Why did the proletariat fail to rise up and seize the means of production from the bourgeoisie? The global revolution should have happened by now.
>>942677
because humans aren't computers
Labour unions
The ruling class would never allow it
>>942698
what if
we are the ruling class
whoa...
>>942677
>The global revolution should have happened by now.
No it shouldn't have, the conditions set by Das Kapital haven't occured. WW1 and WW2 saw huge destructions of wealth that also caused the rate of profit to bounce back up astronomically.
>>942677
Because quality of life kept going up under capitalism
>>942677
>The global revolution should have happened by now.
Not according to Marx. We are still not in a position where most labor can be automated.
Further, we are entering a time where you don't need capital to make capital, as seen with the rise of Facebook or Google, companies that literally started from nothing to get to the top within less than a generation.
If Marx saw this, he'd probably say we might not want to riot right now, since this is a perfectly adequate system where those without access to "means of production" can still achieve greatness with hard work.
>>942677
They needed a vanguard party to do it for them
>>942720
Are you really implying that the internet (something many have no access too) is on it's own enough to totally legitimize capitalism, indeed so much so that a man who's name is synonymous with socialism would renounce it completely?
Thank about that for a second.
Is there some reason why they would?
>>942795
>something many have no access to
And many people had no access to factories during his time.
He wasn't thinking of the chinese farmers or african herders when he wrote his work.
And yes, the internet and the modern entrepreneur put a new perspective on things that he didn't have.
>>942802
>the internet and the modern entrepreneur
Don't make me laugh. All the internet does is potentially lower the bar for some business models. The amount of internet businesses that take of is as low as any other business, if not smaller. The realities of capitalism are as stark as ever.
>>942677
Because not everyone is a 18 year old college freshman who just read Marx
>>942821
During Marx times: you need capital to make capital, you need access to the means of production to produce.
During Internet times: you can start from scratch and make millions, you dont need a big budget to get a startup going and can one-man-army your way to riches from your garage.
>>942822
/thread
Because every nation that adapted Marx's ideas has turnt to shit.
>Inb4 true scotsman fallacy
>>942677
The ability of capitalism to placate popular unrest through consumerism and propaganda/advertising.
We'll see if it lasts with the current ongoing shift occurring wrt. the means of production: automation, massively deployed weak AI, 3D printing, ...
The basic idea underlying marxism, that the material conditions and means of production influence the (potentially) existing political superstructure, is not wrong. But Marx did not understand the working or the economy and human psychology enough to make any useful predictions.
>>942840
Every nation HAS adopted Marx ideas. Modern capitalism practically runs on them.
You might want to read his book, it is almost entirely objective facts and truths.
The only part that people argue is the "how do we fix this" section.
>>942826
But that's irrelevant. Yes, it is easier to become an entrepreneur from nothing, so to speak, but there is still a limit on how many entrepreneurs there will be at any one time. A few lucky duckies.
For the great masses of the people, however, the current economic systems offers nothing. If you can get a useful degree, you can capture some surplus wage, but even that is tenuous.
We are entering an era where we have existing capital owners, who will get infinitely richer, creators of new intellectual property, who will go on to make it if they can capture the rents on that IP, and the rest of us, who will not even be able to sell their (physical or intellectual) labor anymore thanks to automation and increasingly capable algorithms + cheap computing power.
This is not socialism, it isn't even capitalism anymore, because so little labor is sold.
If anything, we are entering a stage much like late republican Rome, where the masses have to exist on the dole, and a small handful of extremely wealthy elites rule over all. And much like happened then, we can see how for example the European and American systems of governments are starting to reach the limits of simply doing the day to day ruling.
>>942852
I have not read it
>>942677
Because the name communism has been sullied by the failures of a dozen states in the past century. It has become a toxic brand.
>>942855
This seems like a plausible result that would happen in 100 years but there are far too many variables to account for to actually believe that will happen.
>>942866
The parts regarding income and production seem inevitable. The great masses of the people will simply no longer be needed in the process of production, they have nothing to offer the capital owner, outside of a few who have good ideas (the garage entrepreneurs). So either they set up a parallel, inferior economy (as we already know from place like Africa; slums and subsistence agriculture), or they get a basic income to keep them tethered to the larger economy.
You can always have some change at the margins, like if the capital owners would find it fashionable to buy handmade goods again, and keep larger amounts of servants. But because of the small number of the capital owners, that will not suffice to sustain any but a lucky few people. Not to mention that this would create an utterly perverse situation: all material needs can be met by machines, yet the rich will still demand physical labor from the proles just to show their status!
>muh conspicuous consumption
check out veblen senpai ppl b satisfied n shit with what they own in comparison to their peer groups cuz they get to emulate the societal elites n feel good so they become satisfied n dont revolt n shit
combine dat with marshall n some others n u see that ppl r basically stupid af senpai n revolting takes effort desu fuck that
marx a real 1 tho same 4 engels n lenin desu
>>942822
this desu
>>942891
true
>>942855
>This is not socialism, it isn't even capitalism anymore, because so little labor is sold.
Depends on how you define labor, the Third World is by a large amount the producer of the world. Marx however did say that intellectual labor is labor all the same, so I don't think he would disqualify the current service sector economies as junk.
>marxists trying o justify why 100% of the predictions made by a butthurt idealist in the 19th century didn't come true
He was wrong. That's it. Marxist thought has no relevancy or application in 2016.
