Why is academia still so full of Marxists?
We have an entire century of proof that his ideas don't work, and are even harmful in the large sense.
>>1265900
I have no idea.
It all comes from bullshit disciplines like X studies, political "science," literature, or the lower dregs of philosophy. There evidence doesn't really matter, only feels.
>>1265900
Marxism is an aesthetic movement of bourgeoisie values against aristocratic one, economic results don't matter
>>1265900
Because academia is full of people who withdrew from the real world to focus on beautiful theories.
>>1265900
Marxism is basically the philosophy for the self-wanking intellectual who has no experience with the people they think they're fighting for. Same as SJWs supporting minorities or Christians claiming they're praying for you.
>>1265909
>the lower dregs of philosophy
>implying there is anything less than philosophy
>>1265900
Marxism worked pretty damn well in Russia. Even though communism was never achieved, the Soviet Union was better than what it replaced and what came after, by essentially every possible metric.
>>1265920
>Soviet Russia is better than Tsarists Russia
>Therefore Marxism worked
I dont think so m8
>>1265920
Russia as of right now may not be a beacon of social and economic success, but I'm not seeing people starving and disappearing by the millions.
>>1265920
Yeah I love commieblocks and rationing. Also having the government control my economic life.
>>1265922
>the Soviet Union was always Stalinist
>>1265900
Economists don't respect marx at all.
Sociologists only respect his sociological theories and critiques (though I guess some may wrongly trust his economic theories)
The rest of his academic supporters are probably just wishful thinking on areas they don't know much about, like a lot of us do.
Thinking less than a century of experimentation of a social structure done in a generalized specific autocratic way is "proof" that it doesn't work, you have a very narrow view of reality. The same could be said for any political structure that existed once and no longer exists by your logic, and some nations survived hundreds of years and beyond before dying out. We're in our infancy when it comes to social development, and trying things out that may or may not work is what we have been and will be doing for millennia.
>>1265993
You're right, Marxist goals had nothing to do with Stalin and his actions. Silly me.
>>1265916
most marxists are very understanding of the working class in my experience. they understand that there's certainly no rush to the adoption of marxist ideas, in that capitalism needs to fail first before the working people will be open to alternatives.
capitalism tends to fail fairly often, so the best time for marxists to disseminate their ideology is during economic crises.
>>1265900
>We have an entire century of proof his ideas don't work
We don't.
Collectivization of property was only one of his ideas, the only one the proved wrong. All other ideas, like dialectic materialism, alienation of labor, and his analysis on economic crises have proved as accurate as ever.
Without Marx there wouldn't have been the European social democracies in their nowadays shape or form. Capital: Critique of Political Economy is a masterwork, a must read for every educated person. Marx was a brilliant thinker without doubt.
Stark financial inequality will have an impact on our democracies. We must beware of that. Studying Marx now is very important.
>>1266007
>Economists don't respect marx at all.
Economists have loads of respect for Marx, they just dislike him because he didn't contribute to free market thought - which is what economists usually are about.
>>1265900
Well think about the academic landscape. The ratio of retard positions to real positions are about 3:1 and usually that 3 side are hyper leftists who never ventured outside their field of study and stayed in academia the whole time. But that's mainly from the side of the leadership like professors.
For students it's because of the ever growing polarization between political parties. Marxism sounds good on paper and due to the 2007/2008 financial crisis people went with a version of the no true scottsman philosophy. I've also noticed it's common among my fellow students to, as said before, never study outside their major and when forced to take an economics or sociology class take the 100 flat level which is basically a high school course that they can literally not pay attention to and get an A.
Yeah fuckboy had some points but that shit ain't gonna happen and even if it did I bet these people still would bitch or become like Bryan Griffon from family guy and become a right winger because it's the new cool.
>>1266028
most historian consider his ideas on history deeply flawed.
>>1265900
Because people who take the time to read and think tend to recognize he's right, ignorant people get swayed by right wing propaganda.
Sorry but it's true.
Also, read https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/4losrq/in_my_very_limited_scope_it_seems_like_marx_is/ for less bullshitty answers.
>>1265900
I bet you think Communism the the sole legacy of Marx.
>>1266057
Historians spend so much time looking backwards they also start thinking backwards
So when are people going to finally realize that both socialism and capitalism are wrong and that State Capitalism is objectively and without refutation the best economic system?
>>1266072
fucking what dude
>>1266072
Capitalism is bretty good once you have enough liquor factories.
>>1266072
>>1266072
The third position is the future
>>1266019
>most marxists are very understanding of the working class
>working class people are overrepresented in voting for "far right" parties.
>>1266072
Nigga are you retarted?
>>1266067
This is Nietzsche right?
>>1266083
>>1266080
>>1266075
Examples of state capitalism:
Post-Deng China
Japan between the Meji restoration and American occupation
Prussia for almost its entire history
Singapore
Most European countries in WW1, Germany (and arguably America) in WW2
Norway, modern day
Switzerland, depending on how specific you want to define a few things
State capitalism has shown to have a truly amazing track record and the only reason people think otherwise is because of literal memes (muh free market, muh class consciousness)
>>1266019
The working class despise Marxists
>>1266072
We should be a capitalist technocracy.
>>1265900
Marx is seen as a positive mostly for the problems he exposes, not the solutions he presents. Alienation of labor, class struggle, and exploitation are problems within the free market. Does that mean Capitalism is bad? Of course not. I'd rather have some complaints about the free market rather than the endless masturbation of Ancaps/Libertarians over how Capitalism will make anime real.
>>1266089
does the fact that the working class does not widely support marxism necessarily mean that marxists don't understand why the working class thinks the way they do (ie not supporting marxism but instead right wing parties)? no. it doesn't.
most marxists are members of the working class who have put in the time to understand what marxism is and why it is beneficial to them. a majority of working class members do not have the time to study philosophy or discover what marxism is about compared to their preconceptions of it provided by the government and media of capitalist nations.
