Ask a Marxist anything
>>80842964
How do you feel knowing that Kek will smite you?
What is the difference between Marxism and communism?
>>80842964
how old r u
>>80842964
Kill yourself.
How do you feel knowing that marxism has basically lost the ideological argument?
Why are you a faggot?
>>80843105
That's a good question
Are you Jewish?
>>80842964
Why do you think people a are entitled to things they have not earned?
>>80842964
I'll ask an actual question.
How do you address the inherent problem of Marx's theories being provably false?
Marx believed that because Capitalism was motivated entirely by a desire for profit, it was inherently exploitative and unsustainable--but we have seen the exact opposite to be true. Capitalist societies did implement fair work hours, vacations, welfare, etc. They did all of the things that Marx said it would take a Socialist society to do, and they have done it better than actual Socialist countries.
Marx's theory was that communism was inevitable, but the criterion he set for its rise have all been met, and it has not occurred.
How do you reconcile this and continue to being a Marxist? He was simply wrong about the global Socialist revolution, has it occured to you that he might also be wrong about the virtues of state ownership of the means of production?
Additionally, how do you reconcile the fact that a "classless stateless society" is literally an oxymoron?
>>80842964
>one post
Wow I bet you want to distribute some (((yous))) too
>>80842964
You useful idiot
>>80843428
Wow you sound racist.
>>80842964
>Calls himself a Marxist
>Never read "The Capital"
Yes, you're hilarious.
>>80843029
Marxism encompasses Socialism and Communism.
>>80843128
Except it hasn't because it's never been implemented
>>80843250
Explain. The workers have in fact earned all of their produce. Why do they need to give a percentage of that to their Capitalist overlords?
>>80842964
Why do you hate yourself?
All this bourgeois in this thread is making me sick...
>>80843587
they always told me Irish were the niggers of Europe
>>80843587
>Except it hasn't because it's never been implemented
>real gommunism never existed
every fucking time top kek
>>80843557
cg on winning in football. i was rly happy for you :)
How's middle school treating you
>>80843587
>Except it hasn't because it's never been implemented
you know now you can never use that same argument with ancaps, right redtard?
I don't know any websites to order a new kippah can someone help me out?? Also if they sell das capital that'd be cool too, you should read it!
Why are you so intent on destroying the world as we know it?
>>80843428
>How do you address the inherent problem of Marx's theories being provably false?
How so? Communism in the way Marx envisioned was never implemented.
Those states that called themselves Communist were in fact extremely top-down.
>-but we have seen the exact opposite to be true. Capitalist societies did implement fair work hours, vacations, welfare, etc.
Yeah, but only after Marxist thought came to prominence and labour unions became effective.
Capitalism is inherently exploitative because the worker must work for the Capitalist or face dying.
>"classless stateless society" is literally an oxymoron
How so?
What are the benefits of world government? Surely the best system would be 6 gorrilion city states each specialized to the specific needs of their people.
>>80843890
Thanks anon.
>>80842964
Goys communism is good! It sticks it to the bankers!
Ignore this marxist beta faggot.
Post anti communist and marxist propoganda
>>80844022
I'm not. We Marxists wish to make it a fairer place.
>>80843883
Because it hasn't, anon.
How can you say those states in the past were even remotely Communist when currency still existed and there was even less equality than there was in Capitalist nations.
>>80843587
>The workers have in fact earned all of their produce. Why do they need to give a percentage of that to their Capitalist overlords?
Because those capitalist overlords provide the tools and money needed for production. Without that your workers are useless. Both are required for a functioning production process.
>>80843935
There has never even been a society that has claimed to be an anarchical capitalist one.
There have been many that claim socialism/communism/marxism
>>80842964
what is the role of an innovator in a marxist society?
How will you create value or capital in a society with no currency?
Jewish rabbi 『Marxism is False logic for Judea national liberation』
https://translate.google.co.jp/translate?sl=ja&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Finri.client.jp%2Fhexagon%2FfloorA6F_he%2Fa6fhe805.html&edit-text=&act=url
>>80842964
You need to be 18 to post on 4chan.
>>80844270
jesus fucking christ - please see my original post you cucktard
>>80844215
Well why can't the workers just do that when they take control of the means of production.
Let's say someone opens up a factory and hires workers to produce stuff and a manager to oversee everything.
Well, why does that owner still get a percentage of the cut? Why do workers have to hand over their produce?
Let's take Bill Gates for example. Why does he still receive so much money when he's been retired from Microsoft for years?
