How come someone that has a PHD in economics and an ivy league education becomes marxists?

different assumptions

there is nothing wrong with communism if you assume "people are naturally productive"

different assumptions

there is nothing wrong with socialism if you assume "people are naturally productive"

also, most people view the labour theory of value as outdated in the 21st century, so you have to consider that too when you consider modern Marxism

I don't believe a given institution is going to force one towards or away from specific stances on the normative aspects of economics.

>there is nothing wrong with socialism if you assume "people are not inherently evil"

fixed that for ya user

Because academia strongly selects for naive immature people with no life experience who are highly susceptible to liberal ideology

Goddamn, this pol fags just won't shut up

Because science selects for idealism. Like a good experiment, marxism is an elegant, beautiful ideology that can only exist under specially designed conditions. Capitalists are like engineers - they like ugly, hacky solutions that work and scale to millions of units. The kind of people who get into science and marxism (or libertarianism) do so because they are idealistic. The kind of people who describe themselves as living in the "real world" go into industry and capitalism because they are pragmatic. This also explains the eternal feud between scientists and engineers.

>everyone in this board
Well the pol boogeyman faggot of sci exposes himself as a newfag what a surprise

one of my tutors has phd in economics from respected school in my country and she's full-on laissez faire

There isn't a single economics depertmant in America that pays any attention to Marxian economics beyond a slight historical nod.

I wish /pol/faggots like you that don't know shit yet still have the gall to spout their half baked thoughts would off themselves.

>economic
>science
anyone taking a shitty humanities degree is expected to go full on marxist at some point

something something liberal academic indoctrination marxist degenerate numale SJW conspiracy something

I'd say it's because academics in every field don't care as much for gaining more money and becoming the richest they can and maintaining their status to the detriment of poorer people, that's why. There's a reason most academics and intellectuals are left-leaning all right, but it ain't indoctrination. Believe it or not, these successful smart academics have a much greater capacity for critically examining political theories in context than the average NEET /pol/ack who thinks they know "human nature" and see things for what they are thanks to their anecdotal evidence and unsourced redpill infographics. Maybe that should make you reflect on your political insights instead of dismissing everything those "closeted" genius people say as propaganda, because it can't really be that the smart people disagree with you, right?

Most economists who actually work in research and the industry have a grasp of statistics and math, but his undergrad career was focused on history, and his masters was a masters of arts.

Basically I think he just happens to deviate from the trend of economists who have faith that it is possible to understand markets well enough to tweak them for optimal outcomes, without the need for any type of marxist system.

I dunno.

>humanities majors
>thinking they know "human nature"
enjoy your gender studies degree

This isn't even true. You learn in any introductory class that perfect competition is the best type of model but it's virtually impossible to implement it outside of a select few markets.

I spoke once with a physicist who told me that in the field they joke "it works in theory, now if only it could work in practice". I think that statement lends well to your question OP.

That's likely because all the people that share your closeted opinion () are too stubborn and uneducated to have any actual discourse. When /pol/ was created, the rest of the boards rejoiced because there was finally a place for you "enlightened intellectuals" to go. And when you finally do all get together, you create literally the worst of all boards, imagineer that.

Are you implying that the average /pol/ack is a humanities major? what? I said /pol/acks pretend like they know "human nature", not anyone else. This has to be bait because the alternative is borderline mentally retarded reading comprehension.

>Because in a vacuum, communism is the best economic model

False

In a world with scare resources, you cannot have an urban civilization without significant income inequality.

lol no

no, the alternative is me calling you out on your whiny shit
humanities are bullshit, no better than whacky conspiracy theorists. "successful smart academics" is a very long winded way to say "people who agree with me"

stop filling Veeky Forums with your idiotic board fights

Ivy League is a meme

>nothing wrong with socialism if you assume "people are naturally productive"
You're thinking of collectivized production, which is not synonymous.

>it works in theory, now if only it could work in practice
>marxism is an elegant, beautiful ideology that can only exist under specially designed conditions.
>idealism
Marxism is not itself a roadmap or vision of economic organization. Far too much laziness in here about distinguishing between Marxist philosophy itself (which asserts a "historical materialist" view beyond just the physical world to include social organization and endeavor, which can be described and predictively modeled in terms of their fundamental, objective factors, the influences they exert, and their dialectical contradictions, rather than left obscured in the familiar, nebulous lens of idealism) the application of this framework towards more scientifically rigorous critiques of capitalism (Marx didn't invent socialism or anticapitalist ideas, and far from holds a monopoly today,) and the actual plans/concepts for post-capitalist society (by a range of thinkers applying very little actual work by Marx and with widely varying degrees of heterodoxy if at all, to generally lackluster results.)

Marx had a fundamentally correct assessment of capitalism's ills, and it's not difficult to see SJWism, neoliberalism and "globalization" informally as manifestations of bourgeois rule.

Economics is also a bit of a meme.

Because Marx was the only person to complete a truthful analysis of what capitalism is, how it functions, and how it will collapse under it's contradictions.

Communism will win.

>there's no board for proper economic or political theory discussion

The theory is sound, reality is just wrong.

>proper economic or political theory discussion
>/pol/

kek'd

cf.

Veeky Forums is mostly just for people looking for money making tips, very, very rarely is there ever an actual discussion on the scientific study of the economy

Veeky Forums just doesn't like econ that much

/pol/ is /pol/

They're not - they're fabians and globalists. Mostly rallying under the banner of misinterpreted Keynesianism.

>In a world with scare resources, you cannot have an urban civilization without significant income inequality.

Source: your ass

Protip: Marxism != Communism.