>>1266137
Not just the media and government, corporate propaganda invades schools, churches, city halls, they stop at nothing to control what lower classes think. Read historical work on it.
>>1266072
You're actually right but not for the reasons you think.
There is no pure communism and pure capitalism as spoken about by adherents. Every successful nation has been a kind of state capitalism, you just have to implement it correctly.
That refers to Britain, Soviet Russia, United States etc.
>>1266063
Based Reddit
>>1266072
Literally the worst of both worlds.
Orthodox economists work
Marxist economists teach
>>1266228
>>1266018
It's cool kid, don't let it happen again.
>>1266341
>replying
>>1266403
>posting a meme bait image
>>1266050
Did you just begin your thesis with a made up ratio?
>>1266435
what did you seriously expect from an anime forum you sperg
>>1265900
This world ends in some type of socialism might as well pick one
>>1266435
And here comes the obnoxious "intellectual" determined to look down on everyone for being obviously dumber than His Glory
>>1265912
>Marxism is an aesthetic movement of bourgeoisie values against aristocratic one, economic results don't matter
Isn't it the other way around? Communism and utopian socialism was mainly developed by the old arostocracy that lost its status to the bourgouis.
>>1266450
this tendency for people to shout down anyone who asks for some modicum of research as an 'intellectual' who should be ignored is seriously damaging to the education of people in general. so long as you see people who are educated in opposition to you, you'll never be able to actually learn about the shit you're opposed to. you'll be forever ignorant.
i'm sure you'll look at this post with the same disdain as you did for the other one, but at least consider the fact you're doing yourself no favors here. you benefit no one with anti-intellectualism. we should celebrate knowledge, not shun it.
>>1265920
Go and say that in a baltic republic or Poland . The soviet union was an empire that basically monopolized commie manufacturing. When China and the other countries stopped buying the USSR products,the USSR economy went to shit. It is not a tale of commie succes,when you are given basically the monopoly of manufacturing of over 2 billion people
>>1266019
>capitalism tends to fail fairly often
Like when? For the moment only places like Venezuela are going to shit,and they are not capitalistic
>>1266028
>All other ideas, like dialectic materialism, alienation of labor, and his analysis on economic crises have proved as accurate as ever.
No. His theories are obsolete,they were alredy rebutted in his life time.
>>1266463
2008 comes to mind as the most recent economic crash. people losing their jobs, their homes, their wealth.
>>1266465
>His theories are obsolete,they were alredy rebutted in his life time.
[citation needed]
>>1266063
>Because people who take the time to read and think tend to recognize he's right
Only pseudointellectuals takes Marx meme theories seriously.
>>1266459
There's a person with knowledge and then there's an intellectual. Knowledge is fine, but intellectuals like you usually wank over how much wiser you are than the common man and will instantly attack anyone you disagree with as doing no research without any context.
>>1266099
>Switzerland
I am curious about this. Switzerland is very Cantonal and with very few regulations,and as far as I know,none state owned companies.
Feel free to correct me
>>1266435
>>1266466
Recessions happen in every economic system from feudalism to socialism. Recessions prove nothing. The system didnt crash in 2008,unlikes Venezuela's
>>1266040
>Minor post ricardian
Muh economists are free market shills. Economists say markets are generally good with a disclaimer ( not always good), politicians take the rhetoric but don't actually listen to the disclaimer, and forget about the regulations that really need to be scrapped.
>>1266099
Aside from the oil industry Norway isn't state run.
>>1266099
Central planning is only good for a war effort, dreadful at meeting consumer demands.
Marx went wrong when he turned what should have been a purely deconstructive form of critique into a costructive ideology (I.e. communism)
By writing the Manifesto Marx created yet another form of the thing he was trying to defeat
>>1265919
kys fgt
>>1266028
How do I start with Marx?
>>1266209
You mean mixed economy?
Capitalism does not mean only pure anarchocapitalism.
>>1266137
>Marxism
>Good for the working class
>>1266477
I've seen that graph posted a lot recently.
>>1266486
He is making it up
>>1265900
Marxism is a method of analysis.
>>1265900
>soviet dictatorship and puppet states are gommunism
Soviet Russia and satellite states were as communist as the HRE was
>
>
>
>>1266560
german ideology
>>1266574
>Not
>Real
>Socialism
>>1266552
Central planning is decent at trying to play catch-up when you have a roadmap and a clear destination ahead of you.
>>1266072
When I stop playing Vicky 2 and deal with reality.
...Which one is real, however?
>>1266129
>over how Capitalism will make anime real.
Better than state-enforced collectivization of waifu.
>>1266580
Any actual socialism where the means of social ownership is enforced by state ownership by definition necessitates an effective democratic government in which society at large controls the state which owns the capital.
Which the Supreme Soviet was obviously not. The Supreme Soviet eventually became a rubber stamp that provided legitimacy by formally declaring the consent of the governed.
The Soviet system just created an oligarchy/dictatorship run by the Party, where control over capital was restricted to a small elite class of Party members. Similar to the "state capitalism" people refer to China as today.
>>1266593
>>1266129
>free market
Stop using words you don't know the meaning of.
>>1265900
What exactly is wrong with his analysis of capitalism?
Go ahead, since you're an expert, enlighten us.
Keep in mind, ANALYSIS, not ideas on how to proceed.
>>1266623
>inb4 misconstruing ltv
>Another thread on Marxism.
>Over half the thread as usual is nothing but kids who don't even know what Marxism is.
>The other half are "Marxists" trying to school the kids on how little they understand about Marxism for that sweet Anon Karma.
>At the end of the thread, the kids will still be retards who think the USSR was the epitome of Communism and will come back tomorrow and make the same shit posts they did before again and again.
>This cycle will never end.
>>1266614
>my perfect definition of "free market" has never been realized
>>1266633
It hasn't though.
