Communist wondering the principles of Sup Forums

Okay Sup Forums it's not like you've ever read or care to read Marx, Lukacs, Lenin, etc

Do you guys have anything like theory, political philosophy, critiques, polemics, etc from which I could learn why you think what you think?

Other urls found in this thread:

friesian.com/marx.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

moar pls

Fuck off, commie filth.

>Do you guys have anything like theory, political philosophy, critiques, polemics, etc from which I could learn why you think what you think?
enjoy trump twitter memes and shitposting.

>theory
>political philosophy
>critiques
>polemics

we generally despise all this pseudointellectual bullshit. never did any good.
if you really want something to read that gives you a perspective on our thought process, read evola, hitler and friedman.

Locke and Rousseau.

I actually have access to a hard copy, and thumbing through the table of contents I find this is exactly what I am looking for.

And reading the translator's note (of a Houghton-Mifflin from 1999) even for two paragraphs I get the uneasy feeling I got when I read a preface to the Communist Manifesto, a copy from the mid 1950s, written by a prof at Georgetown. The feeling is that they are just using invective to discredit and stupefy the reader. I guess I'll find out for myself. Thanks anyway Sup Forums. This thread can die as far as I care.

>Sup Forums is one person

>Sup Forums is one person
>OP wrote "you guys"
:D

Locke is okay (treatises on civil government hold some water), I need to read Rosseau

>pseudointellectual bullshit
But what if it helps you describe reality...in other words...but what if it's right?
That being said I'm okay with the hate for the 'academic left' and thanks for the info. Don't think I'd heard of Evola

Maybe not exactly what you are looking for, but if you haven't read Kaczynski's manifesto I highly recommend it.

I have and it's very good. Too bad it isn't more popular. You can take the idea of power process and critique of technology without the critique of 'socialisation'

>Okay Sup Forums it's not like you've ever read or care to read Marx, Lukacs, Lenin, etc

I have and fuck yourself with a rake. Any communist is either a monster or an idiot. I sincerely hope you fucking die.

...

I'll die someday user don't hold your breath. What'd ya read?

>privileged but still a failure
>blames parents for not being more strict

This is your standard Sup Forums anti socialists. They transpose their patents onto governments.

>Okay Sup Forums it's not like you've ever read or care to read Marx, Lukacs, Lenin, etc

actually, I have. Das kapital is an ancient tome and not worth reading after his argument was COMPLETELY destroyed by the economic calculation argument.

But it's not like you've ever read Von Mises or Hayek.

>Do you guys have anything like theory, political philosophy, critiques, polemics, etc from which I could learn why you think what you think?

Sup Forums doesn't "think", it reacts.

It's apparent you don't know what the "value theory" is.

Das Kapital was orthodox 19th Century economics. This was its greatest strength, it wasn't an economic critique; it built upon the work of Adam Smith and David Riccardo.

If you want a crash course in Classical economics, read Kapital.

Communism doesn't work.

I'm going to read Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth and get back to y'all, and of course browse-read Mein Kampf.

Marx was a Capitalist. Not a lot of people know this.

He believed in historical process; capitalism was an essential stage.

Fuck off communist scum.

It's apparent you haven't read a single word written by Marx.

Marx was a classical economist, same as Adam Smith.

>Okay Sup Forums it's not like you've ever read or care to read Marx, Lukacs, Lenin, etc
But I used to be a commie, friend. You'll see soon.
>Do you guys have anything like theory, political philosophy, critiques, polemics, etc from which I could learn why you think what you think?
Julius Evola

Absolutely disgusting. You'll be swiftly deported once Emperor Farage is elected.

I read them and became a hardcore Communist.
Then I read Mein Kampf then I came to Sup Forums.

>Marx was a Capitalist

He acknowledged that you need capitalism before you turn to socialism. Basically someone (capitalism) has to create a system for socialism to destroy.

This doesn't make him a Capitalist

There won't be a UK in five years; so, I'm guessing Farage will be "emperor" of The Isle of White.

Yeah well I don't have to real Twilight to know it's fucking shit, too.

Communist Manifesto. Made me physically ill to look at it. Basically some fat fucking Jew that fucked his enslaved housekeeper and that had never held a job in his life was trying to tell the rest of the world how to live. Pure, insane and self aggrandizing drivel that only attracts idiots and psychopaths.

Seriously, it's the most disastrous line of economic thought to ever exist and is the largest cause of preventable human suffering to ever exist.

Sup Forums is an international gathering of nationalist chauvinists. It strives to be modern version of the greek forum where the bums debated the important issues of the day.

Also gas the kikes.

