[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon


File: 1686449203950.png (1.92 MB, 2000x1120, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.14131[Last 50 Posts]

the way i explain the labor to people is very simple. I cut straight to the chase.

I say these things, usually not all at once. I let people chew on each one:

> 1 If you’re a boss, and you own a business, you have to pay the worker less than their work is worth.

> 2 If you pay them exactly what their work is worth, you don’t make any money, your business won’t grow, and you’ll get bought out by some asshole who pays workers less.
> 3 If you pay a worker more than their work is worth, you’re losing money, your business will shrink, and you’ll go out of business.
> 4 the problem is the system, because the way the system is set up, workers have to beg for a job from people who own the places we work at, and the bosses only give the job to the lowest bidder, the people willing to do the most in exchange for the least in return.
> 5 everybody who can't get a job has to keep looking for a job until they get so desperate they start selling themselves for less and less
> 6 even with how little they pay us they think it's too much. so they constantly look for ways to make more money and pay less money.
> 7 they send our jobs overseas to where the labor is cheaper, and they want us to blame the people overseas even though they're the ones sending the jobs off and calling themselves job creators while they do it
> 8 they hire a bunch of overeducated nerds to make machines and programs to do our jobs for us, so they can fire us, and then they take credit for what those nerds make
> 9 they give the jobs to people who just got here and are usually running away from some fucked up shit like war and are therefore more desperate than even the average schmuck here is
> 10 despite all this shit they do to get rid of us or make us work for less money, they still need to sell the stuff they make, and if everyone's too poor to buy that shit, then they gotta lower the price
> 11 the faster they make stuff, the cheaper that stuff is because less work goes into makin it, and money is just a piece of paper that says some work got done

"oh but this is stuff marx says!"
yeah but he says it real fancy and takes a long time. keep it simple stupid.

 No.14132

Dude communism to the worker is Patrick to his own wallet

 No.14133

>>14132
pull your head out of your ass and keep it simple

 No.14134

based.

 No.14135

Fucking cringe. German workers read the first edition of Capital voraciously. They might not have a lot of free time but proles aren't illiterate folksy morons.

 No.14136

>>14135
>German workers read the first edition of Capital voraciously
yeah because

1) Marx was German and he didn't need to get translated
2) the red scare isn't as strong in germany as it is in other countries since the German people were literally liberated by communists from the nazis
3) the GDR existed and made reading marx a mandatory part of the education system

It's not about poor people being "folksy" and "illiterate" it's about them being so exploited that they don't have much free time, and deliberately deprived of a marxist education by the bourgeoisie. Illiteracy is a systemic problem anyway, not a problem inherent to workers. Illiteracy is on the rise in the US and child labor has returned. This isn't because workers are getting dumber, but because the bourgeoisie are getting more ruthless.

 No.14137

>>14135
> proles aren't illiterate folksy morons.
shit nobody said. you're honestly telling on yourself. brevity is the soul of wit.

 No.14138

>>14135
>be german
>go to work at a freudenberg factory
>hour long break for lunch but only spend 5 minutes eating and drinking
>back to work
>go home
>read kapital, a book about work
>stop after an hour or two, the words are deeply hypnotic but you must continue your routine
>boot up pc
>farming simulator, train simulator, pilot simulator
>computer needs to update windows, hop off and go to bed
>go to sleep
>dreams about working in a tourist resort
>dream turns into a nightmare because the boss tells you that you need to spend your yearly accumulated vacation time before the government inspects their branch for labor rights violations
>wake up in a cold sweat, frightened and confused about whether the government would ever actually do that

 No.14139

File: 1686452434386.png (959.26 KB, 1208x1444, marx5.png)

Volume One: How Capitalism Works
Capitalists buy things (means of production) so they can make more stuff (commodities). They want to sell those commodities for profit (surplus value), but workers only have so much time each day to work on them. So capitalists compete to pay workers as little as possible for their labor power (wage) while still making good profits from sales. Some bosses exploit workers, leading to unequal wealth distribution (class struggle). Social democrats try to reform this system to help workers, but ultimately communism seeks a world where we own stuff together instead of individuals controlling everything for private gain.