>>943354
>Marxist thought has no relevancy or application in 2016
>>943354
Nice false flag lit
>>942891
That's what people have been saying since the Industrial Revolution.
The truth is that creative work will always be needed. In the forseeable future, humans are still the only ones who can come up with new ideas, product designs and all different kinds of innovations.
This is probably what is going to happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu7aVEUc-2w
>>942677
MArx wasnt as smart as he though, and instead of just admitting he was wrong, his followers just doubled down and started massacering people to put his ideas into practice, which just resulted in starvation, and when people ended up rebelling against that instead of the evil capitalist, they just started killing all those people to.
And along the way, taking out loans from capitalist countries all the while being on their high horse about how evil and unsustainable they were before collapsing.
And now, edgy teenagers STIILL worship this guys retarded ideas because its a safe counter culture for LARPers
>>942677
>Why did the proletariat fail to rise up and seize the means of production from the bourgeoisie?
Due religion, its why I believe that mass genociding theists and enforcing anti-theism is the to go for humanity
>>943691
Says the man who cannot understand basic grammar.
>>943623
>The truth is that creative work will always be needed.
Yeah this is the key bit. Though I think in the short-run when robots start to be able to do a lot of manual tasks easier than and cheaper than humans (imagine all taxi drivers, truck drivers etc being unemployed over the span of a decade) there will be a lot of pain and fear. In the long-run it'll probably be fine.
>>942677
Because the workers revolution is being most prominently pushed in first world countries and not third world countries where workers are most exploited and numerous.
>communism
Into the lake of fire it goes.
>>943911
good comic
>>942677
The global revolution has been happening since prior to Marx, who just explained why it started and why it will continue until capitalist production is overthrown. History is a material process and nothing happens overnight, just as capitalism spent more than a hundred years and a number of setbacks before it seized control. But as to your question: liberal and imperial nations were aware of Marx, revolutionary movements, and their own (the capitalists') spectacular failures, so they implemented reforms to lessen class antagonism and exploitation to satisfy their workers just enough to not want to overthrown their governments/lords. Obviously this has mixed-results, but the countries that took this route in addition to heavily amplifying nationalist identity politics (the US and the UK especially) and assassinating communists did in fact succeed in abating revolution. Countries that didn't do /all/ of these (mere reforms for the populace, or mere barbarism against the populace) became revolutionary hotbeds, and these countries were the colonized non-industrial places like Russia, China, Latin America, etc. Contrary to his detractors, Marx did not fail in his what-they-call "predictions", it's just that capital made the adjustment.
>>942677
Because whar Marx proposed goes against the very core of human nature, we would need to rewrite our ideologies and start acting like we care about on another when the vast majority of everyone on this planet is only doing what they can to survive
>>943799
Bit is what he said wrong? Just pointing out he writes like a moron won't instantly invalidate his argument
>>944038
Not him but let's look:
>MArx [sic] wasnt [sic] as smart as he though [sic]
very first sentence, and anon pics his own fallacy to run with that is, in addition, obviously wrong. Anti-Marxism loves to say shit like this but that's their bread-and-butter, personal attacks devoid of substance. The fact that the anon can't even write is just icing on the kek.
>>943623
>come up with new ideas, product designs and all different kinds of innovations
Blatant handwaving. Not everyone has creative potential, and all the things you mentioned can only employ a minuscule fraction of the working age population. What's more, all of those things need only be done once, after which they are replicable at no cost. Designing an i-phone can employ a few engineers and designers for a little while. That's it. All the millions of people who have no such skill fall by the wayside.
You can't solve everything via education, and not everyone is capable of being educated anyway.
>>943821
In the long run, we are all dead. Human society is not a frictionless universe.
I mean, sure, collectivizing agriculture will be a painful process, but we'll be fine in the long run, right? That's how you sound.
>>944076
>very first sentence, and anon pics his own fallacy to run with that is, in addition, obviously wrong
Marx and his followers thought WW1 would lead to a world wide Marxist revolution, similar to the one in 1848 or something and it didnt happen.
This isnt an opinion, its a historical fact. Deal with it Marx fag.
Japan was nuked twice and went on to have one of the best economies in the world simply by having the americans copy past their economy onto it, while eastern europe is still a poor shithole some 20+ years after marxs ideas were applied to it.
Go wear your Che shirt and enjoy all the fruits of capitalism you LARPer
Maybe because it was slaughtered by the commies themselves? Ask the 30 million ukrainian farmers genocided during the holodmor, or the cambodian workers and farmers slaughtered by the red khmer
Never forget that the answer to 1984 is 1933
>/his/ is full of communists and marxists
That explains the hatred for Germany and Christianity on this board.
because handing all your liberty and power over to the state as a solution to capitalist corruption doesn't actually work out all that well.
I'm unsure how anyone can value freedom and be a Marxist
Baukunin was right
>>944308
>32 posters, many of whom are anti-communists
>/his/ is full of communists and marxists
>>942891
The issue with basic income is that it demeans people's self worth and effectively tells them that they have no reason to exist/they provide nothing for their loved ones. It's just another way of further divorcing power from the people and giving it to the state whom acts as life support. If you've never known anyone on welfare I can tell you it really fucking sucks and not just because of the ammount of money you get but just how degrading the entire process is.
