View Poll Results: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

Voters
94. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    38 40.43%
  • No

    56 59.57%
Page 52 of 56 FirstFirst ... 2425051525354 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 520 of 555

Thread: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

  1. #511
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Well I own my home, and run a home business from this property.
    Well you are the worker. You own that means of production.

    WHy do Socialists insist on telling people like myself that they are not morally allowed to own private property?
    Because of the profit value. Why should a "owner" be the man who gets the profit. Why should he get the profit and live off the exploitation of labor? To be truly free the workers who make toil for a living should control that workplace instead of sending off a part of their labor to a "owner".

    Who died and made you guys the moral police?
    Never said I was the "moral police". Its an economic polciy, not a morality issue.
    So you see no necessary purpose for owning private property but I do, what gives you the right to dictate your opinions on me?
    Not dictating anything. Simply sharing my beliefs.

    Cant we just live in a diverse society where the people that want to own private property have that liberty and the people who dont want to own private property retain that liberty as well?
    Who hates liberty?


  2. #512
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Well you are the worker. You own that means of production.
    Down below you mention workers being truly free. That is my point whether is work form my home or not I just want to be free to live in my own home.


    Because of the profit value. Why should a "owner" be the man who gets the profit. Why should he get the profit and live off the exploitation of labor? To be truly free the workers who make toil for a living should control that workplace instead of sending off a part of their labor to a "owner".
    You avoided my question. But I will answer yours.

    A worker when they get a job to work for someone else they made a agreement. The agreement is that they will do some work for the employer for a agreed on compensation amount. It is up to the worker to refuse to work for someone that isnt paying what they demand for their work. Many jobs create ZERO product. They are a service. Now in America we can get our buddies together if we choose and provide a service, for example land scapeing. That works out good for you and your buddies. But guess what you have to give some of the earnings for the work that you did to your buddies. You all are going to share expenses gas and what not. But if you and your buddies cannot get any jobs lined up you wont make any profits. So one of you or perhaps all of you work together to get more work to do. That is additional labor on the individual or the group. But it may take away valuable time from the actual land scapeing that you guys do. A solution is to hire someone to do the book keeping and marketing for you especially if you have no clue how to do that.

    We cant all be book keepers or any of the other long list of job descriptions that are available in the work force. Some people like to migrate around a country. They have a set of skills that they are willing to market for work. There is ZERO wrong with willing working for someone else and being paid what you two agreed on.

    So I fail to see that in all cases that exploitation is a concern, or that being a worker is immoral. Changing it form a single employer to a co-op is only moving the goal posts the same potential problems are persistent in both case. Both require some form of regulation for it to work. After all a co-op could be a co-op of assholes.



    Never said I was the "moral police". Its an economic polciy, not a morality issue.
    You can deny being the moral police but when you assert that it is morally wrong to own private property because it is a form of exploitation then you are passing a moral judgement. And whats more the assumption that Socialist make is that owning private property is unfair to other citizens and that the owner should be penalized for such transgressions. How dare someone think that they can own private property and **** on everyone else? It is a moral issue for Socialists.

    Not dictating anything. Simply sharing my beliefs.
    No not now are you dictating anything, that is very obvious. But given the chance what then? Say that your beliefs became our reality, where you cant hide behind it being just a belief of your?


    Who hates liberty?
    Plenty people do, though they rationalize it away saying to themselves that its for the good of society. That is how prohibitions become laws. Or how theocracies get started. Socialists, tea party Libertarians rationalize that their beliefs are righteous and that everyone should be compelled to jump on the bandwagon. The nay sayers will see and will agree given the chance to live in such a society.

    The beauty of diversity is that we come together and teach each other the best of our beliefs. The beliefs that harm or otherwise make others uncomfortable are swept to the side. Isnt that what drives Democratic Socialism? Why not be open to other good things from other people? We all have ideas, some good and some bad. A community serves the purpose of weeding out the bad ideas. This board that we are speaking on serves this purpose for myself. I am exposed to many ideas and I share my own ideas that I learn through conversation sometimes, that some are bad ideas. I learn and move on. But whatever'ists seem to never learn and just keep moving on with the bad ideas, never learning a thing. My ideology is no ideology.