Volume Two: What Capital Does to Workers
Workers produce lots of goods, which create surpluses (more than anyone needs), so competition among capitalists drives prices down. To stay afloat, capitalists invest in new machinery that makes individual workers redundant (obsolete). Unemployment rises, and those without jobs fight over remaining scraps of work, driving wages even lower for everyone. Overproduction creates periodic crises that disrupt societies globally, because there's simply not enough demand to keep buying all these products. Only by owning our means of production collectively can we overcome this cycle of boom and bust.

Volume Three: A Society Without Classes
In a truly communist society, nobody would "appropriate the product of another man's labor" because no one would control any particular means of production to lord over others. Instead, "labor itself becomes merely a manifestation of life," freeing humanity from the alienating effects of class antagonisms like greed and oppression. This future world will arise out of current struggles against capitalism by proletarians who recognize their shared interests across nations and cultures, uniting humanity through solidarity until we achieve true freedom and equality. Marx closes his book emphasizing how important international worker unity is if we hope to succeed in overthrowing global plutocracy

 No.14140

>>14136
I'm talking about the first edition of Capital, published in 1867
>>14137
It's implied in the OP pic and text

 No.14141

>>14135
>noooooooooooooo you can't just compress and simplify complex works of nonfiction through casual speech, you have to make a big show of reading in order to look smart

 No.14142

File: 1686452653603.mp4 (307.85 KB, 480x480, shut up bitch.mp4)

>>14140
>It's implied
no it ain't. quit lookin for shit that ain't there. pull your head out of your ass.

 No.14143

>>14141
You can't make a big show of reading, which is something that you can do on your own. You can, however, make a big show of patronizing to workers who you think can't comprehend anything that isn't a picture book or a TikTok video.

 No.14144

>>14135
and yet tiktok is the most popular social media platform

 No.14145

>>14140
>I'm talking about the first edition of Capital, published in 1867

god this reeks of insecurity. like you're afraid porky's watching and he's gonna think you're dumb if you don't insist the average german facotry worker immediately went out and bought a copy of capital the moment it was released and immediately read the whole thing with zero trouble while doing one handed pushups in their free time.

prove to me with even a single source that the first edition of capital published in 1867 was "voraciously" read by a majority of workers in germany the second it hit shelves, as you are suggesting. the manifesto was a pamphlet for workers. Capital was a theoretical work of political economy. yes obviously many workers read it, and many were and are capable of understanding it, something nobody has tried to deny but which you insist on making the conversation about.

 No.14146

>>14144
Read Marx is useless, I'd rather listen to the most directionless 20-something ever on TikTok tell me that capitalism and imperialism exist like it's the most mindblowing, esoteric information ever

 No.14147

>>14143
>You can, however, make a big show of patronizing to workers who you think can't comprehend anything
i can, but i'm not. however you want to pretend that is the case. you seem heavily invested in that perception for some reason and don't want to let it go even after i've disavowed that idea several times. I THINK WORKERS CAN READ CAPITAL VOLUME 1, 2, and 3, OK? THE REAL QUESTION IS, CAN YOU READ THIS POST?

 No.14148

>>14145
>like you're afraid porky's watching and he's gonna think you're dumb if you don't insist the average german facotry worker immediately went out and bought a copy of capital the moment it was released and immediately read the whole thing with zero trouble while doing one handed pushups in their free time.
I love how you assume this elaborate fantasy, and yet attack me for reading how you think things need to be kept "simple" for the workers instead of "fancy"

 No.14149

>>14148
fancy wastes time, simple don't. it's about not wasting people's time, not treating them like they're dumb.