>>80844270
and if all of those count, then all of the ancap examples count
>>80844330
18 what? cm? i am.
>>80844287
Workers will produce items, and these items will be distributed amongst society.
No one would be above another.
>>80844024
"Communism" is supposed to be the end-state of Socialism, Socialism is a transitionary phase between Capitalism and Communism. Socialism is SUPPOSED to be extremely top-down, it's State ownership of the means of production turned to the ends of the people.
But instead of seeing a global Socialist revolution gradually transforming into Communism, what we saw was Socialist revolutions, then failed Socialist states, then a return to Capitalism.
>Yeah, but only after Marxist thought came to prominence and labour unions became effective.
And yet the fair conditions and improvements to the lives of workers did not require a Socialist revolution, they came about as a result of the labor market protecting its own interests, something which is clearly compatible with Capitalism, as it happened, and we still live in a Capitalist society.
>Capitalism is inherently exploitative because the worker must work for the Capitalist or face dying.
That is simply not true either. You could quit your job tomorrow and live for the rest of your life off of welfare, food banks, or simply handouts. People do not starve to death in Capitalist countries, they starve to death in Socialist ones, where agriculture inevitably suffers under incompetent State management and disaffected workers who have no motive to grow for more than themselves. The plenty brought about by Capitalism has raised even the lowest bar in those societies to above the line of starvation.
Moreover what you are ultimately describing is not Capitalism, but nature. If you want something, you must work for it. There are some problems with the overall distribution of wealth, but this is a problem that is not limited to Capitalism, but to all societies.
>how so
I would posit simply that a society without classes cannot be established without a state. Human stratification is natural, it occurred in pre-industrial societies, and indeed in hunter-gatherer societies. Without coercion, equality does not exist.
>>80844577
That is the most retarded answer I have ever heard.
they will produce items already invented.
What incentive will be there to innovate and invent new things?
What if individuals have different preferences and need things as a different rate?
>>80843883
It hasnt you moron
Coming from a masterrace I can also tell you a Nazi state never existed
>>80844419
Because he took all the risks. Bill Gates could have failed horribly and live in the gutter for the rest of his live but no he took a gamble and won. Employers provide the stuff needed for production while employees provide the labour. How can one not know/understand this basic economic principal?
>>80844419
Southbro stop, you're embarrassing the Isle
>>80844601
I would add that my ideological qualm with Marxism is not so much the problems that were addressed in Das Kapital (though I disagree that profit is theft, for reasons upon which we shall mostly likely not agree) but with the means he proposed to resolve them.
I do not even have a problem with the idea of a classless, stateless society in and of itself, except that I do not think that it can exist. I believe that there will always be haves and have nots, and that the best we can do as a society is to ensure that at the very least the quality of the individual is the deciding factor in who has and who does not have. I also believe firmly that Nations can represent the interests of their people better the smaller they are, that it is wrong to force people of different cultures and identities to participate in the same democracy. This always leads to conflicts of interest which are inevitably resolved through simple numerical superiority, it rewards those who breed and waste and do not innovate, and punishes those who build functional societies.
It is the problem of attempting to resolve a global problem that is essentially a bunch of bankers, an international clique of financial interests, by giving them exactly what they want--an international collectivism that shuns the idea of nations and puts control of the means of production into either their hands, or the hands of their patsies, and then expects them to abolish it all and go live as farmers or factory hands.
>>80844097
I would if I was on my computer.Theres literally no room to download anything here.
God like ugh seriously fuck rich people
>>80843587
The haven't earned anything exept a wage for their labour, no one asked them to do it so if they don't want to they can lump it.
If they want to have more control then start your own business, don't take from the job provider
>>80845021
That's unfortunate goyim
>>80842964
If communism really worked then it would have taken a firm hold in where it's been attempted, rather than distorting itself into something that doesn't at all benefit 'the working man'. See China, USSR - it's no coincidence. The ideology flies in the face of human nature. The quality of life outside of such an arrangement is much better.
Under communism everyone will get free kippahs! Doesn't that sound great?
>>80844577
>No one would be above another
I swear to god you people are just extremely jelaous of people who are actually successful so you want to create a society where theres no winners,ergo theres no losers as well,so you can feel better about yourselves.
>>80844840
But Bill Gates no longer provides anything for Microsoft, and even when he was still with them he had managers to oversee the stuff.
Who cares if they took a risk? That risk is over now.
>>80844716
Well, because how will the farmer live if he doesn't produce food? Furthermore, people are not total cunts. The farmer will undoubtedly distribute the excess food.