Basic income only ensures you have a large population of irritated people with lots of time on their hands, a recipe for disaster and crime.
>>943698
Except Russia was incredibly religious and revolution happened there
Meanwhile Europe is full of atheists and no one cares about communism
If anything lack of faith kills communism in the end because social bonds break down, not to mention the idea of egalitarianism without God is laughable ad only accomplished with huge leaps of logic to explain why people are equal when they obviously are not
>>943911
Makes a good point since revolution is entirely the domain of the "middle classes" since the rich are already at the peak and the poor have no means or ability to organize such a revolt, not to mention they lack the deep seated envy that the middle class has for the rich
Every revolution is just the two swapping sides
>>944308
Yea it's awful, they spam Marxist trite every day when it's the most bullshit form of historical thought
>>944141
>Not everyone has creative potential, and all the things you mentioned can only employ a minuscule fraction of the working age population
DId you even watch the video?
>>943366
>/leftypol/ memes
>>942677
The economy is a highly complex system and partitioning it into modules 'the proletariat' 'the bourgeoisie' etc is an inept reductionist approach
>>944428
>large population of irritated people with lots of time on their hands, a recipe for disaster and crime
Aha, but that's where cultural marxism hijacked by the neoliberal model jumps into the void, my friend. We'll just all become SJW's so obsessed with navel-gazing that we cannot present a front to the capital owners. And besides, thanks to feminism we'll be too effeminate anyway.
Give people free university, and a basic income, and you're halfway there. Huxley predicted drugs, but he was wrong. it will be memes.
Capitalism is crafty like that.
>>943354
>by a butthurt idealist
Do people even know what idealism is
Just because someone predicted something does not mean it will happen.
In any case, much of the things that the left has traditionally railed about such as minimum wage, 40 hour work week, subsidized education and welfare all exist in 1st and even 2nd world countries.
The left has won almost everything it wanted, the powers that be gave just enough each time to prevent unrest.
>>942720
>You don't need capital to make capital
Yeah sure, their stock value just soared and money spontaneously emerged on the company's bank account, right?
Facebook and Google were worth approximately $0 before capitalists started funding/buying them.
you can't unburgoise the burgoise. the capitalists gotta be littered with the blood of the revolutionaires.
>>943885
If it was pursued seriously in the third world then it wouldn't be effective since the richer countries would just force them into capitalism again.
>>944000
>he thinks "human nature" exists and can be conceptualized
>>944188
>Japan was nuked twice and went on to have one of the best economies in the world simply by having the americans copy past their economy onto it
Yeah, and maybe the insane ammount of money injected into their economy probably had something to do with it. And the privileged status in trade agreements due to being in the US's sphere of influence.
Moron.
>>944940
>thinking actual scholars visit /his/
>>942677
Because Marx is wrong about a fuckton of things.
>>945132
What a great addition to the discussion.
>>942677
Because Marx's conception of "classes" is ridiculously simplified, to the point of being basically useless. Most societies have a hell of a lot more than an oppressor class and an oppressed class, who have huge, defining interests along the entirety of said class, far greater than any intra-class differences. Modern societies encompass dozens of classes, all of whom have an extremely complex set of interactions with each other.
>>945045
>explaining why capitalism worked is somehow an argument of how it doesnt work
lol stay angry marxfag
>>942677
The vast majority of people does not know exactly what to do.
I believe while they suggest they know, they are aware that actually they don't.
When I was young I believed I did, now i know i dont. Economy is complicated. And i dont know how to make a better system. I believe main advantage of capitalism is how the accountability is automatically distributed. If a worker does not do his job well, he will be fired, because the businessowner has total authority and it is in his interest to do that. If the business does not have price and quality it will bankrupt, so these items are on the interest of the businessowner and he will pursue them. With collective ownership, you dont have these things - people are to decide the rules and they will make it soft from themselves. No one if afraid of business faiulure because it does not belong to anyone. Without the threat of failure, people won't work hard because there will be no bad consequences.
And the same time e believe that excessive concentration of money must be somehow forbidden and that wealth should be more distributed. And all that with a birth control policy
>>945822
And money is the common bond between all of them.
>>942795
it change the whole meaning of 'means of production'
>>944297
>Never forget that the answer to 1984 is 1933
ironic considering that 1984 took some inspiration from Nazi Germany
>>945026
Gee like theres been absolutely no instance where a superpower fails to instill its beliefs into a third world backwater
Communists are hated by the average person because they keep digging their own hole by being massive assholes. And i'm not saying that communism is not flawed.
>>945822
>Most societies have a hell of a lot more than an oppressor class and an oppressed class
That's true but at the same time disingenuous. There is a concentration of political power in the top wealth class, the fact that there are other types of classes, or that there is a bigger number of classes than simply two, does nothing to dispel the reality of capital equalling power, and capital being concentrated in the hands of the relatively few.
It's the literal truth, the US at least is a complete oligarchy. The wishes of the poor have zero correlation to policy decisions.
>>948136
b-but the ruling class
muh borjewazee
See this book OP. The business community has waged a "war for the minds of men" through excess propaganda and legislation. Literally billions now are spent on convincing people of free markets, all the lies.
When you shed light on the sheer volume of propaganda you'll be amazed.
Cause Marx was wrong about everything.
>>948138
This isn't even worthy of a *tips fedora*
Read something besides Sowell
>>948143
*tips fedora*
>>948152
Oh, it's the hysterical capitalist again.