 No.14150

>>14145
>the average german facotry worker immediately went out and bought a copy of capital the moment it was released and immediately read the whole thing with zero trouble while doing one handed pushups in their free time.
nta but that does sound like a stereotypical German factory worker
Interestingly the Weimar German navy was full of communists because of that factory tech connection with ship building

 No.14151

Also you get a bunch of shit wrong in your explanation
Half of it is just dumb received wisdom that you could hear someone whining about half the time, too
Woah, outsourcing and automation exists and capitalists like to cut costs, wtf I didn't know this, as if people don't complain about it all the time

 No.14152

>>14151
>Also you get a bunch of shit wrong in your explanation
like what

 No.14153

>>14151
>Half of it is just dumb received wisdom that you could hear someone whining about half the time, too
now look who's patronizing to workers

 No.14154

>>14151
>Woah, outsourcing and automation exists and capitalists like to cut costs, wtf I didn't know this, as if people don't complain about it all the time
marx writes a lot about automation. is it not worth to distill that into some common talking points?

 No.14155

>>14145
>prove to me with even a single source that the first edition of capital published in 1867 was "voraciously" read by a majority of workers in germany the second it hit shelves, as you are suggesting. the manifesto was a pamphlet for workers. Capital was a theoretical work of political economy. yes obviously many workers read it, and many were and are capable of understanding it, something nobody has tried to deny but which you insist on making the conversation about.

honestly this. it's the most cited work of nonfiction work of social science published before 1860, but that's in academia. it doesn't mean it was a widely purchased or read book. You can be a communist without reading it, too. Being broadly sympathetic with the aims of communism without having read all 3 volumes of capital is incredibly common all over the world. workers aren't stupid. that's why they don't need to read capital to intuitively know what marx is talking about through their own lived experience. i think some anons over-emphasize reading because reading is how they were introduced through communism, instead of through working. they confuse the idea that most people haven't read something means they can't read. But illiteracy like the other anon said is a systemic issue anyway, not a sign of low intelligence. and even if a worker is low intelligence, why exclude them from the movement? Low intelligence isn't that important. People with low intelligence shouldn't be exploited either. Someone with a learning disorder, or autism, or brain damage, or dyslexia, etc can be a communist.

 No.14156

>>14152
Points 1 thru 11 are all wrong. Read capital and you'll know why.

 No.14157

>>14145
>prove to me with even a single source that the first edition of capital published in 1867 was "voraciously" read by a majority of workers in germany the second it hit shelves
it just was. it's common knowledge. like literally just ask any german.

 No.14158

>>14149
The fact that you think people just cannot read these texts means you inherently think they're dumb

 No.14159

Unequivocally based, so many lefties use incomprehensible language when the target audience is supposed to be an uneducated and exploited worker

 No.14160

>>14131
lol i read the title and already knew there were going to be comments complaining for little to no reason. anyway, good post op, wish more people had this mindset.

 No.14161

>>14145
>>14155
>>14157
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p3.htm
>The appreciation which Das Kapital rapidly gained in wide circles of the German working class is the best reward of my labours. Herr Mayer, a Vienna manufacturer, who in economic matters represents the bourgeois point of view, in a pamphlet published during the Franco-German War aptly expounded the idea that the great capacity for theory, which used to be considered a hereditary German possession, had almost completely disappeared amongst the so-called educated classes in Germany, but that amongst its working class, on the contrary, that capacity was celebrating its revival.
..
>The learned and unlearned spokesmen of the German bourgeoisie tried at first to kill Das Kapital by silence, as they had managed to do with my earlier writings. As soon as they found that these tactics no longer fitted in with the conditions of the time, they wrote, under pretence of criticising my book, prescriptions “for the tranquillisation of the bourgeois mind.” But they found in the workers’ press — see, e.g., Joseph Dietzgen’s articles in the Volksstaat — antagonists stronger than themselves, to whom (down to this very day) they owe a reply.
The bourgeoisie and academia ignored Capital, at best writing a few dismissive reviews

 No.14162

>>14161
The Volkstaat was "the central organ of the German Social Democratic Workers Party", the most popular political party of the working class in Germany at the time
>The party press was a vital element of the SDAP's political strategy. The party's newspaper was first called Demokratisches Wochenblatt (Democratic Weekly Paper) and later Der Volksstaat (The People's State) and was edited by Liebknecht. The paper was published in Leipzig from 2 October 1869 to 23 September 1876. The party did not yet have its own printers, but Liebknecht was ambitious in his efforts to promote its publications on a wide scale as educational tools for workers. Although most issues of Der Volksstaat were primarily composed of incendiary writing about the German political situation, Liebknecht attempted as much as possible to include essays on political theory, transcripts of academic lectures and even some popular fiction.