  3. #513
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    1. I will not be bound by silly restraints especially when it is still on topic.

    2. I will say what I want about Marx dont get all but hurt over it.

    3. Unfettered is the same as unregulated.


    unregulated (ʌnˈrɛɡjʊˌleɪtɪd)

    — adj
    not regulated; uncontrolled
    ----------------------------
    un·fet·ter [uhn-fet-er]
    verb (used with object)
    1. to release from fetters.
    2. to free from restraint; liberate.


    See its the same concept. When you free something from restraint it is unregulated.

    4. Well has unregulated Capitalism ever actually existed in its true form? His so called analysis of Capitalism is synonymous with observing that unregulated school children on the playground will be troublesome. Duh of course if the markets are not regulated then greedy bastards will screw us all over. One doesnt need to write a book to come to that conclusion.

    5. The events that i stated happened before he was born and before he was a adult, Germany was not a so called third world country, its people were able to obtain information from the US freely. Besides the fact that those things that I listed were not going on just in the US. Its basic economic history FFS. WHich was readily available to Marx throughout his life.

    6.Settle down there, I can not like Marx if I like. I dont care if you like the dead man or not. And yes I have indeed read Das Kapital just because I dont have the same analysis of it as you do doesnt mean that I havent read it.

    The full name is Capital: Critique of Political Economy.
    1. THe topic is "Was Karl Marx right about Capitalism" not "was Karl Marx right about everything."

    2. You can say all you want about Your psycho analyzing of Marx, but none of it is relevant.

    3. My point in brining that out was to show, that you haven't read Kapital, and are thus speaking out of ignorance (which is obvious).

    4. Analyzing unregulated School children will tell you more about the nature of children than studying regulated children .... that was Marx's point, to study the NATURE of Capitalism.

    5. Ok ....

    6. No one, NO ONE cares whether or not you or I like Marx as a person.

    If you have read Kapital, and don't agree With it, why can't you offer ONE just ONE critique of it that is actually an economic critique and not an ad homimen .... I mean it's pathetic that after all these posts you haven't offered one.

  4. #514
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    1. THe topic is "Was Karl Marx right about Capitalism" not "was Karl Marx right about everything."

    2. You can say all you want about Your psycho analyzing of Marx, but none of it is relevant.

    3. My point in brining that out was to show, that you haven't read Kapital, and are thus speaking out of ignorance (which is obvious).

    4. Analyzing unregulated School children will tell you more about the nature of children than studying regulated children .... that was Marx's point, to study the NATURE of Capitalism.

    5. Ok ....

    6. No one, NO ONE cares whether or not you or I like Marx as a person.

    If you have read Kapital, and don't agree With it, why can't you offer ONE just ONE critique of it that is actually an economic critique and not an ad homimen .... I mean it's pathetic that after all these posts you haven't offered one.
    Sigh... Its just amazing to watch you do that. Since you do that over and over again (no matter the subject or who you are talking too) I suspect that you believe that actually works in a debate.

    Hint: If I or anyone for that matter says anything that you disagree with you dont actually need to make a comment about it. And if you feel something is off topic FFS ignore it.

    And for the record I have been addressing Marx's Capital: Critique of Political Economy. You just dont agree with my assertions. So therefor out comes the silliness and accusations aimed at me personally. And quit misusing ad hominem if you dont understand what it means dont use it. I can call Marx every name in the book in a debate UNLESS I was in a debate with him but hes dead so that isnt going to ever happen. What I cannot do is call you names or any other poster. You also might want to ****ing learn wth critique means while you are at it.

    Here is the problem (Im repeating myself here so if you want to spend this thinking of a new way to insult me that might be more fun for you) is that Das Kapital goes in great detail about the pitfalls of a system that doesnt exist in the real world. Marx builds a strawman then unleashes his bull**** on it in typical fanatical Marx style. Then SOcialists all around the world point to Das Kapital and try to relate it to the real world and because of that huge bias they indeed find things that appear to them because of their great bias that hit home for them. ANd lowe and behold to them Marx is right!. But of course Marx is dead correct on certain things but they are things that any da,mn fool could have seen during his time.