>>1266628
That's how arguments on the Internet in general work like
>one idiot argues with another idiot
>one idiot gains the upper hand
>other idiot stops arguing, later googles something to reaffirm his original belief
>repeat
At best, attempts at socialism turn into social democracy with more labor camps and mass executions.
At worst they implode and everyone starves while infrastructure collapses and then some opportunists swoop in, buy everything up dirt cheap, and we're back to square one.
>>1266635
Can we say the same thing about socialism then?
>>1266647
How would one "buy" "capital" when "capital" can not be "private"??
>>1266650
I'm telling you that you don't even know what a free market is.
>>1266647
Those are ideas on what to do.
Marx however was primarily an analyst. And his analysis is very often correct. Please read at least basics and you'll understand.
I'm not a communist. I simply acknowledge that Marx can teach you about capitalism. It's not a religion (even though it was treated as such, sadly), it's a theory.
90% of critiques of Marx actually criticize socialist states that appeared, not the theory of Marx.
>>1266668
I mean after the socialist government collapses, like what happened in the former USSR and the Yugoslav republics.
>>1266675
Or they attack LTV when they misunderstand what Marx was trying to say about LTV, or even worse they make up a definition of LTV Marx never used.
>>1266678
Do you know how socialism collapsed here?
Neoliberal "shock therapy". That's the direct cause of chaos, not socialist system.
I'm not arguing socialism worked great, on the contrary, but using collapse which was caused by neoliberal ideas as a way to criticize socialism is simply awful.
>>1266678
You think the USSR collapsing was natural? It didn't implode by itself. It was the result of a cold war.
If you want to argue that capitalism gave the west the upper hand, you can try. But one can try to claim capitalism gave America the upper hand against fascist Germany, when the realty is different.
By the way, I hate Soviet Russia and I'm not a Soviet apologist. There's other reasons for the collapse of the USSR besides gommunismlel
>>1266688
The USSR had almost a monopoly in manufacturing in the commie block. It was strong because of this,not because its socialistic policies worked wonders. When China started to trade with the US,the USSR started to tremble.
>>1266708
>socialistic policies
It's policies were not "socialistic". Socialism does not mean anti-market.
>>1266712
>It's policies were not "socialistic".
Colectivizing the means of production is socialistic. If you want to go and say thar without direct democracy there is no socialism,be my guest,but that would be pushing autism to its fullest extend. Is like those libertarians that claim the not true free market crap.
>>1266100
Said no one. Ever.
>>1266726
Collectivization only happened in agriculture, and you'll be hard pressed to find many, small single-family sustenance farms in the United States. Collectivization of agriculture is little different than corporatization of agriculture.
A large corporation using eminent domain to buy out farm plots for almost nothing is not "socialistic" but it's basically what happened.
>>1265900
MAKE UP YOUR FUCKING MIND.
IS ACADEMIA FILLED WITH MARXISTS, SJWS, LIBERALS OR WHAT?
>>1266761
It's filled with sour grapes
>>1266682
Go away Naomi Klein, stop blaming neoliberalism for the world's problems.
>>1265900
Because capitalism is disliked by people for various reasons, and Marx is quite coherent and systematic in his critique of capitalism.
>>1265900
>Why is academia still so full of Marxists?
Because it's the only place where Marxist """""intellectuals""""" can find a job.
>>1265900
We do not.
We have a century of proof that Lenin's ideas are dubious. But Marx's ideas? Don't think they've ever been applied for a long period of time, m8.
>>1267518
>just brushing off the mountains of overlapping sentiments between Marx and Lenin on the basis that the latter's greater influence ended up causing more evil
Not gonna work pal
Because it requires little to no understanding of economics. The perfect system for leftist professors who are concerned with the state of society.
What happens if the state provides public companies hiring poor people so they can afford the same goods and services they produce but there's also private capitalism providing normal goods and services but also luxury goods?
>>1265900
Your question assumes that people in hackademia are disinterested, honest individuals looking for the truth and open to reevaluate their ideas if proven wrong. They aren't. "Intellectuals", specially in the humanities, know that they'll have to work for the government in one form or another and that minimal government implies they'll have less job options, if one at all. Hence they support theories that advocate for more government. It's simple as that.
>>1267791
Only instead of saying "more government = more advantages for me" they say "more advantages for the poor, etc."
>>1266137
>Most marxists are members of the working class
The working class doesnt exist anymore and if it did those are not marxists
>>1266137
>Most marxists are members of the working class
University students =/= working class.
>Why is academia still so full of Marxists?
Because Marxism is the religion of the intellectuals. It has a prophet, it has a holy book, it has an absolute division between good and evil, it has a day of judgement in which heaven on earth is finally created and it even has a God in the form of the historic dialectic, which basically turns history into an omnipotent being that moves the world towards utopia.
Marxism is basically Judeo-Christianity with every aspect renamed and relabeled
it's not and it's obvious you have never been to college
go back to /pol/ Jar Jar
>>1267525
They do have overlapping sentiments.
However so does Marx and Keynes, this does not mean Marxism is a roaring success because Keynes accepted a lot of the Marxist criticism of capitalism.
>>1266555
The problem with Marx is that he was determined not to be viewed as a Jonny Come Lately. The revolutions if 1848 started, so he rushed out the manifesto to give the college kids something to shout from their soap boxes. Had he put more time and effort into the piece, maybe his solutions wouldn't be so half assed
>>1266497
>The system didnt crash in 2008
>idk shit about 08
08 was saved through very very artificial and uncaptialistic means and with the benefit of hindsight, only going to get worse
Because academia is full of Jews, jews are Marxism, jews teach it to the elitist socially isolated goyim and we have a vicious feedback that turns the whole world to shit
>>1265909
>political science
I have come across a few commies, but generally political science does not promote or attract marxists in any major way.
That or american universities are shit at political science.