 No.14163

>>14159
treating the working class like unthinking drooling retards is so based comrade

 No.14164

File: 1686458344000.png (109.22 KB, 801x439, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14161
Germans apparently had an unusually high literacy rate for the time, and this could have contributed to their radicalization. I think it is important not to discount the importance of literacy as a systemic issue rather than simply a reflection of whether workers are "smart" or "dumb." In Afghanistan today, the literacy rate is only 38%. This isn't because Afghan workers are "dumb."

And OP's point is that you should distill points for brevity, not because people are stupid.

>>14163
>treating the working class like unthinking drooling retards
Again, nobody has said this. This is an assumption people are walking into the thread with.

1. Drooling retards are people too, and deserve to not be exploited by the ruling class. only nazis think otherwise.

2. nobody said the working class is drooling retards, what is rather being suggested is that they don't have very much free time and are overworked and underpaid, and instead of telling them to read a 19th century german manuscript that is several hundred pages it might be more useful to distill those ideas into casual conversation that can be had between workers in the work place.

 No.14165

good post

 No.14166

This doesn't explain why demanding higher wages makes a difference. When people demand higher wages prices go up anyways, so what's the point?

 No.14167

>>14163
Where did I say this? People who work for a living can't understand Deleuze as easily as someone who sits on his ass all day reading theory and arguing about it over and over. I certainly can't.

 No.14168

File: 1686458588262.gif (875.78 KB, 220x164, walltalk.gif)

>>14158
>The fact that you think people just cannot read these texts means you inherently think they're dumb
wrong. I think people who work 40 hours a week, go to school (for things besides Marxism) and have children at home don't have time or energy doesn't mean I think they're dumb. You think "dumb" is the only possible explanation for why someone wouldn't read something. And you keep ignoring that i have said several times already that illiteracy is a systemic problem not an individual failing. And even if they were dumb (they aren't). So what? Being dumb shouldn't be a death sentence. Obviously some people have mental disabilities, learning disabilities, etc. but I'm not suggesting most workers do.

 No.14169

>>14164
The US has 80% estimated literacy, and that's low as far western countries go
Also teaching yourself to read and write is a thing
Also this is a different goalpost from "workers can't read because they're so busy working"

 No.14170

>>14167
Workers can definitely read Das Kapital
I have
Also sometimes I put it on as an audio book when I put the lights out and go to bed

 No.14171

>>14169
>Also this is a different goalpost from "workers can't read because they're so busy working"
it's not a "goalpost". i keep getting accused of saying workers are dumb, and I'm saying that there's other systemic issues at play other than mental abilities. obviously phenomena can have several explanations. it doesn't have to just be one.

 No.14172

>>14170
I'm happy for you.

 No.14173

>>14166
>When people demand higher wages prices go up anyways, so what's the point?
to seize the means of production

 No.14174

>>14171
It's okay to admit you don't want to read Capital for political reasons and want to stick with vulgar economy. You don't need to project.

 No.14175

>>14164
> Drooling retards are people too
I like how you deny that you think the working class is dumb and almost immediately call them dumb
> what is rather being suggested is that they don't have very much free time and are overworked and underpaid, and instead of telling them to read a 19th century german manuscript that is several hundred pages it might be more useful to distill those ideas into casual conversation that can be had between workers in the work place.
Thinking that theory should be dumbed down makes that theory redundant. Also texts like the communist manifesto are not hard to read at all. In marxs time his writings were popular with the masses as the other anon points out. Generally working class people do not have the time to go as in depth but thinking that they're toddlers that need things to be dumbed down for them is extremely condescending.
>>14167
>I certainly can't.
I seriously doubt you work full time so i guess in your case its just a skill issue
>>14168
>You think "dumb" is the only possible explanation for why someone wouldn't read something
You're the one who thinks theory should be dumbed down, why would it be dumbed down if you inherently don't think the working class is smart enough to understand it.