>>948155
i'm not the one spewing memes everywhere.
>>944499
*tips fedora*
>>944308
>needing communism or Marxism to be an atheist or anti-Germany
>>944188
*tips fedora*
>>948167
just report shitposters.
hopefully some of those brand new jannies are still awake.
>>942845
>The ability of capitalism to placate popular unrest through consumerism and propaganda/advertising.
That's a cynical drama queen attitude
>>942852
>You might want to read his book, it is almost entirely objective facts and truths.
>>948182
Marxists are usually cynical drama queen.
>>942855
>A few lucky duckies.
It's not luck because you don't understand it.
>>948182
Just read the fucking history. There's a good amount of scholarly work done on this. Business propaganda and their influence on society is real.
>>948198
>Just read the fucking history. There's a good amount of scholarly work done on this.
Cite specific examples. Do your homework. Don't expect others to do it for you.
>>948201
A ushanka spewing memes, what a surprise.
>>948164
Nietzsche was redpilled and pro-germany you retard
>>948202
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Manufacturers#History
For one example.
And read the books "The Fall of the House of Labor" and "Selling Free Enterprise" if you want in depth discussion.
>>948207
>Nietzsche
>pro-Germany
I've read more of his work than I think you even know exists, and the only possible conclusion I've come to is he was anti-German. Where did you get the idea that he was nationalist? Because you're wrong
>>948212
I didn't say he was "nationalist" you retard. But it's obvious you're taking quotes from him out of their whole context or misinterpret them severely. Nietzsche was anything but an anarchist, he hated commies with a passion. His various criticisms regarding his fatherland after the German Reich stem from other more complex motives, not germanophobia as you're falsely claiming.
"Nietzsche turned away from Germany, as Germany was in luck. The reason came from the cultural aspects. [...] In 1866, he expressly pleaded to 'our German hopes'. [...] The departure from Germany came only from the disappointment by the nation since 1870 [...] From then on, the early realization was that the German people were still not able to implement the unexpected event of this political agreement in a national culture that had owned it until then. About this realization Nietzsche was the merciless critic of the early formative years after 1871, who was not tired, to indicate the highest unity of a people, as a unit of the spirit and of life, which we missed at the time."- Arthur Moeller van den Bruck
*after the German Reich was finally united
>>948229
van den Bruck is literally a proto-nazi German nationalist and propagandist. Sure, he later condemned the nazis but his work is pretty similar. Of course any nationalist retard is going to interpret Nietzsche how they wish.
>I even feel it my duty, to tell the Germans for once what they have on their conscience. Every great crime against culture for the last four centuries lies on their conscience.
>It is even part of my ambition to be considered as the despiser of the German par excellence.
>When I try to think of the kind of man who is opposed to me in all my instincts the picture that springs to mind is always that of a German.
>German sprit is indigestion; it can digest nothing.
>Wherever Germany extends, it ruins culture.
I suppose you missed these quotes. I suppose you also missed the discussion of how Germany's militarism is a threat to all of Europe, and how they should stop Germany? And how Germany will be the loser of great wars in the future?
Look, Nietzsche wasn't against Germany in general. His quotes consistently suggest he was against this elevation and nationalism and-"German spirit". Basically, Nietzsche didn't think Germans were great or special, and he is at great pains to stop idiots like van den Bruck from pushing this "Germany is great" agenda because he literally thought it was going to destroy Europe.
Germany: the country of ressentiment, resentful they had no Napoleon, resentful they had no colonies, resentful they were blocked from earlier unification.
Guess what? Nietzsche was right, Germany's past basically bred the conditions for hitler (you really think Luther's raging Antisemitism didn't play into Nazi hands? I might add that Luther is the most influential German author, barring maybe Goethe.)
>>948229
If you need to quote people other than Nietzsche to tell me what Nietzsche thought, you are pretty much admitting defeat.
His name was used to support something he hated, even as he was rotting away still alive.
>>944940
Physics and other bourgeois sciences?
>>944076
those are style errors you pedantic prole
>>945039
>biology is idealism and marxism is science
Has anyone ever met a self professed 'Marxist' who wasn't either still a student, or under the age of 24?
>>944540
Almost as much as historical materialism.
>>948258
Have you ever been to Eastern Europe?
>>948258
Old retards are still spooked by "muh Soviet Union" lies.
>>945039
So you are denying basic biology?
>>948278
>the theories of biology confirm and expound an idea of human nature
>>948285
>Aspects of human nature aren't visible due to biological and evolutionary research.
>>948285
>biology has no influence on how humans act
TOPKEK
I bet you are one of those cucks who thinks gender is entirely a social construct too.
>>948258
There are still a few old fucks like Ziveck that grow up in Glorious Worker's Paradise.
Once the last people that lived in Soviet countries die off than the movement will have been fully extinguished.
Baudrillard did explain why the workers didn't revolt.
Everything went from actual rebellion to the simulation of rebellion.
Thus you have the sexual revolution, the imitation of an actual revolution confined to the bedroom. After 68' it became obvious that the world would not revolt, and that nothing would change but only for the worse, more simulation and the demarcation of value. This was the "post-orgy" world.
Baudrilard I think was right in that Marxists could not have taken over because they were confined to a productivist mind-set. In sense they couldn't offer anything much different to them in terms of "human defined by his work", but only criticize an abstract notion of alienation (which wasn't enough since alienation is constant).
