• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

  • Yes

    Votes: 30 41.1%
  • No

    Votes: 43 58.9%

  • Total voters
    73

yes the land of no jobs for US CITIZENS, only money for trust fund babys, tech guys, and $300 million in Gov Health Care and jobs for foreign criminals.

THAT is SEATTLE.

PS
Oh and a Boeing job if you got one before 1985.
 
yes the land of no jobs for US CITIZENS, only money for trust fund babys, tech guys, and $300 million in Gov Health Care and jobs for foreign criminals.

THAT is SEATTLE.

PS
Oh and a Boeing job if you got one before 1985.

It was a joke about the band nirvana ....
 
yes there is US and THEM. GILLOTINE TIME!!!!!

Did you forget about OWS? All those millions marching?

Look at the $10B a major bank is going to have to pay out for criminal acts.

Why are criminals allowed to just pay a fine? Why does NO ONE go to jail?

Bourgeois is the owners of production. Not this "society" BS you talk about.

No I did not forget OWS and it is a outright lie to claim that there were millions marching.

Citing fines and opinions about sentences doesnt prove anything really. Other than you hate the exact people that you were taught too hate.

Karl Marx claimed that a Bourgeois Society ends up with people worshiping wealth and greed and ignoring family. Marx also talks in absolutes claiming that all people with wealth are greedy assholes. Marx decided that he hated a certain type of people so he devised a way to get people pissed off at those types of people. It is a blue print for war. If you are going to hate someone hate them for what they do personally not what class they belong too. Prejudice is a ugly thing he causes people to harm or even kill innocent people because they are perceived to belong to a certain group.

But you wouldnt want to listen to any rational view now would you? All that you are concerned about is forcing the revolution right?
 
No I did not forget OWS and it is a outright lie to claim that there were millions marching.

Citing fines and opinions about sentences doesnt prove anything really. Other than you hate the exact people that you were taught too hate.

Karl Marx claimed that a Bourgeois Society ends up with people worshiping wealth and greed and ignoring family. Marx also talks in absolutes claiming that all people with wealth are greedy assholes. Marx decided that he hated a certain type of people so he devised a way to get people pissed off at those types of people. It is a blue print for war. If you are going to hate someone hate them for what they do personally not what class they belong too. Prejudice is a ugly thing he causes people to harm or even kill innocent people because they are perceived to belong to a certain group.

But you wouldnt want to listen to any rational view now would you? All that you are concerned about is forcing the revolution right?

JEsus Christ ... you haven't read Marx AT ALL have you ... No he doesn't claime that all epopl With wealth are greedy assholes AT ALL, nor does he say People will end up worhsiping wealth and greed and ignoring familty (although, look at how Things are going).
 
yes the land of no jobs for US CITIZENS, only money for trust fund babys, tech guys, and $300 million in Gov Health Care and jobs for foreign criminals.

THAT is SEATTLE.

PS
Oh and a Boeing job if you got one before 1985.

You must have had a pretty bad experience with a tech guy to include them in that murder's row.
 
JEsus Christ ... you haven't read Marx AT ALL have you ... No he doesn't claime that all epopl With wealth are greedy assholes AT ALL, nor does he say People will end up worhsiping wealth and greed and ignoring familty (although, look at how Things are going).

**** jesus he didnt say this: "The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto


I am sure that you think that you can pull the wool over my eyes and outright lie to me, but unfortunately for you Marxists dont agree with your foolery.

"The increase in crime and violence, pornography, bourgeois selfishness and the brutal indifference to the sufferings of others, sadism, disintegration of the family and the collapse of traditional morality, drug addiction and alcoholism—all those things provoking the hypocritical wrath and indignation of reactionaries—are only symptoms of the senile degeneration of capitalism. In the same way that similar phenomena accompanied the period of decline of slave society under the Roman Empire."

If we consider this: Origin of the family: In Defence of Engels and Morgan That Marxism assumes that family is only valid in a communistic society that Capitalism destroys the family (see feminism etc) then what I asserted about Marx was right on the money.

“There can be no poor and needy – the communistic household and the gens know their responsibility towards the aged, the sick and those disabled in war. All are free and equal - including the women. There is as yet no room for slaves or, as a rule, for subjugation of alien tribes…

This is what mankind and human society were like before class divisions arose.” Engels, The Origin, pp. 519-20,


Marx and Engels criticize the relationship between capital and labor, arguing that it dehumanizes the working-class into slave labor and destroys family relations and all sense of morality and replaces it with money relations.
 