 No.14176

>>14166
When the working class realises that short term economic demands aren't enough it moves on to long term political demands, this is what the communist party exists for.

 No.14177

>>14172
I think we should all do so

 No.14178

>>14175
>I like how you deny that you think the working class is dumb and almost immediately call them dumb
you missed what i was saying entirely. I'm saying there are some retarded people (like, as in actually mentally disabled), and that those people are worth treating with dignity and not exploiting them. I'm talking about literal retards as a separate category from workers. i am saying that even if workers were retards (a premise i have never stated nor agree with) it wouldn't exactly be an indictment of workers, nor a license to exploit them. only the most deliberately uncharitable reading of what I was saying could have yielded your present interpretation.

 No.14179

>>14170
>>14175
I am straight-up not as well versed in terms as other people so condensing them down into a few well-placed sentences is important to, you know, create a mass movement among people who couldn't give a shit about "eggheads" but do give a shit about not having their wages stolen

 No.14180

>>14175
dumb online vulgar marxist analyses like this thred are what got me and probably many others into marxism. Also the basics of marxism are dizzyingly simple, as OP has exemplified. There's nothing wrong with stating simple ideas simply.

 No.14181

>>14175
>Thinking that theory should be dumbed down makes that theory redundant.
abbreviating and compressing is not the same as dumbing down.

 No.14182

>>14177
ok. i can read capital, but I'm having a hard time getting my sister to do so. She has 3 kids and works two jobs. Her weekends are spent driving her kids back and forth. What do you suggest she should do?

 No.14183

>>14175
>I seriously doubt you work full time so i guess in your case its just a skill issue
you don't hesitate to be cruel and demeaning and make assertions about other people as long as it's "individuals" meanwhile if someone else suggests that workers don't have very much free time to read you'll leap on them and say they're suggesting workers are dumb or illiterate (as if being dumb and illiterate were a moral failing and not a systemic issue caused by the bourgeoisie fucking our lives up)

 No.14184

>>14175
>You're the one who thinks theory should be dumbed down
you're putting words in my mouth and deliberately missing the point over and over. I think you're either trolling or you have become so attached to your perception that you are unwilling to actually listen to what I am saying. Have a nice weekend.

 No.14185

quick survey of the thread

>you think workers are dumb

<no i think they're tired and might benefit from a summary of theory that can be spread through casual conversation
>no you think they're dumb and you hate them
<i'm literally a worker and i'm saying they don't have free time
>no you just hate workers also skill issue also my great german grandpa in 1867 read capital in like 2 secs ggez no clap

capitalists literally poisoned my brain with lead and microplastics but even I'm smart enough to know an asshole when i see one

 No.14186

>>14178
> I'm talking about literal retards as a separate category from workers
lmao is this a bit? why would theory as a whole be dumbed down in some weird attempt to reach the actual mentally disabled? It's such a small group of people wouldn't it be more worth while to focus on the working class as a whole?
>>14179
> condensing them down into a few well-placed sentences is important to, you know, create a mass movement among people who couldn't give a shit about "eggheads" but do give a shit about not having their wages stolen
That's not how mass movements even form, if telling people what to think was how it was formed then activist groups would be more successful than they actually are. The communist movement emerges through the working classes fight against capital and consciousness is something it may or may not acquire in its own experience.
>Hence, nothing prevents us from making criticism of politics, participation in politics, and therefore real struggles, the starting point of our criticism, and from identifying our criticism with them. In that case we do not confront the world in a doctrinaire way with a new principle: Here is the truth, kneel down before it! We develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles. We do not say to the world: Cease your struggles, they are foolish; we will give you the true slogan of struggle. We merely show the world what it is really fighting for, and consciousness is something that it has to acquire, even if it does not want to.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/letters/43_09.htm
> It is not a question of what this or that proletarian, or even the whole proletariat, at the moment regards as its aim. It is a question of what the proletariat is, and what, in accordance with this being, it will historically be compelled to do. Its aim and historical action is visibly and irrevocably foreshadowed in its own life situation as well as in the whole organization of bourgeois society today.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm
At which point since consciousness is the result of class conflict, it makes no point to dumb down theory when spreading theory is not how movements start and it weakens the movement for when the time for theory comes in.
>>14180
>Also the basics of marxism are dizzyingly simple, as OP has exemplified. There's nothing wrong with stating simple ideas simply.
there's something extremely wrong for thinking its a good idea to dumb down and neuter theory to try and making more presentable when spreading theory is not even how movements start.
>>14181
yes it is, the communist manifesto is already a good summary, what is wrong with spreading that? and why does the idea of workers reading further need to be thrown away at all?
>>14183
> if someone else suggests that workers don't have very much free time to read you'll leap on them and say they're suggesting workers are dumb or illiterate
why else would one try to "compress" theory if they fundamentally did not think the working class could understand it? That in inherently shows that they think the working class is dumb.


>if someone else suggests that workers don't have very much free time to read you'll leap on them and say they're suggesting workers are dumb or illiterate

 No.14187

>>14182
Have informative quick conversations with her after you read a chapter
Hell read it with the kids while your babysitting them then have a group chat when you pass the baton back?

Kids are a lot of fucking work, she'd appreciate that

 No.14188

>>14186
>The communist movement emerges through the working classes fight against capital and consciousness is something it may or may not acquire in its own experience.
…what? How will they know how to fight without guidance, and how will they follow guidance if they don't understand it?

 No.14189

>>14188
Do you literally think that the working class needs to be told to strike?

 No.14190

>>14186
>lmao is this a bit? why would theory as a whole be dumbed down in some weird attempt to reach the actual mentally disabled?
that's not what i was suggesting at all.

let's go back to where the "retard" comment first dropped.


>>14163
>treating the working class like unthinking drooling retards is so based comrade

i responded indirectly, because I don't think workers are retards. But my brain immediately went to a 2nd thought. because your statement
<treating the working class like unthinking drooling retards

seems to imply that being "retarded" is something worthy of contempt. it obviously isn't. so on top of your first assertion, which is that you assume i was saying "workers are dumb" (i wasn't, i'm not, i'm literally a worker, why would i call myself dumb???) you also were assuming that "dumb" is a bad thing. it's not. it's not bad to be dumb. if someone is dumb they shouldn't be exploited. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WORKERS ARE DUMB. THEY AREN'T. but even if they were it doesn't mean anything and is totally irrelevant to the thread, got it????

 No.14191

>>14189
>Do you literally think that the working class needs to be told to strike?
nobody said that

 No.14192

>>14186
>why else would one try to "compress" theory
to SAVE FUCKING TIME THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE NOW STOP WASTING MINE YOU BOURGEOIS GREMLIN

 No.14193

>>14189
Don't put words in my mouth. You seem to love reading books, yet refuse to entertain the idea that other people don't care about reading or don't have the time to do so.

 No.14194

>workers are already exploited, so theory should be shorter and easier to read to waste less of their time
<lol you think workers are dumb
>no, I'm a worker, I just think shit should be shorter and easier to read
<that means dumbed down
>no it means compressed and abbreviated
<i refuse to listen, you just hate workers

dishonest fucking scum, kill yourself

 No.14195

>>14190
> why would theory as a whole be dumbed down
ah yes, because OP definitely said "burn all existing long form copies of capital and only allow workers to read summaries"

 No.14196

>>14192
But texts like the communist manifesto already exist specifically for that, and again why does the idea of the working class reading further NEED to be abandoned?