>>1267860
islam is better
>>1267995
When did goverment intervention became an alien thing to capitalism retard? Just watching a youtube documentary doesnt make you an enlighted intelectual. 2008 didnt crash the system. Unlike 1991 did with the meme of the communism.
>Inb4 not true communism,while every single form of capitalism is the same.
>>1268058
Truth tbqh.
Capitalism is basically shit and Marx knew what's up.
>>1266477
>yfw employment and real wages were higher under Allende
>yfw you realize robo-communism would have solved everything.
>yfw the US openly declared they were going to fuck Chile's economy up.
>>1268043
Explain how the USSR was communist.
>>1268072
Comunism is the last stage of marxism. The USSR was a proletarian dictatorship,what Marx described as a necessary middle step. So yeah the USSR was following Marx little dumb guide to stablish his meme system.
>>1268077
Okay, how was the USSR a dictatorship of the proletariat? Be aware that he used the Paris Commune as an example of such a system and described it as follows
>The Commune was formed of the municipal councilors, chosen by universal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible, and revocable at short terms. The majority of its members were naturally workers, or acknowledged representatives of the working class. The Commune was to be a working, not a parliamentary body, executive, and legislative at the same time
>>1268088
Soviets as workers assemblies. The Paris commune on fucking Russia wouldn't work,so they adapted it.
>>1268072
Explain how water is wet.
>>1268102
.t I have never read a book.
>>1268098
>Soviets as workers assemblies
Which got castrated very shortly into the creation of the USSR and became dictated by the central committee and more or less unaccountable nor directly democratic.
>The Paris commune on fucking Russia wouldn't work,so they adapted it.
Obviously, Marx could have told you that since communism is essentially an evolution of advanced capitalism and as such third-world tier nations like Russia wouldn't be ready for it so had to go back to being capitalist as a state-capitalist society.
Which explains why your arguments may as well come from the mouth of Deng Xiaoping.
>>1268124
>Obviously, Marx could have told you that since communism is essentially an evolution of advanced capitalism and as such third-world tier nations like Russia wouldn't be ready for it so had to go back to being capitalist as a state-capitalist society.
Then why first world tier countries like czechoslovakia,were totally destroyed when their brand of communism came?
>>1268317
Because no first world country had a successful revolution, Czechoslovakia was conquered by the Soviets who by that point had failed at achieving socialism.
Now if the German revolution had succeeded on the other hand...
>>1268317
Yes.
Czechoslovakia actually came closer to communism in the Prague spring than the USSR ever did in their entire history. It actually was developed enough to handle socialism and unlike East Germany didn't gear their entire economy on being the front line of WW3. But of course Soviet stooges had to shut it down in the name of imperialist flexing.
And as anon said the German revolution was probably the best shot at achieving socialism we've had in the 20th century.
Go away from academia if you are a criminal or an individual with a criminal history.
>>1268059
>Le capitalism is shit meme.
>>1267995
>Who was Keynes?
>>1267882
Which parts did Keynes accept?
>>1266459
The reason you get shit on is because rather than actually providing an educated opinion you bitch and moan about everyone's lack of an educated opinion.
You try to get all the benefits of being informed on a topic without actually displaying any knowledge on the topic whatsoever. Save acting superior for when you've actually provided any evidence whatsoever that you know what you're talking about.
You'll find people think you're intolerable for this sort of stupid fucking behavior.
>>1265900
From Platon and Rousseau to Marx and Lenin history draws a red line which marks geometric order thinking from romantic utopists, like a counter melody to individualisation that has slept for millenia to come in the intellectual history of the European continent. As a total solution, their collectivist comprehension of state and society have obsessional thoughts and must be understood as symbols of an aberratio mentalis on a huge scale, emitting a sense of danger.
Especially young people, who have not yet bent their minds towards reality by virtue of never having been in contact with it, want to overcome it idealistically and are barely protected against the infection by this menacing mental virus. Ideals and ideological model are one and the same for them, their pure minds not being able to distinguish, which is why it isn't so hard for modern, seemingly-intellectual agitprop to capture the young people in its grasp.
Now, I've witnessed this countless of times at the campus here. Now mind you, there ARE some really diehard fascist groups in this country, but their numbers are dwindling, so they can't really return these diffuse aggressions by the left. A legal history professor had multiple of his lectures spoiled by socialists/greens/communists/feminists who stormed the auditorium and, for instance, started to chant the Internationale. Newspapers forcing the narratives dictated by these future academics just transform education, information and even entertainment, giving reason to genuine concerns about the future order of our society.
>>1265900
>This man's ideas are awful because societies implemented them incorrectly in a way that was sabotaged by better-established nations.
![6e97df25d12d68a29b7ec02eee243f6d8e9e9b57e6b7d4cddfa1f27512e3847c_large[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/IgHL9XN.jpg "6e97df25d12d68a29b7ec02eee243f6d8e9e9b57e6b7d4cddfa1f27512e3847c_large[1].jpg")
>>1269103
Nice
Epic
I like it
>>1269011
Business cycles were basically invented by Marx as an economic concept and one of the main pillers of Keynesian economics is how to rectify this.
Capital accumulation is another major Marxist criticism that Keynes would go on to accept.
>>1269111
>Implying there have only ever been 4 brands of communism
>Implying these are actually brands of communism
>>1266743
As someone who's fairly marxist in terms of how I think things "ought to be," it's true.
Working class people despise Marxism, Communism, and Socialism. They can't even properly distinguish between the three.
Working class people are poorly-educated, temporarily-embarassed millionaires indoctrinated by advertisment and capitalists to believe that licking boots = wage raise and wage raise = merit.
They ignore the four horsement of cronyism, nepotism inheritance, and lobbyism that makes true merit-based capitalism impossible, while at the same time using these things to their own advantage for pathetic gains in power at their local supermarket job.
>>1269127
Hey now even though it didn't work out Lenin was legit.
