Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory? I'm

>>9531342
try the redpill stupid little idiot

the truth is in capitalism but with nazism combined and with women back in the kitchen

File: Main_Currents_of_Marxism,_volume_1.jpg (26KB, 331x500px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 331x500px

Read this.

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?
Yes. Reality.

What economics have you read?

>rendered irrelevant by modern computing technology

Can you expand on that? Computers may be able to handle it, but we still need people to program them.

File: Z3htVQw-[1].jpg (24KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 384x384px

human nature.

Socialist theory, marxism etc etc.....generally rely on a fairly optimistic account of human nature.
I find this implausible as people are generally cunts.

also, they tend not to take into account scarcity of resources in any substantial way....scarcity is something that will characterise the world increasingly so in the future.....but capitalism doesn't really deal with this issue either

>bating /pol/tards seeking refuge from the influx of "pedes" on /pol/

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?
Socialist practice.

>>9531369
Read the paper "Calculation, Complexity and Planning" by Cockshott and Cottrell for a overview. This stuff is pretty complex to get into in a 4chan post.
Basically though, the calculation problem only really applied to a centrally planned Marxist-Leninist economic system, and even then it's controversial to claim resource allocation as the primary factor of their failure. In any case, today's models of economic planning are not Soviet ones.

Oh yeah, since I'm already seeing replies like this, "human nature" is an absolutely meaningless statement that doesn't say anything. The capitalist mode of production has existed for a miniscule time period compared to previous economic systems, so to consider it an essential aspect of human civilization is so mind-bogglingly stupid that it's hard to express. I can say "collective tribal hunter-gathering is human nature" and it would be similarly stupid, but more historically supported.

>>9531342
>which is a meme rendered irrelevant by modern computing technology
Tell me how you can create a computer program able to take into account subjective value.

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?
Dumb ones suffice.

>>9531342
You have too be kidding

also anime would never arise from a communist system

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?

Try a history book.

>>9531700
This. Neither would 4chan.
>inb4 "good"

File: Robyn_Anderson_Profile.jpg (96KB, 411x581px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 411x581px

>>9531759
>if I say 'inb4' it doesn't count

File: 1495211007242sss08347.png (74KB, 434x434px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 434x434px

>>9531342
>and the vast planning that already takes place in market economies.
Do even you realize that this an argument AGAINST socialism, you dumb faggot? Planning under capitalism is possible because it uses prices, which would not exist in socialism.

>>9531839
says who

File: Shana_on_Calculator_by_kimatg.jpg (28KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x375px

>>9531951
pic reltaed

>>9531700
I love communism now.

This is why /pol/fags should stick to /pol/ and stop shitposting outside of their containment board.


OP asked for book recomendations and the whole thread has maybe one rec.

>>9532088
He asked for refutations of a meme and he got meme refutations.

>>9532088
this
only /leftypol/ is allowed to shitpost here

>>9531688
gotta crack a few eggs to make an ommlete

Socialism by Ludwig von Mises
The Road to Serfdom by Fredrick Hayek
Struggle for the World by James Burnham

>>9531342

Define socialism. Do you believe that all businesses should be forced to work for the public good, as opposed to profit?

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?

ITT, no.

Try Stirner or Nietzsche although that doesn't put off the good folk at leftypol

the road to serfdom was supposed to be a critique of socialism

>>9532275
Did you miss the part where OP found Austrians laughable?

>>9531342

I would support socialism if I lived in an all white country

Unfortunately, 99% of socialists advocate for demographic replacement and multiculturalism...which guarantees that socialism is impossible.

>>9531342
There are a lot of criticisms that could be leveled at communism, but the most fundamental one is probably the issue of its complete lack of incentives. Communism works fine in theory, but only when the theory conveniently ignores immutable aspects of human nature: people are more productive when they can get ahead; when they can't better their circumstances relative to everyone else's, they won't be as productive.

This is the reason Russia fell behind the west in the 1970s. Their economy grew rapidly when they were just moving country people into cities and building factories, but when they ran out of capacity, the lack of innovation saw them fall steadily behind the capitalist countries. They were lousy at innovating and couldn't increase their technological level, which as you probably know is the biggest factor in economic growth.

There are a lot of other problems with communism too. Countries have tried creating moneyless, classless societies, but they're doomed to failure because it's impossible to restrain humanity's natural tendency towards specialization and stratification. It always ends up a hypocritical mess.

>>9532629
cuz nothing says unbreakable brotherhood like the color of your skin.

>>9532701

the more homogeneous the culture is, the easier it is to implement socialism. i don't understand how you can deny that

>>9531488
>Calculation, Complexity and Planning
Still managerial and not entrepreneurial.

>>9532736
I don't deny that at all. I just don't connect skin color with cultural homogeneity, it's too superficial. All men won't suddenly become comrades just because people of different races have been expelled.

The one thing that I've always found convincing from Marx is that history is a record of endless class struggle. In the end, pure socialism will always be unattainable unless we stop yearning for hierarchy, which will never happen as long as resources are limited and desires aren't.

Tldr An all-white country is still going to have class divisions.

Marx and the Marxists are good as descriptive accounts of capitalism, but their is very little worth salvaging in their prescriptions. Read some anarchist literature by Bakunin, Proudhon, Kropotkin, Goldman and Bookchin and their critiques of Marxism/ML(M)

File: that one lit poster.jpg (64KB, 514x585px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 514x585px

>>9531349
obligatory

>>9531488
>I can say "collective tribal hunter-gathering is human nature" and it would be similarly stupid
It's not stupid, for hunter-gathering populations. Why do you think certain populations who were at the tribal stage just a few centuries ago have so much trouble adjusting to modern civilization, as opposed to populations with more established civilizations, like the Chinese?

Because human behavior, like any trait of a given population, changes overtime due to natural selection, depending on the particular environmental conditions the population lives in.

I eagerly await for the last "60s radicals" in academia to die out so that behavioral scientists and geneticists can stop hiding and for the current zeitgeist to shift away from "we r a blank slate lmoa"

>>9531342
>are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory

Lenin Russia
Stalin USSR
Mao China
Pol Pot Cambodia
Castro Cuba
Kim Jung Un North Korea

ad nauseam

How do you respond to critiques of the vanguard party model of Leninism op?

I think the claim that the vanguard party functionally becomes a new upper class of intelligentsia is a fair critique. But moreover, can you reconcile the inevitable consequences of any new born revolutionary government? It is inevitably the few ideologically motivated individuals trying to lead the people into a utopia they have no interest in. Terror must exist, and once it has been employed it is very hard to remove from your political toolkit if you will.

What gives you the right to force a utopian project people have no desire for on them?

This only applies to revolutionary communism of course, if it can come around by another way these critiques don't apply.

