Are these men worthy of reverence or scorn?
Well I don't know what they did wrong. They conducted business, built shit, and made shit cheaper. They are only worthy of scorn if you believe in creationism tier Marxist economics.
>>468897
>"They conducted business, built shit, and made shit cheaper."
>Accuses Marxist economics of being "creationist tier"
>>468912
Did they not do those things? Those aren't exactly controversial claims.
>>468897
Horizontal integration is bad for the consumer. And hiring private armies of head-breakers to beat and murder organizing labor is not acceptable.
>>468873
They destroyed the potential for democratic capitalism and embedded into law, politics, and society the idea of corporate/crony capitalism. So they're evil for killing the possibilities for a kinder, gentler form of capitalism that more people could benefit from. Corporate, monopoly capitalism was not an inevitable development in America.
>>468929
I was expressing the sentiments of contemporary Marxists, not Marx (who did in fact hold those same sentiments).
>>468941
>I was expressing the sentiments of contemporary Marxists
Citations fucking needed
Banaji notes and observes. Federici conjectures and argues. Cleaver does nothing more than produce a method for reading.
I think you're full of shit and don't actually read any marxists whatsoever.
Go fuck yourself with a blunt knife.
>>468922
>Corporate, monopoly capitalism was not an inevitable development in America.
America was from its very beginning extremely class oriented and even enshrined slavery. There has never been and never will be a "kind", "gentle" capitalism there.
>>468961
Well if you want to ignore the masses of Marxist drones and deny the idea that these thinkers have any emotional/moral stake in Marxism.
>>468979
>Marxist drones
You need to be 18 years old to post on this website
>>468981
Cool argument
>>468987
You're confused, it wasn't an argument. Neither was what you posted.
>>469000
Do you wriggle out of every disagreement by being overly technical?
>>468961
>implying anyone gives a fuck what these marxist "academics" write about
Literally whos, all of them.
They were kind of cuntish to be honest. People like Henry Ford were the first good guy industrialists.
>>469013
>Henry Ford, known Nazi collaborator: Good guy industrialist
>>469029
I count that as a positive.
>>469029
Is that all you've got? Pathetic 2bh.
>>468873
Why is it always reverence or scorn with historical figures... It's possible for people to be neither saints nor demonspawn, desu
>>468873
Can't say anything bout the others, but from everything I know rockerfeller at least was donating to charity since he started earning 50 cents a day.
>>469247
Carnegie is also famous for giving all of his money away iirc
>>468873
Depends on who, Carnegie at least tried to give back to the community
The other three were dicks.
>>468873
both Rockefeller and Morgan made money by funding multiple wars (both sides) so i say they are worthy of scorn.
>>468873
They produced the backbone of American industry and economics and set the country on the course to becoming a superpower, of course they should be revered for giving the nation the status of exceptionalism it enjoys to this day.
My complaint is that labor unions and workers rights diminished the ability for successors to continue building their companies with the same tools used by their predecessors. Companies should be able to hire private armies to enforce authority over the workers, and any person or force that prevents or otherwise obstructs a company from achieving maximum profit should be destroyed, just as it was by these pioneers.
>>469273
Carnegie on the one hand did his philanthropy gag writing his Gospel of Wealth and on the other suppressed labor movements in Texas. His son was a Marxist.
It's like a systematic throughput.
>>468973
This
The American economic system is an extension of the economic system that existed in Europe around the time of it's independence, in that the state is deeply involved in the function and operations of domestic industries and trades through monopolies or favoritism towards certain companies.
>>468873
Carnegie is worthy of reverence for his philanthropy, the rest of scorn.
>>469230
The last time I tried to view Hitler like that I got called a nazi apologist, go figure.