>>1265900
Academia full of Marxists? From my perspective, Academia is full of revisionist libertarian dunderheads.
>>1269111
If I say "Everyone should share," people call it "Anonism" and then everyone proceeds to beat each other up in the name of "Anonism." it does not mean sharing is bad. It just means people are largely unwilling or incapable to implement "Anonism" properly.
Your dank meme only proves my point correct.
Communism's economic failures are largely due to its constant need to defend itself from other ideologies that want it to fail, through use of war, trade blockades, etc.
I believe many (not all) ideologies are actually perfectly fine if implemented properly, but there's always an incentive to sabotage/corrupt the ideology for some party with different interests.
>>1265900
Modern Marxists in academia in the West are only self-identified Marxists.
>>1269170
>self-identified Marxists
or SIMs, for short.
>>1266098
What did he mean by that?
>>1265900
The incentive to automate all possible labor, intellectual or manual, will eventually result in Capitalism morphing into Communism before our very eyes, as a perfectly natural process.
>>1269130
>hiring my cousin even though I make less money
>capitalism
>>1266642
The key is to make both idiots realize this cycle.
BY FORCE FEEDING THEM LSD
>>1269227
I didn't say the four horsemen were capitalism.
I said they sabotage any effort at capitalism.
I'm saying true, merit-based capitalism has "never been tried."
It gets corrupted by various forms of cronyism, nepotism, inheritance (which is really just nepotism again) and lobbyism, which is the race between competitors to corrupt regulatory legislative bodies (governments) to their own advantage.
With regards to lobbyism, some say the solution is to get rid of regulatory bodies altogether, but then you essentially have anything-goes Neofeudalism where each corporation is limited only by its own sense of morality.
>>1269206
>he thinks the plebs will own the machines
>>1268059
Capitalism isn't shit, the world is shit, capitalism is the rooster that climbs the pile of shit to crow.
>>1269261
I never said that.
And the post in the image simply argues that it is advantageous to both the "owners" and the "plebs" to not penalize and disenfranchise the "plebs" for the coming wave of inevitable unemployment, as that will result in massive violence. Of course someone will still "own the machines." and use them to acquire mostly automatic wealth (minus repair, which can be solved by self-repairing maintenance AI).
I am saying that there will always be ambitious people who are richer than others, but that it will eventually become unnecessary in a post-scarcity world to use that power to keep others down. There will be enough for *nearly* everyone to have a sustainable, mostly labor-free life for a while.
But if we continue to have this idea of "unemployment = lazy and deserving of poverty" we're in for a rude luddite awakening once automation really starts to eat up the remaining jobs.
>>1265900
communist subversion
>>1269127
Your specific, perfect, infallible brand of communism has never been tried?
>>1269328
>subversion
Ideologies corrupt each other through sabotage, making true implementation of ideology impossible to perform.
The key is creating an ideology immune to sabotage that also has the best interests of humanity in mind.
Good luck.
>>1269339
see
>>1269158
>>1269130
>>1269351
>>1269254
>>1269364
And of course the thread's fucking dead because God forbid anyone actually refute these points.
>>1269227
Collusion doesn't necessarily make you less money. It's just anti-competitive, which is the market force that drives prices down to equilibrium prices.
>>1269254
Ownership of capital itself is a merit unto itself.
Ownership of capital is not even necessary in managing capital. CEOs can manage a public company fine without owning a company. Financial institutions get bailed out anyways, and obviously the well paid worker level bankers don't actually own capital, they're glorified laborers.
>>1269445
Why don't you fucking refute my points about ideologies corrupting each other and making implementation impossible? Because you can't. These threads die every time I make those points because no one has anything to say. Their inherent hatred for ideologies they don't like motivates them more than any real care for humankind.
This is why corruption, sabotage, and short term GAINZ always end up motivating socities more than long-lasting sustainability, regardless of ideology.
FUCK.
My points aren't even Communist points. I'm asking how can we make it so that we can implement Capitalism OR Communism (I don't even care which) without opponents trying to sabotage genuine efforts.
>>1269364
I like the jewstars on his hat
>>1268373
She had it coming to her.
>>1269485
How do we fix the lobbyist problem of private interests racing to bribe and corrupt public regulatory bodies?
How do we fix the problem of removing regulatory bodies resulting in unregulated, cutthroat practices, disregard for safety, and exploitation of disabled, underage, elderly etc.?
>>1269492
Is this all you have to say for yourself, young man?
>>1269513
I didn't say that those other things aren't problems.
The answer is always more checks and balances. The problem is the system rewards men for being unethical, and punishes good people for doing the right thing. It's only natural men of low integrity rise to the top and good men stay at the bottom. If you want the population in of itself to be a regulatory body that serves as a check and a balance, it must be robust and not easily corrupted.
>>1269130
>They ignore the four horsement of cronyism, nepotism inheritance, and lobbyism that makes true merit-based capitalism impossible
And you think "true communism" is going to be achieved by magically overlooking these problems?
>>1269254
A system with a lot of success with some failures is much better than a system with some successes with a lot of failures.
>>1269571
Who are the good men?
If people didn't like the unethical actions of one company, they would buy from another.
Inb4 it's all monopolies.
>>1269634
>Who are the good men?
Men who are naturally inclined to do go things all the time. You do realize there's a huge amount of people in between total dicks and saints, right? These people will try to make decisions based on their environments. With the right environment you can even motivate a total dick to do the right thing for the wrong reason.
>If people didn't like the unethical actions of one company, they would buy from another.
No they wouldn't unless they banded together for collective bargaining power. That's the entire reason why people call for organized boycotts. Otherwise it becomes like one of those game theory plots because you can't count on other people. Decisions are ultimately made with a crude and human cost-benefit analysis.The vote with your dollar theory is awful and full of holes.