Also (sincere curiosity here), under Socialist/communist models how does a person choose what sort of job or career they want to spend their life doing? Is it a personal decision or must the state assign a function? I feel like function assigning is necessary, as the Labour market must be controlled, however it doesn't sit right with me that choice of your life path might be taken away.

Please don't take me as a troll, I sincerely want to hear your counter arguments and discuss, these threads always devolve into shit meme discussions

>>9532275
>The Road to Serfdom by Fredrick Hayek
lmao dude if u try to control markets then it leads to genocide

>>9532629
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Federal_Republic_of_Yugoslavia

>>9533506

Y-yeah it's not like Yugoslavia collapsed to ethnic conflicts or anything

>>9531342
yes. it is materialism like any other economic theory.

>>9533658
s-so what different skin colors did those ethnicities have

How do you reconcile the refutation of the labour theory of value?
>>9532701
Race is more than skin colour.

>>9533684
None of them are white.

>>9533700
wrong
also not an answer

>>9533709
It's not wrong. Slavs aren't white. I'm also not the same person you're replying to, you brainlet.

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?
you would think that 99% of economists would be Marxists if the theory had no issues with it.

>>9533737
>Slavs aren't white

>>9533745
What's the point of quoting my post without replying?

>>9533748
>quoting

>>9533755
That's what the symbol means. This board is 18+.

>>9533758
>implying

>>9533759
Go back to /b/, kid. Your "le greentext" meme doesn't belong here.

>>9532858

You're right but people will always be divided more by race/culture than class. I think Marxists are in denial of how important racial identification is to most people. Its such a deeply subconscious part of us - connecting more with people who look like us. No matter how primal it seems it's not something that can just be erased away.

Even in supposedly "multicultural" societies (which I think is the wrong term - I would moreso use "multiracial" because while different races are together, they don't really blend) you still see people separate themselves. They separate themselves in prisons, churches, schools - anywhere where they are free to associate they divide. Multiracialism destroys social trust and cohesion, which makes socialism so much harder, if not impossible to truly implement.

>>9533767
xD epic. Have an upvote, fellow /b/yard :)

>>9533770
>yard
>yard
>yard
>yard

>>9531342

There is little incentive if profit is not involved. Most people really don't care about others that much. I live in an apartment building, and most of the people living in it are meaningless to me. I wouldn't work just to help them out.

>>9533774
I'm le big dog and le this is my yard *raises Guy Fawkes mask*

>>9532691
yeah I'm sure ken thompson made unix because he wanted a good bonus at the end of the year
>>9533782
>wages are profit

>>9533788
Wages are usually profitous.

>>9533015
>"we r a blank slate lmoa"
no one thinks this anymore.
>>9533292
>I have no argument so I have to strawman
damaged leftshit
>>9533763
They're answer is "false consciousness," I wish I was making this up, but that's how deluded they are.

>>9531342
Socialism, Mises

Hayek, The Use of Knowledge in Society, The Fatal Conceit

Any socialist country should also be a pretty good live refutation.

>>9533878
>>"we r a blank slate lmoa"
>>I have no argument so I have to strawman

>>9533902
OP has already refuted the neé Anglos.

>>9531759
how are these downsides, literally

>>9533912
These works aren't heavily based on Austrian methods.

>>9533284
>how does a person choose what sort of job or career they want to spend their life doing? Is it a personal decision or must the state assign a function? I feel like function assigning is necessary, as the Labour market must be controlled, however it doesn't sit right with me that choice of your life path might be taken away.

Political theorist Veronica Roth presented a superb theory explaining this in her 500 page long essay from 2012 called Divergent.

>>9533919
Yes they are. They are based on the presuppositions of the Austrian formulae, that hence is problematic for a number of reasons based on their flawed epistemological perspective.

>>9531342
To me, the main problem with socialism is that the mechanisms needed to abolish (and keep abolished) so-called oppressive institutions like private property, money, and the state are at least as oppressive as said institutions.

For example, socialists advocate social ownership of most forms of property. This requires the existence of an institution capable of preventing any other group from asserting ownership over said property. Similarly, socialists want to abolish money and production for exchange. How can money be banned and remain that way? You need a sufficiently powerful surveillance institution to crush black markets and crypto-currencies. This all sounds an awful lot like bringing back the state, which socialism was supposed to abolish in the first place, except with a lot more restrictions on what types of contract may be formed.

There are many other difficulties with socialist societies and Marxist theory, like Marx's belief that fiat money can't be money, the vacuousness of his labor theory (value is defined to be socially necessary labor content, commodities have an exchange value, a value, a use value, and a price, some of which are not observable, etc.)

>>9533924
The ideas in those books are just common sense to economists now. It's easily acceptable by anyone of any epistemological streak.

>>9533931
>common sense
Pure absurditè. This concept of the reasonable idea, like the structures of capitalism you have come to love is your masochism, is no more than an illusion of the dogmatic group-think of Cultural Control. Even your premises here are based on resented impraises.

File: 2bc40856e5f62b65bbc6f7fc63b8defbe0be1d184e8062ddc8c17906e83f8c5e.jpg (43KB, 924x627px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 924x627px

>>9533924
>if I spout enough empty buzzwords people will think I'm smart.

File: 6e82ecc54d6ec0811f62837bd23d0d726b480383f8140f1dac1fe2d976d5ee18.jpg (230KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 598x792px

>>9533940
>everything fits into my apriori ideological framework

>>9533940
>reason and economics are just instruments of oppression

Right then.

Well, how can I ever refute the absolute reasonableness of unreasonableness?

>>9533945
Are you having trouble following me?
>>9533953
The opposite, actually. I say no one idea is exemplerary in the scope of reason, to be judged as reasonable to the reasonable in commonality. I say that the idea is in of itself, not by the standard of authority.

>>9533960
Your totalitarian duology is not representative of the metaphysical immaterial consciousness that, through expression, we thrust into the Cosmos of ideas. Rather, the reasonable is unreasonable! I say that that which can be elucidated by the misconception of the reasoned proposition is naught! That which is like the dormant, untenable, is the home of the Just approach and not the reasoned.

File: 1398632018256.jpg (70KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1000x1000px

>>9533961
that's not what I was referring to, you fucking pseud.
> I say that the idea is in of itself
you're either extremely retarded, or are baiting.

>>9533978
I think you fried your brain on postructuralism or something.

>>9533979
You say the idea is at once one of reason or not of reason. Thus you approach the perspective at a duology, no?
An Idea is of course in of itself. Consider the Absurd Self. Not reasoned is the conflations of the madness in his methods with the rigid archetype of his phenomenological quallia, but rather it is not. So your idea of rigidity in this supposed duology of reasoned and not falls like the duology of experience. Hence the instability of the Austrian epistemological footing.