    ANd if you read this far: Surplus value is a crock of ****. The assumption that Marx makes is that all employers are magically compelled to be greedy assholes because they cant help it because of Capitalism, dictates that all people within a Capitalist system are 7 years olds with tiny reactionary brains. But really not everyone is ****ing greedy making Marxs unproven assertion a crock of ****. If everyone isnt mindless and greedy then Marx's assertions become silly and pointless. Das Kapital goes further than just analyzing unregulated Capitalism it counts on there being just unregulated Capitalism because he needed it to make Socialism look like it was the rational solution. That is why Das Kapital is a CRITIQUE and not science. Its propaganda aimed at pointing the reader towards Socialism and away from Capitalism.

  5. #515
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Sigh... Its just amazing to watch you do that. Since you do that over and over again (no matter the subject or who you are talking too) I suspect that you believe that actually works in a debate.

    Hint: If I or anyone for that matter says anything that you disagree with you dont actually need to make a comment about it. And if you feel something is off topic FFS ignore it.

    And for the record I have been addressing Marx's Capital: Critique of Political Economy. You just dont agree with my assertions. So therefor out comes the silliness and accusations aimed at me personally. And quit misusing ad hominem if you dont understand what it means dont use it. I can call Marx every name in the book in a debate UNLESS I was in a debate with him but hes dead so that isnt going to ever happen. What I cannot do is call you names or any other poster. You also might want to ****ing learn wth critique means while you are at it.

    Here is the problem (Im repeating myself here so if you want to spend this thinking of a new way to insult me that might be more fun for you) is that Das Kapital goes in great detail about the pitfalls of a system that doesnt exist in the real world. Marx builds a strawman then unleashes his bull**** on it in typical fanatical Marx style. Then SOcialists all around the world point to Das Kapital and try to relate it to the real world and because of that huge bias they indeed find things that appear to them because of their great bias that hit home for them. ANd lowe and behold to them Marx is right!. But of course Marx is dead correct on certain things but they are things that any da,mn fool could have seen during his time.


    ANd if you read this far: Surplus value is a crock of ****. The assumption that Marx makes is that all employers are magically compelled to be greedy assholes because they cant help it because of Capitalism, dictates that all people within a Capitalist system are 7 years olds with tiny reactionary brains. But really not everyone is ****ing greedy making Marxs unproven assertion a crock of ****. If everyone isnt mindless and greedy then Marx's assertions become silly and pointless. Das Kapital goes further than just analyzing unregulated Capitalism it counts on there being just unregulated Capitalism because he needed it to make Socialism look like it was the rational solution. That is why Das Kapital is a CRITIQUE and not science. Its propaganda aimed at pointing the reader towards Socialism and away from Capitalism.

    You didn't actually adress Marx's Capital, you made adhominen attacks on what you think his motivation was .... trying to psycho analyse him.

    Why not actually dea With the actual economics in Marx's Capital.

    The ONLY point you made was that there are no unfettered markets in reality, which isn't really a good argument because that's how economic analysis Works, you have to assume a framework, and he assumed the classical economic framework, i.e. what libertarians look toward (even the gold standard, which was the standard then).

    Think about it, when you study human behavior, you study it under certain conditions and then apply it to the real world, and Your analysis can be verified or disverified by certain trends .... this is SIMPLY how economics Works, that's what economic theory is.

    Surplus value theory isn't saying that anyone is a greedy asshole, it isn't making ANY judgement on personality (obviously you haven't studied Capital at all), it's saying that of the value produced a certain amount of it goes to the owners of the Capital, not for the value they produced, but simply because they are the owners of Capital, i.e. The owners of Capital recieve the surplus.

    It has NOTHING to do With anyone being greedy or whatever, that is psychology, not economics, Kapital is about economics not psychology. ....

  6. #516
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:24 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,217

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    You didn't actually adress Marx's Capital, you made adhominen attacks on what you think his motivation was .... trying to psycho analyse him.

    Why not actually dea With the actual economics in Marx's Capital.

    The ONLY point you made was that there are no unfettered markets in reality, which isn't really a good argument because that's how economic analysis Works, you have to assume a framework, and he assumed the classical economic framework, i.e. what libertarians look toward (even the gold standard, which was the standard then).

