Thread: Can someone aware me on marxism?
04-07-2023, 08:46 PM
-
#121
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Well that's fairly amazing. Marx died in 1883 yet responded to a book published in 1957.You didn't make criticisms, you suggested reading Mises' criticisms.
Many of Mises criticisms were countered by Marx himself.
Many of Mises criticisms were countered by Marx himself.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-07-2023, 08:47 PM
-
#122
04-07-2023, 08:49 PM
-
#123
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
CringeNot responded, but countered in Kapital.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-07-2023, 09:36 PM
-
#124
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Can you post some sources for this? Here I thought Austrians thought that Capitalism was the single most important thing ever.While the "Austrians" consider their ideology as the single most important thing ever, very few others agree.
As for their contributions, they were yuge.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
04-07-2023, 09:59 PM
-
#125
04-08-2023, 03:00 AM
-
#126
- isingmodel
- Registered User
-
- isingmodel
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2019
- Age: 56
- Posts: 11,925
- Rep Power: 57442
-
-
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
Austrian economics is a joke lmao. One of the core principles is their rejection of empirical evidence in favour of voodoo pseudopsychology called "praxeology" because they're too retarded to do anything difficult like math. Even Marx didn't reject math and he started writing a century before the famous Austrians did.Can you post some sources for this? Here I thought Austrians thought that Capitalism was the single most important thing ever.
As for their contributions, they were yuge.
As for their contributions, they were yuge.
Hayek made a small handful of contributions to our mainstream understanding of the subject but otherwise as a discipline they contributed almost nothing.
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
04-08-2023, 04:26 AM
-
#127
- lowkeycommie
- Banned
-
- lowkeycommie
- Banned
- Join Date: Apr 2023
- Age: 56
- Posts: 402
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
Best way to tell is just ask if someone's taken real analysis. 99% of the online republican "economics" experts have not. lolAustrian economics is a joke lmao. One of the core principles is their rejection of empirical evidence in favour of voodoo pseudopsychology called "praxeology" because they're too retarded to do anything difficult like math. Even Marx didn't reject math and he started writing a century before the famous Austrians did.
Hayek made a small handful of contributions to our mainstream understanding of the subject but otherwise as a discipline they contributed almost nothing.
Hayek made a small handful of contributions to our mainstream understanding of the subject but otherwise as a discipline they contributed almost nothing.
04-08-2023, 07:54 AM
-
#128
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
You think the irs operates the same way restaurants doAustrian economics is a joke lmao. One of the core principles is their rejection of empirical evidence in favour of voodoo pseudopsychology called "praxeology" because they're too retarded to do anything difficult like math. Even Marx didn't reject math and he started writing a century before the famous Austrians did.
Hayek made a small handful of contributions to our mainstream understanding of the subject but otherwise as a discipline they contributed almost nothing.
Hayek made a small handful of contributions to our mainstream understanding of the subject but otherwise as a discipline they contributed almost nothing.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 08:09 AM
-
#129
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
[QUOTE=J.L.C. post_id=1680385553][Img]https://m.media-amazon.com/images/W/IMAGERENDERING_521856-T1/images/I/31aLpJqR20L._SX320_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg[/ig]
[Img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1316127373i/10303367.jpg[/ig][/QUOTE]These books are criticisms of keynesian ecomomics
[Img]https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1316127373i/10303367.jpg[/ig][/QUOTE]These books are criticisms of keynesian ecomomics
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 08:20 AM
-
#130
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
-
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
- Join Date: Dec 2012
- Posts: 44,104
- Rep Power: 271274
-
-
If someone living under a rock with no idea asked me what Marxism was I'd sum it up by the idea that everyone is paid the same reguardless of waht they do to contribute. They also belive that all work is equal and the only measurement is time.
04-08-2023, 08:22 AM
-
#131
04-08-2023, 08:22 AM
-
#132
Originally Posted By Jasonw1178⏩
These are the common misunderstandings and misrepresentations presented in this thread.If someone living under a rock with no idea asked me what Marxism was I'd sum it up by the idea that everyone is paid the same reguardless of waht they do to contribute. They also belive that all work is equal and the only measurement is time.