Ultimately a world of pure bullshit triumphed, the world of media, lies, non-politics, and viral contentless "truths". This world of simulation is the way it is because people chose, and choose it everyday,passively the masses like cows ask only for freedom of consuption.
>>948289
>>948294
You guys have no idea what I'm referring to, do you?
Human nature =/= there is absolutely no degree of biological determinism. Human nature =/= we can't make statements about humans in general. Human nature is a pretty specific philosophical concept with quite a bit of interesting work done, none of which you're referring to. You're just doing the "Marxism can't work because muh human nature!" It's literally nothing. You say and mean nothing. You're just circlejerking in pride of your ignorance.
You probably use Marxist methods to analyze the world every day, you just don't realize it. When you see Hillary enter closed-door fundraiser meetings with bankers, do you have predictions about what's being said? Are you skeptical and don't trust her? If so, congratulations! That's Marxist dialectics. Do you believe some people have a harder time in life due to bad nutrition in childhood? Holy shit! Historical materialism!
Marx is straightforward and much of what he said is pretty easy to accept, even for a capitalist. But no, memes, not the cheap internet kind, more the actual kind, you actually believe those dumbass tidbits of "wisdom" about social your retarded grandmother told you and believe them. I'm not a Marxist either, I just fucking hate every single person who tries to talk about him.
>ctrl+f scarcity
>zero results
Look up "post-scarcity economy" if you are going to be discussing Marxism in 2016.
>>948305
Zizek contradicts the whole "just ask anyone who grew up in soviet states, it was horrible" line of argument though, doesn't it? :-)
>>948318
>>>948289 me
I have no political affiliation, apart from maybe some general conservation preference.
Don't get so triggered, just because the entirety and specifics aren't understood (and may never be) doesn't mean that some features shared by Homo sapiens haven't been identified, all species have unique features.
>>948321
I grew up in a soviet state, and 80% of people born before the 70s miss it and hate "these damn democrats that ruined the country".
>>948342
Thats fine if they aren't known, I don't oppose the idea, but it makes it impossible to say so exactly what is and what isn't tenable in regards to social structures.
>>948321
No he thinks his Glorious Worker's paradise was shit. But he "I'm sure it will work better next time".
Marxism is only alive because there are aging intellectuals like Ziveck that can food the one-liners into the young one's heads.
Once they are gone the youngs will evoporate. The fact that the only Marxist intellectuals are from that time period, and often those countries means it's going to fade away
>>948346
Yeah. Exactly. That doesn't mean everything about the soviets was peachy, but it wasn't also just a gulag-ridden hellhole either.
>>948319
>post-scarcity economy
Looked it up, seems like a spook.
>>948374
The people fooding one-liners into your head are the capitalists, a perfect example being your tacit assumption that "all Marxist communities ended up terribly", which is empirically false.
Where did you learn that? It's amazing how often pro-capitalists materialize "facts" about economics but have no clue were they learned it. Successful propagandizing. "It's just true!"
>>948400
Why is it that Marxists have the tendency to talk about capitalists like they're some kind of an inferior race?
>>948408
Because capitalism sucks. Imagine someone arguing for a return to feudalism, or despotism.
>>948412
Fuck me, where's /pol/ when you need them?
Just out of curiosity, which country are you from lad?
>>948408
because they are leeches and parasites, sucking the blood off the working man's labor.
>>948431
That doesn't even make any sense you horrible mongrel. I repeat, which country are you from?
>>948408
>That doesn't even make any sense you horrible mongrel.
You asked where /pol/ is, I showed you the door.
>I repeat, which country are you from?
Same as you.
>>948318
>You guys have no idea what I'm referring to, do you?
>Human nature =/= there is absolutely no degree of biological determinism. Human nature =/= we can't make statements about humans in general. Human nature is a pretty specific philosophical concept with quite a bit of interesting work done, none of which you're referring to. You're just doing the "Marxism can't work because muh human nature!" It's literally nothing. You say and mean nothing. You're just circlejerking in pride of your ignorance.
Perhaps they weren't using the philosophical definition of 'human nature', but are simply pointing out that what most Marxists consider an 'ideal society' goes go against basic aspects of how humans operate due to their own innate biology.
>>948437
I know you wanted to respond to me, but I doubt we're conationals since I do come from a gommie country and you wouldn't be peddling this horrendous bullshit around here even as a maymay.
>>948450
ex-gommie* is what I meant
>>948448
There are no grounds to make such a claim. It's just ignorant or willfully stupid to say "biology states Marxist society is impossible"
>>948450
Except for the large amounts of people from ex-soviet countries who do.
>I think a certain way, therefore everyone must.
>>948459
>ex-soviet
Sure they do. Like the Baltics that joined NATO right? Or the Caucasians who are on the verge of joining right? Or the Ukies who are voting right wingers right? Or the rest of East-Europe who en-masse joined EU and NATO and are as we speak voting right wing parties right??????
>>948457
You're pretty dumb if you think you can't compare a natural human lifestyle, the lifestyle humans evolved on, to a proposed lifestyle and make an analysis on how similar and compatible they are.
Fuck, Kacynski's entire manifesto focused on this.
>>948485
>evopsych
>citing the Unabomber as a mechanism to defuse Marxism
>>948522
Not that anon, but see dysevolution
http://scienceline.org/2013/12/dysevolution-how-changing-habits-are-making-humans-sick/
>>948450
Literally american. I'm from Lithuania, which is barely even ex-communist.