I respect Marx's crisis theory but Lenin was a moron, aight? Everything sans acknowledging capitalism system's flaws may go in a trash can.

>destroy

No, he didn't think Socialism would "destroy" Capitalism, if it did we'd end up back in a state of Feudalism.

Marx believed Capitalism would transform into Socialism, and Socialism would transform into Communism. The dialectc at work in the later transition is unclear (any Marx scholars here are welcome to fill in the details).

Of course there will be a UK. It'll be part of Donald Trump's Anglo Empire.

yeah sure
>locke
>hobbes
>kant
>schopenhauer
>epictetus
>cicero
>von Clausewitz
>adam smith
>marx
>keynes
>plato
>aristotle
>machiavelli

of these, I not enjoyed reading Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Epictetus

He was only good at pointing out the flaws of capitalism but his answer was an absolute fucking horror show.

most* instead of not

fucking mobile

>Basically some fat fucking Jew that fucked
>never held a job in his life

Ad Homs away!

>Seriously, it's the most disastrous line of economic thought to ever exist

He explained the process of Capitalist Globalization rather pointedly.

>Marx believed Capitalism would transform into Socialism, and Socialism would transform into Communism.
you're repeating exactly what he said

I agree with this user

This is plain silly. He built on their works but only as critique of capitalism, to understand what makes capitalism tick. He did not /support/ capitalism.

Also, in Mein Kampf, I just read in Vol 1 the part about the Social Democracy "These men rejected everything: the nation as an invention of the "capitalistic" (how often I was forced to hear this single word!) classes; the fatherland as an instrument of the bourgeoisie for the exploitation of the working class; the authority of law as a means of oppressing the proletariat; the school as an institution for breeding slaves and slaveholders; religion as a means of stultifying the people...There was absolutely nothing which was not drawn through the mud"

So your boy sounds like a spooked moralfag who doesn't like the word capitalism. Learning about it would be a hassle. Hey, kinda like Sup Forums! "scary words are scary better gas everyone who says them!" I have yet more to read, don't lose hope in me, comrades!

Socialism doesn't "destroy" capitalism, according to Marx.

Thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis.

Socialism is the logical conclusion of Capitalism; according to Marx.

Here is a simple philosophical critique of communism:

Communism assumes the equality of all men to be foundational and posits that class distinctions are social constructions - this is observably false.

Because communism never accounts for this, the societies which implement it will inevitably waste labor, energy and resources attempting to create an equality of outcome.

Societies which waste labor, energy and resources are inherently inferior to those that do not, such as Meritocratic ones for example.

Therefore Communism is inherently inferior, as an ideology, when compared to Meritocracy.

>He did not /support/ capitalism.

Yes he did, explicitly.

He thought it was a vital step on the road to Communism.

you damn well know that by "destroy" he means that socialism replaces capitalism much like capitalism replaced feudalism. why not move onto other parts of the discussion with him instead of getting stuck on definitions like you socialists/communists always seem to do

>Communism assumes the equality of all men

No, it doesn't, Marx is VERY clear on this point:

"From each according to their ability, to each according to their need".

Try actually reading some Marx.

Sup Forums is fucking retarded and they don't believe in anything more than internet memes, they are the perfect representation of spectators in the Debordian sense.

You should of asked this question in /lit/ but if you want good rightwing political theory check out Nick Land.

You will appreciate him I believe as he has a basis in Marx and Deluze that he never abandons, of-course his historical materialism does not reach the same conclusions however.

Ride the Tiger by Evola is also essential reading and you would probably appreciate Alexander Dugin aswell if you are a Marxist-Leninist.

Also Mein Kampf is shit and anything by Austrian economists is a joke if yo have in the slightest basis in philosophy (pic related).

Anyway go to /lit/ and ask for their rightwing chart and never expect anyone on Sup Forums to know shit about politics.

>made me ill
Dude I think there is something wrong with you.
>tell rest of the world how to live
Marx was never prescriptive, and I don't see how the Manifesto was self-aggrandizing outside of saying that the Communists are internationalists and stand for the interest of the proletariat as a whole.

>disastrous economic thought
Hey did you know, Marx only critiqued capitalism, and never elaborated what socialist society might look like?

>won't address human suffering or hundreds of millions tortured and killed
>won't address failure of every single communist state within 50 years
>hurrdurr ad hom

Wake up from the indoctrination and pseudo intellectualism before it's too late.

>like you socialists/communists always seem to do

I'm not a Socialist, nor am I a "Communist".

If you want to use the term "destroy", I'll indulge you... Marx's point was: Capitalism "destroys" itself. The logical conculsion of Capitalism is Socialism.

