Was he ever right about anything?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/COMPRNFB
research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LES1252881600Q
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Current history shows that his diagnosis of the process of capital is VERY correct.

For over a century, his prediction of workers wages falling did not come true.
But for the past 40 years, wages have either dropped or stagnated.

We live in the world Marx and Engels wrote about over 150 years ago.

No. He died a fool, dependent upon his wife's parents for charity.

He actually was supported by Engels, who ran his father's company.

His wife, Jenny supported her husband and believed in his cause.

Marx was a brilliant man who read and spoke multiple languages.

Just because you disagree with Marxian theory is no reason to call him foolish.

His influence on the world is permanent.

His impact on modern Western thought is so profound and lasting it's hard to attribute any specific thing to him anymore, like with all our greatest thinkers.
Everyone who isn't a Marxist today is either a post-Marxist or an ignoramus.

1875 – Marx moved to 44 Maitland Street and lived here until he died

Can someone resume historic materialism?

>for the past 40 years

Which coincides with the deindustrialization of the Western world, which just proves Marx further wrong.

His greater impact was providing a tool for intellectuals to use as a weapon of their own caste attempts at building absolute power. It's perennial popularity is linked to it's usefulness in this regard, not to it's accuracy, which it has none whatsoever.

Brilliant quote. Brilliant man.

except the stagnation of wages in the west can be explained without resorting in any way to Marx.
Marx conclusion that wages and profits tend to fall is based on a completely faulty theorization.

Funny how he was the epitome of a lazy trust-fund babby "intellectual" yet claimed to know what's best for laborers.

there are two types of people in the world...

everyone who isnt a christian today is either a post-christian or an ignoramus

Yes, you get it.

what if i told you that my thought process as a communist was not to create new inequalities that would be in my favor, but rather to remove all inequalities to create as meritocratic a society as possible.

pareto assumes malice on the part of all of those who desire equality. that's not my own experience. i don't want any gains for myself. i want a world in which those who work the hardest can receive the most, and i can say that they deserve what they have because all individuals start at the same starting line.

the problem of communism will be envy, not corruption.

For someone who likes to spam the exact same post in every Marx thread so much you sure don't put much effort in actually backing anything you say up.

these are jews

Why do you repeat that meme?

research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/COMPRNFB

This is already adjusted for inflation

research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LES1252881600Q

And who decides what a meritocratic society looks like. Who decides that society currently fails in that regard.

Oh, it's you? Well good thing you have good character, otherwise you would be tempted to use that power to bend society to best suit yourself

Literally nothing, what a joke lmfao

Wages aren't falling, the rise in healthcare costs are eating up any wage increase.

Also, it wouldn't matter if they did, because everything gets massively cheaper over time.

How much would an 64GB iPhone cost in 1970 compared to today?

no, it's not me alone. i would have that power in the hands of every person. if some people still felt that we had a ways to go before achieving a fair starting line, everyone else would listen to their criticism and determine whether it was a fair criticism or not. then, assuming we value a more meritocratic society, the society would change in response to these criticisms.

i'm not advocating for a small group of people deciding how society should run. everyone should have a vote on how society should be structured.

The cost of Researching, planning, and prototyping all of its predecessor's and itself is the best answer IMO, though it's not a perfect one. Maybe you can add the cost of the lives of their developers up until the point where they were developed. Maybe you could add the cost of advertisement to get more and more people to buy(fund) the next incarnation. Maybe you can add the cost of these all in regards to whoever came up with the idea of forced obseletion that gave us a 64GB iPhone in the first place. It's just not really something you can quantify without setting a scope for quantification, because of the interconnectedness of these things.

But healthcare insurance is something like rent. Rent doesn't provide an incentive to improve on something. Rent provides an incentive to incentivize rent, and to incentivize it in a way that more rent can be more stably extracted.

>the deindustrialization of the Western world
Dude.......what?

He was smart enough to realize that capitalism would eventually turn the common people into wageslaves with diminished rights.

Mah nigga Tyrone has better predictions when higgh than dis old white cracka xDdd just lmfao at him

>capitalism is bad
>prices should come from labor value
>this is how to destroy capitalism
>lol i have no idea what we do once it's actually destroyed, but i still think you should destroy it lol :)
>dies before the 3rd is finished to his satisfaction but followers published it anyway

>ignoramus

>> 1282905

>i want a world in which those who work the hardest can receive the most

Protip: That is not communism. That is the opposite of communism.

not capitalism either mind you lel

"Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen" - Karl Marx, Kritik des Gothaer Programms

>people actually criticise Marx
>he is responsible for your rights, your healthcare and every privilege you enjoy

APOLOGISE

right, because Murray Rothbard and Milton Friedman came from humble backgrounds, right?

Fuck off with that NEET bullshit. Vincent Van Gogh was considered by many to be the greatest painter who ever lived even though he died a penniless dependent of his older brother. The fact that he never made a living creating art reflects more on the society around him refusing to recognize a true genius in his own time than it did on his work ethic or moral standing.

You're thinking and the social democrats. A different group of people.

Whose existence is a response to Marx and his ideas.

You think capitalists would permit the existence of profit swallowing social democrats if there wasn't a threat of socialist revolution?

>Whose existence is a response to Marx and his ideas.

Yes, in response to the failure of his ideas at least in my country.

Yes and No.
He was correct that materialism gives rise to a soft people who want nothing more than material happiness and want to be taken care of, to give satisfaction equal weight of desire, oh wait, Nietzsche said that...

Marx only said that Capitalism leads to Socialism, which it can if Capitalism the soul of the culture, it is not a necessity as Marx put it but it is a trend which can occur simply because man becomes devoid of any higher ideals.

If anything, Marx's critique should used as a warning, his philosophy is full of holes, for instance society being driven by class division alone and not to mention it presents a dualism where one side wins. society wouldn't progress in a communist world --- wait a sec---- -look at the soviet states-

Communism is humanism secularized -Marx

Communism is the bane of man.

The "right" to be an irresponsible leech on western society? The "right" to be degraded to dependent voting cattle for crooked politicians?

>America was invented by the democratic party applying Marx's teachings

Yeah mate, would be much better if our conditions resembled those of 19th century workers :)

The current system is shit - I agree - however it is better than it was before, and the only solution is communism.

>muh exploited factory workers

still better living conditions than being a farm hand

read the post again.

capitalist countries are forced to give workers concessions - otherwise people would think "this is a bit shit" and rise up against the capitalist class.

Or maybe you agree that millionaires just love hemorrhaging money to give to the general population

>muh exploited farm hands

still better living conditions than being a slave

>muh exploited slaves

still better living conditions than being dead

He was just a shitposter NEET, so no.