Ahh, Marx. Probably the first adherent of word salad. It baffles me to this day how such a shitty scholar could have ever rose to prominence, besides with the aid of the devil.
Of course, looking through that paragraph we see the devil in abundance. A state of never ending agitating and self inflicted unrest, all from a perverse and wicked desire to make the possessions of others their own.
Being and non-being are the same, therefore it is the same whether this house is or is not, whether these hundred dollars are part of my fortune or not.
Damnation I lost an enormous reply, fuckin mobile piece of shit. I'll summarize.
Marx's analysis of capitalism is highly flawed and intellectually dubious for several reasons, some of which I will elaborate on.
Firstly that his theories are predicated on the labor theory of value, which had been debunked a century prior. Labor inherently has no value unless it is desired, warranted, and has a beneficial outcome.
Secondly that he misconstrued the concept of capitalism, conflating it with greed and covetousness in order to argue against what capitalism really is. In essence he strawmanned it. Capitalism in reality means nothing more than the free exchange of goods and services. Something that is a fact of human existence and is in a literal sense harmless. One man trading a horse to another man in exchange for wheat doesn't effect you in the slightest. To bypass that truth, Marx relied on an externality theory, the idea that any and everything other people do somehow effects you, and therefore justify laying collective claim to not only the possessions of others, but to those other people themselves. Externality theory is really where the lies of his philosophy evolve into tyranny, because it allows the adherent to reach out and declare that so long as anyone else exists who is allowed not to bow to the ephemeral collective good(which as a reminder is entirely based on the jealousy and covetousness of the Marxists themselves), then somehow theft is occurring.
I've never read the author you quoted, but it seems myopic. The idea that the modern time is a period of unparalleled greed or excess of the self styled elites flies in the face of history.
one such example being diversity officers, gender studies
Capitalism absolutely did not create any of that shit.
You could argue that "free market capitalism" created an environment so successful that parasites were able to latch onto institutions and perpetuate themselves, but people did that, not "capitalism."
Parasitic losers do that in any environment. The stakes are just bigger here because the whole pie is bigger ... thanks to free markets.
And you also prove GP's point: these useless people provide "labor," but clearly provide no value. If every person on the planet labored as a DIE commissar, we'd all starve to death. Because "labor" doesn't have any inherent value.
When you talk about jobs that only fulfill ideological needs, I am immediately reminded of my memories of the Soviet Union.
What you describe isn't capitalism at all. It's a contortion of business, a contortion of human life even, made to serve the dictates of the government first and above all else. There is no free exchange of goods and services with the presence of external coercion, especially from a government.
Additionally I am not referring to free market. Nor am I referring to the abject myth of free trade.
As for "society", I don't think that's correct at all. Society has no claim and cannot legitimately lay claim to the success and possessions of individuals. Horses, and taming animals in general, is something that existed far before any idea of society. Same thing with farming. Simply put, transactions are not deterministic, nor do they owe their existence to factors outside of the transaction.
By definition, they can't. If a man offers to buy a lock of my hair, and I give it to him, I don't owe society anything. This doesn't cease to be less true merely because what I'm selling isn't a literal part of my own body.
As for history. As you mentioned the quote is from a century prior. Degeneracy existed in abundance a hundred years ago from our perspective. It certainly existed in the author's past as well, far more than he, or you, realize. For goodness sakes at one point entire continents conducted heart eating, demon worshipping child sacrifices. Present degeneracy is not new or novel, we're merely proximate to a large and loud pustule of it emerging into view. Once excised, they'll go hide again for a few decades.
You lost this very shortly into the post. The biggest point was that labor theory of value has been disproven and you handwaved that away with an excuse that you didn't have the energy to reply, then put down a wall of text anyway. What disingenuous bullshit.
"Free market," to which you're referring to, is as utopian as communism, its inherently premised on the idea of free, equal, (read: liberal) individuals, which has no basis in reality.
This is reading into what he said. Props to Marx for supposedly inventing the idea of Capitalism, but at the core it's really just economics. It doesn't imply belief in an idealized free market. Free just means not a planned economy. (I suppose buyers, sellers, and "Capitalists" are planning things though.)
Ahh, Marx. Probably the first adherent of word salad. It baffles me to this day how such a shitty scholar could have ever rose to prominence, besides with the aid of the devil.
Of course, looking through that paragraph we see the devil in abundance. A state of never ending agitating and self inflicted unrest, all from a perverse and wicked desire to make the possessions of others their own.
Truly, a disciple of hell.
That would be Hegel:
Damnation I lost an enormous reply, fuckin mobile piece of shit. I'll summarize.
Marx's analysis of capitalism is highly flawed and intellectually dubious for several reasons, some of which I will elaborate on.
Firstly that his theories are predicated on the labor theory of value, which had been debunked a century prior. Labor inherently has no value unless it is desired, warranted, and has a beneficial outcome.
Secondly that he misconstrued the concept of capitalism, conflating it with greed and covetousness in order to argue against what capitalism really is. In essence he strawmanned it. Capitalism in reality means nothing more than the free exchange of goods and services. Something that is a fact of human existence and is in a literal sense harmless. One man trading a horse to another man in exchange for wheat doesn't effect you in the slightest. To bypass that truth, Marx relied on an externality theory, the idea that any and everything other people do somehow effects you, and therefore justify laying collective claim to not only the possessions of others, but to those other people themselves. Externality theory is really where the lies of his philosophy evolve into tyranny, because it allows the adherent to reach out and declare that so long as anyone else exists who is allowed not to bow to the ephemeral collective good(which as a reminder is entirely based on the jealousy and covetousness of the Marxists themselves), then somehow theft is occurring.
I've never read the author you quoted, but it seems myopic. The idea that the modern time is a period of unparalleled greed or excess of the self styled elites flies in the face of history.
Capitalism absolutely did not create any of that shit.
You could argue that "free market capitalism" created an environment so successful that parasites were able to latch onto institutions and perpetuate themselves, but people did that, not "capitalism."
Parasitic losers do that in any environment. The stakes are just bigger here because the whole pie is bigger ... thanks to free markets.
And you also prove GP's point: these useless people provide "labor," but clearly provide no value. If every person on the planet labored as a DIE commissar, we'd all starve to death. Because "labor" doesn't have any inherent value.
When you talk about jobs that only fulfill ideological needs, I am immediately reminded of my memories of the Soviet Union.
What you describe isn't capitalism at all. It's a contortion of business, a contortion of human life even, made to serve the dictates of the government first and above all else. There is no free exchange of goods and services with the presence of external coercion, especially from a government.
Additionally I am not referring to free market. Nor am I referring to the abject myth of free trade.
As for "society", I don't think that's correct at all. Society has no claim and cannot legitimately lay claim to the success and possessions of individuals. Horses, and taming animals in general, is something that existed far before any idea of society. Same thing with farming. Simply put, transactions are not deterministic, nor do they owe their existence to factors outside of the transaction.
By definition, they can't. If a man offers to buy a lock of my hair, and I give it to him, I don't owe society anything. This doesn't cease to be less true merely because what I'm selling isn't a literal part of my own body.
As for history. As you mentioned the quote is from a century prior. Degeneracy existed in abundance a hundred years ago from our perspective. It certainly existed in the author's past as well, far more than he, or you, realize. For goodness sakes at one point entire continents conducted heart eating, demon worshipping child sacrifices. Present degeneracy is not new or novel, we're merely proximate to a large and loud pustule of it emerging into view. Once excised, they'll go hide again for a few decades.
You lost this very shortly into the post. The biggest point was that labor theory of value has been disproven and you handwaved that away with an excuse that you didn't have the energy to reply, then put down a wall of text anyway. What disingenuous bullshit.
This is reading into what he said. Props to Marx for supposedly inventing the idea of Capitalism, but at the core it's really just economics. It doesn't imply belief in an idealized free market. Free just means not a planned economy. (I suppose buyers, sellers, and "Capitalists" are planning things though.)
Marxist insanity.
I hope you continue learning.