I have read the manifesto and parts of das kapital. Literally lost all of its appeal after I stopped bein a teen. Wealth of nations is 1000 times better

>Do you guys have anything like theory, political philosophy, critiques, polemics, etc from which I could learn why you think what you think?
Yes
Everything you think you know about politics and government is a crock of shit
Nationalism, free trade, and capitalism are the only absolute truths.
There has never been anything that has worked better and there is nothing that hasn't been tried yet.
Also you're a cuck and we don't want you

How does an economy grow in a closed thermodynamic system

What does it matter if a society "wastes" labor

What is the purpose of "society"

What is the purpose of anything

What will humanity be doing two minutes from now, next Thursday, two years from now, two hundred years from now, 400 million years from now, 400 trillion trillion years from now, one second before the Universe tears itself apart

These are important questions.

>seize means of production
>kill millions to seize means of production
>can't operate means of production
>everyone is now poorer or dead

Bravo Marx.

The Myth of the Twentieth Century by Alfred Rosenberg.

What were the flaws of capitalism?

Kek no he won't
1) Farage is a moderate birderlineing centerist
2)There is only one emperor and that is the god emperor, you best step the fuck off if you think you're anything close to us in any scope imaginable. We help you because nobody else will not because we want to

I suggest you leave off the "Black Book of Communism", and do some fact checking.

Honestly, Marx was brilliant if you look at his works as sociology. The only reason why socialism is still prominent even after its abject failure in practice is Marx was the first intllectual that precisely criticized the failures of the Age of Reason. Liberalism won in the Modern era, but it still died. Facism died in its youth, unlike communism that died decrepit in its soviet bed, and even liberalism is gone, born from its ashes is post-modernism/post-liberalism.

Individuality, in its glorification, has led to moral relativism; decadence; putting freaks, degenerates, clowns and whores as icons; abandoning myth and ritual; and the demonization of spirituality. And the telltale signs of all of this was there, when Europe starting embracing liberalism. I mean, Marx wasn't wrong about the failures of capitalism. There are classes, and the upperclass do exploit the lowerclass. Communism can only be followed if you look at its manifesto as a holy book, and see its faults as ideological imperfections. Liberalism has no such "holy book" just the vague idea that anyone and eveyone is the same, and we all share a future to strive for.

Liberlism has no end, everyone speaks of moving forward, and constantly chasing the future. It's ingrained in the modern world, to the point where we take it for granted. Marx was right ti criticize it when he did, but his solution was complete shit.

Wealth of nations faggot. Free market is the best way to create incentive and mutually benefit individuals at the same time.

Pol is partially satirical, and probably best not taken at face value. It's effectively just layers of irony canceling themselves out while new layers constantly form. Some layers remain. Some layers aren't even ironic.

Some layers aren't even layers

Tldr; people come here to complain and talk about shit like recent happenings, make jokes that are meant to trigger autistic SJW's, all the while blending together with other people who actually literally follow the stuff that many people are simply joking about.

A lot of it is just opinion, mixed together with children arguing with adults, while not even realizing it.

Speech here is not limited (beyond anything Sup Forums tier), and people will just either tell you off or ignore you if you try to make it otherwise. What you take of it is not the same as what someone else would.

>if I pretend that hundreds of millions of people weren't tortured and killed it didn't happen
>nanana I can't hear you

You argue like a child.

>Never read a word of Marx...

Anti-intellectualism.

I have read the communist manifesto.

Marx believed that each individual was DIFFERENT but that they all contributed EQUALLY to the collective, and this central point is how he rationalizes a ditch digger having the same access and power of the state as a doctor, and how he rationalizes the upper class being EQUAL to the lower class. This is observably false.

Basically someone wins and someone loses.

>never read a word of actual history outside of Jewish Marxist controlled academia....

How come?

Capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction.

This was Marx's point.

Socialism is the logical conclusion of Capitalism.

The sole purpose of politics is to channel wealth upward. All other functions are simply public relations maneuvers to distract attention from what is really happening.

The difference between liberal and conservative is simply over the morphology of the funnel, i.e. capitalists and communists can't agree on precisely what type of human makes the best slave.

The reason nobody actually implements a true "free market" system is that it is inefficient in achieving the primary goal of politics.

...

>Capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction.

I agree with this.

>Socialism is the logical conclusion of Capitalism

I kinda agree with this, I just don't advocate this result.

...

>if I pretend that hundreds of millions of people

Hundreds of million...

Think about that figure, now go and look at 20th Century international demographic records. You will be hard pressed to find the missing "hundreds of millions"...

In the 1930s the population of of the Soviet Union was around 170 million. Are you seriously suggesting the entire population of the USSR died several times over?

Idiot.

...

...

Why are you denying the holocaust?

Communism killed 100,000,000 people yet it's acceptable to be a communist.

Fuck off I know people that lived under it

>equality
No. But capitalism does when it comes to market relations. We are all equal in having the right to own. On the flip side, capitalism fails to appreciate anything non-quantifiable about people.
>class as social construct
No. For social constructs you need society. For society you need people. For people you need food. For food you need economy, which is a mode of production and relations of production. Class has an objective basis. It's not just some fucking whim. Anyway, if class as a social construct is false, then what IS it? I thought you people didn't believe in "class" at all and that we are all capitalists of varying size? The whole relations of production thing is helpful in clarifying this muddle.
>wasted labor
What does this mean?
>inherently inferior
I'm not sure you know what that word means, since the inferiority comes from what the society DOES and not what it IS. But at any rate I guess there should be no festivals, parties, public celebrations. No. Infinite growth for growth's sake. Machine efficiency. We just don't see eye to eye, you and I.

Just hop in my helicopter senpai

>I read the communist manifesto

Why even comment when your gonna make yourself look like a nonce

>what is Maoist China

How come capitalism is going to destroy itself? It hasn't already, and doesn't seem like it ever will. If anything, we are getting close to a pure capitalist system.

>won't include China
>only posts stats from before/early communist periods

Ok now I'm know I'm talking to a troll. Good night.

Er...

How you came to your conclusions on Marx's theories after reading his pamphlet, "The Manifesto", is a bit of a mystery.

>Marx believed that each individual was DIFFERENT but that they all contributed EQUALLY to the collective,

Er... no he didn't.

Marx was very clear, he stated in black and white: "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need".

People aren't "equal", according to Marx. You can't get any clearer than this.
1

Saying that socialism is the logical conclusion of communism is a standard slippery-slope argument.

It's like saying if I went on a first date with your sister, the logical conclusion is anal sex. I mean, it's certainly possible, but I'd probably put it at only about 20%.

Evola

Government doesnt work like dating jackass. Fuck your faggot analogies

I only think capitalism destroys itself when there is a state attached to it. It's an extension of modernist liberalism. Capitalism is great, and Objectivism is a laudable philosophy, but when the state adopts it, and power keeps funneling up, it will become cronyism.
I'm no lolbertarian, I definitely believe in nation states, I just want the government out of the market.

All commies are evil or stupid. If you're not evil, read link below. Pic is related, but the main arguments are in the link.

friesian.com/marx.htm

>How come capitalism is going to destroy itself? It hasn't already,

Capitalism is in a perpetual state of crisis.

Socialist countries keep emerging after financial collapses, then they are beaten back into submission by international capital.

>we are getting close to a pure capitalist system.

Mate, we're getting further away from the "pure", "free market" ideal. Crony Capitalism and Corporatism is taking over the globe.

Ayn Rand
Thomas Jefferaon
Hobbes
Milton Friedman
John Locke
Evola
Nietzche
Patrick Henry
Thomas Sowell

I got you

No, it's not "slipery slope fallacy".

Marx provides a logical account of how societies transition from one mode of production to another.

Marx's mechanism is called: "dialectical materialism".

we have reached disproportion levels present in economy before 30's Great Crisis. 2008 will be quickly forgotten just like WW I, because the next crisis is coming soon and it will be nothing like what we have seen before it.

Not everyone can win.

Not everyone is born a special snowflake, and there are millions of other insignificant people just like you who could easily do just as good, or even better than you.

Not everyone has the option, ability or talent to make money, and from that alone, you will always be able to expect to find someone unemployed, or homeless.

Welfare doesn't help, as you'd be creating a system of dependents that may or may not ever find a way to live on their own.

You know why people ask you not to feed the animals? When you feed the animals, the ones that would otherwise not have babies would then produce offspring. When that source of food disappears, the birds all die.

In the case of a population however, the economy is the one that dies, collapsing.

Oh my fucking god

>Want to criticize Marx
>Criticize Manifesto
>Criticize fucking Fitchian dialectics instead

Why is every Sup Forumsack so goddamned retarded.

>didn't read the fucking link
full retard

1st part ok
2nd part is rubbish

There's not much point browsing Sup Forums if you want to understand anything, or convey understanding. They're a bunch of fucking retards here.

I'm going back to /lit/...

Who gives a fuck, why should the state be interested in what degenerates do? There's an economy to balance and if wealth redistribution is necessary then it should happen, fuck your bleeding heart social parenting.