Yes, he espoused evil beliefs intentionally
No, he was just misguided, and possibly loony
No, he was right
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers
Globalist = Free Trade, Open Borders, Multiculturalist, Anti-White Racist, Hypocrite, Sophist, Deceiver, Manipulator, Warmonger, Vulgar Culture, Morally Depraved......Enemy
Death to Globalists
One must put Karl's words in historical context. No democracy, no human rights, no labor rights, well... no rights. In that context, yeah, rise up and take control of your authority. But in the modern world? With representative government far beyond anything Karl imagined? No. It's just outdated economic philosophy.
Why would he be a bad person? He's just an ancient person who didn't have a clue what future governments would look like. Monarchy turned into capitalism and that to free market economics with rights and laws.
His developed country -> socialism -> communism is just a simple utopian conjunction.
Last edited by ecofarm; 08-06-12 at 11:21 AM.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
I'll agree, but if you're a serious masochist, sit down with a copy of Wealth of Nations sometime. That book should come with a 2 liter of Dr. Pepper. It's so dry and mealy, and I swear that Smith intentionally made himself vague and obtuse, speaking in tongues like some African tribe.Originally Posted by DemSocialist
Hatuey is mostly right. Marxism is both a critique and an endorsement of capitalism. The only problem with his views is that they are too optimistic and ideal, and lack pragmatism across the board. Empirical evidence tends to favor other schools of thought, such as classic economics and those based on early French and Austrian ideology.
Marx was well-meaning in his thoughts, but unfortunately he was too brainwashed with social acceptance and appeasement, catering to the lowest common denominator. He was a sympathist, being a lawyer from a well-endowed family, just as Trotsky was a factory owner and member of the bourgeoisie, and Che Guevara was pretty close to being a wealthy doctor before he got some bug up his ass.
I definitely would not call him evil, but I think he was more of a soapboxer who wanted to be loved more than understood. His opinions in relation to major economic truths, such as Labor Theory of Value and the Water-Diamond Paradox, are nothing below laughable. Marx was a statistical nightmare, and was nothing but a starry-eyed optimist.
☮★★☮ Just a democratic-socialist in the heartland of America.CHECK OUT MY TUMBLR(BLOG)HERE "Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression, and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
Europe is in the midst of disaster, only, they do not realize.
How many examples do you need of the children of the ruling classes playing Leftist before you realize that hereditary power is the real enemy of civilization? Before finding a cause to assert his unearned feeling of superiority, Marx was a drunken preppy fraternity snob just like Bush. Bush ran away from his innate evil by hiding behind God, while Marx hid behind turning government into Godzilla.
On the outside, trickling down on the insiders.
We won't live free until the 1% live in fear.
Hey, richboys! Imagine the boot of democracy stomping on your faces, forever.
As AIG and 1001 other banks prove in 2008.
he was right.
Free trade will piss of USA to no end and bring about revolution..........(he will be right agian)