>>9534002
Ok, nobody take this bait now.

>>9534008
t.authoritarian personality

>>9533987
>>9534008
As soon as you are shown the invalidity of your position, and its hypocryphal contradiction in your own trail of thinking, you give up on it and denounce it as a heresy. This is why we Don't like to argue with you.

>>9531342
>Are there any intelligent refutations of socialist theory?
There are purely emotionalist appeals towards muh billions billions billions billions. If you're an intellectual coward or middling and willing to overlook the wider death toll of the actually existing actually governing economic system of the world, as most people are, that's generally enough. Capitalism however has no substantial response to socialist criticism of liberal economics as laid out by Marx and since expounded on. After years of fiddling about trying to simply keep the criticism itself quiet via violence including assassination, terrorism, and war their line is generally that all the things that capitalism is criticized for are actually good. This is the financiers talking to the servant population which, sleepwalking, follows.

>>9533694
http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine/notes/Law-of-Value.html

>>9534048
This is totally misguided. Value and price are synonymous. The price placed on a good represents the value of the good to the person selling it. Money is the method of exchange.
All this article does is try to redefine value, but if it does that it changes the LTV anyway.

>>9531371
Marxism is neither intrinsically optimistic not pessimistic about human nature. Marx believed that what we call human nature comes from our understanding of social relations- to be pessimistic in this instance is merely to reflect the poor conditions of life in a particular epoch.

>>9534066
>The price placed on a good represents the value of the good to the person selling it
wat

>>9534066
Marx defines value to be socially necessary labor time, iirc. So the mudpie argument falls flat, for instance. In Marxist theory, price is an expression of exchange value, which describes how much of one commodity can be exchanged for another, but exchange value can't be directly observed or calculated, only inferred.

>>9534066
>You: Value and price are synonymous.
>Actual professor of economics: One thing that should be clear from the start is that the LoV does not assert is that "average market prices" for each market equal "labor values."

Try again.

>>9534037

I hate how Marxists attribute literally every death that happens due to geopolitics to capitalism. As if all the middle east situations happen because of capitalism. They never seem to appreciate that in a world where different states must compete for resources (i.e the real world) then yes, some people are going to get fucked. One world centrally planned government could fix it sure, but that's never going to happen

>>9534037
>muh imperialism muthafuka
>completely ignore the genocides, ethnic cleansings, and imperialism the USSR and PRC engaged in
Just because they were incapable of performing it on a global level like the US, doesn't grant them moral superiority. Economists have had numerous critiques and responses to socialism, you just seem incapable of reading anything not in your catalog of goodthink.

>>9534075
So it is a tautology, then.
>>9534081
Actual economists disregarded the LTV decades ago.

>>9534085
I've usually thought Marx was more "not even wrong" than wrong, yes. With that said, some useful currents came out of Marx's thought. But I don't think it's a very good theory, since it's nearly impossible to build good economic models with it.

>>9534082
>I hate how Marxists attribute literally every death that happens due to geopolitics to capitalism.
>when you don't even read the post
>As if all the middle east situations happen because of capitalism.
Of course it is dumbass
>They never seem to appreciate that in a world where different states must compete for resources (i.e the real world) then yes, some people are going to get fucked.
So there's nothing wrong with the billions and billion and billions and billions and billions personally strangled by Stalin and Mao?

>>9534002
what the fuck are you even saying you faggot? Speak properly, and define yourself, or fuck off.

>>9534096
Marx is a preeminent figure in most thought today, and started currents that have yielded great understanding. But his economic philosophy is outdated, or rather, was never really accurate.

>>9534085
The exact point is that there is no "LTV", read it again.

>>9534103
Fucking Anglo. Go back.

>>9531603
Tell me why a socialist system would do that

>>9534109
Blatantly false. The LTV was formulated before Marx and Marx used it.

>>9534115
sorry that Analytic philosophy is vastly more coherent and superior to continental garbage.

>>9534127
dude possible worlds lmao

>>9533763
Race is a spook you dumb amerilard. It's as much arbitrary nonsense as class. We're all part of the brotherhood of man

>>9534142
The idea of species is a spook, by that reasoning.

>>9534142
No, it really isn't, you retard.
>muh yurobald caliphate
even the majority of chinese scientists think race exists.

>>9533808
Wages are usually (read: invariably) less than the value of the labor, which by definition makes them not profits.

>>9534151
How do you determine the value of the labour?

>>9534142
>We're all part of the brotherhood of man
fuck off with your ideology; class enemies are vermin not people

>>9534126
http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine/notes/Law-of-Value.html

>>9534155
By its products. We don't need a particularly robust value theory to notice that if a worker can't afford what he produces, then his wages are less valuable than his labor. This is inherently the case as to pay a laborer what he earns would leave little or nothing for the moochers, aka shareholders and executives.

>>9534146
>The idea of species is a spook, by that reasoning.
Perhaps, but a more useful spook than race. If you are traveling across the desert, put your bags on a camel not a polar bear. There is no similar prediction you could make regarding race. It should be easy for you to explain the differences between these races of yours.


>>9534150
>even the majority of chinese scientists think race exists.
Well that settles it then. Chinese academia is right about everything. It should be easy for you to explain the differences between these races of yours.

>>9534158
Let him who is without possessions shoot the first kulak

>>9534118
Human needs and desires for material goods is still subjective in socialism. But I guess history will create a new man able to work like a machine, right?

File: 1453109515064.png (332KB, 413x761px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 413x761px

>>9534158
Fucc yes

>>9533808
Wow missed this little gem

File: Screenshot_2017-05-21-16-49-50.png (194KB, 1024x600px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1024x600px

The Labour Theory of Value has empirical support. There are calculations than clearly show a strong correlation between average labour time and market price. You can plug your ears and pretend it's all "muh subjective", but it doesn't change reality. Try "Classical Econophysics"
It's also laughable to appeal to mainstream economics as an authority, like the field is a impartial science. Neoclassical economics is a long string of capitalist apologetics and market worship. Post-Keynesians shred it to pieces, let alone contemporary Marxist theory.

>>9533292
but that's what happens in socialist countries

>>9534099

We both know that the Stalin and Mao numbers are inflated. Maos deaths were inconpetency, Stalin's were large but not muh 20 million.

The thing is, in terms of foreign policy, Mao China and Stalin's USSR were every bit as imperialistic as the US, and a very few profited from the plundering of the Poles and Ukrainians.

File: 1466953072830.jpg (58KB, 780x653px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 780x653px

>be a conservative liberal
>say labor and capital have the same power of defense
>let capital defend itself by the use of the legal fiction of 'company' with limited responsibility
>labor says it wants to open a syndicate/union
>you can't because of the free market

>>9534151
Wages are equal to the value of labour.

>>9534192
The labor theory of value isn't a labor theory of price. value is not price.

>>9534175
The value of his labour is determined by what his employer is willing to pay for that labour, in addition to what the labourer will take. This is affected by other forces, such as labour competition and the return for his production.
One labourer, usually, does not produce a finished product single handedly in any industry, so to purchase his own output directly from his employer, the owner of the product he produced, would not happen, as the value is determined for the sum of the parts. Obviously, once sold to distributors, the price is marked up. You see, all parties intend to profit here.

>>9534190
Why do you think the destruction of capitalism is a valuable end?

>>9533940
>this post
Can we all agree that marxism is an anti-intellectual ideology?

File: d5486d9d7be6da21c03014f7bab17de3290d0a43dd0c1379a96eee9b7c66cba7.jpg (92KB, 600x596px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x596px

>>9534179
>Well that settles it then. Chinese academia is right about everything. It should be easy for you to explain the differences between these races of yours.
>my academics in the humanities are more intelligent and correct about race than the leading country in genetics research
>>9534158
>fuck off with your ideology; class enemies are vermin not people
"class-consciousness" is the most pathetic thing in existence lmao. Pic related.
>>9534192
> You can plug your ears and pretend it's all "muh subjective",
on the contrary it's you who does this; you're the one so adamant on believing some vague metaphysical construct such as abstract labor can be computationally verified.

>>9534228
we have since the 70's (the only good thing the post-structuralists ever gave to the world).

>>9534228
>call out on the 'common sense' spook
>be called an 'anti-intellectual'
>implying 'common sense' is upheld by the intellectuality

>>9534257
>call out on the 'common sense' spook
>in order to do that claims that reason is socially constructed
>but obviously that doest not apply to your own reasoning

>>9532858
>The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

This is one of the least convincing elements of Marxism for its absurd reductivism. Certainly there were revolts, even civil wars, throughout history that could be characterised as class struggles, but class struggles ignores other types of conflicts, periods of harmony, and cannot explain anything beyond those specific conflicts to which it can be applied.

>>9534229
I guess you want to justify your irrational fear of brown skin. The rest of humanity is moving on from this stuff.

There's a reason nobody agrees with you, and that your view about race are considered unpleasant, and it would be career suicide for a politician to come out with them.

Here's a hint: it's not because you are a daring iconoclast speaking the truth in a world of lies. It's because you're an unintelligent racist.

>>9534202
>One labourer, usually, does not produce a finished product single handedly in any industry, so to purchase his own output directly from his employer, the owner of the product he produced, would not happen, as the value is determined for the sum of the parts.

Mental gymnastics at its laziest. Yes, most workers do not individually produce sellable products. All we need to do is put together a group of workers who collectively do, and ask if their collective wages could purchase their collective products. The answer will be no for the same reason I stated above: there would be nothing left for the moochers.

And yes, there are many forces in our economy which collectively screw over the proletariat. Even if we assumed there was no way to cut out the owner as middleman (there is) and that such ways are not being actively suppressed by the USA Incorporated (they are), we still are faced with the question of why the owners take so much for so long. If they were necessary, it would make sense for the workers to give them a cut until they had been paid off for the means of production they provide. It can even be argued that they would be paid more than that as incentive to do so. But why is it that this doesn't stop when they have been paid the necessary incentivizing amount? Isn't it inefficient to continue paying them for the rest of their lives, and the lives of their successors or even all their descendants should they so choose? Is this really the minimum incentivizing amount? It is not, and the reason this process continues is simply power. They are the beneficiaries of government protection, and the workers are put down when they unite to strike fair deals. It is in this way that the value of the worker's labor is depreciated. This is the so-called "hand of the market" you worship like a golden calf.

>>9534281
He was saying that the idea of common sense asserts what is reasonable by appealing to a middle ground position held by a majority, you fool.

>>9534290
There is much more to race than skin.

>>9534294
But nobody is stopping people from working as a collective. As long as you can purchase the capital you can split your profits and everything. What is in place to stop that?

>>9534290
Right wing parties and antisemitism are making comebacks at a terryfiyng speed over the world, and democracies all over the world are pretty much making no progress or commiting suicide one by one. I'm no racist, but shoving your fingers down your ears and shouting "la-la-la-la I can't hear you because of PROGRESS!" will hurt you more than help you. Be careful whenever you take progress for granted, there are few things worse than having a triumphalist ideology and then seeing it fall apart - just ask the Marxists. You're going to have a long and bitter fight ahead of you in the 21st century, even if there were no explosion in racism caused by mass immigrations.

File: 1482361069832.png (204KB, 800x670px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 800x670px

>>9534290
>I have no argument so I need to make unintelligible strawmen of my opponents.
Marxists everyone, even Marx himself couldn't help, but strawmen his own contemporaries. It must be something in their genes.

>>9534318
Mass immigration benefits the people who bitch about it the most. Immigrants are shown to improve GDP and lower the price of goods. They also do the lower paying jobs that natives don't do. There is no drawback besides white people getting an inferiority complex

>>9534297
what if I told you that science needs common sense and therefore you can't dismiss it a priori

>>9534311
Currently, propaganda. The very people who would benefit most from collectivization are given the poorest educations and fed patriotism and hatred for the leftist agenda three meals a day, plus dessert. In the past? Union busting and similar tactics. Corporate collusion to prevent the success of such groups. There are tons of ways to stop people from acting in their best interests without appearing to do anything illegal.

>>9534340
This.
>>9534318
>You're going to have a long and bitter fight ahead of you in the 21st century, even if there were no explosion in racism caused by mass immigrations.
Dude, the fight is already won. There are a few old racist white people left, in a few years they will be gone. The young have largely moved beyond this 'race' silliness.

>>9534350
They are given an education. Obviously it isn't the best because the best teachers are more valuable. Maybe you can pay for better teachers in public schools when you form your own collective business, since you're immune to this propaganda.

>>9534340
R u mental. Mass immigration into white countries is what is currently causing them to implode.

>>9534318
What you've been instructed to believe are muh racism and muh antisemitism are, respectively, the most basic and natural of human reactions that will never go away, and a perfectly healthy response to jewish group behavior. It's like you don't know anything dude. There's a reason they've been kicked out of 100+ places. They do bad shit.

>>9534379
Yeah, our booming economies are "implosion". You're delusional. You just hate ethnic diversity, admit it.

>>9534366
Americans regularly graduate high school without knowing how to do long division. If you think education in 90% of schools is anything more than day care with complementary propaganda, you're not paying attention. I was lucky enough to live in a town sharing a school district with one of the McMansion fields that houses rich New Yorkers who don't want their kids to grow up in the city, so my education was a genuine one. God only knows how I would have turned out if I had grown up 15 miles up the freeway.

>>9534398
You live in a third world country. What do you expect?

>>9534294
>All we need to do is put together a group of workers who collectively do, and ask if their collective wages could purchase their collective products. The answer will be no for the same reason I stated above: there would be nothing left for the moochers
Wrong; these "moochers" should be included as part of the labor going into making the product, as their contribution is not insignificant in allowing the company to produce at higher outputs.

>>9534385
>booming
Europe has been skirting 0% GDP growth for years now, meanwhile America is doing pretty well despite Trump. What gives?

>>9534415
Source?

>>9534412
What does a shareholder do for a company?

>>9534385
You must be a child, because it's all too apparent that you have no clue what's going on out there in the world. Importing low IQ 3rd worlders while exporting most of your industry overseas is a recipe for disaster. Unemployment and underemployment are off the charts, nothing is "booming". Wake up and stop reading jewish propaganda.

>>9534294
>Mental gymnastics at its laziest. Yes, most workers do not individually produce sellable products. All we need to do is put together a group of workers who collectively do, and ask if their collective wages could purchase their collective products. The answer will be no for the same reason I stated above: there would be nothing left for the moochers.
Of course they would not be able to purchase their collective products as companies do not sell at cost. What is left for "moochers" is profit, the difference in product cost and selling price, minus tax. It isn't being deducted from wages.

>But why is it that this doesn't stop when they have been paid the necessary incentivizing amount?
Which is?
The idea is to maximise incentive.

>>9534433
None of that is true. Did your girlfriend leave you for an immigrant?

>>9534426
Why would a company go public if it wasn't to their benefit?
Shareholders provide capital investment.

>>9534433
>/pol/ told me Europe was collapsing so it must be true.
Visit London my friend. Most ethnically diverse place on the planet and also the most vibrant, fun, and economically dynamic.
Diversity works. Multiculturalism leads to dynamic, thriving societies. I know that upsets you, but it's the truth.

>>9534460
And our women love it. I can see why that /pol/yard is upset. He can't get a gf because immigrants are sexually superior.

>>9531342
Try statistics and study empirical examples from historical data. It's so funny, to watch communists after they were talking with almost tearful eyes about the miracles of communism in history for hours, to suddenly jump to the conclusion, that real communism has never been tried.

File: 1438141062831.jpg (188KB, 410x700px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 410x700px

>>9534216
1) It's in my class interests to overthrow the class that oppresses my own.
2) Capitalist economics is leading to the now all-but-assured destruction of the planet and human life.

There's actually no reason not to want to initiate full socialism toward full communism.

>>9534460
London is going to be a caliphate in 20 years. All the actual English people are leaving. Are you white? If so there's no excuse for buying hook line and singer the jewish establishments diversity propaganda. London is a perfect example of why diversity doesn't work, and yes, I've been there several times. You must be like 16. I can't imagine being so naive.

>>9534482
What interests?
Why do you want to prevent the destruction of humanity?

>>9534468
This kind of demoralization tactic is both false and childish. You must be one of the many millions of 3rd worlders currently squatting in countries white people built. You have to go bavk.

File: The+site+now+i+m+really+fucking+lost+i+ll+be+honest_626bb9_4887376[1].png (2KB, 201x199px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 201x199px

>>9534460
>>9534483

>>9534444
How about after that? 100 years later, don't you think the shareholder will have easily earned back their investment? Why do their descendants or those they sold their shares to still receive dividends and a voting stake?
>>9534442
The price is increased not in order to pay the moochers, but because of the value added by the workers' labor. This is 100% of the explanation for the difference in the cost to produce and the price of the marketed product. If the price added was to pay the moochers, it would be eliminated by competition immediately as moochers don't add value.
>Which is?
>The idea is to maximise incentive.
No, you idiot, the idea when purchasing anything is to pay as little as you can for the highest value you can. The goal would only be to "maximize incentive" if incentive were somehow immune to the law of diminishing returns. Learn your own system.

>>9534460
>>/pol/ told me Europe was collapsing so it must be true.
>Visit London my friend.
Didn't England recently vote to distance itself from Europe? Also, it's a shithole.

>>9534491
Look, mate, I know your tiny white dick makes you feel bad. I understand. But women have no obligation to fuck pasty, racist babies. Okay?

File: ancap reading.jpg (2MB, 2426x2676px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2426x2676px

Read Socialism by Mises

>>9534504
Europe and the European Union are different things..

>>9534508
You should really go back to whatever shithole your genes emanate from. You don't belong in civilized European societies.

>>9534504
I guarantee you London has better music, arts, fashion, nightlife, restaurants, sports, than where you live.
Mainly this is because of London's awe inspiring diversity. And it's beautiful

>>9534518
Yes.

>>9534521
Why are immigrants so good at so many things? Cooking, sport, romance, music, art, dancing. We were so boring before they helped us.

>>9534520
Why do you deserve European societies more than anyone else?

>>9534504
Europe is collapsing, and you don't have yo go to /pol/ to figure that out. The UK voted for brexit but London is occupied territory currently being fought over by semitic tribes, hence the recent mayoral election between a jew and a muslim. Future does not look bright for blighty.

>>9534529
Because I'm European. What kind of question is that? Societies belong to.the people who built them. Not the shitskin peasants who showed up for handouts.

>>9534497
>The price is increased not in order to pay the moochers, but because of the value added by the workers' labor. This is 100% of the explanation for the difference in the cost to produce and the price of the marketed product. If the price added was to pay the moochers, it would be eliminated by competition immediately as moochers don't add value.
Markup.

>the idea when purchasing anything is to pay as little as you can for the highest value you can
In this case, incentive to invest is maximised.
I don't get what your point is.

>>9534497
Dividends to shareholders is simply a cost to a transaction agreed to by both parties. A company is within its rights to stay private.
If the opportunity cost of staying private is more than the cost of future shareholder payoffs, as it most often will be, then of course a company will go public. Nowadays, seeing a rise in companies going private, the rules of supply and demand will obviously apply themselves to the cost of going public.
tl,dr: things literally cost what people are willing to pay, all transactions are mutually beneficial in a competitive market.

>>9534549
Not when the ones doing the selling are moochers themselves. The ones paying the dividends in actual labor are the workers, who have no say
>>9534547
I don't see an argument

>>9534537
So why do you, someone who built nothing, deserve to keep Europe to yourself? What is your issue with helping people in need?

Capitalism is a plague that people defend even when cucked by it.

>>9534557
>I don't see an argument
Are you a moron?

>>9534567
They should realise that immigration is also a tool of capitalism and that without capitalism we would be racially homogeneous.

>>9534559
My genes built Europe, I am a continuation of those who did build it. Just ask an Asian.

