What would Karl Marx think of basic income his?
I think he would not be for it because it is just another means of control
>tfw communism was created by a literal fat neckbeard and his buddy, the fugly Jew
Not surprisingly the followers of Marxism fit one of those cathegories even today
>>1009063
do you want the real version or the fake?
>>1009131
I didn't know that young Marx was such a hottie.
>>1009214
>hottie
>deformed inbred face and a receding jewfro
He would probably see it as having the same contradictions he saw in social democracy. He would also rightly put forward the fact that libertarian justifications of basic income are further proof that it's not a tenable long term victory for the working class. Being "for" or "against" would of course rely on the specific historical contexts of the countries trying to implement it, and he'd likely not have a broad sweeping idea of it as a totality since that would contradict how diamat analysis works.
But the Karl Marx that Berniebros reanimated as a stupid fuck would be really into it cause lol taxes are socialism
>>1009131
Engels would have liked anime a lot.
Srsly, are the critiquers just going to keep critiquing until everyone is a robot controlled by a centralized AI?
>>1009334
It gives them something to do i suppose. better than having them committing crimes like basketball muricans
>>1009232
what would he think about communism in practice?
Marx was fiercely against the welfare state, so yes.
We have a huge basic income program in my county, in which the government simply gives money to people who earn less than a certain number.
Result? The good thing is that misery is down by a lot. The bad part is that we have entire towns of people who live solely of the money they receive from the government. Also, the program doesn't stop growing. It has basically turned into a strategy to buy votes from the poor. Not to mention the toll it takes on the budget.
Could it work in a developed country? Maybe, provided it substituted all other forms of welfare.
Basic income is the right to be poor. But capitalism today has completely twisted working relations between the capitalist, the managerial and the proletariat classes that it's seen as a victory when it's won.
Of course capital today no longer has teh flexibility to do that Keynesian pact with teh proleteriat today, so they fight any economic or social reform in the work place with extreme paranoia.
>>1009435
This is why I think Zizek and Varoufakis etc encourage refugees and open borders. They're desperate for capitalism to accelerate (e.g. open borders is labour deregulation) so they can see what happens next.
Why would a state of basic income be unfeasible? Does capitalism die instantly without growth?
>>1009457
It rewards dropping out of labor pool, so the basic ability of firms to attract producers is severely diminished. In its own way, welfare state ideology is a form of accelerationism. It just hasn't shown itself as such cause firms exploit the third world to satisfy increased consumer ability in these countries. It's unsustainable in the very long term tho. Thus imperialist wars.
/nutshell
>>1009457
>Why would a state of basic income be unfeasible?
Because someone has to pay for it.
>>1009457
Capitalism without growth is basically a contradiction.
The problem is who is benefiting from that growth, when capitalism slows down or degenerates things like Nazi Germany happen.
>>1009472
I'd follow this up by saying the interview between HG Wells and Stalin on FDR summarizes quite nicely what Marxists see as the core contradiction of welfare capitalism.
Marx was a stateless person. Who lived off the money given to him by his family, since he never had a job.
>>1009539
no one cares, most philosophers lived the NEET lifestyle.
>>1009351
Not tried yet, I'm afraid.
>>1009569
Most marxist philosophers did. There's just something about being a filthy rich old-money NEET that makes people attracted to communism. Maybe it's their self-righteousness or maybe they just like to roleplay as the proletariat.
>>1009539
>>1009755
>shit writer effortlesly churns out shitty books that sell by the millions
>hard working. valuable.
>Person dedicates the vast majority of his days dedicated to developing one of the most original critiques and influental schools of thought of his time, on top of actually having held jobs in his life contrary to retards claims.
>lazy, worthless.
not even a marxist. just kill yourself.
>>1009472
>rewards dropping out of labor pool
If it's additive (you get a set amount of cash whether you work or you don't), no. It would make labor relatively less rewarding.
>>1009755
almost every philosopher was a neet or an academic who did nothing else with their lives.
>>1011268
>implying social status and income are 1:1
>implying income shouldn't be based off of the demand for your labor
>>1009435
Its still better than having millions of government workers that arent productive at all just for the sake of giving people jobs and form strong unions that make stupid demands as if their work was really needed..
Also protecting with tariffs jobs that shouldnt even be done in a first world country because of strong unions...
>>1009063
he would probably oppose anything which lead to amelioration of tensions between 'classes' of people as these things would likely fuck over his theory of history which has the working class as the next up to bat at running the show.
Marx was against the welfare state, social democracy and basically paying off workers to allow Capitalism to continue. So I think he would be vehemently against it.
>>1011268
>most original critiques
>Marx
>original
>>1009063
Basic income is the ultimate form of "bread & circuses" to distract the underclass.
>>1011625
Absolutely stunning critique of Marxism.
>>1011702
I don't think there's anything to criticize, Marx just copypasted everything he wrote from someone else like a typical Jew.
>>1011711
>Jew
His parents were converts to christianity
>>1011716
A pair of Jews WOULD be sneaky enough to convert to Christianity! What will they think of next?
>>1011716
Don't engage with people like that. There's no winning.
>>1011625
He didn't steal dialectics from Hegel. He utilized dialectics in a capacity that Hegel hadn't envisioned.
Also, the LTV was pretty standard fare for economists of the time.
Marx could have at least read Adam Smith.
>>1011625
>Hurrr durrr a thinker uses tools and and ideas from other thinkers and presents his own new thought to it
>>1009351
I think he wrote an entire work on the Paris Commune and why it failed, don't know what it is called though.
>>1011966
Fucking nothing. His only claim to fame is the fact he utilized Engels as a sugardaddy and got his retarded copypasted ideas spread everywhere thanks to his connections. He was a faggot plagiarizer and nothing else.
>>1011966
He produced butthurt. His writings are full of spergy psychopathic ravings about killing people, about genociding entire classes, about how everyone, even other socialists who stray from his crackpot fringe doctrines are bourgeoise shills who need to drown in blood, shit like that. He was a buttblasted fedora before fedoras were even a thing.
>>1011759
He did and he copied half of his shit from him.