>>80845152
I bet the Jew did this.
>>80842964
Are you racially aware? Do you support eugenics?
OYYYY VEYYYY GOYIM GIVE MORE REPLIES! TAKE THE IRON PILL! IT COMES With FREE CURTAINs. FREE STUFF!!!
>>80845401
No.
Racism is a disease that needs to be snuffed out. We should treat others as we would wish to be treated.
>>80845392
g-goyim w-w-what?? Are you b-being anti s-s-semitic?!?
>>80844419
Because by making the initial investment that caused that company to be created and to become such a massive empire, Bill Gates provided a service of enormous value to society. He owns that company--or owned it. The system encourages people to make long term investments that benefit them, but also provide services to the people.
Without this there is no incentive to start big businesses, they must all be implemented by the State. Have you ever had to deal with the government before? The government is terrible at everything, it has no interest in innovating, because there is nothing in it for them.
>>80845303
>Well, because how will the farmer live if he doesn't produce food? Furthermore, people are not total cunts. The farmer will undoubtedly distribute the excess food.
No, they won't! We know that they will not because they DID not, that is why the Kulaks had to die, they learned that their hard work and the produce of that hard work was going to be scalped from them by the government, so they simply stopped producing more than what they personally needed.
You realize that this is the exact same situation as what you describe with Capitalists taking the excess productivity of the worker, except the people involved did not even participate in the creation of the farm! A capitalist builds a factory with his own money and then hires people to work there, buying their labor. The arrangement may not be perfectly equitable but at least it is voluntary. What is voluntary about, what separates from theft, the confiscation and distribution of the sweat of the farmer?
>>80842964
Where is money?
>>80845303
He still provides to Microsoft because he is a shareholder, he has voting rights and is one of the owners of the company. This brings responsiblities with it.
He also still has a big risk and again because he is a shareholder. If a company turns a profit, the shareholders get a reward in the form of money BUT if a company turns a loss, the shareholders lose part of their wealth and money. It are the shareholders who hold the business risk and not the workers.
>>80845589
I agree, we need to treat others as we want to be treated and sharing is caring. I just learned my ABCs, are you counting numbers yet?
>>80845589
Marx was a racist, plus being racially aware just means identifying race
>>80845733
OY VEY ENOUGH WITH THE CAPITALIST PIGGISH LIES! STOP SMEARING HIS NAME THAT WASNT REAL RACISM!!
>>80845610
But anon, you're strawmanning Communism. There would be no government. The whole idea is to have a classless, stateless society.
>>80845720
>>80845733
Nice condescension there.
What exactly is wrong with wanting to be treated the same as others?
>>80842964
When do you sit your junior cert?
>>80842964
Yugoslavia
>>80846010
The part where you force people to and the ones who don't comply get gulaged
>>80846010
I treat others how I want to be treated, but I recognize race and want to preserve it
>>80845900
I may have misread you, I was describing the events under Socialism.
But again, what happens if the farmers do not cooperate? What if the farmers disagree upon how much is to be distributed? How is this system upheld without the coercion of the state? I have expressed before that I do not believe that Communism as a concept for a society is possible, I believe that it is self-contradictory.
Essentially the argument boils down to "well, they'll do it because they're nice." But if people were nice, we would not be in this situation to begin with. Have you heard of the plight of Jamestown that the early settlers faced?
There, under John Smith (Mel Gibson from Pocohantas) they established a system of communal ownership of the land, and shared resources including food, supplies, etc. All people worked the land, and the food was distributed as needed by an impartial arbiter to ensure that everyone got as much as they needed and did not take more at the detriment of others. This is as close as I can see a society getting to Communism naturally.
And it failed! Within one winter the people were starving to death, nobody did enough work, and even though people were hungry they continued to not do enough work. In the end the colony had to abolish the system of shared supplies and distribute each family a plot of land, telling them to either grow food or starve. And lo and behold, within one year the colony was well-fed and productive.
People are intrinsically selfish, and will do as little work as they can get away with doing unless motivated by a direct threat to their own interests.
>>80846015
About 11 years ago. Why?
>>80846165
Nice strawman
>>80846289
Hmmm, good argument. I may have to think this over...
>>80846509
Sure you did child, sure you did
>>80846289
And before someone says, "but would it be any better if one man owned all of the fields and paid everyone a pittance to work them," the answer is yes, it would be, but not by much, and that is still not optimal.