>>9534583
So why can't a man from Africa join you in the progress of Europe?

>>9534587
Because they are low iq savages.

>>9534559
Because my ancestors built it dummy. I know your dwarf sized brain is trying to justify why you deserve to live in nations other people built, but you don't.

File: images(10).jpg (24KB, 713x430px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 713x430px

>>9534589
no

>>9534578
You stated a word for a concept I argued was not descriptive and stated a conclusion to my argument without showing how it follows. First learn your theory and then learn what an argument is.

>>9534580

Race doesn't matter at all.

>>9534609
Okay, even if we accept that immigration is still a tool of capitalism. There would be no need for immigration in a classless society.

>>9531342
>which is a meme rendered irrelevant by modern computing technology
uh, no. Computers can't make up market information. Without markets there are no computer inputs. In fact, modern computers have widened the gap between market economies and planned ones because they make market information more valuable

Autistic 16 yo white kids should understand that these abstract ideas like socialism and communism and libertarianism that they think are edgy and are told they should waste their time reading about and understanding on some faux-deep level, are just scraps and traps being tossed down by the jewish elites who invented those concepts and don't want them to wake up to what really matters: race. These abstract ideas are ultimately meaningless, race determines everything.

>>9534650
This Fuck white people.

>>9534599
>First learn your theory
Surplus value? That is your theory, not mine

>>9534658
Whites need to take a lesson from the meager peasant mind of the brown people they naively believe are their friends joining them to participate in some harmonious liberal utopian dance. The savages hate you and don't share your civilized mindset. That's why they don't belong and must be removed.

>>9534622

I can agree with that. The only immigration would be entirely voluntary.

On the contrary to the idiots ITT, I do not think that marxism was a bad economic theory, Marx was quite the genius and analised a lot of factors that other economists weren't seeing. He was although wrong on the outcome of the situation.

I suggest Karl Popper's "The Open Society and Its Enemies"

>>9534659
No, the efficiency of price determination in a market. Can you not think more than one post in the past?

>>9534580

Then why are socialists the ones who advocate for more immigration and multiracialism?

>>9534557
>Not when the ones doing the selling are moochers themselves. The ones paying the dividends in actual labor are the workers, who have no say
Irrelevant to the worker because wages are set by the labor market, not the company.

>>9534559

What obligation do Europeans have to give their countries over? It does not benefit them in any way. They have no obligation. To ask them to commit cultural and demographic suicide is ridiculous.

>>9534714
>The price is increased not in order to pay the moochers, but because of the value added by the workers' labor. This is 100% of the explanation for the difference in the cost to produce and the price of the marketed product

>>9534729
Not what you were responding to. Let me remind you of what you yourself quoted:
>the idea when purchasing anything is to pay as little as you can for the highest value you can

>>9534741
>You stated a word for a concept
This is what I was responding to.

File: 26236.png (595KB, 1116x626px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 1116x626px

>>9534743
Do you truly believe all that crap?

Let's suppose that he indeed explained how to overthrow the euro aristocracy, blah blah blah... he still was the first one to figure out that kind of shit... I'm not a commie, and Marx himself was a burgeoise. I'm not speaking about what I ideologically think about him, I'm simply saying that the man was a shrewd bastard and a good economist.

File: 51QAXGCAF6L._AC_UL320_SR242,320_.jpg (25KB, 242x320px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 242x320px

Got you right here my man, by the time you finish this you'll be set

>>9534771
> posts anime
> expects to be taken seriously
What I explained is correct. And you know how we know this? Because it's exactly what happened; the Jewish communist coup against the European aristocracy worked.

>Marx was bourgeois
Marx wad first and foremost a jew.

File: 9781610391849-us-300.jpg (22KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x450px

>>9531342
I wouldn't go so far as to say the calculation problem is a meme. It's relevant and unsolved. I can see why you'd like to sidestep that discussion if you don't care for Austrians, though.

If you haven't already, I highly recommend The Dictator's Handbook, which doesn't set out to directly refute socialist/communist theory, but does so as a corollary. Essentially, the book lays out a non-Austrian economics of power, then applies it in analyses of different societies. The ultimate conclusion is that effective (where "effective" = maintains power for an extended period of time) leaders dedicate resources primarily to maintaining the social order, secondarily to accruing more resources, and tertiarally to all else (including: the leader himself, citizen welfare, and non-essential infrastructure).

Following from this, a leader who dedicates a significant portion of available resources to anything other than power or accruing resources will be ineffective (experience some level of disloyalty among upper-middle- and middle-level supporters, who are necessary to maintain power). The closer the state gets to actual socialism/communism, the less stable it becomes, and the easier a fascist or other power-grabber can gain influence.

The reason this doesn't cripple democracies the same way it hinders societies with single leaders is because the nature of democracy makes power-grabbing much more difficult. Even so, an elected official who doesn't co-operate with industrialists and other powerful figures will, broadly speaking, lose to one that does. This is why subsidies exist — they're the bargaining chips politicians use to earn the backing of the powerful. Thus, leaders must still dedicate more resources to other powerful individuals than the citizenry at large, and socialist/communist change is unfeasible.

I'm oversimplifying, of course, a whole book can't be condensed into a 4chan post, and, again, nowhere do the authors argue directly against socialist/communist theory. Still, at the end of the read, it's hard not to see that this economics of power rules out socialism and communism as a corollary.

>t. de-spooked syndicalist

>>9534743

Posts like this really make me think there is no help but a gulag with a human face. If you truly believe this insanity, you need medical help. Stop browsing /pol/ for a while.

Look at this fucking retard. Computers cannot fix the problem of calculation unless you live in a metal gear solid 4 tier universe where everyone has a fucking chip in their head connected to a central mega computer with real time visual access to every factory, workshop, and mine on the planet.
Hayek wrote a lot on collectivist economic planning. Go read that shit you fucking hack.

>>9534820
Of course you can't properly calculate an economy when it's basically a form of controlled state capitalism, retaining wages and commodity production. A planned economy is a qualitatively different system to the 20th century experiments.
Read "Towards a New Socialism" and come back

>>9534818
What I explained is the absolute truth and if you had any historical awareness beyond the jewish propaganda that has been handed down to you, you would understand that what I said is nothing new. These things have been well known for a long time.

>>9534842
>>9534743
How dumb are you two exactly?

There's no known way to efficiently allocate resources without the price signals that markets provide. Perhaps in a hundred years some benevolent AI central planner will be able to make planned economies feasible, but we're not there yet. Mixed-market systems are the best we can manage at the moment.