>>948522
>he was emotionally unstable, therefore everything he said was wrong
He was accepted into Harvard at age 15, he's probably one of the smartest people alive.
>>948586
Yeah, a genius at math. Doesn't mean anything else he says matters.
>>948574
>barely ex-communist
>lithuania
You're either lying or a fucking retard
>>948605
Baltics still suffer very much from commie times. I too live in the region
>>948615
Which was my point.
>american
>gommie
They should be lined up and shot as a principle.
>>942720
>Further, we are entering a time where you don't need capital to make capital, as seen with the rise of Facebook or Google, companies that literally started from nothing to get to the top within less than a generation.
Except now these companies are monopolizing all the skills and knowledge necessary to achieve anything great in the modern digitized world.
Do you think a new google could rise up now and compete against the major players like google and facebook? The answer is that it couldn't, and those behind a project like this would have a better idea trying to work for google as a wageslave.
>>948485
>>948485
>You're pretty dumb if you think you can't compare a natural human lifestyle, the lifestyle humans evolved on, to a proposed lifestyle
With people like you:
agriculture
city states
laws
justice
any non-brutal life in general
etc
would never have happened because it would not be the "natural lifestyle" that people always used to experience.
Humans are not made to repeat the past, they are made to make the present while planning for the future, most of the time using methods given by the past, but not always.
>>948594
That's why his manifesto has been criticality acclaimed as one of the most important pieces of modern literature, and is hosted on so many universities servers.
Lel.
>>948658
>Do you think a new google could rise up now and compete against the major players like google and facebook?
Baidu, Yandex and Bing appeared after Google, and all make hundreds of millions of searches per day.
Giphy is less than 3 years old, its estimated to be worth 300 millions. It is a search engine in a Google dominated world.
But you don't need to be a search engine. Twitter and Tumblr showed up after Google, and are huge today.
Facebook itself appeared in a world that already had MySpace. According to you that wouldn't be possible.
Look at Pateron and Kickstarter, they are very big projects that only recently started making it. They pretty much moved from zero to millions in parallel, despite being competitors.
Plenty of such successful startups, more today than in any other point of history. You can, with a good idea and good work ethic, become a millionaire from your desktop in the bedroom. Marx would be amazed how little power the capitalists have over who makes it in this new wild wild west of the Internet.
>>948624
Far more likely revolutionaries are gonna line someone up and shoot them, than a fat happy capitalist pig like you ;^)
>>948321
Most normal people like socialism back then just because it was the first time their country could experience the Nation-State and Nationalism on a major scale.
>>942677
Jews
>>948949
Soviet Communism was anti-nation and anti-nationalistic, you dumbass.
They were all being prepared to become one people, rather than their different nations.
Literally the exact opposite of what you claim.
>>948798
Shlagoy srs
>>948798
Check'em
>>949032
And it turned heavily nationalistic in the 60's and onward. Communist Eastern Europe was very very nationalistic lad.
Capitalism's days are numbered, revolt or no revolt.
automation and the overall crisis prone system global financial system will bring the capitalist owned enterprises to their knee.
The crucial question is, what is going to come after capitalism?
>>949077
Onanism. And robotfucking after that.
>>949073
Nope. European Commies were really into the International thing.
It's the Asian Commies who were the problem, particularly because of China. Any government in China was based on the national ideal of "nobody foreign will treat us like trash/slaves again." Guess what they saw USSR's domination over the world commies as?
Yeap.
Hence the Sino-Soviet split.
As for Eastern Europe all that nationalism was counterculture that turned serious only during the decline of Commies in Europe in the 80's.
>>949073
>Communist Eastern Europe was very very nationalistic lad.
No. And since you claimed it without proof, I am dismissing it without proof.
In fact I can point you towards some ideas. There was a "soviet" patriotism movement, as in us soviet folk are better than the rest and so on. This wasnt tied to nation, and thus wasnt nationalistic. It was tied to an ideology.
You had heroes of the people, not heroes of the Ukrainian nation.
>>942852
>every nation had adopted Marx's ideas
Such as? Maybe you should read his book again, mate.
>>949088
He is talking about Kapital, not the communist manifesto.
>>949085
Are you shitting me? Nationalism was very heavy starting with the late 60's, and it was not counterculture it was very much the culture propped up by the Party. Romania and Bulgaria were especially nationalistic during the era.
>>949086
Are you actually confusing the USSR with Eastern Europe?
>>949092
Still, Kapital is not a manual for public policy. It attempted to explain how the 19th century capitalist system worked within a Marxist vision.
>>949100
Communist Eastern Europe was USSR.
Or are you one of those people who will argue that technically this or that was a sovereign state, because the soviets didn't want to trigger another world war by annexing it?
In all ways they were parts of the union, except for in american maps.
>>948765
Exactly. Don't even get me started on apps...
>>942852
[Citation needed]
>>949134
You can't possibly be this retarded lad.
>>949134
>>949142
Do you mind making a point before starting with the insults? So far you havent stated anything.
Tell me your position.
>>949134
>Poland was part of the USSR
Stop joking, mate.
>>949152
For all practical purposes it was.
>>949145
I'm not debating you son. That was so stupid it's not even worth debunking. Now go ahead and claim victory or that I'm a shitposter.