    Think about it, when you study human behavior, you study it under certain conditions and then apply it to the real world, and Your analysis can be verified or disverified by certain trends .... this is SIMPLY how economics Works, that's what economic theory is.

    Surplus value theory isn't saying that anyone is a greedy asshole, it isn't making ANY judgement on personality (obviously you haven't studied Capital at all), it's saying that of the value produced a certain amount of it goes to the owners of the Capital, not for the value they produced, but simply because they are the owners of Capital, i.e. The owners of Capital recieve the surplus.

    It has NOTHING to do With anyone being greedy or whatever, that is psychology, not economics, Kapital is about economics not psychology. ....
    I always feel that people are pulling my leg, when they say I should deal with Marx's economics. I did the books and must say, that it is pretty drab stuff. I understand why he had a problem being simple as he does not use math. But he goes in all which ways and you might want to specify the precise piece of theoretical prophesy you refer to.

  7. #517
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    You didn't actually adress Marx's Capital, you made adhominen attacks on what you think his motivation was .... trying to psycho analyse him.

    Why not actually dea With the actual economics in Marx's Capital.

    The ONLY point you made was that there are no unfettered markets in reality, which isn't really a good argument because that's how economic analysis Works, you have to assume a framework, and he assumed the classical economic framework, i.e. what libertarians look toward (even the gold standard, which was the standard then).

    Think about it, when you study human behavior, you study it under certain conditions and then apply it to the real world, and Your analysis can be verified or disverified by certain trends .... this is SIMPLY how economics Works, that's what economic theory is.

    Surplus value theory isn't saying that anyone is a greedy asshole, it isn't making ANY judgement on personality (obviously you haven't studied Capital at all), it's saying that of the value produced a certain amount of it goes to the owners of the Capital, not for the value they produced, but simply because they are the owners of Capital, i.e. The owners of Capital recieve the surplus.

    It has NOTHING to do With anyone being greedy or whatever, that is psychology, not economics, Kapital is about economics not psychology. ....
    Quit telling me what I have or have not done.

    When you study human behavior that is related to psychology. Right? So then psychology is a factor in Marx's Das Kapital actually a huge factor.

    Surplus value is the social product which is over and above what is required for the producers to live. Marx was referring to Classism. In Das Kapital Marx mostly talks about surplus value. Marx explained that in a Capitalist society of wage earners that those worker were a commodity for those greedy bastards at the top. He asserts that workers become nothing more than capital to be traded and profited on. Damn those greedy bastards all workers should rise up against their oppressors viva the Revolution!.

    Come on dont act as if we are stupid enough not to notice such simplistic overtones of the Communist Manifesto in Das Kapital. Das Kapital is a psychological tool to reach a goal. Das kapital only makes sense if you gulp down the kool aid that Marx was pedaling. Most good Socialists will worship Das Kapital to the grave never actually addressing that stark and obvious underpinnings of psychological manipulations that are trademark Marxism. To the Marxist they are correct and everyone else didnt actually read Das kapital, those non believers are the fools that keep the greedy bastards at the top and their lords. The main theme is always for the workers to rise up against their oppressors. I just cant get past that part and its the point of Das Kapital, and it being a main theme for Das Kapital puts that theme on the table of this debate on whether Marx was right or not about Capitalism. Marx like most people like him that want massive political changes to happens exploit the general populations want of a better life. Das Kapital is a continuation of the Communist Manifesto and the exploitation of the common man to to do the bidding of a madman that hated the culture in which he lived. We all want a better life, but we dont need to become Marxists to do that. There are ALWAYS options and never only a single way of doing something when it comes to politics.


    SO no you cannot bury my head in the sand and pretend that I wont choke on it. Surplus value is what Das Kapital is all about. Everything else in Das Kapital was to support surplus value to convince the reader that Marx's assertions were valid about surplus value. Once he was able to convince the reader that as a worker they are being treated like Capital and as slaves then Marx's goal was achieved. It is very intellectually dishonest to manipulate people in such a manner and very insulting. Just as insulting as what he was saying about employers exploiting the workers. A intelligent reader might walk away from Das Kapital being pissed at employers and Marx for their exploitation of the common man. A honest man writing on economic theory would leave the emotional assertions to the side and only state the facts in true methods of science. But Marx never was good at numbers now was he?