>why is academia full of useless intellectuals
probably because it's the only place that useless intellectuals can earn a living
>>1269634
Because you do your best to hide the fact that your company is extremely unethical to prevent consumers from making fully informed decisions and behaving like ideal free-market-robots
>>1269300
>give us free stuff or there will be massive violence
You are unlikely to achieve anything resembling "post-scarcity" if power resides with the best at violence.
The elite will use welfare to create the illusion of "post-scarcity" while they prepare to undermine democracy behind the scenes.
People need to be connected to reality and the best way to ensure this through individualism and autonomy, which means you have to do some of the work yourself instead of rely on machines. The alternative is waiting for the elite or maybe some rogue AI to become powerful and create scarcity by warring with you and driving up the cost of security exponentially.
>>1269716
One could also be an Austrian "intellectual" which is about equally without merit, if not moreso, the only difference is your academic institution is a corporate funded think-tank, and you're "useful" in creating propaganda for the corporatists that fund you.
>>1269745
I never understood the people who claim you don't need revolution because eventual advancements in post-scarcity industry will elevate society to communism.
If the capitalists own everything, why the fuck would they share their post-scarcity with you? There's no reason not to you say, well there's no reason for them to either.
What if you put post-scarcity industry in the hands of say, scientology, and they created a scientologist welfare state that only shares post-scarcity goods with converted scientologist peons or something equally retarded?
If you want some of that post-post scarcity goodness, you're going to have to cater to the whims of he who controls the robots, and humans and dominion over them will still be a resource with relative scarcity unless the human's right's are removed and reduced to a slave. You can count on never ever seeing any form of control over the robots.
In exchange for your freedom you get to live a life of scientoligistic comfort. They only need to provide you with more comfort that you could otherwise obtain with non-post-scarcity industry. If non-post-scarcity-industry becomes stagnated, say because the supply lines for making microwaves withers away, this becomes easier and easier over time, lowering the cost which must be met.
>>1269495
Whilst it's very sad it's comforting that the Bolsheviks slaughtered the Romanovs so reactionaries on the internet can be asshurt too.
>>1269792
You don't need to be a reeactionary to view it as unjust, his children lived in a bubble and did not deserve to be executed under any reasonable system of ethics.
>>1269490
>I'm asking how can we make it so that we can implement Capitalism OR Communism (I don't even care which) without opponents trying to sabotage genuine efforts.
it seems clear to say that the powers that be today both oppose an attempt at true capitalism (a stateless society where those who succeed succeed based on the merit of their ability to produce goods, an ancapism with protections against your four horsement of captalism) and true communism (probably doesn't need much explanation) because the powers that be benefit greatly from the four horsemen you listed and certainly want to avoid their wealth being expropriated by the working class.
so in order to implement true capitalism or communism you have to overpower the powers that be. you have to match their military strength or surpass it, and you have to organize enough people around your ideas such that they will march along side you. a revolution is necessary, because it is obvious that true capitalism or communism will not come about without a large amount of human action.
and this human action needs to be international. it is not enough for one country to overthrow their government. every government must be overthrown (or at least a majority of them) so that the governments cannot overpower the revolutionaries with their own military strength.
if all this seems obvious, that's because it is. the answer to your question is revolution. it is absolutely true that every ideology will sabotage competing ideologies if possible at every instance. thus we need a global revolution in order to instate any new sort of order.
>>1269859
dgaf still making right wing stooges made almost 100 years later.
>>1269861
How to you transfer from an armed military revolutionary force to an ideal government? Do you have to keep trying until you get a Cincinnatus?
>>1266028
True. You have to view Marx as an influential intellectual. He influenced more than just the socialist/marxist countries of the 20th century. Thanks to him a certain social responsibility for the poor started to influence other political groups and even capitalists. Inequality breeds extremism when it becomes too strong.
>>1269881
well, in the USSR there was initially a collection of worker councils post revolution that was shortly removed by lenin and his pals in favor of a centralized state.
i say we try the worker councils thing again and see how it works out. it wasn't really given the proper test run in soviet russia. if the revolution which we use to overthrow the state is popular, it should make sense that our resulting government is one that takes in as many people's opinions as possible, and that's what worker councils can accomplish- local groups of representatives who most ideally represent their constituency debating about what actions should be done next to progress towards our goal.
of course, the above is only applicable to communism. i don't know what form the ideal government in true capitalism would take, or if there would be a government at all there. in both cases though, i imagine any sort of government would be transitionary- existing for the period of time for which its existence is necessary, but then removed after the popular majority decides that government is no longer necessary.
>>1269925
The USSR was supposed to be a transitional government
>>1269932
i agree, it was supposed to be. we've seen how well the central government that claims to be transitional worked out. we should try something different next time.
>>1265912
There is nothing aesthetic about Marxism. Jesus have you read any of his books? They're nearly completely inaccessible outside of lecture.
>>1266477
>That inflation chart
Hrm...
>>1270930
HRRMMMMMMMMMM.....
>>1265900
>>1269039
this tbhq, "what, you don't have a certificate of borrowing yourself into debt in order to get brainwashed by political correctness a k a cultural marxism in universities? get educated!"
>>1271727
>mfw I took a sociology class to fulfill my Diversity gen Ed & the professor told us he was still $90,000 in debt because of his degree
Why do people do this to themselves? Academia is the new serfdom and it's so fucking obvious. Moldbug was right.
>>1265900
because it would work in a perfect world, too bad people in universities dont realize that gree, couption and people who can abuse the system exist
>>1272277
How would it work in a perfect world? What's a perfect world, anyway?
>it's another "I haven't read Marx, but heres why he's wrong" episode.
>>1266080
RL ain't fucking vic2, dumbfuck.
>>1269227
They ARE as much capitalism as "real socialism" was socialism.
Capitalism is always bound to become Real capitalism just as much as socialism that isn't regulated via a democratically system is bound to become Real Socialism, and like every libertarian anarchy is bound to become rape-trained by every neighboring state that does have a standing and organized army.