04-08-2023, 08:30 AM
-
#133
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
-
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
- Join Date: Feb 2016
- Location: United States
- Posts: 29,410
- Subscribers: 16
- Rep Power: 751004
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Some folks call hills mountains. Some folks call mountains hills. Either way, they're large piles of dirt and rock. If it starts with control, has it in the middle, or ends with control, it's all the same thing. Spare us the semantics. Socialism, communism, Marxism are the same thing.These are the common misunderstandings and misrepresentations presented in this thread.
04-08-2023, 08:39 AM
-
#134
Originally Posted By hendrixfreak70⏩
Except that's incorrect. Marxism is anti-statist and anti-authoritarian control.Some folks call hills mountains. Some folks call mountains hills. Either way, they're large piles of dirt and rock. If it starts with control, has it in the middle, or ends with control, it's all the same thing. Spare us the semantics. Socialism, communism, Marxism are the same thing.
I do find it interesting that those who proclaim to value individual freedom also seem to support authoritarian rule and reject anything that threatens the power of the state.
04-08-2023, 08:47 AM
-
#135
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
-
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
- Join Date: Feb 2016
- Location: United States
- Posts: 29,410
- Subscribers: 16
- Rep Power: 751004
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Except that's incorrect. Marxism is anti-statist and anti-authoritarian control.
I do find it interesting that those who proclaim to value individual freedom also seem to support authoritarian rule and reject anything that threatens the power of the state.
I do find it interesting that those who proclaim to value individual freedom also seem to support authoritarian rule and reject anything that threatens the power of the state.

May want to let the fine folks over at Oxford Handbook know.
"According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably."
04-08-2023, 08:51 AM
-
#136
Originally Posted By hendrixfreak70⏩
You're making my point.May want to let the fine folks over at Oxford Handbook know.
"According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably."
"According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably."
"Free individuality"
04-08-2023, 08:53 AM
-
#137
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
-
- hendrixfreak70
- My eyes are up here.
- Join Date: Feb 2016
- Location: United States
- Posts: 29,410
- Subscribers: 16
- Rep Power: 751004
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Man, I dunno. How can you call anything that is about control "free?" Ded srs. Is this like Orwellian double-speak or something?You're making my point.
"Free individuality"
"Free individuality"
04-08-2023, 08:55 AM
-
#138
04-08-2023, 08:57 AM
-
#139
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By hendrixfreak70⏩
May want to let the fine folks over at Oxford Handbook know.
"According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably."
I think this letter written by Engels is instructive:
May want to let the fine folks over at Oxford Handbook know.
"According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably."
Originally Posted By Engels
Marxists are anti state, but they view the state as a symptom of the core problem of class, and once a classless society is achieved the state will disappear. So its just a couple minor ideological hops to decide that creating an all powerful state is an anti-state endeavor as long as its goal is to end class.Bakunin has a peculiar theory of his own...the chief point of which is in the first place that he does not regard capital, and therefore the class contradiction between capitalists and wage earners which has arisen through social development, as the main evil to be abolished--instead, he regards the state as the main evil.
While the great mass of the Social Democratic workers hold our view that state power is nothing more than the organization with which the ruling classes, landlords and capitalists have provided themselves in order to protect their social prerogatives, Bakunin maintains that it is the state which has created capital, that the capitalist has his capital only by favor of the state.
As, therefore, the state is the chief evil, it is above all the state which must be done away with and then capitalism will go to hell of itself. We, on the contrary say: do away with capital, the appropriation of the whole means of production in the hands of the few, and the state will fall away of itself.
While the great mass of the Social Democratic workers hold our view that state power is nothing more than the organization with which the ruling classes, landlords and capitalists have provided themselves in order to protect their social prerogatives, Bakunin maintains that it is the state which has created capital, that the capitalist has his capital only by favor of the state.
As, therefore, the state is the chief evil, it is above all the state which must be done away with and then capitalism will go to hell of itself. We, on the contrary say: do away with capital, the appropriation of the whole means of production in the hands of the few, and the state will fall away of itself.
Its important to note that the concept of 'class' is not an objective one. Its a social classification only and Marx himself was unable to truly define it.