A condemnation of Capitalism is not necessarily an endorsement of Socialism, nor vice-versa. Both present problems, it is simply my opinion that those presented by Socialism are worse, which is a perspective I hold because that is what history indicates. There are additional options, however, which could perhaps be viable if they were examined instead of clinging to the antiquated theories of Socialism.
Have you heard of Distributionalism? I would urge you to investigate it, it is John Smith's answer, but adapted for the modern age. Championed by the likes of G.K. Chesterton and Pope Leo the somethingth, the idea is essentially an adaption of the idea that people should be able to work for themselves, but also that people should trade for goods and services beyond their own means to provide.
I find it compelling but not convincing--the point however is that there are more than two ideas out there.
>>80846289
Is there any literature specifically focusing on the refutations of Marxism that you could recommend?
>>80842964
How's high school?
>>80843587
>>80844024
>neva been dun before
Have you considered that the reason why it's never been implemented may be that it doesn't work?
>>80847184
>it's never been implemented may be that it doesn't work?
>it's never been implemented
>it doesn't work?
>>80844193
Communism doesn't rely upon a nonfinancial society; that's anarchism.
>>80842964
Why do you think all Marxist societies fail?
>>80842964
Why haven't you offed yourself yet?
>>80847038
Almost nothing that I have said is really high-level refutation, I find that the more into academia one delves the more one finds people using made-up terms and theory instead of simply pointing to facts.
I did read a lot of Sowell though, and desu I think it is very important to actually sit down and read through Das Kapital and TCM so that you can actually understand what it is you're arguing against.
A lot of people don't really grasp what Marx was aiming at, they just latch on to specific elements of the ideology that they hate and then go from there, which is why these discussions often turn into shitflinging contests where nobody convinces anyone of anything because it gets emotional.
If I had to recommend two books besides Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto, it would be Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics, and a history book focusing on the Soviet Union. It is in Lenin and Stalin's attempts to make Socialism work that the cracks in the system become most evident. Let me go check the name of the one I read.
jk I'm a Trump supporter lol, I've never opened a book in my life.
>>80843587
And by ideological argument, I mean the lack of revolution in industrially developed countries. Instead, it only flourished in one of the most backwards nations at the time, agrarian/feudalist Russia.
>>80847331
Well, people have certainly tried to implement (their understanding of) it.
Everytime they did that, they failed and were unable to achieve true communism, as you admit.
If people consistently fail to achieve communism, maybe the whole concept is flawed and can not exist in reality?
>>80847565
I've read the actual Marxist literature but thanks anyway
>>80845303
The farmer will produce just enough food for himself and his family. Why will he try and work extra hours in the hot sun if he is not going to get compensated for it.
What if some people have lesser calorific needs and need less food, but have more needs for other things like books. How will one government keep track of all the varying needs of millions of individuals.
You also have no answer for the incentives for risk taking inventitiveness.
Marxist here
Are you a leninist, comrade?
>>80845303
> distribute the excess food
Yea, Let's say there are about a million farmers in the U.S. So 1 farmer provides for 300 other persons. What if he decides to work a little bit less. Work is hard and he will have enough food. If he only works half, there is only half the food in the U.S. And that will be a problem. But if you reward him with money for making food, he will make really much food. Like more than 300 times than he needs himself.
>>80848196
>leninist
"Oy vey goyim! State capitalism is a good thing, this is why I need total control!"
Give it up OP;
classless society requires intelligent people that will not get caught up in an ever growing web of exploitation
Maybe in a few hundred years...
>>80842964
What does man-chowder taste like?
>>80847565
>A lot of people don't really grasp what Marx was aiming at, they just latch on to specific elements of the ideology that they hate and then go from there, which is why these discussions often turn into shitflinging contests where nobody convinces anyone of anything because it gets emotional
Bullshit, its always the marxist who does the whole "new semantics" thing that ends up rebranding a bad idea when its proven to be bad.
I have had enough arguing about the hundreds of different versions of communism/socialism when the differences are too minute to warrant it. Living in malaysia, I can draw parallel to the koran nuts that wants sharia impolemented and keeps on chanting that only Allah's law can properly govern men/man-made laws are too flawed; every time you ask them to outline the steps of implementation so they may be open for critique, they just couldnt do it. marxists all share that fundamental pathology where errors in implementation as a consequence of incompatibility is diverted as an external factor. If the system was as good as advertised then it should follow that implementation must be seamless as real improvements are observable and thus create a sustainable positive feedback loop
theme for this thread
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U06jlgpMtQs
>>80842964
gtfo shill
When the revolution happens, we will be tossing the sjw's into the gulag, r-right?