>>949157
>state your claim
>no, i wont
Okay, sure, I'll mark it as a victory for glorious communism. Seven today. Man, you capitalist pigs cant argue for shit.
>>949134
By your retarded reasoning FRG was part of America. Even more so, since they had and still have troops there. You mongoloid cretin.
>>949161
When discussing Marxism it might as well have been.
How about you stop arguing about irrelevant shit and go back on topic?
>>943354
Marx predicted 1% owning more than the rest of population. And he did it nearly 150 years ago.
>>949207
no marx is ebil gommie everything he says is wrong
>>948311
This, pretty much.
People are more than just workers and often consider other problems easier and more gratifying to fix than the greatest problem that is global capitalism.
>>949207
Source? Are you sure you are not confusing wealth with income? And did you know that global inequality is actually falling?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/upshot/income-inequality-is-not-rising-globally-its-falling-.html?_r=1
I just can't get over how self-important marxies are. It's fucking adorable.
Because you don't need to revolt when you make good money, and have lots of interesting entertainment.
This shit is only going to be worse, and tbqh, I think this is the reason why we have never heard from an alien civilization, because they are too busy playing Gods in the Matrix.
>>948311
>89 revolutions didn't habben
>arab spring didn't habben
Topov Lelovici
>>949207
The top 10% supposedly own more than the rest, not the 1%.
>>948123
Are you implying that Vietnam and China aren't once again almost completely within the realm of a capitalist global economy?
>>948672
Holy fucking shit, those things came to be because of human nature, because people were willing to trade some of the things they had for better way of life, do you think people will just magically look to their side and accept to be equals to everyone else? Rich people are rich because they strive to have more money and power than anyone else, 99% of humanity wants to have more power than everyone else, this is basic human nature that Marx wanted everyone to ignore because he as is the same with every idealist that has ever existed and will ever exist is completely disconnected with reality because as with every idealis they are rich fucks who had everything given to them by dear mom and dad, they do not know what is to strive to become better because they were already born at the top.
They just have the stupid line of thin king
>Why is not everyone rich and free like me?
This is why I fucking loathe Marxists, can only spout stupid platitudes about how everything could be better while not providing a realistic way for that to happen
>>949225
>they are too busy playing Gods in the Matrix.
That happens because they embrace notions like "post-scarcity" and other utopias like communism.
We can break the cycle through capitalism. Capitalism creates artificial scarcity encouraging people to keep working and trying to obtain more wealth even though they already have everything, it keeps them grounded in reality which is an essential human need.
>>949223
*tips fedora*
>>949134
>Communist Eastern Europe was USSR.
Yes and UK is the USA. You fucking retard.
Picrelated is what you should do.
>>949755
Marx was poor as fuck his whole life, and had many children. They all said he was an absolutely fantastic father and had nothing but good memories of him.
Pic related is you. Adam Smith was a fucking radical in his day. There's nothing wrong with his theory of a classless society, besides your arbitrary "it can't work because humans can't do it", which is literally worse than what you accuse Marxists of saying.
>>949207
>>949755
>This is why I fucking loathe Marxists, can only spout stupid platitudes about how everything could be better while not providing a realistic way for that to happen
"Things are only realistic when I SAY THEY ARE!"
>>949965
Adam Smith was a moron and Marx ripped off like half of his theories from him. The rest he riped off of Hegel.
>>949972
>I'ma try what everyone already has tried and ended up in genocide, but I won't end up killing people. Also, somehow people who lived under gommies and tried their damndest to get out will somehow agree to giving it a 2nd shot.
You all need to be rounded up and shot. There are only 2 pure gommy places on Earth and one is on the verge of becoming Puerto Rico.
>>949966
Workers are not comfortable or complacent, and Marx never made one single prediction of the future he knew to be true, he made many alternate predictions based on different theories. This is 101 shit, posting up meme images doesn't cover the basic lack of comprehension of Marx.
Still confused desu why so many anti-Marxists get so frothing mad and post wrong things constantly.
>>949948
That lost meaning long ago lad. But you maxxies are cute in the present day, when you know, you're not trying to round up rich people and shoot them for having shekels. Because you'd end up looking at the wrong end of the gun.
>>949985
Yes they largely are, how many workers' revolutions you see happening in the modern western world?
>>949992
*tips fedora*
>>949985
Lad, most people here are socialist in some way or other, we mostly embrace public healthcare, roads and the like. That doesn't mean we want to become fucking Cuba
>>950000
>>949994
>>949948
Top lads
>>949996
Excuse me, they are complacent, not comfortable. Are you watching this election cycle at all? Basically you have the indoctrinated right Trumpers and mostly stupid pro-Sanders people. Anti-establishmentarianism is rampant.
Also maybe Marx discounted too much and too often the role of propaganda. That shit is effective.
>>949994
LTV? Smith.
Alienation and dialectics? Hegel and Feuerbach
Social egalitarianism? Rousseau
Marx was about as original as Michael Bay
>>950033
So anyone who does any work on ethics is literally just copying Plato?
Nice meme there.
>>950014
>>950005
>>948425
>>949073
>>949142
>>949992
>lad
Proles are proles because they've not good at doing things.
>>950101
Proles are fine. It's the jobless university urban cucklords who always call for a revolution.