>>9534842
>it's """qualitatively different"""
Nigga unless it's quantitatively different then you're just polishing a piece of shit, even according to your own damn framework.
Also,
>being anti-capitalist but still wanting a large-scale economy

>>9531342

The thing about socialism is Marx can be skipped in the same way that Freud can be skipped in Psychology. It's all 19th century bullshit. One gets a far more nuanced understanding from modern economics and a rigorous empirical testing prior to rollout of any schemes.

>>9534883
>neoclassical economics
>empirical

L M A O
M
A
O

>>9534883
History repeats itself, you need context and background. Also, marxist theory is not as useless as you think.

>>9534229
>"class-consciousness" is the most pathetic thing in existence
nice try, capital

>>9534728
>It does not benefit them in any way.
Uhmm, diversity has nothing but benefits. Ironically the places that would most benefit from diversity and multiculturalism are the places most afraid of it like rural Britain and the American rustbelt. Nothing would improve the economies and cultural life of these places more than an influx of vibrant newcomers with fresh ideas.
The success of multicultural cities like New York and London (especially when compared with the moribund mono-cultural backwaters) is proof of the positive effect of immigration

>>9535033
What? NYC and London have become shitholes because of the mass influx of low IQ nonwhites. People want to come to white nations because white nations are safe and because white people are industrious, kind, and create nice societies. But the present invading classes come from shitty societies so they in turn are simply recreating their shitty but now inside previously clean and safe white societies.

File: 1489021006098.png (68KB, 467x364px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 467x364px

>an interesting thread with a potential to incite serious discussions is created
>turned into shitfest about Jews and blacks
This is exactly the reason why all intellectuals hide in the "ivory tower" of academia.

>>9531342
Hegel was wrong about the dialectic and Locke was right about e v e r y t h i n g.

So yeah, Marx was wrong and socialism a dick.

>>9535086
t. phil undergrad

>>9535068
>NYC and London have become shitholes
Go live in Montana then. The rest of us will enjoy our world class cuisine and qt brown girls

>>9535068
New York is probably the safest it's ever been.

>>9531342
Ayn Rand
>Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand
>Ayn Rand

ethno-socialism = possible and perhaps benefitial
multicultural socialism = impossible and retarded

>>9535125
Manhattan is, because it removed the criminal black element that caused the surge in crime during the 70s and 80s. The rest of NYC is a brown wasteland.

>>9535098
If you're white you should be ashamed of yourself. Hopefully you will one day be able to move beyond your selfish hedonistic values and obtain a more long term perspective.

>>9534926
>capital is a person

>>9534861
how could it be solved by higher computation? the issue is not the computational complexity, it's the fact that the relatively simple computations have to be taken by millions of separate actors in what they each determine to be their own best interest.

>>9535204
>falling for the racial consciousness meme
>believing yourself to be white
I can't even... are you for real?

The gulag archipelago

File: 1491837386623.png (543KB, 807x739px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 807x739px

Any still existing anti-capitalist sentiment (which hardly exists outside of backwater anime image boards) are just rapidly dissipating ripples from the Industrial Revolution.

Socialist countries have been at worst utter failures, and at best barely mediocre.

All economists have totally abandoned any non-capitalist system.

Even economists who are supposedly leftists (Krugman, Stiglitz) are card-carrying capitalists and love the market.

It's time to just rest guys. It's over.

File: slavoj_zizek[1].jpg (155KB, 660x440px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 660x440px

>>9535268
marx loved capitlaism

>>9532736
Cuba is very racially diverse and it's been a success.

>>9535271
The mistake was thinking there was something beyond it.

>>9531342
the main 'arguments' against socialism in popular discourse are red scare era talking points. if there are any you wont get them asking a 4chan board.

A lot of the main points of socialism (that there is a divide between the owning class and the working class, that the owning class extracts surplus value from the working class etc) are so obvious that i dont even know what an argument against would look like. Just start reading Capital and stop listening to these dum dums
>>9531362
>>9533782
>>9534660
>>9534861
if he asked 'what are some arguments against the copenhagen interpretation' would you be humble enough to admit you never read a book on it and just shut up, or would you come into the thread loud & proud about your ignorance as well.

>>9535256
http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm

it's literally fascist agitprop

>>9535288
>that there is a divide between the owning class and the working class
Lol no. Sounds pretty spooky to me my friend.
Heard of confirmation bias?

>>9535268
>which hardly exists outside of backwater anime image boards
wrong
>>9535224
no

>>9535298
i guess i now know what an argument against would look like LMAO

>>9535288
>A lot of the main points of socialism (that there is a divide between the owning class and the working class, that the owning class extracts surplus value from the working class etc) are so obvious that i dont even know what an argument against would look like.

>implying you can reconcile any of this with contemporary economic theory

>>9535312
every publicly traded company (so almost every major one) has people that work there, employers theyre often called, and people that own the company, shareholders theyre often called.

The people that work there get payed for the money they generate in the company, but not all of it! No, a big portion of the money that is made by the people that work there is given to the shareholders. They get paid for owning stock.

So you see here two kinds of people, people that get paid to work, and people that get paid to own. Does that clear up any confusion?

>>9535332
>implying employees can't own stock
You know very little about this topic. Please educate yourself further.
Seriously Marxists are like some autistic religious cult that divide the world into the saved and the damned.

>>9531342
>as I read more economics

I've the feeling that this commie doesn't actually studies economics in a university

>>9535443
reals > feels libcuck

"Socialism" is a meme, you can create worker cooperatives in a "capitalist" economy

>>9535431
if you make 15 bucks an hour, is it intellectually honest to say that you can own stock? You make enough to sustain yourself and if youre lucky a little more, youll never make enough to own any significant part of the company you work for.

>>9535455

That's what I don't understand. In a libertarian society, you would be free to create socialist communities if you wish. You are free to say "Ok, let's collectively put money into this put, and anyone who needs it will use it".

The problem is that if it's voluntary, most people wouldn't want to do it.

>>9535462
>if you make 15 bucks an hour, is it intellectually honest to say that you can own stock?
Yes, it is a fact that you can own stock
>You make enough to sustain yourself and if youre lucky a little more
That's all anyone is doing. Some require a little more sustaining that's all. Everyone just trying to make ends meet, and they don't divide neatly into categories.

>>9533940
>absurditè

Are you aware that this is an international site? Do you think using a French word will make you sound smarter? Do you wanna impress anonymous people on 4chan?>

>>9531342
Socialism and communism would work if greed wasn't a thing. Simple as that.

>>9533978
Holy shit I don't know what you're trying to say but I want to find you and jam your thesaurus up your ass you little pseud faggot

>>9535526
Thanks for your contribution.

>>9535517
it is a fact i can own a yacht

>>9535443
Mainstream economics is a fucking atrocious field pretending to be a science. Taking it as any kind of authority proves you are drinking the koolaid.