    So while you are disquieted at me psycho analyzing Marx you want me to ignore Marx's psycho analyzing of society? Why does Marx get to have all the fun?
    Last edited by FreedomFromAll; 07-11-14 at 03:16 PM.

  8. #518
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Down below you mention workers being truly free. That is my point whether is work form my home or not I just want to be free to live in my own home.


    You avoided my question. But I will answer yours.

    A worker when they get a job to work for someone else they made a agreement. The agreement is that they will do some work for the employer for a agreed on compensation amount. It is up to the worker to refuse to work for someone that isnt paying what they demand for their work. Many jobs create ZERO product. They are a service. Now in America we can get our buddies together if we choose and provide a service, for example land scapeing. That works out good for you and your buddies. But guess what you have to give some of the earnings for the work that you did to your buddies. You all are going to share expenses gas and what not. But if you and your buddies cannot get any jobs lined up you wont make any profits. So one of you or perhaps all of you work together to get more work to do. That is additional labor on the individual or the group. But it may take away valuable time from the actual land scapeing that you guys do. A solution is to hire someone to do the book keeping and marketing for you especially if you have no clue how to do that.

    We cant all be book keepers or any of the other long list of job descriptions that are available in the work force. Some people like to migrate around a country. They have a set of skills that they are willing to market for work. There is ZERO wrong with willing working for someone else and being paid what you two agreed on.

    So I fail to see that in all cases that exploitation is a concern, or that being a worker is immoral. Changing it form a single employer to a co-op is only moving the goal posts the same potential problems are persistent in both case. Both require some form of regulation for it to work. After all a co-op could be a co-op of assholes.



    You can deny being the moral police but when you assert that it is morally wrong to own private property because it is a form of exploitation then you are passing a moral judgement. And whats more the assumption that Socialist make is that owning private property is unfair to other citizens and that the owner should be penalized for such transgressions. How dare someone think that they can own private property and **** on everyone else? It is a moral issue for Socialists.

    No not now are you dictating anything, that is very obvious. But given the chance what then? Say that your beliefs became our reality, where you cant hide behind it being just a belief of your?


    Plenty people do, though they rationalize it away saying to themselves that its for the good of society. That is how prohibitions become laws. Or how theocracies get started. Socialists, tea party Libertarians rationalize that their beliefs are righteous and that everyone should be compelled to jump on the bandwagon. The nay sayers will see and will agree given the chance to live in such a society.

    The beauty of diversity is that we come together and teach each other the best of our beliefs. The beliefs that harm or otherwise make others uncomfortable are swept to the side. Isnt that what drives Democratic Socialism? Why not be open to other good things from other people? We all have ideas, some good and some bad. A community serves the purpose of weeding out the bad ideas. This board that we are speaking on serves this purpose for myself. I am exposed to many ideas and I share my own ideas that I learn through conversation sometimes, that some are bad ideas. I learn and move on. But whatever'ists seem to never learn and just keep moving on with the bad ideas, never learning a thing. My ideology is no ideology.

    Global Relief Foundation


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsbfOxUx8ZA




    Global Relief Foundation


  9. #519
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,039

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Global Relief Foundation


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsbfOxUx8ZA




    Global Relief Foundation
    Ok I watched it and I am wondering why you linked it?

    Right away there some big red flags in this video that must sound great to Socialists but to the rest of us we are going to cry foul. The biggest is when Richard Wolff goes on about democracy. He is obviously preaching to the choir at this point because many Americans with any knowledge of our Constitution would have spoke out from the crowd at that point. Wolff is dangling a carrot in front of Americans making a point to exploit people in the need of jobs. Come to our side we have jobs! self-directed enterprises would require a magic trick in order to make it work. See not everyone cares enough about their job to invest themselves in it. And then the kicker that made me scratch my head, Italy as a good example. lol, Then there was the in eloquent pooh reaction to Capitalism. This guy must have drank his own kool aid it will be a cold day on the Sun when Republicans go along with such bias. Wolff's existed yet condescending method of delivering his speech/rant leaves a foul taste in the listeners mouth. It is a direct example of what I pointed out about Marx and his manipulation of the common people in order to exact a certain type of ideology that looks down on everyone who disagrees with their authoritative style of getting a message across, that is simply our way or the highway for you immoral Capitalists.


