took econ 101 you'd know this.

File: image.jpg (26KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 250x250px

>>1568198

>I'm not saying Jews don't give Jews preferential treatment

>implying

>dude i love humanities
>pursues ideology that seeks to destroy many of the humanities for the sake of "perfect equality"


?????

am i missing something?

>>1568198
That's because capitalists want you to think private ownership of property is required for markets, and capitalism, including private ownership of capital, is the only for of market economy.

Most people who defend capitalism can't distinguish between capitalist and entrepreneur, or capitalism and markets.

>>1567749
>that thread
I want this "stem is right wing" meme to die but I know it never will

I'm a social anarchist but the study of Marxist theory is still important to draw from it alternatives to conservative policies.

>>1568216
Show me where Marx wrote "perfect equality"

Marx thought the concept of equality was bourgeois as fuck.

>>1568216
coming from someone thoroughly unfamiliar with marxism, can someone elaborate on this? Never heard of marxism "destroying humanities" (not that I'm denying it).

Daily reminder the notion of "equality" is foolish and unnatural

From Considérations sur la France (1797):

"I will simply point out the error of principle that has provided the foundation of this constitution and that has led the French astray since the first moment of their revolution.

The constitution of 1795, like its predecessors, has been drawn up for Man. Now, there is no such thing in the world as Man. In the course of my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc.; I am even aware, thanks to Montesquieu, that one can be a Persian. But, as for Man, I declare that I have never met him in my life. If he exists, I certainly have no knowledge of him.

....This constitution is capable of being applied to all human communities from China to Geneva. But a constitution which is made for all nations is made for none: it is a pure abstraction, a school exercise whose purpose is to exercise the mind in accordance with a hypothetical ideal, and which ought to be addressed to Man, in the imaginary places which he inhabits....

What is a constitution? Is it not the solution to the following problem: to find the laws that are fitting for a particular nation, given its population, its customs, its religion, its geographical situation, its political relations, its wealth, and its good and bad qualities?

Now, this problem is not addressed at all by the Constitution of 1795, which is concerned only with Man."

>>1567870
Or you could just kill the proles

>>1568235
"Why even have a constitution? Memes already exist. Why look at me, I'm memeing right now."
Fucking cucks.

>>1568249
Is this the ramblings of a schizo or do you have a point you are trying to emphasize?

>>1568234
Marxism means equality is a meme.
>Although Marx's position is often confused or conflated with distributive egalitarianism, in which only the goods and services resulting from production are distributed according to a notional equality, in reality Marx eschewed the entire concept of equality as abstract and bourgeois in nature, preferring to focus on more concrete principles such as opposition to exploitation on materialist grounds and economic logic.

Adam Smith, founder of modern market economics, on the other hand, literally thought free markets would bring about real equality.
>THE whole of the advantages and disadvantages of the different employments of labour and stock must, in the same neighbourhood, be either perfectly equal or continually tending to equality.

>>1568259
"This is bad because I say so. Memes. Look a meme."

>>1568241
This desu.

And once you've killed the proles, you now have post-scarcity utopia, and since everyone owns enough capital to sustain themselves, you will end up with marketless stateless gommunist utopia.

File: image.jpg (35KB, 360x432px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 360x432px

>>1568249

>cucks

>>1568266
>lol lets make everyone follow the same laws b/c lol xd everyones the same trust me itll work guys xdddddd

>>1568273
>french
>not a cuck


>>1568278
>establishing a ruling class by law
Good idea...

>>1568282
>making inherently unequal people be considered equal by law
Good idea...

>>1568131
not slave labor at all look at the DDR, they had better work conditions than americans and europeans today

File: constonzorb batting cage.jpg (978KB, 2848x4288px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 2848x4288px

>>1568291
>Accepting equality under the law and rejecting literal equality isn't possible ;)
>Why even codify laws?

>>1568296
>lol i swear guys we totally dont want a gommunist equal soicety its just the law i swear haha xddd
>law: men can get drafted into the military in
wartime
>omg thats ntos equal u gotta aplly it to both sexes equally omg the sexes are exactly thes aeme

>>1568296
>Accepting equality of ownership of capital and rejecting literal equality isn't possible ;)
Modern capitalist economics was literally founded on the ideas of an egalitarian.

>>1567877
But that's not true. Singapore, China and South Korea all have internationally highly regarded universities.

>>1568225
>stem is right wing
The linked posts show the exact opposite, retard.

>>1568383
He said it's a meme and he wants it to die, dumbdumb.

>>1568394
>he

>>1568383
Those posts only show the college level individuals are leftists. It gives no mention of degree.
If you get rid of the fake fields/degrees polluting academia, you find it is right wing.
Good luck finding an engineer or economist that is leftist.

>>1568294

Proof?

Because Marxism is correct.

Because marxism is incorrect.

>>1568463
Baited

>>1568435
>Good luck finding an engineer or economist that is leftist.
I'm leftist and my economist uncle is leftist too. I doubt he'd have /that/ hard of a time.

>>1568424
I sorry I didn't learn your pronouns.

>>1568435
The opposite is true.

File: 1465145358310.png (3MB, 1716x1710px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1716x1710px

>>1568470

In a country ruled by an autocracy, with a completely enslaved press, in a period of desperate political reaction in which even the tiniest outgrowth of political discontent and protest is persecuted, the theory of revolutionary Marxism suddenly forced its way into the censored literature before the government realised what had happened and the unwieldy army of censors and gendarmes discovered the new enemy and flung itself upon him.

>>1567737
Stalin wanted to focus on implementing socialism in the USSR first because he deemed world revolution to be impractical, he wanted to go by steps. He was an internationalist who rejected private property.
Hitler was a nationalist and his idea of socialism had nothing to do with the marxist idea of socialism. His idea of socialism was about the unity of the nation, not about class struggle

>>1568470
If you want a leftist economist, walk into a muh librul university. If you want a rightist economist, walk into a corporate funded think tank.

File: engineers.png (58KB, 533x662px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 533x662px

>>1568435
Civil engineer detected.

>>1567650
Because it's a useful tool for socioeconomic analysis.

>>1568500
Chemical

>actually bragging you're an engineer

You're not actually an engineer.

>>1568491
That's just not true. My uncle is bloody millionaire for crying out loud! You can't illegitimize him solely based on his political values. That's ridiculous!

>>1568435
>This is what Conservatives actually believe

>>1568511
YOU'RE not an engineer.

>>1568456
no proof but some guy on /his/ posted proof a few weeks ago

>>1568500
What's it from?

>>1568527
Does he work at either of those places?

I'm just saying it's very easy to find an economist that is right or left if you know where to look. Economists that aren't in either can swing either way.

>>1568550
Counter point. The left works more than the alt-right.

>>1568552
Counter point. The left doesn't work because they are marxists.

>>1567650
Because 1. they overwhelmingly don't and 2. the ones who do recognize it's a good theory to discuss oppression

Marx is fine as a thinker, accept it and move on past red scare hysteria.

>>1568550
>Statement made during a time of central planning and actual socialists, not social democrats or any other leftwing mixed system

Why do people take this dumbass seriously still?

>>1568556
But I just told you the left works more. And that's factually accurate. "Work" in this case is a non-issue in spaces like these anyways, as you, and posters here generally, are chronically unemployed.

Let's just be real here.

>>1568503
Litetally this.
You can all stop posting now, the answer was already given.

>>1568564
>ussr
>actual socialists
I know the anticaps will defend them, but no.

>>1568564
>>1568578
>socialists
>social democrats
>the nazis weren't socialists
>the french revolution wasn't a failure
>not my communism
>nevah been dun before
>it could totally work
>marxism and capitalism are totally incompatible despite that fact that marxists are able to try and fail with their ideals in a capitalist system.

>>1568583
Arguments against existence of phenomenon in practice aren't arguments. All available avenues of social control should be rigorously tested without outside contamination of results. It should be down to a science, to see exactly which is more effective.

The cold war was not a science. But it did show the production capability of central planning.