Last edited:
**** jesus he didnt say this: "The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto


I am sure that you think that you can pull the wool over my eyes and outright lie to me, but unfortunately for you Marxists dont agree with your foolery.

"The increase in crime and violence, pornography, bourgeois selfishness and the brutal indifference to the sufferings of others, sadism, disintegration of the family and the collapse of traditional morality, drug addiction and alcoholism—all those things provoking the hypocritical wrath and indignation of reactionaries—are only symptoms of the senile degeneration of capitalism. In the same way that similar phenomena accompanied the period of decline of slave society under the Roman Empire."

If we consider this: Origin of the family: In Defence of Engels and Morgan That Marxism assumes that family is only valid in a communistic society that Capitalism destroys the family (see feminism etc) then what I asserted about Marx was right on the money.

“There can be no poor and needy – the communistic household and the gens know their responsibility towards the aged, the sick and those disabled in war. All are free and equal - including the women. There is as yet no room for slaves or, as a rule, for subjugation of alien tribes…

This is what mankind and human society were like before class divisions arose.” Engels, The Origin, pp. 519-20,


Marx and Engels criticize the relationship between capital and labor, arguing that it dehumanizes the working-class into slave labor and destroys family relations and all sense of morality and replaces it with money relations.

1. Read the context, and the rest of it. (btw, have you seen divorce courts, dating services, "gold diggers," sugar daddies .... and so on).
2. My point is it's a lot more Neuanced than than that, if you read read the whole theory in Kapital.
 
You quoted someone talking about what Karl Marx said, and totally ignored the actual Karl Marx quote, InFact you ignored the entire argument of what Karl Marx was right about and threw a Red Herring, i.e. arguing about something totally unrelated.
I quoted no one. Those were my words.

Marx was wrong. He was big picture wrong. Let's assume, just for the sake of argument that in his 50 volumes full of nonsense has an occasional accident where maybe we can give him credit for almost getting something right. In your opinion is that cause for celebration?
 
1. Read the context, and the rest of it. (btw, have you seen divorce courts, dating services, "gold diggers," sugar daddies .... and so on).
2. My point is it's a lot more Neuanced than than that, if you read read the whole theory in Kapital.

Yea because TV is such a good indicator of reality.

"The proletarian is without property; his relation to his wife and children has no longer anything in common with the bourgeois family relations; modern industry labour, modern subjection to capital, the same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him of every trace of national character. Law, morality, religion, are to him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests..”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto


The Communist Manifesto is nothing more than a attempt to get the masses to destroy Capitalism and instate Socialism. Everything that Marx every said about Capitalism was aimed at attacking a section of society that stood in the way of his crazy ass ideas. And he designed a way to manipulate the masses to make it happen. It all counted on people blindly following Marxs philosophies. But those numbers have always been small because Marx sounds like he is a fanatical preacher. It is Marx's fanaticism that shows bright and clear when he would attack Capitalism and make predictions about how it affects society. Of course you could deny all that but Marx wrote too much for anyone to take you serious.
 
I quoted no one. Those were my words.

Marx was wrong. He was big picture wrong. Let's assume, just for the sake of argument that in his 50 volumes full of nonsense has an occasional accident where maybe we can give him credit for almost getting something right. In your opinion is that cause for celebration?

What was he wrong about? Have you read the OP?
 
Yea because TV is such a good indicator of reality.

"The proletarian is without property; his relation to his wife and children has no longer anything in common with the bourgeois family relations; modern industry labour, modern subjection to capital, the same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him of every trace of national character. Law, morality, religion, are to him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests..”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto


The Communist Manifesto is nothing more than a attempt to get the masses to destroy Capitalism and instate Socialism. Everything that Marx every said about Capitalism was aimed at attacking a section of society that stood in the way of his crazy ass ideas. And he designed a way to manipulate the masses to make it happen. It all counted on people blindly following Marxs philosophies. But those numbers have always been small because Marx sounds like he is a fanatical preacher. It is Marx's fanaticism that shows bright and clear when he would attack Capitalism and make predictions about how it affects society. Of course you could deny all that but Marx wrote too much for anyone to take you serious.

The Communist Manifesto was a political pamphlet ...

Kapital vl 1, 2 and 3 are the actual theory of Marxism.
 
“Most people who read "The Communist Manifesto" probably have no idea that it was written by a couple of young men who had never worked a day in their lives, and who nevertheless spoke boldly in the name of "the workers".”
T. Sowell
 
What was he wrong about? Have you read the OP?
RG, I get it. You want for Obama to be "right" so you want Marx to be right.

You need to change your thinking. Marx was wrong. Only socialists, Marxists, Progressives, (or, if you wish university professors not in the hard sciences) and Obamabots continue to believe. Oh and the young who fall for everything, of course.
 
RG, I get it. You want for Obama to be "right" so you want Marx to be right.

You need to change your thinking. Marx was wrong. Only socialists, Marxists, Progressives, (or, if you wish university professors not in the hard sciences) and Obamabots continue to believe. Oh and the young who fall for everything, of course.

I'm not a domocrat and I don't support Obama, never have.

I read Marx, I read Kapital 1,2 and 3, I studied it, and I've actually read what Marxists and non Marxists had to say about it.

YOU haven't.
 
I'm not a domocrat and I don't support Obama, never have.

I read Marx, I read Kapital 1,2 and 3, I studied it, and I've actually read what Marxists and non Marxists had to say about it.

YOU haven't.
Really? Tell me about Capital vol 3.

One has to really love Marx to read so much of his nonsense. Or one has to wonder, as I did, what all the fuss is about. The guy was a prolific kook. His drippings fill fifty volumes.

Be cautious. When you fill your mind with crap it cannot help but come back out...
 
Really? Tell me about Capital vol 3.

One has to really love Marx to read so much of his nonsense. Or one has to wonder, as I did, what all the fuss is about. The guy was a prolific kook. His drippings fill fifty volumes.

Be cautious. When you fill your mind with crap it cannot help but come back out...

Capital vol 3 was where he talked a lot about Finance Capital.

When you fill your mind with lots of information you can judge it honestly ... maybe you would be able to actaully critique marx properly if you actually read Kapital, or about Kapital from someone who knew it.
 
Capital vol 3 was where he talked a lot about Finance Capital.

When you fill your mind with lots of information you can judge it honestly ... maybe you would be able to actaully critique marx properly if you actually read Kapital, or about Kapital from someone who knew it.

Are you sure that you even read it? I mean the name of it is Capital: A Critique of Political Economy Yet you tried to tell me that it is "the actual theory of Marxism". Marxism isnt just Volumes 2 and 3 of Capital: A Critique of Political Economy And just about every Marxist would agree that the Communist Manifesto is a great deal of it. Also there are other writings that make up the body of Marxism. I find it funny that you are trying to discredit the Communist Manifesto as just a "political pamphlet" just to avoid what is written in it because it proved my point. I guess that is why you didnt respond to my last post huh?

But then we can look at Capital if thats what you want. And it says the something about the so called natural course of Capitalism, that it leads to a society where money is the only thing that matters if left unchecked. Or are you going to deny that? But if Capital is the theory of Marxism then we can conclude that Marxism is nothing more than a critique of Capitalism. And I tend to agree with that point of view since every Marxist that I have met is obsessed with critiquing Capitalism and nothing much more than that. But that is what Marx wrote about generally.
 
Last edited:
Why fill your head with foolishness?

Capital vol 3 was where he talked a lot about Finance Capital.

When you fill your mind with lots of information you can judge it honestly ... maybe you would be able to actaully critique marx properly if you actually read Kapital, or about Kapital from someone who knew it.
Marx was a fool. And Capital, all three volumes, were about capitalism.

Filling your mind with foolishness only helps when you recognize it for what it is. You are not alone. Today's Marxists tend to be the same kinds of people who have wished for him to be right in the past. For the most part they are the disaffected, the incapable and the wannabes who think they should have more to say about how to run the world and that they should get more than they got.
 
Re: Why fill your head with foolishness?

Marx was a fool. And Capital, all three volumes, were about capitalism.

Filling your mind with foolishness only helps when you recognize it for what it is. You are not alone. Today's Marxists tend to be the same kinds of people who have wished for him to be right in the past. For the most part they are the disaffected, the incapable and the wannabes who think they should have more to say about how to run the world and that they should get more than they got.

Beta males, dependents, people who can't compete. These are who find refuge in marxism.
 
Back
Top Bottom