    Perhaps WOlff did not sound that way to you (or perhaps he did?) but for the non believers we see right through his utopia crap. And BTW I own my own business because I was tired of dealing with the idiots I worked with. The last thing that I would ever do is depend on their voted in a business ran by us all. Wolff never even mentions the fact that most workers are not educated at ALL in how to run the many aspects of a business their votes would probably go with any propaganda that they were fed by their unions. Yes those idiots at work that spend their free time drinking beer and watching Duck Dynasty or some other rot mind reality show will be great business partners. I wonder what Wolff thinks should be done about the people that would exploit such a system,? I bet it didnt even cross his mind. And what about the businesses that fail who is going to prop them up after a disaster? There are countless other questions but for people like I mentioned above who have never ran a business of their own or have some training they have no clue and would believe this Wolff guy and take him at his word. Its sad really.

  10. #520
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Was Karl Marx Right About Capitalism?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Quit telling me what I have or have not done.

    When you study human behavior that is related to psychology. Right? So then psychology is a factor in Marx's Das Kapital actually a huge factor.

    Surplus value is the social product which is over and above what is required for the producers to live. Marx was referring to Classism. In Das Kapital Marx mostly talks about surplus value. Marx explained that in a Capitalist society of wage earners that those worker were a commodity for those greedy bastards at the top. He asserts that workers become nothing more than capital to be traded and profited on. Damn those greedy bastards all workers should rise up against their oppressors viva the Revolution!.

    Come on dont act as if we are stupid enough not to notice such simplistic overtones of the Communist Manifesto in Das Kapital. Das Kapital is a psychological tool to reach a goal. Das kapital only makes sense if you gulp down the kool aid that Marx was pedaling. Most good Socialists will worship Das Kapital to the grave never actually addressing that stark and obvious underpinnings of psychological manipulations that are trademark Marxism. To the Marxist they are correct and everyone else didnt actually read Das kapital, those non believers are the fools that keep the greedy bastards at the top and their lords. The main theme is always for the workers to rise up against their oppressors. I just cant get past that part and its the point of Das Kapital, and it being a main theme for Das Kapital puts that theme on the table of this debate on whether Marx was right or not about Capitalism. Marx like most people like him that want massive political changes to happens exploit the general populations want of a better life. Das Kapital is a continuation of the Communist Manifesto and the exploitation of the common man to to do the bidding of a madman that hated the culture in which he lived. We all want a better life, but we dont need to become Marxists to do that. There are ALWAYS options and never only a single way of doing something when it comes to politics.


    SO no you cannot bury my head in the sand and pretend that I wont choke on it. Surplus value is what Das Kapital is all about. Everything else in Das Kapital was to support surplus value to convince the reader that Marx's assertions were valid about surplus value. Once he was able to convince the reader that as a worker they are being treated like Capital and as slaves then Marx's goal was achieved. It is very intellectually dishonest to manipulate people in such a manner and very insulting. Just as insulting as what he was saying about employers exploiting the workers. A intelligent reader might walk away from Das Kapital being pissed at employers and Marx for their exploitation of the common man. A honest man writing on economic theory would leave the emotional assertions to the side and only state the facts in true methods of science. But Marx never was good at numbers now was he?

    So while you are disquieted at me psycho analyzing Marx you want me to ignore Marx's psycho analyzing of society? Why does Marx get to have all the fun?
    Yes, but you arn't examining Marx's psychological assumptions or claims in Kapital, you're trying to psycho analyze Marx himself, which is the definition of an Ad Hominem attack.

    Marx talks about many Things in Capital (it's 3 volumes).

    Capital doesn't Call anyone greedy bastards ... and yes labor IS treated as a commodity that is traded, and yes, surplus value is taken and Distributed by the Capitalist, how is that not true?

    Surplus value is basically synonymously used with profit, do you claim that profit doesn't exist?

    I mean common, so far you haven't shown ANYTHING in Kapital that you can show is false?

Page 52 of 56 FirstFirst ... 2425051525354 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •