Dedicate 25 years to studying everything written in economics up to cutting edge...

>tfw gigantic fucking morons ala are eternally butthurt and will be thrown into the dustbin of history anyway

Imagine being this ignorant

How does commodity fetishism have anything to do with what I just said. Commodity fetishism would imply that the exchange value of a particular good comes from some inherit value of the good itself. Marx just says that the exchange value comes from the labor put into it

>Marxism is becoming less and less popular since everyone who likes it and tries to model a government after it ends up destroying themselves
>You're going to end up in the dustbin of history mister!

was he part of the lumpenproletariat?

>dedicate 20 minutes to trying to understand complex government ideologies
>Learn of a contrarian ideology that supports the workers and diminishes freedoms
>Fail to look at real life examples and instead live in a theoretical dream land
>Claim anyone with a mind is an edgy kid or nazi fuck boy
Feels bad man

Labor theory of value, as it was laid out by Ricardo and Smith, is not about exchange value. It's about value in general. The most we can say is that Marx emphasized labor as a necessary component of capitalism as he described it. There may be evidence that, at some point, he supported such a labor theory of value, but there is also evidence that he later rejected it. Beyond that it isn't necessary for the general framework to function, nor is it his main contribution.

It's not just necessary for capitalism. Understanding that labor is the source of exchange value is, for Marx, the reason for Communism to be something to be desired.

/
didn't he work as a printer or something?

Most of the wealthiest people in the world don’t work in the conventional sense.

Do you want to imply that George Soros or Warren Buffett don’t understand the economy, because they’re not manual laborers?

Marx’ great mistake was that he never developed a coherent theory of post-revolution society

>never worked a day in his life
>envisioned a world where he would never have to work a day in his life

>worked a day in his life
who actually wants to do this though

>hate capitalism
>supported by rich capitalist's son

NEET masterrace

Wageslaves will always stay wageslaves, since they don’t even have the time or energy to envision another life

What a retarded meme.

Marx adored labor, deemed it necessary and wished to lift the worker class above the capitalist class. Nowhere were workers as glorified as in the Soviet Union.

How is researching and writing all day not work?

Marx worked in journalism.

Yes his " democracy " without state is very nebulous

>Have your critique be so inescapable that economics just ignores it,
That's literally not true

>marx never worked a day in his li-

I don't buy this. Marx was a terrible person and was terrible with his finances. I wouldn't criticise him for simply being born into wealth, but he constantly leached off others and spent frivolously. And he had a rotten personality. I don't know why Engels put up with him.
Coming from a rich family, being a B-list actor and writing novels isn't comparable. Coming from a rich family, working with academics, working with businessmen and then working in universities isn't comparable. Working in the government and then becoming a college professor isn't comparable.
youtube.com/watch?v=ZybqpGVZu3k

Why didn't he just continue working in journalism? Censorship? He was obviously talented so why did he constantly borrow money?

Marx understood revolution could only destroy the old system, not remodel it in the will of man. Theology understands this and says that Creation is an act of the Divine, so Man can only destroy and create chaos, thus creating the opportunity for divine creation. This is the case of every revolution, they all gave way to a newer, unpredictable system.
Don't even reply to those saying Marx never worked. They're wageslaves who can't wait to get home to turn on netflix and watch TV shows. Despicable.

kek

>Don't even reply to those saying Marx never worked.
>They're wageslaves

>tuquoque.jpg

it really is pretty obvious you've never read kapital...

>His ideas were wrong because he was a hypocrite and I find his character loathsome

Try again snookums

>>Dedicate 25 years to studying everything written in economics up to cutting edge,
and still somehow manage to not learn anything

His ideas were wrong because they were wrong.
His core predictions for the demise of capitalism never came true and when Marxists during the early part of the 20th century became discontent with waiting for the Proletariat uprising that was never going to happen. Men like Lenin and Mao would set the tone for how Socialist regimes would begin, through an artificial uprising led by a cult of personality.

Actual criticism of Marxism that doesn't resort to ad hominem or straw man ???
Something I never thought I'd see in Veeky Forums.

>intellectual labor is not labor

makes u think

>His core predictions for the demise of capitalism never came true
They are true and becoming reality. What's the deal with people consciously rejecting Marxism? Marx was right. And it is because he was right that we need to consider an other alternative than the dystopian shit he came up with. You are just closing your eyes to the inevitable, and it's going to come and fuck you up the ass. Open your eyes and fight against what's coming instead of pretending it doesn't exist.
Right wingers rant about 'cultural marxism' being everywhere, yet they'll say marxism isn't true and not possible. Incoherent.

>dude they're coming true now
That's not the case, prove that his assertions are coming true.
I'll wait.

Great.

HOW
DO
YOU
FUCKING
CALCULATE

Read Cockshott

If you can't see the problem with unlimited debt and credit you're literally dumber than a sumerian born 4500 years ago hahaha.

>"Right wingers rant about 'cultural marxism' being everywhere, yet they'll say marxism isn't true and not possible."

You realize we say that to call attention to the far-left parroting marxist ideology applied to culture (equity movements, etc), right?

You absolute fucking mong

i'd really rather not

From what i've read in the last 15 minutes. The solution is apparantly build a big computer, which is nonsense and doesn't solve the fact that wants are ordinal and not measurable.

>They're wageslaves who can't wait to get home to turn on netflix and watch TV shows
You mean the proletariat?

Except everywhere that Friedman was able to get his ideas through is much better off today than it was before. And much better than today than it's neighbouring countries that are shit.

Cultural marxism is the means to get marxism, you dimwit.

Funny post, but the entire reason this argument is made is to show the distance between Marx himself and the workers he claimed to care about. It's easy to 'care' about the noble workers idea when they're a complete fabrication in your mind (indeed, because even bourgeois in contemporary times still work), but in reality all Marx truly did was show his ignorance of the masses and hate for the rich.

You know, probably because he was a mooch and resented his own laziness, then took his ideology out on people who mostly didn't deserve it.

Like modern-day Marxists.

what? do you not know what marxism is?

Marx didn't care about anybody for fuck sake this board is driving me crazy. MARXISM IS NOT A MORAL IDEOLOGY.

IF YOU THINK IT IS YOU ARE THE BRAINLET TO WHICH THE MANIFESTO WAS ADRESSED.

YOURE TOO DUMB TO COMPREHEND HISTORICAL MATERIALISM AND HAVE TO BE FED EVERYTHING ACCORDING TO MORALITY.

Marx couldnt give two shit about the living conditions of workers, except for its material repercussions on society.

If you don't have an actual mathematical understanding of markets honestly by practicing models and examining actual statistics, then you're no better than one of those pseuds who regurgitates popsci factoids about quantum physics without actually understanding the math behind relativity. This goes for everyone, not just Marxists. You can only go so far as an intellectual without having a firm grounding in mathematics.

You deserve to feel bad you stupid commie.

You are as bad as the Marxists.

Go on, model me the ordinal preferences of society. Economics is not a hard science you brainlet.

Marx is probably the most important philosopher since Kant and Hegel. Attempts to discredit him in this sphere (postmodernism, etc) are quite literally part of a bourgeois plot to protect liberal democracy.

Both the French state and the CIA supported Foucault and other postmodernists in an effort to eject Marxism from the academy.

>Economics is not a hard science you brainlet.
That doesn't mean we should just neglect the quantitative aspect of it. Just because it's not a hard science doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for an empirical basis for our theories over endless philosophical debates.

bad bait

>muh logical fallacies checklist

>"NOT A MORAL PHILOSOPHY"
>“Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains."

really seized my means of production

It's worth remembering that equality is not a virtue.
Desires for equality are born out of covetousness and envy.
If a man is starving and in destitute poverty, he does not desire equality with a rich man, but rather he simply wants to be able to survive and feed his family.
Economics is also not inherently a zero sum game and most transactions are voluntary in the free market.
A man being rich does not deprive another man of wealth, not does employment exploit the employee.

PURE
U
R
E

Marx anticipated Friedman? Could you expand upon this?

BASED /pol/reddit at it again!

Marx didn't really talk about equality at all

He talks about inequality and pits economic classes against each other.
Inequality is not a problem in this world, only destitute poverty.

Capitalism succeeded where Marx believed it would fail. Destitute poverty is becoming increasingly rare in the US, as a result economists now use the idea of "relative" poverty which is just talking about inequality which is a natural occurrence when considering innate differences between people.

lel America is one it's way to become a third world country

Thanks to the demographic shift and a shrinking white taxpayer base.

Oh look, this one hasn't had a single semester of economics.

He literally has two standard bookshelf rows worth of books, possibly more.
He worked harder than you ever will. No, burgerflipping isn't 'work'.
Because it isn't for Soros, it's for oneself.

FUGMUGGGIN WHITE CIVILIZASHUN!!~!~!!!!!#!#!#!!

Cockshott is a fucking moron

>write volumes on a complex subject
>forgot about muh human naychur

Everything I disagree with is communism and Marx never had a job lol brainlet commies communism killed the dinosaurs

Thanks to capitalism

Hardly, it's no longer economically beneficial to import cheap labor with guarantee of automation on the horizon.

It's a concerted effort to ethnically replace European caucasians, by the UN's own words.

You guys are worse than poltards. It's always fucking (((capitalism)))'s fault. Any kind of nuance is lost with you retards. Marx is rolling in his grave.

...

>presents a ludicrous claim with no evidence

>.23 shekels have been deposited to your account

Fuck, this looks like one of those shitty forwards from grandma that gets posted on the_donald

Have you ever heard of the service industry? It's kind of a big thing in the west, you should look it up!

Also if the capitalists were to embrace full automation the entire system would collapse. It stops being profitable to lower costs when you target demographic have literally no money.

All those wasted years to a failed system. I honestly feel bad for Marx

>Also if the capitalists were to embrace full automation the entire system would collapse.

tfw capitalists bring about communism by eliminating the working class and not the other way around like marx said

Marxism isn't a political system, it's a method of analysis

The economic policies of the Soviet Union have very little to do with Marx. He specifically spoke out against nationalization and a top-down "barracks socialism" centered around commodity production

Go back to R*ddit.

>Marxist-Leninism has very little to do with Marxism

>it's another Marxists attempt to force their pseudoscience by shouting at mainstream economics thread

Tankies would get mad if they heard that but yeah, nowhere in Marx's body of work will you find pronouncements toward the policies advanced by the Soviet Union

>he actually has a deviantart link of the bottom of the poster

that is perfect, i never noticed it before

Nah it would be more cyberpunk than FALC unless they kill of all the working class

what is a "category" in this context?

>His ideas were wrong because he was a hypocrite

Precisely this dumbass. You cannot develop a theory on how the proletariat will operate if you yourself have not felt their struggle.

Wealth =/= Good theory

nice feels over reals, libtard