>>1272362
Vicky 2 tells you all you gotta know about economics.
Planned economies suck unless you're autistic enough to handle it or it's run by an AI.
Laissez faire is only ever good when you already have enough of an industrial base to let the invisible hand take care of it because you're too lazy to micromanage anymore.
State capitalism is the big dogs biscuit for developing countries.
>>1269130
Working class despise Marxists because they don't give a fuck about your subversive bullshit, they are the ones tilling, toiling and making society work.
>>1272418
>or it's run by an AI.
So why not do this? We could by now, and even track what the people need via online surveys in real time and let the AI adjust the plan accordingly daily.
It even would prevent business failures, since the AI would KNOW what the people want, instead of business owners guessing only and some succeeding and others failing.
>>1272431
>but who will till the fields?
>the slaves
t. Marxists
>"Probably the intellectual has more difficulty than the common man in freeing himself from this ideology which, like the State which derives from it, is his especial handiwork. The Soviet government rules in the name of a doctrine elaborated by an intellectual whose life was spent in libraries and interpreted for the past century by countless other intellectuals. Under a Communist régime the intellectuals, sophists rather than philosophers, rule the roost. The examining magistrates who unmask deviations, the writers coerced into socialist realism, the engineers and managers who are supposed to execute the plans and to interpret the ambiguous orders of the central authority—all must be dialecticians. The Secretary-General of the Party, master and arbiter over the lives of millions of men. is also an intellectual: at the end of a triumphal career he offers to the faithful a theory of capitalism and socialism—as though a book represented the highest accomplishment. The emperors of old were often poets or thinkers; for the first time the emperor actually reigns qua dialectician, interpreter of the doctrine and of history."
Raymond Aron, The Opium of the Intellectuals
>>1272358
>Counter-Countersignal Memes for Commie Jews
>>1272433
Allende actually almost did exactly that but Pinochet had to kill the fun.
>>1272446
>kill the fun.
kill the scum*
>>1272451
Because it does.
Victoria 2 is the most visionary economic work of our times.
>>1272459
>Because it does.
[citation needed]
I know that it tries to, I enjoy playing the game, I have yet to see anything demonstrating that what you say is true.
>Victoria 2 is the most visionary economic work of our times.
Are you familiar with all contemporary economic works? Or are you talking out of your ass because you're a Paradox fanboy?
>>1272464
>Are you familiar with all contemporary economic works? Or are you talking out of your ass because you're a Paradox fanboy?
No, Paradox is run by Jews that forgot all they mastered of economics in Vicky 2.
>I have yet to see anything demonstrating that what you say is true.
I already said, we can see the economic systems of vicky 2 working exactly as their IRL counterparts.
>>1272486
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn
>>1272486
Yes, I do want to tell you that. The burden of proof is on you and the other commie faggot to show that such a botnet exists. As >>1272446 says, Allendd *almost* had such a system. He also had problems with inflation that were only solved when his regime was terminated.
>>1272493
>Paradox is run by Jews
Swedes*
>we can see the economic systems of vicky 2 working exactly as their IRL counterparts
How about a source, or something other than your repeated assertion?
>>1272500
>Swedes*
*Jews
>How about a source, or something other than your repeated assertion?
http://www.victoria2wiki.com/Industrialization_guide
>>1272507
It should be obvious that I want a source that isn't meant to guide you in playing the game. How about some article by an economist comparing game mechanics to actual economies?
>>1272515
> How about some article by an economist comparing game mechanics to actual economies?
>>1272520
I've got memes, too, you fucking faggot.
>>1272526
>not an argument
Not an argument.
>>1272525
>When we can simulate more complex thing, the ability to simulate lesser ones is a given
I don't even understand why you think there's parity here. A simulated economy is not the same as a simulation of an economy. A video game is an instance of map & territory being one entity. A simulated economy is an instance of map & territory being separate entities.
>>1272533
Are you uninterested in supporting the claims you've made ITT? If so, keep doing what you're doing. I'm perfectly willing to believe what you're saying if you can show me a couple of scholarly sources backing up your claims. You seem completely uninterested in doing so.
>>1272538
>He wants scholarly sources talking about vidya gaems.
You already know that no such source exists. Nice job shifting the goalposts when I already provided a source btw.
>>1266010
>less than a century
>communist league started 1847
>communist manifesto published 1848
>>1272544
>Nice job shifting the goalposts when I already provided a source btw.
I'm not shifting the goalposts, I expected something other than a guide on how to play the game all along. You're a fucking idiot. You seriously think that that wiki page is evidence that Victoria II runs the kind of software that could be used to perform accurate and effective economic calculations for the purpose of running a centralized and state-planned economy? Come on.
>>1266137
>most marxists are members of the working class
maybe 50-60 years ago this was true, certainly not currently outside of union apparatchiks (who've never been "working class" in their lives, went to university and have never done manual labour)
>>1272558
I'm supposed to be able to read minds now? You serious think I'm supposed to provide an extremely specific and probably non-existent source before I even know you want it? lmao.
>This source proves me wrong, better ask for one that doesn't even exist
> You seriously think that that wiki page is evidence that Victoria II runs the kind of software that could be used to perform accurate and effective economic calculations for the purpose of running a centralized and state-planned economy?
When the fuck did I ever say that?
>>1272571
>You serious think I'm supposed to provide an extremely specific and probably non-existent source before I even know you want it? lmao.
When I asked you for proof that this game does what you say it does, I not only expected you to have some reason to believe this yourself, I also expected you to be able to support the claim. Why are you making claims you can't support?
>The source proves me wrong
How does it do that, exactly? It says it's a very deep simulation and one of the best ever, I don't see how that proves me wrong.
>When the fuck did I ever say that?