A real study of economics would involve studying classical, neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxist economics and comparing their explanatory power. For example, when you take sociology classes, they don't shove you a single theoretical perspective, you get to study all of the major ones and see where they come from. Isn't that nice? Now, why isn't that part of economics too? Maybe because economic theory is extremely ideological, and teaching the various perspectives would involve questioning the dominant ideology. Keeping the capitalist system in motion is more important than academic integrity.

>>9535692
>A real study of economics would involve studying classical, neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxist economics and comparing their explanatory power.

Economic courses in virtually all universities involve comparison of these economic theories, I don't know what you are talking about. Just because there are almost no Marxist economists nowadays doesn't mean that Marxism isn't being studied at economic departments.

>>9535692
>Mainstream economics is a fucking atrocious field pretending to be a science

Funny how most people who make this claim have never seriously studied mainstream economics in their lives

>>9531342

Socialism is excellent until you're the privileged ruling class with all the money and the luxury.

>>9535727
Not him but, empiricism =/= Science.

Economics is empirical, but that doesn't mean it's scientific. The same goes for Marxism.

>>9535727
not the guy but i have studied economics. it truly is a field with a limited scope, moreso then people think. whether socialism works or is desirable or w/e is definitely out of its scope.

File: mises_0.jpg (16KB, 443x361px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 443x361px

>>9535754
>Economics is empirical

>>9535818
Well it is. What the fuck do you think economic statistics are?

>>9536064
yeah record keeping is the heart of science
the game is predictive accuracy nigga

>>9531342

Not for "social theory". It's a wonderful theory .

Other thing is "practical socialism" Mao, Stalin, Tito, Polpot, Kim Il Jong.... Choose your beast.

File: 1492916939724.gif (623KB, 950x450px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 950x450px

>>9535818
>Science: Must be repeatable, explainable, demonstratable, and mathematically rationalized.

>Economics/Social Sciences: I feel therefore it is.

Nice one, dingleberry.

>>9531342
If you want everything provided for you, there is a place you can go. You'll be fed, clothed, housed, given medical care, given exercise, and kept away from the outside world. We call that prison.
Anyone who speaks socialism, if you start to pull at their threads, you will eventually notice that they don't believe in freedom itself.

>>9531342
>I'm steadily turning full commie as I read more economics
What shitty book are you reading, then?

>>9535754
Marxism isn't even empirical, it makes no predictions except "there will be a crisis in the future" and "the rate of profit will fall except when it won't due to countervailing tendencies". There aren't any useful Marxist economic models for a reason.

>>9531342
I used to be a commie, and I've amounted an argument against it that don't even need to take a really good knowledge in economics, just some knowledge in anthropology.

Basically:

1. Humanity existed first in Tribal bands, then to small tribes, than to larger tribes, then kingdoms.

2. The only one without a "state" or bureaucrats who run things are small bands. So technically this is what we could call a classless, stateless society known as primitive Communism.

3. A turn back to this (involving a super advanced technological band society) would be the only way to remove ALL bureaucracy from any state, thus creating communism

4. However, the necessary change would take such energy and time that it would be physically impossible to do, since it could easily collapse or be destroyed by some power hungry revolutionary. Not to mention other disasters.

The amount of carnage would be unimaginable, since communism would also require complete world conquest since they can't create with reactionary forces to counter them.

>>9531387
underrated kek

>>9535288
>so obvious that i dont even know what an argument against would look like
this is your mind on ideology

>>9535692
>muh conspiracy theory against the evil academy
>muh people who studied economics for their entire lives understand it less than me
why do leftists hate intellectuality?

>>9536487
I don't think you were ever a committed communist if that line of thought dissuaded you.

>>9536673
Well, once you realize you have to chose between:
Marxist leninist: (Holodomor apologists, apologists for commie crimes, authoritarians)
Anarchist: (Decentralized revolution which leaves power vacuum, armies literally had NO morale or training.)
or Leftcom: (Obscure branch which will never do anything, but at least they don't care about SJW bullshit.)

I pretty much understood most of the theory, but once I understood the implications of it I started to abandon it.

>>9531342
The inherent nature of human behaviour

>>9532858
i have really struggled with whether and how to respond to this. The execution of this message was very nice and respectful, and I genuinely appreciate that. The premise, however, is problematic. Maybe not inherently, but within the context of the sexist society we live in. Men are allowed, and often feel compelled, to think out loud at women, to share unsolicited not necessarily informed thoughts at women. (And usually these men, unlike you, don’t even seem to recognize that their thoughts may not be useful.) Women on the other hand aren’t allowed to be as open. So, if you want to not just be respectful, but actually be anti-oppression, it is better (IMO) not to respond to a woman’s work with the types of thoughts that other men pawn off as insights, if you know what i mean. again, i appreciate your honesty, but i feel obligated to point these things out.

>>9536765
Belated reply, but I believe that someone can be committed to the communist hypothesis without entirely subscribing to the canonical schools of communism. Decrying the hypothesis itself because of the flaws of failed praxes betrays in my view a lack of commitment.

Can somebody just tell me whether the "human nature" argument is a meme? I've read lots of Dostoevsky and Solzhenitsyn and communism seems like way too optimistic of a system to impose on a large population group.

>>9538970
When everyone and their mother criticized the incentive problem of socialism, the marxist response was "history will change the human behavior." If the human nature argument is a meme, then marxist intellectuals themselves are nothing but shitty memes.

File: 1479940020739.jpg (179KB, 1050x1572px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1050x1572px

>>9531342

>>9531342
>I'm steadily turning full commie as I read more economics

Try reading some history

>intelligent refutations

how about the fact that governments are generally corrupt and shouldn't be trusted to be in charge of redistributing wealth? I've never seen this addressed properly without resorting to something akin to a "not true socialism" response.

otherwise, why not a Taoistic stance that emphasizes anti-materialism? money doesn't really matter, people only need shelter and food and a lot of people can actually afford that under current economic situations in 1st world countries. furthermore, why don't middle or upper class socialist give up a significant portion of their own wealth and not just the occasional donation to charities?

File: 58527050_p0.png (453KB, 1244x697px) Image search: [Google]

453KB, 1244x697px

>>9539580
get a load of this firstworlder

>>9539216
Meme book on the level of Mein Kampf.

File: pol.jpg (63KB, 640x756px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 640x756px

>>9533760
>>9533758
>>9533748
>>9533741
>>9533737

>>9539618
Third-worlders hate their governments even more than first-worlders do ever since the internet arrived in their countries.

>>9539692
>t. Firstworlder.

>>9539699
nope, Brazilian. I've already seen a couple of fat fucks with Gadsden snake t-shirts at my uni.

>>9539710
>couple of
yeah, I suppose you speak for all of us, then