Perhaps the greater, more important question is why so-called intellectuals (or those who like to think of themselves as such and therefore above the common wheal) keep falling for the ravings of a man who was proven wrong by history hundreds of times.
I mean seriously. A theory of history? That's so unscientific that Marx labeling his ideas "scientific" was just laughable. How anyone falls for this bullshit is beyond me.
>>949228
>89 revolutions didn't habben
>arab spring didn't habben
how does that have anything to do with proles revolting against capitalism?
One was a coup and counter-coup that ended an highly inefficient and decadent state with a centralized economy and the other was just a bunch of color-revolutions engineered and pushed by the US state dept.
>>949228
>Arab Spring was an uprising of the proletariat
>>949948
yeah, Marxism is a meme alright.
>>950152
Because they feel like their beliefs are objectively right it appeals to their sense of superiority and makes them feel like they understand the world. Very common amongst teens and 20 year olds in uni. Notice how outraged and incredulous they get when someone implies that Marxism wasn't objectively true and that attempts to implement it backfired horribly.
>>950120
those are LARPing bourgesoise are they that postmodern to not recognize the resemblance
>>950376
Well the biggest proponents of marxism were always the bourgeoise, proles legit don't give a shit.
>>950376
the only people who still give a shit about communism are middle class kids.
everyone else gave up on it.
>>950388
i would make distinct between the unwitting fools and the card-carriers but yes this is the case.
>mfw Marx will NEVER EVER be relevant again
Welcome to the free market you cucks. It's not going anywhere
>>950152
Marx's contributions to the study of history, although overstated, can't really be denied dude
Materialism is bunk but that doesn't mean it hasn't had a massive influence upon the field of history as a whole
>>950480
>Post a man who got blown out for the past 30 years
>>942677
The "bourgeoisie" are forced to embrace reality every time their hedge fund fails to beat the market average while smooth talking liberals only tell people what they want to hear.
You see it all the time, they claim all their critics are just racist, sexist etcetera while the rich are incompetent neurotic fools and they are virtuous. This disney-like view of the world is dangerous, you underestimate your enemy and ignore your flaws, it is kind of like when you're playing a video game and do well against the AI on easy mode but when you try multiplayer you receive a pasting.
>>950033
>LTV was made from Smith
What? Are you serious? There are numerous LTVs from Smith, Riccardo, and others. However, both Smith and Riccardo thought the value of commodities came from the literal time it took for the commodity to be made. Marx doesn't think this nor claim this.
>>942700
Do you own any means of production?
>>950519
The definition of bourgeoisie is not based on your feelings, you illiterate faggot. Being part of the bourgeoisie is owning the means of production, that is, having employed labor and stable capital.
Class is objective, ideology or whatever else you might be "feeling" is not.
>>950504
He did contribute to the study of history in the same way that Nazi historiographers have, in that we're unfortunate that either ever existed to pollute the discipline.
>>950504
>Materialism is bunk
This must certainly be true, for how can science be materialist, when they study material causes and effects?
>>950480
*tips fedora*
>>950627
>This is terrible equivocation
You're right, at least only /pol/ takes the Nazis seriously.
>>950693
Name some Nazi historiographers, friend
>>942698
This is the only correct answer. As long as the regular plebs are told to be happy with their two bedroom apartment, flat screen tv, and sports on the aforementioned there will not be a revolution.
Bills like the reform acts in Britannia gave voting rights to middle class & working class which allowed workers to not rebel because they could gain what they wanted through the governmental peacefully
>>950573
my dick is a means of production
>>944428
Basic income ensures everyone has the means to be able to do what they love
>>950005
Cuba might have been a success if it wasn't for the embargo
>>951065
cuba might have been a sucess if it wasn't for cuban exiles being hella butthurt, and if they didn't decide to lean with the losers of the cold war.
>>951065
True, but Cuba without kamanism would be even better country.
>>951096
Yes, just look at all those wonderful capitalist central american states like Honduras, Haiti and the like
>>951115
Unlike Haiti the Cuban slaves never chimped out and killed all of their white people. It's a matter of human capital, fampai.
>>951115
mexico's alright.
>>951115
>capitalist
>heavy government corruption and intervention in the economy
Everything I don't like is capitalism!
>>944428
>it demeans people's self worth and effectively tells them that they have no reason to exist/they provide nothing for their loved ones
That's what being unemployed/on welfare does under the current system, yes.
Basic Income won't do that if it's given to everyone. It's like complaining that public schools will remove the parents' "reason to exist" and we should stick to homeschooling or private schools.
>>948658
Yes they do monopolize but only their own respective markets that they essentially created. Many have left google/Facebook to pursue their own startup idea and have been very successful.
>>951161
nah, the cartels run the north, but the gubbment has been pushing back, what with the capture of that cartel leader a month or so back.
of course, we all know the only way to kill the cartels is to cut off their revenue source.
>>951161
Antigua, Barbados, St. Kitts, Caymans, Trinidad, Bahamas, all better than Cuba.
>>951161
>Batista
Everything I don't like is capitalism, this time I really mean it!
Stop using "capitalism" as a shorthand for the status quo in some place or other. It pollutes the conversation with unnecessary baggage. Unless your idea is not for a conversation but a forced conversion.
>>951186
I never implied Cuba was better than any of them, just that it could have been were it not for the embargo
>>951195
Embargo and communism.
>>951186
Also Costa Rica is indeed a massive shithole.