You see a lot of that sort of thing with marxists. They use terms that dont really have any basis in reality but act as if they are as foundational as natural law, like physics, and as such any means needed to implement them are justified. The result being the mass killings they are so famous for
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 09:03 AM
-
#140
Originally Posted By Stizzel⏩
This is a common approach by conservatives.I think this letter written by Engels is instructive:
Marxists are anti state, but they view the state as a symptom of the core problem of class, and once a classless society is achieved the state will disappear. So its just a couple minor ideological hops to decide that creating an all powerful state is an anti-state endeavor as long as its goal is to end class.
Its important to note that the concept of 'class' is not an objective one. Its a social classification only and Marx himself was unable to truly define it.
You see a lot of that sort of things with marxists. They use terms that dont really have any basis in reality but act as if they are as foundational as natural law, like physics, and as such any means needed to implement them are justified. The result being the mass killings they are so famous for
Marxists are anti state, but they view the state as a symptom of the core problem of class, and once a classless society is achieved the state will disappear. So its just a couple minor ideological hops to decide that creating an all powerful state is an anti-state endeavor as long as its goal is to end class.
Its important to note that the concept of 'class' is not an objective one. Its a social classification only and Marx himself was unable to truly define it.
You see a lot of that sort of things with marxists. They use terms that dont really have any basis in reality but act as if they are as foundational as natural law, like physics, and as such any means needed to implement them are justified. The result being the mass killings they are so famous for
Dictatorial authoritarian regimes called themselves Marxists, so conservatives take those instantiations as representative of the philosophy, without reviewing the actual philosophy.
IMO, social conservatism is the most authoritarian modern ideology where everyone is free to be like me or be punished.
04-08-2023, 09:17 AM
-
#141
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
-
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
- Join Date: Dec 2012
- Posts: 44,104
- Rep Power: 271274
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
The most common misunderstaning of marxists is how human nature works and probably the misrepresentation is the idea that it hasn't been tried when it has, and every time it turns into an authoritarian chithole. How can you have a system that keeps everyone equal and makes sure nobody is out of line without being oppressively authoritarian? Unless "everyone is honest" which we know they aren't. By that token, if you can't make what you want the honest way you'll make it anoher way.These are the common misunderstandings and misrepresentations presented in this thread.
04-08-2023, 09:26 AM
-
#142
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Those regimes are almost always installed by marxist revolutionaries. I've discussed this with too many communists to buy that line sir. The size and power of that state just is not an important concern to them. As long as they are convinced that the state's goals are measures that lead to the end of class in society it is acceptable regardless of its size and scope. And that sentiment has gone terribly wrong often enough by now that it should be indesputable that the whithering of the state should take precedence over ending classThis is a common approach by conservatives.
Dictatorial authoritarian regimes called themselves Marxists, so conservatives take those instantiations as representative of the philosophy, without reviewing the actual philosophy.
IMO, social conservatism is the most authoritarian modern ideology where everyone is free to be like me or be punished.
Dictatorial authoritarian regimes called themselves Marxists, so conservatives take those instantiations as representative of the philosophy, without reviewing the actual philosophy.
IMO, social conservatism is the most authoritarian modern ideology where everyone is free to be like me or be punished.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 09:31 AM
-
#143
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
There is only one example i know of where marxists overthrew a government and created a stareless classless system without using a powerful central government as an intermediary. Spanish catalonia
Anyone unfamiliar should look it up. It was a real shyt show.
Anyone unfamiliar should look it up. It was a real shyt show.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 09:39 AM
-
#144
Originally Posted By Jasonw1178⏩
It has happened on smaller scales.The most common misunderstaning of marxists is how human nature works and probably the misrepresentation is the idea that it hasn't been tried when it has, and every time it turns into an authoritarian chithole. How can you have a system that keeps everyone equal and makes sure nobody is out of line without being oppressively authoritarian? Unless "everyone is honest" which we know they aren't. By that token, if you can't make what you want the honest way you'll make it anoher way.
However, power hungry authoritarians operating under a guise of being "for the people" has more historical examples.
04-08-2023, 09:40 AM
-
#145
Originally Posted By Stizzel⏩
You said above that Marxists, like socialists and anarchists, are anti-state.Those regimes are almost always installed by marxist revolutionaries. I've discussed this with too many communists to buy that line sir. The size and power of that state just is not an important concern to them. As long as they are convinced that the state's goals are measures that lead to the end of class in society it is acceptable regardless of its size and scope. And that sentiment has gone terribly wrong often enough by now that it should be indesputable that the whithering of the state should take precedence over ending class
With that, I agree.
04-08-2023, 09:54 AM
-
#146
- isingmodel
- Registered User
-
- isingmodel
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2019
- Age: 56
- Posts: 11,925
- Rep Power: 57442
-
-
Originally Posted By Stizzel⏩
I get that math is hard especially for baldcel tradies but that doesn't mean you can turn to voodoo to try and explain the worldYou think the irs operates the same way restaurants do
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
04-08-2023, 10:58 AM
-
#147
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,768
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384441
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Yes, anti state while willing to expand and use the stateYou said above that Marxists, like socialists and anarchists, are anti-state.
With that, I agree.
With that, I agree.
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
Communist math: 1+1=the irs is a restaurantI get that math is hard especially for baldcel tradies but that doesn't mean you can turn to voodoo to try and explain the world
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
04-08-2023, 11:07 AM
-
#148
04-08-2023, 11:16 AM
-
#149
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
-
- Jasonw1178
- 5'3" 300lbs Fudge Rounds
- Join Date: Dec 2012
- Posts: 44,104
- Rep Power: 271274
-
-
Originally Posted By J.L.C.⏩
Yes very small close-knit groups such as the Amish have a system that you could relate to a marxist type ideal in many ways. No way in hell could that work or a nation like the USA.It has happened on smaller scales.
However, power hungry authoritarians operating under a guise of being "for the people" has more historical examples.
However, power hungry authoritarians operating under a guise of being "for the people" has more historical examples.
It seems every time someone talked about being "for the people' in a marxist way was a brutal authoritarian. Even if it wasn't them, it was those around them. A Marxist system seems to be ideal for those who want to take control. Outside of those people, there are a lot of people who have nothing to offer that people are willing to pay for. In order to make it in a capitalist society, you need to have something that others are willing to pay for, either a good or service. There are some people who are talented, smart, and well educated and despite all of this, nobody is willing to pay them for it. Artists and intelectuals are prime examples. They would love a system that would reward them for their contributions.
Not saying that capitalism is fair or our system is perfect by any means. Look at your Congress. Senators and Congress members getting rich AF and they don't do anything but hold a position. This is in other places as well. If we went Marxist that wouldn't change. Communism is a system the elites push onto the masses as a way to control them.
04-08-2023, 11:18 AM
-
#150
Originally Posted By Jasonw1178⏩
Individuals taking control of a society is incongruent with Marxist philosophy.Yes very small close-knit groups such as the Amish have a system that you could relate to a marxist type ideal in many ways. No way in hell could that work or a nation like the USA.
It seems every time someone talked about being "for the people' in a marxist way was a brutal authoritarian. Even if it wasn't them, it was those around them. A Marxist system seems to be ideal for those who want to take control. Outside of those people, there are a lot of people who have nothing to offer that people are willing to pay for. In order to make it in a capitalist society, you need to have something that others are willing to pay for, either a good or service. There are some people who are talented, smart, and well educated and despite all of this, nobody is willing to pay them for it. Artists and intelectuals are prime examples. They would love a system that would reward them for their contributions.
Not saying that capitalism is fair or our system is perfect by any means. Look at your Congress. Senators and Congress members getting rich AF and they don't do anything but hold a position. This is in other places as well. If we went Marxist that wouldn't change. Communism is a system the elites push onto the masses as a way to control them.
It seems every time someone talked about being "for the people' in a marxist way was a brutal authoritarian. Even if it wasn't them, it was those around them. A Marxist system seems to be ideal for those who want to take control. Outside of those people, there are a lot of people who have nothing to offer that people are willing to pay for. In order to make it in a capitalist society, you need to have something that others are willing to pay for, either a good or service. There are some people who are talented, smart, and well educated and despite all of this, nobody is willing to pay them for it. Artists and intelectuals are prime examples. They would love a system that would reward them for their contributions.
Not saying that capitalism is fair or our system is perfect by any means. Look at your Congress. Senators and Congress members getting rich AF and they don't do anything but hold a position. This is in other places as well. If we went Marxist that wouldn't change. Communism is a system the elites push onto the masses as a way to control them.
We don't have a Congress.
The existence of an elite class is also incongruent with Marxist philosophy.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts

