"Marx just didn't want to work!"

Marx literally worked out at the library for 10-12 hours a day for almost three decades

>>9409283
>being a freeloader, living of the wealth of a friend while doing some writing in your spare time
>hardworking

pick one

>>9409283
Amazing how someone can write so much and yet produce so little

>>9409304
>defining the amount of work done by the amount of capital it brings in

Is this the power of ideology?

>>9409320
>criticise capitalists because your theory of labour defines their input as irrelevant, and attributes all (surplus)value as being generated by labour
>don't commit to labour yourself and live of the wealth of your friend

>>9409327
>he thinks the conclusion of the labor theory of value is to participate in a system that doesn't follow it

Wew

Books are not work my friend, only wasting your time on the fields all day is real work for men.

I'm anti-marxist but I have to agree, that argument "he don't work" is completely stupid

In the old days was very normal artist had patrons, for example: Dante Alighieri, Horácio, Virgílio, Propércio, Da Vinci, Botticelli, Michelangelo and many others artist.

Marx has an incredible bibliography, but 99% is harmful to society

>>9409283
>fukkk capitalism xDD pls buy my bookS i need to eat

>>9409314
Shut the fuck up. It's hard to produce things when the means of production are privately owned. Give him a break ffs

>>9409314
>The Collected Shitposts of Anon

What the hell? What'd he even wrote about the entire time? Just more commie rambles?

File: 1482510748902.jpg (23KB, 479x317px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 479x317px

>>9409356

>I mean c'mon! Capitalism is just human nature, guys!

>>9409320
>spinning your gears
value added: 0

not shitting on Marx, just your post

A child advocates communism
A man advocates capitalism
An elder knows it is best to support fascism

what is it with rambling commies? Castro did 5-7 hour speeches. His audience couldn't recall much of what he babbled about.

>>9409444
Actually it's not not just human nature; work and property are concepts known to animals. Monkeys have been observed to develop rudimentary forms of capitalism, making them more intelligent than Marxists

>>9409456
A ghost advocates theism.

>communism is human nature
>writes 50 books to convince people about "human nature."

>>9409486
>Lower apes have shown a tendency to form hierarchy
How does this even prove your point? Do you think capitalism has existed since our inception? Then don't regurgitate your meme about True Capitalism(TM), which "anarcho"-capitalists don't think exists yet, though often only extend to a system which most agree has only been in existence for a couple centuries.

"The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking."
- Murray Bookchin

>>9409444
Capitalism is the most efficient economic system, and that's not just due to "human nature". It is structurally efficient (decentralization, price system, competition).

I bet no one in this thread can concisely define "Capitalism", let alone discuss any critique beyond it.

>>9409513
>capitalism is decentralised
How is a board of executives not centralised? How is a boss not centralisation of power? It is only decentralised in your mind because you think the only political dichotomy is State vs Capitalism, when capitalism will ultimately create a state if left alone. It is hierarchy in its purest form.

>competition
Competition stifles efficiency, since you're getting a bunch of businesses competing to make the same thing, or, in the case of medicine/science, firms do not share information that would otherwise speed up scientific research. It will also inevitably create monopoly (a State), as said before, which will produce shitty products and kill of labour. It is not in the interests of the majority of people, the working class.

>>9409526
Capitalism is a system where the state protects property rights.

>>9409536
>property rights

That is merely one of the common aspects of capitalism as a whole.

>>9409540
It is the only defining aspect of capitalism. Markets aren't free under capitalism, since products are being "created" - they don't create it, the working people do, who aren't paid fairly, and not given a say in their working place - by capitalists (property-owners) who modify wants and neglect needs.

>>9409444
don't use a human nature argument, for that has no ability to prove either side... We don't have knowledge of a "correct" ontology; all economic/political arguments must be conducted within the realm of logic/math/etc.

>>9409283
New to marx; could someone please explain to me the solution to the transformation problem?

>>9409530
>How is a board of executives not centralised? How is a boss not centralisation of power? It is only decentralised in your mind because you think the only political dichotomy is State vs Capitalism, when capitalism will ultimately create a state if left alone. It is hierarchy in its purest form.

Yes, it is decentralized as opposed to a state run economy, but the point was that the sort of decentralization present in capitalism is efficient.

>Competition stifles efficiency, since you're getting a bunch of businesses competing to make the same thing, or, in the case of medicine/science, firms do not share information that would otherwise speed up scientific research.

On the net, competition is efficient. That you would suggest otherwise alerts me to the fact that you don't have even the most basic understanding of economics. Besides, research is best left to the universities and government.

>It will also inevitably create monopoly (a State), as said before, which will produce shitty products and kill of labour. It is not in the interests of the majority of people, the working class.

No, competition ensures that monopolies do not form. Again, I'm not sure you know what you're talking about.

>>9409551
That's a nice fruit salad you've got there.

>>9409558
Which one? From industrialised capitalism to socialism to communism? I'm an anarcho-communist, so I don't really see the point of a State which is supposed to be elected to show the dictatorship of the proletariat. I think the transition to communism (post-scarcity society) could be done through a federation of decentralised communes, who would be voting on issues all the time.

File: 13414.gif (1MB, 290x189px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 290x189px

>>9409563
>competition ensures that monopolies do not form

>>9409563
>>9409566
Oh no, they actually believed Thomas Sowell :'(

>>9409574
>>9409576
Not an argument

>>9409418
kek

File: 1492742923620.jpg (20KB, 720x533px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 720x533px

>>9409579
Why should we have to point out to you that capitalism is hierarchy and generally a shitty way to run an economy? If you want to see your "decentralised" capitalism in effect, look at Chile, where it was put to work. Huge unemployment rates and shitty conditions that were only helped through state subsidies by big daddy USA.

>>9409585
Not to mention the massive terror campaigns and state violence. But I'm sure that's okay, because killing workers is a good thing.

>anarcho-Communists
*tips*

You're not even Communists. Youre western cocksuckers. You are they same fags that probably believe the Western propaganda of "war crimes" committed by the Soviets, Cubans, Chinese, and Koreans.

Marxist-Leninism is the only way that will work. You have to embrace the future.

>>9409585
>Implying a colony is a good indicator of capitalisms effectiveness
In truth we do not live in pure economic conditions. It is neither the fault of communism or capitalism solely for the failure of any particular state. Especially one like Chile who has so little self determination in it's fate. South America is the colony that the United States was never forced to relinquish.

>>9409327
Writing is labour.
Engels was his patron, somewhat of an editor, and co-author.

>>9409585
>>9409593
Considering the fact that virtually all actual economists have left non-capitalist systems behind in the trash, maybe you ought to take a second look at it.

>>9409603
>KILL WHITEY EMBRACE GENOCIDES
You're like Tumblr with tanks, no thank you.

>>9409609
(((economists)))
Jokes aside, do you actually read much outside of right wing capitalist circle jerking?
There's plenty of Marxian or Post-Keynesian stuff out there to read, you can even look at revolutionary Spain and see how well they did. Franco even kept Mondragon as a worker-controlled company, since it was so much more productive than others in Spain. Lots of economies and how they thrive are dependent on the politics of the time e.g. wars going on.

Is there a bigger meme than Marxist-Leninism?

>>9409636
Posadism.

>>9409625
Walk into any economics department in the world and introduce yourself as a marxist and prepare to be laughed out of the room.

The empirical evidence in not exactly in your favor either. Just take a look at India or China after they introduced capitalism, or really, any country. Maybe (maybe) you can find tiny exceptions to capitalism being more efficient , but we have to go by the majority of the evidence.

>>9409642
I'm not a Marxist, I take some ideas from Marx. That's why I told you to look into Marxians and Post-Keynesians. Varoufakis is a start.

>>9409283
the more you read marx the more you realise everything you learned about him was a goddamn lie and he was right about EVERYTHING

>>9409644
That doesn't help you very much.

File: 1491986895557.png (101KB, 383x516px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 383x516px

>>9409647
Nice smarmy comments about empirical evidence(TM). Care to tell me what any of it is? That the US empire has managed to force economic ideas down every other country's throat? That India and China are cheap manufacturers for the West now? That their people toil in abject poverty and will never be able to do what they want? That they're contributing profusely to emissions and exacerbating global warming? (I think America and Australia have worse emissions than China, per person, but you get my point.)

>>9409654
The mistake is to think that it was better before and that it won't get better. The West had to go through the same thing - that the supply of labor is so damn large.

>>9409662
Why not give labour a say in their workplace? Like worker-controlled micro economies, which can trade with others in the region e.g. townships trading with one another for things. How is capitalist growth solving any problems in India other than marginalising the majority of the people, keeping them poor and flocking to the city?

By the way, you miss the point of Marx (who I don't agree with) who says that capitalism must industrialise a country, which should then turn into socialism, and then communism.

>>9409682
>Why not give labour a say in their workplace? Like worker-controlled micro economies, which can trade with others in the region e.g. townships trading with one another for things.

Does the word "efficiency" have no meaning to you? You want to go back to the middle ages?
Though I'm not sure what exactly you mean by letting workers have a say. If you mean that workers should make all company decisions, I should refer you to my question.

> How is capitalist growth solving any problems in India other than marginalising the majority of the people, keeping them poor and flocking to the city?

Again, you seem to have a collapsed horizon. You have to let capitalism work its magic by increasing the wealth, as we have seen everywhere (and don't even try to dispute something so basic and uncontroversial in economics).

>By the way, you miss the point of Marx (who I don't agree with) who says that capitalism must industrialise a country, which should then turn into socialism, and then communism.

I am aware of this point.

>>9409456
True scholars take the Strasserpill

>>9409700
You can shitpost about "efficiency" all you like, but we very nearly live in a post-scarcity world with regards to necessities. We don't need to squeeze every last drop of juice out of the orange, we can instead start to focus on distributing the pieces evenly such that everyone can live without fear of destitution and exploitation.

>>9409356
t. never read marx

absolutely classic desu

File: B2IrCN7.gif (164KB, 890x531px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 890x531px

>>9409585
>implying unemployment is inherently bad
loving every laugh

>>9409283
>writing
>work

You Bourgeois motherfucker

>tfw you write 50 volumes of ironic fart fetish posts on 4chan and marx wrote 50 volumes of letters sincerely campaigning for socialism

*BRAAPPPPPPPP*

>>9409530
Do you not understand corporate structure, the board of representatives are the "boss" of the company. They are a decentralized group that can be replaced by the shareholders at large

>>9409512
>someone writes a post that even hints at challenging his marxist world view
>IMMEDIATELY strawmans
Is this marxist intellectualism?

>>9409432
a masterpiece in our time

>>9409475
that's how they get you. sheer attrition

Why can't we ever have a nice conversation about this topic?

>>9409900
>handing my money over to people who either are not as valuable as i am or simply have done nothing to deserve it
no thanks

>>9409931
>he doesn't agree with my marxist bullshit so he must not have read it
nice

>>9409570
>i'm an anarcho-communist
Thanks for the laugh, anon. I had a bad morning.

>>9409636
Yeah. Ancoms.

File: 1491570915416.jpg (63KB, 250x323px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 250x323px

>>9409486

>>9410919
because marxists can't into argumentation, logic, and economics

File: 5558-slavoj-Zizek.jpg (17KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 240x240px

>>9410931
kkkkkkkrhhhhh we found the ideology. Over kkrkkkkrh

>>9410999
Just because people are living deems them worthy of being given some of the resources I worked to attain?

>>9410931
>valuable
>deserve
>my

Just keep chugging that ideology, friend

>>9411011
>>9410999

>Implying socialism and Communism aren't themselves ideologies

File: 1470592522923.jpg (17KB, 434x470px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 434x470px

>>9409900
>we very nearly live in a post-scarcity world with regards to necessities

>>9411011
>my money
>not mine
Come and take it, pantyboy.

>>9411026
They're working within a specific commie lexicon
>>9411037
In the western world certainly

File: 1492716303884.jpg (65KB, 433x482px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 433x482px

>>9409900
>we very nearly live in a post-scarcity world with regards to necessities.
This is your brain on leftism/marxism

>>9411009
>using capitalist notions of labor and ownership in a Marxist context

>>9411037
The amount of unoccupied housing in the world could house every homeless person. The amount of food produced in North America alone could feed the whole world. Property rights impede on the former, and US market manipulation the latter. Food would sell for orders of magnitude less if we didn't pay farmers subsidies to let their land go untilled.

What does /lit/ think of the theory of Alienation?

>>9409283

>Marx didn't want to work!
>shows pictures of books titled "MARX AND ENGELS", with the captions that they were all Engel's work or the collections of "letters"

dude did nothing but shitpost for half of his life, occasionally compiling letters into glorified shitposts like The German Ideology. without engels there'd be no marx. get over yourself

>>9411071
Homelessness is a mental illness issue and most houses are vacant for a short period of time
This is one of the stupidest arguments against capitalism

>>9411086
Four of the fifty books are marked Engels, and that represents his entire contribution to the collection beyond editing.

>>9411071
>>9411097
pleb discourse

>>9411071
If that's what we're going to call post-scarcity, we have only attained it through market efficiency.

Your post smacks of marxism in its naive linearity. It's not as if we have reached "Da Point In History" where we have "da houses" and "da food" and we just give it (somehow) to "da people". But never mind that - it will just happen - somehow!

>>9411097
Yes, people move around a lot so which particular houses are vacant changes frequently, but there is still 5 times as much available housing at any given point as would be needed to house all of the homeless population.

>>9411110
You pay taxes so that the price of food stays high. If you think that's efficient, you're too far gone to save.

File: oHM3bhj.gif (2MB, 177x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 177x150px

>>9409418

>>9411125
I don't approve of subsidies and no one in their right mind can. Capitalists and socialists agree on that issue.

>>9411047
if the west is living in post-scarcity, why do we need to redistribute wealth to make up for the failures of some groups to meet their living needs?

>>9411117
but there's nowhere near as much as 5x the available resources for those people you dumb shit. If housing was all that was necessary why not just post everybody up in hoovervilles and FEMA camps?

>>9411164
Because the owner class controls access to resources and deprives those people of partaking in the bounty

>>9409283
He owned and operated multiple newspapers (all shut down by the state) and worked for the New York Times (some American rag, I forget which).

>>9411204
>owned
triggered

>>9410936
It's more "this is an absurdly reductive claim, so he must not have read it". It's the kind of thing some grandstanding amateur would say about something he'd never read, but which he'd read other people's opinions of.

>>9410688
>implying unemployment is inherently bad
Starvation's pretty shit yeah

>>9409327
>labor = physical labor
wew

>>9409642
>Just take a look at India...after they introduced capitalism
I seem to remember something about huge slums, factories, pollution and poverty. And famines which killed millions. Of course things were pretty shit beforehand, too, but that's the nature of feudalism.

>>9411041
We will.

>>9411110
You've never actually read anything about economics, have you.

>>9411407
The horror of capitalism!

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.NAHC?end=2011&locations=IN

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.IN?locations=IN

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=IN

File: marxism btfo.jpg (170KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 640x427px

lmfao

>>9411433
At last someone gets it.

>nice dubs btw

>>9411407
India was pretty socialist in the 60s though, and was close with the soviets

so was a lot of Africa during their worst times.
then when the Soviets couldn't keep their little commie global empire alive anymore, all these states broke out into violence or become utterly grim.

>>9409530
>Competition stifles efficiency
cite one case

>>9409526
kek if two people are arguing about capitalism you can guarantee they're using different definitions

>>9411434
I'm super fucking lazy, but someone should make a "CAPITALISTS HATE HIM! Find out how Marx ruined capitalism with this ONE SIMPLE TRICK" edit.

>>9412522

wtf i hate Austrian economics now

>>9409283
If shitposting counted as working, I'd be Carlos Slim.

>>9409486
>we have to act like monkeys
nice argument there

>>9411433
>hey that argument's kinda difficult to respond to so I'm just not gonna
>>9412319
>India was pretty socialist in the 60s though
No
>so was a lot of Africa during their worst times.
True-ish. Notice that: during their worst times. It's almost like people search for something different when times are really shit, and that something different, for a long time, was glorious Soviet-funded "communism".

File: tips fedora.jpg (20KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x480px

>i'm not like other philosophers, i'm a scientist, more interested in reality

>>9409486
You should check out this dude named Peter Kropotkin

>>9409304
Have you ever fucking written volumes of sociological text? It's more difficult than manual labour, I'll tell you that. I used to shovel dirt every day as a labourer for a landscaper before I started began at uni.

I'd rather dig holes for a while than wrack my brains to write volumes and volumes of philosophy, honestly.

>>9413100
That's kinda dumb but okay. I'd rather write the volumes of philosophy, even though it's harder.

>>9413121
I'm in this position right now. I'm basically a freeter largely supported by government money, but I'm fully committed to writing out a comprehensive text detailing my phenomenological insights, scouring my mind trying to properly ground everything and accounting for all the contingencies thoroughly justifying it all leads to. It's not the absolute most difficult project I've taken on, but it requires serious mental discipline.

>>9409343
>>9409608
>>9411402
Fuck off libcucks.

>>9411434

nice ad hominems but where are arguments?

File: marx.jpg (324KB, 1127x1432px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1127x1432px

>>9413855

>>9413855
I wish we could have fucking firebombed /pol/ in utero.

>>9409283
as much as i hate communism and marx we cannot say hes been doing nothing at all; obviously he knew what he was doing and thats what really matters.

one man can be a disposable dirt shoveler or be the idol of a revolution that still persists today. he wasnt writing furry erotica.

>>9412482
This

>>9412482
>>9413964
All of them, since multiple supply lines are inherently redundant.

>>9413823
>marxists
>liberals
jesus fucking christ

>>9410919
because its the same le econ 101 meme responses and strawmans every time

>marxists defeated in their own thread

damn

How to become so motivated? I can't even be asked to read a book hardly.

>>9409513
Capitalism is actually very centralised. Centres of capital draw more capital (hence mass migration from the country to cities)

>>9415635
Did we read the same thread?

He scribbled all that trash.

Meanwhile Nietzsche wrote like 8 books and was infinitely more influential.

>>9415737
I don't know, but I read this one.

>writing nonsense into a diary
>work

pick one

>>9409563

Big fish eats little fish, capital concentrates, competition becomes more a matter of stagecraft and rabbit-out-of-a-hatism. Capitalists always talk about how it stimulates innovation, but the innovation that arises is more often than not mere marketable difference in which a whole is reproduced with a slight twist. True innovation would change the whole.

Look at the history of media companies, for instance. A newspaper chain develops, it accumulates Capital, it grows, it buys out smaller newspapers. Soon, the whole market is owned by 3 big companies, thus decreasing actual competition.

>>9409486
>even monkeys haven't yet evolved beyond capitalism! See! >I'm so desperate I'm willing to compare my way of thinking to an ape's to support my shitty argument!

>>9409283
he was a proto neet rich daddy supported him while he wrote communism and impregnated a maid he then ditched really makes you think

>>9415870
10/10 critique of Aristotle, but what's it got to do with Marx?

>>9415891
>Big fish eats little fish, capital concentrates, competition becomes more a matter of stagecraft and rabbit-out-of-a-hatism. Capitalists always talk about how it stimulates innovation, but the innovation that arises is more often than not mere marketable difference in which a whole is reproduced with a slight twist. True innovation would change the whole.

The point of competition is not just to stimulate innovation. Innovation is something stimulated by the market generally.

The main point of competition is to keep the companies in check. If one company starts to slack, then another can offer better products/services and outdo them.

>Look at the history of media companies, for instance. A newspaper chain develops, it accumulates Capital, it grows, it buys out smaller newspapers. Soon, the whole market is owned by 3 big companies, thus decreasing actual competition.

1. We shouldn't look to currently existing markets as good representatives of free market competition.

2. You're forgetting the next part in the story there. If a company does come to dominate a market, which is not necessarily bad (it only becomes bad when they feel unpressured and so slack off), another company can rise up and outdo them. Competition is always patrolling markets, even just existing in potential.

>>9409486
>

File: 1492854533387.jpg (864KB, 2200x3300px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 2200x3300px

>>9411110
>'if I put da before nouns that'll make anon look stupid, that'll show him'

>>9411433
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/08/exposing-great-poverty-reductio-201481211590729809.html

>>9411434
1) didn't have to, where's the argument
2) how is that relevant? I can see a politician or political ideology is trash without holding office
3) flat wrong, still not an argument even if not true
4) also flat wrong, still not an argument even if true
5) Ayn Rand was also heavily financially supported. Does that make her automatically wrong?

6) and?

7) According to most people who post this meme Marxism is currently so deeply embedded in society I can't even fucking see it.

>>9417579
>Al Jazeera
>anthropologist

Oh

>>9417602
>anon
>arguments

oh...

>>9417663
The argument presented there is hardly pertinent to my case.

Unless you're really gonna try to claim now that capitalism hasn't reduced poverty in India.