In >>1272493
>we can see the economic systems of vicky 2 working exactly as their IRL counterparts
It seemed to me that you were advocating for a Cybersyn-style computer system and claiming that such a system already exists. You said Allende almost had one going until his fun was ruined, in >>1272446, a reply to someone who claimed that we could successfully do what Allende wanted to do in >>1272433. >>1272486 simply implies that, because we have some technologies, we have the capacity to run supercomputers capable of performing all our economic calculations for us and maintaining and organizing our economies.
Not a single person ITT has provided a source to support any of these claims other than your Victoria II industrialization guide. That source does not, in fact, support any of these claims. If you disagree with this last point, please show me how I'm wrong.
>>1272586
>simply implies that, because we have some technologies, we have the capacity to run supercomputers capable of performing all our economic calculations for us and maintaining and organizing our economies.
>Not a single person ITT has provided a source to support any of these claims other than your Victoria II industrialization guide. That source does not, in fact, support any of these claims. If you disagree with this last point, please show me how I'm wrong.
I wasn't the vic 2 guy, you dumb faggot. I suggested using actual supercomputers to direct the economy based on real time surveys and the calculations of actual economical monographys, NOT letting paradox run the shit.
>>1272586
>Why are you making claims you can't support?
I did support it, you just got butthurt that you got proven wrong.
>In >>1272493 (You)
I didn't say you could literally apply the AI of victoria 2 to a real planned economy anywhere in that post.
>You said Allende almost had one going until his fun was ruined,
That wasn't me, nor are any of the following posts about Allende.
>That source does not, in fact, support any of these claims. If you disagree with this last point, please show me how I'm wrong.
http://www.victoria2wiki.com/Party_issues#State_Capitalism
>>1272594
>I suggested using actual supercomputers to direct the economy based on real time surveys and the calculations of actual economical monographys,
And I say again that you've given no good reason to think that this is possible with currently available technologies, or that it's desirable. Now put up or shut up: Do you have a good reason to believe this, or do you not? If you do, please provide one.
>>1272598
>I did support it,
Where?
>That wasn't me,
Forgive me for confusing 2 economically illiterate anonymous socialists on 4chan.
>Another wiki link
Top kek
Why did you use Victoria II as an example, then? How about you provide an example of an actual program capable of doing this, instead of referring to a video game?
>>1272608
Fun fact: I didn't make the initial fucking claim. One of you faggots did. I don't need to prove anything, I'm just asking you to support your claims with something other than a strategy guide for a video game.
>>1272609
>Where?
http://www.victoria2wiki.com/Industrialization_guide
>Forgive me for confusing 2 economically illiterate anonymous socialists on 4chan.
I'm not a socialist, I just like Vicky 2.
>How about you provide an example of an actual program capable of doing this, instead of referring to a video game?
Capable of doing what?
I want leftypol to go
>>1272612
>http://www.victoria2wiki.com/Industrialization_guide
As I said this doesn't support anything, this only shows you how to play a game.
>I'm not a socialist
You implied that Pinochet ruined the 'fun' that Allende was having with his Cybersyn system, I assumed that this meant you were an advocate of such systems.
>Capable of doing what?
How about you tell me what you're arguing for?
>>1272617
>As I said this doesn't support anything, this only shows you how to play a game.
And explains the functional economics of the game.
>You implied that Pinochet ruined the 'fun' that Allende was having with his Cybersyn system
I never said that.
>How about you tell me what you're arguing for?
I made a one off post about how Vicky 2 tells you everything you gotta know about economics and you pissed your pants for some inexplicable reason and somehow assumed I was saying Paradox's almost decade old AI should run the entire economy.
>>1272625
>And explains the functional economics of the game.
Hardly.
>I never said that
That's why I used the word 'implied.'
>I made a one off post about how Vicky 2 tells you everything you gotta know about economics and you pissed your pants for some inexplicable reason
Maybe it's because you failed to support the claim.
>and somehow assumed I was saying Paradox's almost decade old AI should run the entire economy.
This is not what I have said at all. I said that you seem to think that a system capable of doing this exists and would be a good idea. At the same time I criticized your inability to support your claims about Victoria II's capacity to simulate economies. I even hit the enter key before I mentioned Victoria II in >>1272586.
>>1265920
>Even though communism was never achieved, the Soviet Union was better than what it replaced and what came after, by essentially every possible metric.
This is a baldfaced lie.
>>1272648
This thread is full of Marxists, what would you expect?
>>1272646
>That's why I used the word 'implied.'
Where exactly?
>Maybe it's because you failed to support the claim.
I did, you just have some inexplicable problem with proof that doesn't support your argument.
>I said that you seem to think that a system capable of doing this exists and would be a good idea
I don't know why you thought that.
>. At the same time I criticized your inability to support your claims about Victoria II's capacity to simulate economies
Criticized? More like shout "PROOF? PROOF? PROOF?" Even when faced with proof.
> I even hit the enter key before I mentioned Victoria II
W-what?
>>1272648
It isn't, the USSR was superior in every way to the Russian federation.
>>1272661
Only if your metric is territory held, nukes stockpiled, people enslaved/killed and repression.
Talk to any Russian who grew up under the USSR and isn't a pink-glasses nostalgic 'viva la vida' type and they will tell you that the USSR was a hell hole.
>>1272659
>Where exactly?
>>1272617
>You implied
>proof that doesn't support your argument.
You fucking moron, claiming that Victoria II teaches you all you need to know about economics requires more than a link to what is in fact a guide to how the game works. This is why I asked for a scholarly source.
>I don't know why you thought that.
Maybe it's because this is a Marxism thread and you seemed to like the idea?
>PROOF? PROOF? PROOF?
So you want me to just believe everything you say without question? Do you expect everyone to do this?
>W-what?
Usually, starting a new paragraph indicates a separation between subjects, to some degree. The paragraph about Victoria II was separate from the paragraph about economic calculations.
>>1272661
[citation needed]
>>1272648
Literally how?
