What is the capitalist/western version of this book?

wealth of nations

"coup de tat"

lol

...

You're funny user.

kek

>collectivism
>western
choose 1

Jesus you're either trolling or pushing an agenda.

Try The Road to Serfdom or Basic Economics.

>The Road to Serfdom
>not pushing an agenda

This is genuinely one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen.

Honestly the real answer is Ayn fucking Rand. That really goes to show just how little beauty is inscribed into capitalism.

>everything that isn't communism is capitalism
Cult mentality.

...

fpbp

>Irish Potato Famine was caused by Capitalism
>but the Holodomor wasn't caused by communism

>pushing an agenda by giving OP the foundational text of capitalism

In what way is capitalism not one of the many causes of WWI?

>capitalism exists
>communism failed

Federalist Papers #10
Propaganda by Edward Bernays
and Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith.

Like he ever read either.

>Nazi Concentration Camps: 25 Million
I have a lot of questions.

What mental illness is associated with spending your life bumping shit threads on the literature board of an anime website?

Capitalism failed in countries that had successful socialist revolutions. Just as socialism failed in countries that turned capitalist, yes?

...

Capitalism doesn't need some founding text to exist, it's not a philosophical movement, if a person calls himself a capitalist, it's because of his entrepreneurial activities, not opinions and interpretations.

It's not an "-ism."

Atlus Shrugged

SNIFF

this
read your Nick Land fellas

'Capitalist' is often used as shorthand for 'pro-capitalist' (i.e. supportive of entrepreneurial activities). The former group probably a subset of the latter.
e.g. Land is a self-described pro-capitalist
xenosystems.net/fission-ii/

>thinking social modes of productions do not require an ideological framework to exist
Imagine being this deep in the trashcan

capitalism creates its ideological framework you dummy

>'Capitalist' is often used as shorthand for 'pro-capitalist'
But what does the 'capitalist' within 'pro-capitalist' mean?

The user thought the answer to be pro-pro-capitalist, then the same question appeared with the answer pro-pro-pro-capitalist, and before he knew it, user was lost in the infinite recursion.

Capitalism is no philosophical movement, there is no text that would instruct you on how to piledrive people into the trashcan.

This. Marxian readings that privilege infrastructure over superstructure are consistent with the man's own views, too.

>But what does the 'capitalist' within 'pro-capitalist' mean?
>if a person calls himself a capitalist, it's because of his entrepreneurial activities, not opinions and interpretations
To be 'pro-' something is to have an opinion about it. There is no recursion.

>But what does the 'capitalist' within 'pro-capitalist' mean?

>Capitalism is no philosophical movement, there is no text that would instruct you on how to piledrive people into the trashcan.
reminds me of the "atheism is not an ideology, it doesn't have a set of beliefs like religions do user !"
That's not how ideology works boi, there are more texts promoting capitalism out there than probably any other socioeconomic model I can think of, even your average "how to run a business 101" book is written on the basis of capitalist perpetuation, it implies the upholding of private property, just watch your average PragerU video and tell me their agenda is not ideologically driven

youtube.com/watch?v=SY0V8XVsX1U

>his entrepreneurial activities
it means you generate capital

ur not getting it u stupid gay nerd

>there are more texts promoting capitalism out there than probably any other socioeconomic model I can think of
And yet you cannot think of the founding one, because there is no philosophical movement, you have no culprit, you wish this was an "-ism", but it's not.

Were the spirit and might of Stalin to possess you, and get you to censor these books and send their writers to Gulag, would you thinik this would end capitalism? Unfortunately for you it's not a philosophical movement.

Because no matter how many texts you produce, they are interpretations too, they're not capitalism, you just dream they were.

>"how to run a business 101" book is written on the basis of capitalist perpetuation,it implies the upholding of private property,
What if I told you it was written according to the relevant legislation, because the objective wasn't to instruct people on running illegal businesses?

Why do you guys think Marx wrote These XI, again?

>Why do you guys think Marx wrote These XI, again?
What point are you making? That 'pro-capitalist' is redundant because someone supportive of, but not themselves, generating capital does not engage in praxis and is therefore irrelevant?

If you support somebody generating capital you're a consumer of that particular somebody's company, or perhaps the marketing guy, it's not an -ism that would encompass all the somebodies and all companies, because praxis tells me they're rivals.

These XI seems to be systematically ignored ITT. Especially when the world is being misinterpreted to begin with.

>If you support somebody generating capital you're a consumer of that particular somebody's company
Nah, you can support them from the privacy of your basement by writing a blog nobody reads.
You can absolutely encourage capital generation as a whole without endorsing a particular somebody, e.g. you think it improves the world.
XI is ignored because it rests on axioms people obviously don't agree with. What does the world matter in comparison to interpretation? The very fact that this divide exists between Marxists and those who reject the thesis is indicative that there is an ideological divide, on one side of which purely academic support for that -ism quite snugly fits.

Well, the Irish Potato Famine was actually caused by capitalism. And kulaks deserved worse.

...

The Irish deserved worse

Atlas Shrugged.

No, it was caused by incompetent irishmen who only planted one crop and then wondered why they all starved when a single blight happened. They also are on an island yet never thought of finishing. But keep blaming all your problems on capitalism you dumb commie.

economics in one lesson

>Nazi's\Facists kills
>National Socialists
>Socialists
>Because Capitalism

You are a special kind of retard

In their mind captialism=any bad and communism=anything good. There is no discussion of any ideology or history. It's a simple baby's way of looking at things. Good vs bad.
It's why they refer to the failed USSR as 'state capitalist', at least they acknowledge it was bad, but because it was bad it cannot be Marxist.

>well they have it in their name!
You and the guy below you are literal retards.
The word "privatization" was invented to describe Nazi economic policy but no problem, you just keep taking goebbels' propaganda at face value, that's not dumb at all it's actually the smart thing to do. Next up, you'll be posting antisemitic cartoons and Triumph of the will.

Book of job

Keep trying to describe how different you are from Nazi's, even though you people have the higher body count.

usually when trying to figure out whether ideologies/systems are the same, you don't focus on the amount of people killed like a moorn shill, but on the systems themselves
but you do your thing

not you, this guy:

Why do Commies get so angry when workers make an agreement with the boss. The average worker can't run a business which is what the boss is for.

Constitution of the United States to be honest.

Kommies get upset about how other people use their property. That's why the all want state controlled design economy with no room for individual decision. Planned economy garbage with zero freedom, zero liberty.

Here is your (You) samefagger

Whether or not you take all the productions away from company owners or make company owners do things with a gun to their head, they're both socialist systems and just as authoritarian and evil. No matter what you people try, it doesn't work for any survival of a country.

You lost.

hey retard, in your fantasy land any system that has any regulations on business (even if it's shit like "don't put rat poison in baby food") is "making company owners do things with a gun to their head" AKA evil authoritarian socialism

Privatisation existed long LONG before the Nazis you fucking moron. I guess changing history to suit your retarded and failed system isn't something new to you though. Neck yourself scum.

They believe that value is determined by how many hours are put into the physical production of a product. The extraction from this therefore is that any profit made from a product is exploitation.

Good thing I never said anything about that then you illiterate cunt.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization#Etymology
>The Economist magazine introduced the term "privatization" (or "privatisation") during the 1930s when it covered Nazi Germany's economic policy.[6][7]

>wikipedia
Very nice.

I guess that explains why they had a much more efficient economy than the USSR then.

>73 replies
>No one has mentioned Rostow

He intentionally wrote a stage by stage counter manifesto, it's equal nonsense.

>doesn't even understand what we're talking about
Even nicer.

I mean you've already shown you don't know what you're talking about by saying
>dude 25 million deaths in concentration camps capitalism lmao
If anyone has no clue what they're talking about it's you.

>No one has mentioned Rostow
Maybe because capitalism predates him; Rostow needs capitalism, capitalism doesn't need Rostow.

I have no idea what your problem is.
Do you think a capitalist country is unable to build a concentration camp or what?

Capitalism is an economic system and pretty much unrelated to statesmanship. Any attempt to deny this is to only prove that you don't know what capitalism actually is.

>Capitalism
>unrelated to statesmanship.
Only a moron could divide politics and economy with such ease!

First of all, that's just dumb, economy and politics are intertwined to death.

But let's say you're right. In that case socialism is an economic system as well and has nothing to do with statesmanship. You can't have it both ways.

>When I was 5 I asked my daddy what country our family was from, and why did we leave. He told me about the potatoes getting sick and that's the last I looked into it to be completely honest

See

...

value is subjective. diamonds for water in the desert

>all regimes that murdered people were capitalist states and killed for the purpose of advancing capitalism
>including monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, extranational diplomatic groups and socialists
>especially the socialists

why would anyone buy or certify that baby food?

the free market doesn't require the state. socialism does.

>why would anyone buy or certify that baby food?
Certify? What certifications are you talking about? Certifications are regulations which means they're gone.
Why would people buy it? Because they don't know it's poisonous. Shit, cigarettes cause cancer and they're still selling like crazy.

You're a fucking idiot. Ireland had tonnes of potatoes but were forced to give them to the English as part of the "empire".

They refused to lower the prices so Irish people just starved while England made a profit.

A lot of that list is bullshit, but's that one's legit.

there currently exist private certification agencies. without a subsidized monopoly there would be more competition for a better service than we currently have

and why wouldn't those agencies just take the companies' money and fiddle with the tests? what's keeping them honest?

I mean Jesus, what you people want to do is create more bother and more trouble for the average joe who's gonna have to find out who the producer of his food is certified with, what people say about them and a million other things before buying a can of beans. and the same for the rest of his products.
people don't have neither the time nor the will for that shit, they want to come into the store and buy things, not read labels for half an hour while googling for a rottentomatoes-like site for certification companies.

it seems the answer would be for the certification agency to simply stamp the product.

so your answer to a question about the trustworthiness of such agencies that are easily corrupted by deep pockets is a stamp.

you wouldn't google the safety certification of your food?

"No one can predict the number of firms, the size of each firm, the pricing policies, etc., of any future market in any service or commodity. We just know — by economic theory and by historical insight — that such a free market will do the job infinitely better than the compulsory monopoly of bureaucratic government." -Murry Rothbard

>you wouldn't google the safety certification of your food?
right now I don't have to - there's an agency that does it
in your system I'd be faced with a plethora of companies and i don't know whose stamp I can trust
you're making things worse

Communist Manifesto is a 2-3 page max pamphlet size letter inciting workers to revolt, nothing more

The capitalist equivolent would be the anti union videos that can be found in youtube. Encouraging the workers to be docile good goys

example
youtube.com/watch?v=2j3ZNUxqo9M

>hey it would be better if there wasn't a subsidized compulsory monopoly for food certification

>but there would be too many choices!

would you ever google search and shop around for doctors?