Why is communism so popular in college academia when it has been repeatedly proven ineffective and undemocratic?

>>1568294
Then why did they build a wall to keep people in?

>>1568597
Your question should be why educated people are turned on to ideas you think should be for the uneducated, not imply conspiracies constantly.

>>1568597
cultural infiltration is almost impossible to undo without a police state once its been present for more than 2 generations.
You can thank the soviets and their civil rights movement for that.

>>1568608
Wrong, it was to keep fascists out

Google anti-fascists protection wall you dumbass, go read history

>>1568610
Why do highly educated people support communism, when they REALLY should know better.
>>1568611
I'm disappointed just thinking about it.

>>1568611
do you really blame soviet russia for the civil rights movement

do you really

>>1568583
But there are many co-ops, and many of them are successful. It's often found that because of the worker's vested interest in building the company, they can in many cases be more productive. And when they aren't more productive, it's because they value something more than additional income, that is they're willing to pay for better working standards. They'd rather make a few dollars less than work like slaves.

The problem it, unlike wage-labor, it takes capital to buy into a co-op.

>>1568615
>Why do highly educated people support communism, when they REALLY should know better.

This isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying perhaps if uneducated people hate communism easier, and highly educated people find it attractive, you shouldn't dismiss the possibility that you might actually be wrong.

Besides, claiming any ideology is "dangerous" is bullshit, and action against it is more likely to exacerbate social problems.

>>1568628
Why do you presume I'm uneducated? I have a Bachelor's. And besides, basic pattern recognition would dictate that communist regimes are doomed to failure.

>socialists and communists in 2016

This world is done honestly, just nuke it all.

If you haven't learned in 2016 that socialism and communism is cancer then something is seriously wrong with you.

>>1568639
This. 1991 best year of my life.

>>1568636
Basic pattern recognition would dictate that nations that don't suck up to glorious America are doomed to failure.

>>1568617
No, but a majority of the leaders of the civil rights groups were communists and foreign agents.

The civil rights movement may have bene abotu civil rights to the people on the ground, but it absolutely wasn't for the leadership.

File: 1467226225556.jpg (321KB, 1023x995px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1023x995px

>>1568624
>Why do you presume I'm uneducated? I have a Bachelor's.

If it's not in the topic and you've yet to even approach it my point still stands. Likewise, regardless of your personal experience, my point still stands. Cold war propaganda over why one ideology of organization is more exploitative than another is quite honestly preposterous.

Every fool knows his country did the right thing for the right reasons, and every academic knows not to buy into that nonsense. America and the West have their share of genocides judged under the same conditions. Which is usually the most damning and the turning point for most educated people.

>basic pattern recognition would dictate that communist regimes are doomed to failure.

Under the same terms you judge communism, be it mass die off, starvation, genocide even, every little sentence from the black book of communism your uncle wrote; has been done already by the West.

>>1568655
>communism failed because muh America
Communism failed in every state it was tried in. Don't delude yourself by blaming an outside power.

>>1568662
>that picture

Jesus fucking christ leftists are retarded.

>>1568662
Please be baiting. No one can be that inane.

>>1568660
>No, but a majority of the leaders of the civil rights groups were communists

Because of the times, not sinister conspiracy. If you want sinister conspiracy I would point you in the direction of the CIA.

>and foreign agents.

Laughable. Even if so, they would be working on the United States' terms.

>The civil rights movement may have bene abotu civil rights to the people on the ground, but it absolutely wasn't for the leadership.

I'm not even sure what you're implying.

>>1568664
>>1568668
Someone is saying the civil rights movement is because of Soviet Russia and you call that bait? If it's bait at least there's one more thing I'm better than you at.

File: 3c3.jpg (5KB, 125x120px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 125x120px

>>1568675
>If it's bait at least there's one more thing I'm better than you at.
>communists are proud of this

>>1568675
>implying the soviets didn't start a culture war
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ2fMeer5Mw

>>1568662
There wasn't 30000 dissapeared in Argentina. That's a leftist myth.

I'm a PhD student in one of the most far left non-humanities fields (sociology) and there's very few Marxists, being a Marxist would shut you out of any top journals these days. In reality there's very few Marxists these days in academia.

Marx used to be popular because Marxism provided an easy model for explaining the world, and social science always requires the assumption of some model. The actual socialism part was less important than the Hegelian dialectic (see: historical materialism) which had a lot of power to make forecasts and predictions about society in the future, but required a lot of assumptions which turned out to be nonsense.

Compare that to modern social science models which are usually borrowed from economics. Unlike Marxist models, modern models require very few assumptions, most of which are purely mathematical, but because they're so rigorous, they also provide very little predictive or explanatory power.

>>1568682
I'm very proud.

>>1568684
I am implying that. If infiltration is negative, again, blame the West. For they've actually done it, and you don't have to look at youtube conspiracy videos as sources to cite. You can have unclassified documents.

>>1568688
Sure. Sure. The Soviets caused every single thing I don't like about society, but documented geopolitical occurrence is leftist myth. We're working with the same caliber.

File: so7.jpg (88KB, 850x315px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 850x315px

>>1568700

>>1568264
That Smith quote seems like a rudimentary statement about equilibrium.

>>1568701
Wew lad... We didn't start the culture war with the soviets.
Not starting a culture war with the soviets doesn't me we haven't played the game, just that we didn't start it with the ruskies.

File: 1467560648751.jpg (451KB, 850x1062px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 850x1062px

>>1568715
>We didn't start the culture war with the soviets.

Have a problem with the way the middle class suburbanite world is in post-modern America? Surely, you don't need to look for actual explanations. The Soviets did it. Social infiltration is bad btw.

File: 1416727825561.jpg (71KB, 887x1097px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 887x1097px

>>1568725
>communist furries

>>1568708
"Certain sections of academia don't agree with my findings so I'm going to yell at them for discrimination" is also a debate tactic of many a creationist.

File: 1470679475217-1.png (312KB, 566x500px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 566x500px

>>1568730
>that
>furry
>cat girl
>furry

>>1568725
>academia radically shifted away from american values
>academia leadership took a major 180
>because the civil rights movement
>who organized the civil rights movement
>the leaders of the civil rights groups
>who were they?
>commies and soviet supporters/infiltrators

Gee... I'm glad that I just blindly blamed those pesky commies. Wolverines, amirite?

>>1567650
It provides easy answers to hard questions so you don't have to think as much.

>>1568738
What are American values, and why should academia give a shit about them in search of the truth.

File: 1466561295230.jpg (135KB, 1600x1177px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1600x1177px

>>1568736
>>cat girl

>>1568741
That would be less so in academia actually. It's more so easy to just assume America stands for good things, than to actually criticize its methodology of control.

>>1567738
I'm self employed, but my only client (as an independent consultant) is a company and all the people are cool guys.
Even before when I had a boss stricto sensu, he was fine.

>work is a fucking chore
If you didn't major in humanities that would perhaps be less of a problem. I like my job.

>>1568747
You don't even know where she's from....

>>1567738
no, most of them are to enmashed in liberal ideology (see the replies to your comment lmao)

File: absolutely euphoric.gif (1MB, 230x172px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 230x172px

>>1568762
>two cat ears

>>1568701
>but documented geopolitical occurrence is leftist myth
But the 30000 dissapeared myth is actually that a myth, it's not documented.
And why do you bring up the USSR? I'm not the guy you were talking to about the USSR.

>>1568742
>academia
>truth
It matters because half of academia doesn't give a shit about truth.
Just because they help fund STEM research doesn't mean they have the same goals.

>>1568784
Even if it was a myth, the point of the image is to judge the market on the same terms cold war propaganda judged ML societies popping up.

The image is clear. To anyone it would be clear. Civilization and death go hand in hand. Near universally. Using death as a way to persuade people into damning entire political ideology as "dangerous" is a transparent bid of censorship.

>>1568786
>It matters because half of academia doesn't give a shit about truth.

Interesting. Tell me why your version of truth has better methodology to back it? I'd love some cited sources.

>>1568797
>Tell me why your version of truth has better methodology to back it?
it's reproducible and doesn't care what people think or how they feel.

>>1568814
>it's reproducible

Show me. Basically show me everything why you've cracked the code on why peer reviewed work is bullshit. Don't use the term cultural marxism, and have sources cited. Don't blame me and say that you can't cite sources because academia is biased. Do not link youtube.

>>1567650
Consider the profile typical of someone that actively wants to study humanity.
The crushing majority of productive people will acknowledge what has grown as culture.

Take an example: language. People, including all great writers, just write stuff using language. They may rewrite one phrase 50 times differently but that's an entirely different problem from pretending to "decipher" or "decrypt" language.

Overblown interest in "society" being correlated to subversive stances is no coincidence. It's obviously suspicious, like having too much of an interest in sex.

>>1567650
Because in a capitalist society it's the most viable alternative with the most potential to succeed. Despite emerging out of a dirt-poor empire with no liberal tradition, the USSR got a lot of shit right. Can you imagine how good socialism could be if it emerged in a wealthy and liberty society, as Marx intended?

And in a world in which the only opposition to US led-imperialism are edgy Russian imperialism and fucking Islamofascism, Marxism becomes a lot more attractive. As bad as the USSR was, at least it offered an alternative to the soulless buy-sell culture that dominates the world.

Marxist literature has a 160 year history comprising a body of thousands of individual opinions to the degree that a Marxist perspective can be found on really any issue imaginable, and a Marxist justification can be unearthed for every social phenomenon short of capitalism itself.

>>1568831
But you can say the same about any subject. Interest is interest.

>>1567650

Because liberals are useless and produce nothing.

>>1568844
The neet like alt-right is quickly becoming the thorn in your side.

>>1568823
>non-stem
>giving a shit about alpha values
>implying the psuedo-sciences are stem

Small sample sizes, doing studies to find any correlation that can be calculated to be significant, not publishing papers that show a lack of reproducibility, proponents of paper X saying the reproduction study failed because they did it wrong and muh feels, not subjecting yourself to an alpha less than 0.05, etc

File: 1467058424255.jpg (19KB, 341x395px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 341x395px

>>1568863
So basically you couldn't say the magic words that make the part of academia you don't like disapear, offered an excuse, and said STEM majors are "alpha", as an argument.

That's not an argument. You gave no examples.

>>1568842
I don't think all subjects can be treated the same.
Interest in plastics or semiconductors or finance and investment seems to have a very different psychological content than interest in, say, the various -studies you see in American colleges.

>>1568878
>Interest in plastics or semiconductors or finance and investment seems to have a very different psychological content than interest in, say, the various -studies you see in American colleges.

So you're implying there's "psychological bias" in people interested in a field simply because they're interested. You're not bridging the gap between findings made void from bias and interest-in-field. You could make, and others have, biologists going into the field to explain human interactions with genetics are getting into the field for the wrong reasons, but that argument itself is sketchy.

You need to have data to show that interest makes work dubious, I really don't think that's the case. It certainly could, but to void all findings from it because people are interested isn't very meaty of a criticism.

>>1567714
This is really important. Even a lot of bluepilled lefty academics who still think capitalism is a good thing tend to be influenced by Marxian though without realizing so.

Pop cultural criticism from an ethical, rather than moral standpoint, does not predate Marx and his disciples in any substantive way.

"Cultural Marxism" sort of exists. While there's unfortunately no cabal of Marxists working to create utopia from within, lots of movements and philosophies (including neoconservativism, fascism, and SJW liberalism) are influenced by Marx's non-economic arguments.

>>1568870
>said STEM majors are "alpha"
>2012
>Not understanding significance

>You gave no examples.
Any psychology paper.

>>1568906
>Any psychology paper.

Ok.How is that relevant? What psychology paper?

>>1568836
>Despite emerging out of a dirt-poor empire
The Germans pushed for war with Russia specifically because they realized Russia was about to dwarf them.

>>1568911
>What psychology paper?
About 3/4ths of them.

Psychology is psuedoscience.

>>1568923
>About 3/4ths of them.

What?

>Psychology is psuedoscience.

Who brought up psychology?

>>1568851
Same people. Life used to be difficult. People had to be smart to survive. That is no longer the case.

>>1568893
I never said it was a proof of error.

It just doesn't surprise me that the people most keen on subverting something are the same that are the most interested in the said thing in the humanities, at least at the superficial level (which is all that interest us here about mass numbers, I'm not concerned with the rare scholar). In engineering this is not the case.

File: image.jpg (85KB, 581x363px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 581x363px

Money is a commodity, just like rice and i rather get paid in papers representing 1 ton rice instead of literally getting a container full of rice.
Now do you guys understand how retarded marx is?
Critique of capital, like wtf are you retarded?
critique of fuqqin water, shit be discriminating dem black folks in afriga an shieeet.
Creating value needs smart ideas, thats how man kind evolves
>cuba

>>1568934
No, it's really not the same people.The internet has created social phenomenon similar but exactly the same as before.

>>1568942
>I never said it was a proof of error.

It was implied interest suggests bias.

>>1568942
Also
>In engineering this is not the case.
It is the case. Because most jump straight out of high school or what have you junior college hearing about the potential paycheck of engineering and jump at the opportunity, bloating the field with mixed talent. I would argue that engineering has it far worse than any social science.

>>1568951
Nah it's fine, the ones that can't handle it jump ship long before their second year.

>>1568942
Now dumb poor people breed like flies and smart people have less than 2 children

>>1567650
Smart people are more likely to question the established paradigm

Smart people who aren't STEM autists desire a system that helps people

Engineering majors instead masturbate over Neil deGrasse Tyson tweets about "the republic of rarionalia"

>>1568948
> interest suggests bias
Bias doesn't mean error. But in a way, I do think that in some subject interest suggests (not proves) bias.

Do you think that the people that came up with, say, the queer theory were independent scholars of reason that by a combination of analytic skill and the right circumstances found some previously unknown tens of genders?
Or where the people typically doing it (like Butler) extremely emotionally involved from the start?

So in a sense interest suggests bias. If you are manly or womanly, the probability of being genuinely interested in the gender bender bullshit is low.

>>1569009
>Do you think that the people that came up with, say, the queer theory were independent scholars of reason that by a combination of analytic skill and the right circumstances found some previously unknown tens of genders?
>Or where the people typically doing it (like Butler) extremely emotionally involved from the start?

Nobody is talking about gender theory. Nor is identity politics associated with Marxism. People who care about identity politics cant hemselves be marxist, but the point of Marxism is hardly identity.

>So in a sense interest suggests bias. If you are manly or womanly, the probability of being genuinely interested in the gender bender bullshit is low.

This is a nice observation but it belongs more in a thread about gender theory. And not class analysis.

>>1567650
It promotes them as the top caste, they would be retarded to not shill it at every opportunity.

>>1569024
>but the point of Marxism is hardly identity.
I CANT SEE MYSELF IN THE CHAIR!!!
When will my reflection reflect who I am?

>>1569095
It really doesn't. You'll find the need for individuality more prominent in other ideologies.

>>1567779

What's a real job? Doctors and lawyers rate pretty high on work related stress and suicide, and those are the most desired "real jobs" around.

>>1567650
>everyone
lel
don't get high on your own supply

The vulgar pride of intellectuals, see Thomas Sowell.

>>1569153
What about the vulgar pride of the internet educated neet

>>1569105
Not a burger flipper or a barista.

>>1569153
>The vulgar pride of intellectuals, see Thomas Sowell.
The public intellectual Thomas Sowell?

>>1569153
Thomas Sowell was an uncle tom who made a decent living regurgitating what his masters told him.

>>1569166
Racism of the left strikes again

>>1569171
>left
try again faggot

>>1569174
I'm sorry far left

>>1569171
>hitler wasnt leftist because he hated jews
He hated Jews because they were filthy capitalists

>>1569179
I'm talking about modern leftists

>>1569178
>left
>far left
try one more time, faggot

>waaa he doesn't like my bullshit neoliberal nigger
>he must be a racist leftist

File: 1468784898276.jpg (211KB, 853x1009px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 853x1009px

"Leftists don't work"

>>1569166
He was a marxist that shifted his own views after mounting evidence, the opposite of what modern liberals do.

>>1569158
Internet neets just imitate intellectuals. Monkey see monkey do.

>>1569163
The very same?

>>1569192
Marx didn't work though. He just partied in London on his friend's money

>>1569192
>Milton Friedman was a bit of a bum so Communism is right

Why do you commies keep reposting this? Oh yeah, it's your only rhetorical argument that ever worked.

>>1569226
Someone missed the point :)

>>1569190
I'm 100% sure you are a leftist. Dishonesty isn't a desirable trait m8

>>1569230
When did I ever suggest this was a work all argument in favor of communism. I was referring to the idea of "not working", used as an insult in this context, is pointless.

>>1567767
cuck

>>1569231
M8 it is easy to see the response was a distraction that someone thought was witty and clever

>>1569248
Someone missed the point :)

>>1569226
He was a reporter for decades

>>1569253
That you screenshoted your own response. Mate your occur is meaningless to me. They weren't discussing Milton or rand. The op was about Marx and your response was a distraction to deviate from the point

https://youtu.be/GbCgQKHUhQc

File: 1457397801526.jpg (9KB, 200x267px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 200x267px

>>1568662
>Deaths and genocides that occurred that had literally nothing to do with Capitalism, but happened in Capitalistic societies

obviously Capitalism did this guyz!!!1!1! See mom, Communism dindu nuffin!

>>1567783
>>1567807
>>1567853

You don't work. Pussy.

File: download (2).jpg (11KB, 191x263px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 191x263px

>>1567738
Opposite. More I work, more I hate you whiny cunts. You just want shit for not working. Fuck off.

>>1570062
The more I see this the more I think people who say it don't work.

File: 1432849498001.png (13KB, 418x359px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 418x359px

>>1570062

Ronnie, you're forgetting the part where you blast massive amounts of steroids into your body.

File: gayer.jpg (97KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x600px

>>1567779
>hint: don't major in history

I'm a 1LT in the US Army. I'm certified to teach, so I'll teach high school history once I retire, probably at Captain or Major.

History major out of Temple University, I regret nothing.

>>1570090
Are you going to be that cranky old history teach with an eyepatch and a prosthetic leg?

>>1570102

I still have all my parts. Knees and back are already fucked from fuckin rucks and jump status, though.

>>1569276
shitposting in real life isn't work

>>1569344
>When gommunist do it there evilz!!!!
>But the capitalist dindu nuffin it was all natural!

>>1570126
Are you going to wear an eye patch anyways just because?

>>1570170

No, I'm probably never gonna talk about it again because it fuckin sucks. Dope benefits, though.

>>1568611

Goofus

>>1568610

Gallant

File: 1350979369172.jpg (34KB, 460x602px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 460x602px

>>1570067
I had part time jobs in high school. I had full time jobs after high school. I was unemployed once in 2005 for three weeks. My work history is solid, if not glorious. Your thoughts are wrong.

>>1567667
fpbp

>>1567650
Humanities students have no rationality or logic.

>>1567650
>Why is everyone studying humanities so fond of Marxism?
Because they know they will never be in the 1% so there is no point in studying some rich people bullshit.
>Oh yeah let's study fractional reserve banking and monetized securities
>Because I'm going to grow up to have a Jewish last name and work at Goldman Sachs

FUCK YOU

POOR EAT RICH WHEN?

Because intellectuals think they are better at dictating how society should be rather than allowing people to naturally decide it for themselves.

File: 1466867091348.png (82KB, 635x820px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 635x820px

>>1567667
this

>tfw too smart to be complacent with a mediocre job
>tfw too stupid to get into stem or medicine
>tfw just smart enough to waste all my free time accumulating an encyclopedic library full of useless trivia within the confines of my brain

>>1567738
>Anyone who ever had a job has to atleast have a little bit of sympathy for Marxism
Fuck that garbage

>t. man who had his first job at age fifteen and has worked everything from manufacturing, construction, canvassing, retail, casino, mechanic, mining, customer service, warehousing and sales

Anon, where do you work? Do you even work?

>>1568491
>If you want a rightist economist, walk into a corporate funded think tank.
Nah corporations nowadays are full on 100% lefty scum because they're probably the only ones (and rich people in general) who are benefiting from extreme leftism. Keep people drugged up on casual culture of sex, drugs, consumerism and alcohol, keep selling them products that perfectly match THEIR totally "unique" self, control them by producing outrage and keep them aggressive by demonizing and dehumanizing the opposition (every leftard always thinks they're fighting literally Hitler) and all the while keep flooding the west with immigrants to destroy native culture permanently and replace it with shallow consumerism and to drive down the wages and to kill any demands for better working conditions or more, better jobs.

>>1569192
>"Leftists don't work"
>Proceed to make strawman arguments again "right wing" people who were never even mentioned
>Never refute Marx's shameless sponging off his friend and half-assed freelancing

Why does every /leftypol/ fag pretend this image is supposed to be a universal rebuttal to all criticisms levied at Marx?

>>1567767
cuck

>>1570077
>you're forgetting the part where you blast massive amounts of steroids into your body.
So?

You think shooting up some Anabolic steroids instantly turns you into a world class body builder?

It doesn't. Don't believe me? Ask >>>/fit/

File: 1468255109612.jpg (89KB, 381x449px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 381x449px

>>1567650

>>1570090
Military is essentially living on welfare. You produce nothing but get money from the state anyway.

>>1571737
>fractional reserve banking
it's not the 19th century anymore

>>1572096

> full on 100% lefty scum
> Keep people drugged up on casual culture of sex, drugs, consumerism
> selling them products that perfectly match THEIR totally "unique" self
> keep them aggressive by demonizing and dehumanizing the opposition

Mate, if you're smart enough to recognize this pattern and avoid it, what makes you think the rest of us aren't doing the same?

>>1570173
I thought army benefits were god-awful starving conditions?

File: infrastructure_and_labor_are_worthless.jpg (113KB, 902x489px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 902x489px

>>1573481

Of all the times to pull out this bait, and you choose this week?

>>1572096
>extreme leftism

Is that what Americans honestly think the current culture of capitalist consumerism is?

Man, Reagan seriously ruined your guys perception of politics.

>>1572129
I think the idea is that whether someone did or did not work is not relevant to the content of their ideas, each of those people is a fairly commonly brought up thinker in for lassez-faire sorts.

>>1572096
That's not leftist, and corporations with a socially liberal facade still hire rightist economists.

>>1572096
It boggles my mind how someone can have the Internet at their fingertips and post such uneducated, misinformed and straight-up factually incorrect garbage. Do you know what "extreme leftism" refers to? You do realize extreme leftism is opposed in every way to consumerist culture and capitalism? You do know that it aims to improve working conditions as you mention, for everyone? Please be bait or falseflag and let this post not be an actual brainwashed American. This board can't have fallen so low.

>>1573592

Do economics at the corporate level, by which I mean micro-, even have a bias on the political spectrum?

Supply/demand curves and the time-value of money don't seem particularly political to me.

>>1573626
Most corporations lobby. Lobbyists need studies and economist words. Not talking about the management of the firm but the corporation's political influence as part of how they operate.

>>1567919
Strawman: the post

>>1568115
>that image
hahaha le epic XDDD

>>1568154
>someone points out serious observable differences
>AHAHAHAHA LE NO TROO SGOTSMAN LE XDDDDD IM LE SO FUCKING FUNY AND CLEVER LOL XDDD

>>1567753
Since when does academia consider it to be truth? The fuck? Any source on this?

>>1568969
Nice meme

>>1569226
>didn't work
He was a journalist, writer, political activist, historian, and economist.

>>1573481
I wouldn't say producing dead bodies is nothing. I hear it's a very desired product.