 No.14197

File: 1686460551625.png (212.61 KB, 499x499, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14196
>But texts like the communist manifesto already exist specifically for that
the manifesto is not a summary of capital since it was written when marx was in his late 20s to radicalize workers during the 1848 revolutions and was written long before he performed the 20 years of research that went into the writing of capital volume 1. Marx didn't even finish this monumental undertaking in his life time and had to be finished by engels after he died, yet you pretend that this highly researched highly technical work is "summarized" by something he wrote before he did the research for it? pls…

 No.14198

>>14197
ordinary workers and socialists don't need to read capital. sure if they can it would be nice but there's no need whatsoever, popular appeals and policy proposals are more important than theory

 No.14199

>>14194
Texts like the communist manifesto already exist to be accessible and movements and consciousness grow as a result of conflict not the spreading of "summarised" theory, compressing thoery only hurts those who want to read further and it hurts the movement for when it goes on to political demands and the party, when theory is put into action. There is no reason to compress it unless you think class conflict only occurs and intensifies if a worker can read a instagram infographic or something instead of a book.
>>14197
I like how you just admitted to thinking that the communist manifesto is fundamentally wrong
>>14198
>popular appeals and policy proposals are more important than theory
No it's not, communism is not a pr campaign
>Hence, nothing prevents us from making criticism of politics, participation in politics, and therefore real struggles, the starting point of our criticism, and from identifying our criticism with them. In that case we do not confront the world in a doctrinaire way with a new principle: Here is the truth, kneel down before it! We develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles. We do not say to the world: Cease your struggles, they are foolish; we will give you the true slogan of struggle. We merely show the world what it is really fighting for, and consciousness is something that it has to acquire, even if it does not want to.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/letters/43_09.htm
> It is not a question of what this or that proletarian, or even the whole proletariat, at the moment regards as its aim. It is a question of what the proletariat is, and what, in accordance with this being, it will historically be compelled to do. Its aim and historical action is visibly and irrevocably foreshadowed in its own life situation as well as in the whole organization of bourgeois society today.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm

 No.14200

>>14195
Nobody is implying they are to be abandoned or discarded. Some just can't get what they're saying unless they are paraphrased, whether lightly or heavily like in OP. The average blue-collar worker agrees more with, stripped down to the bare essential, the thrust of "workers are exploited by the elites" than anything the richmen's parties can say.

 No.14201

>>14197
Give us some bullet points and we'll polish it up

 No.14202

>>14199
>No it's not, communism is not a pr campaign

the primary issue stopping change right now is not enough class consciousness so yeah it kinda is

 No.14203

>>14198
>ordinary workers and socialists don't need to read capital.
correct, it's a highly technical work of political economy meant to establish a scientific basis for socialism. not a radicalizing pamphlet like the manifesto meant to be easily accessible. Marx as surprised by how many workers read capital volume 1 but nevertheless it is a technical work, especially when you look at all 3 volumes. I think it would be useful to have more summaries, examples, maybe modernized versions, maybe short explainers that get a chapter across, or get the ideas that are most relevant to workers in their daily lives across.

 No.14204

>>14202
Class consciousness is not gained through spreading texts, if it was then activist groups would be FAR more successful than they actually are, Class consciousness is something the working class may or may not gain in its struggle against capital, it is not something one can inject from the outside.

 No.14205

>>14199
>I like how you just admitted to thinking that the communist manifesto is fundamentally wrong
no. i said it does not summarize capital. that's not the same as saying it's fundamentally wrong. stop putting words in other peoples mouths. you've been doing that this whole thread.

 No.14206

>>14203
>maybe modernized versions
Capitalism has not fundamentally changed so why would it be "modernised"

 No.14207

>>14201
Oh nevermind they're there in OP
but it does bring me to something
Relate it to their lives yeah
This is why I'd especially emphasise Chapter one
Any worker gets it in their bones

 No.14208

>>14205
It comprises the communist movement and what it is and was written specifically for the working class, so then why does theory need to be compressed when there are already accessible texts around and the fact that that compressing theory just hurts the movement.

 No.14209

>>14204
obviously the base is more important than superstructure but the idea that it doesn't matter at all whether people mostly hear pro-porky propaganda or socialist propaganda (or even just a bit of leftist thought to counterbalance) is flat out retarded, do you really deny the fact that at least some people can be convinced of things?

 No.14210

>>14209
>the idea that it doesn't matter at all whether people mostly hear pro-porky propaganda or socialist propaganda (or even just a bit of leftist thought to counterbalance) is flat out retarded, do you really deny the fact that at least some people can be convinced of things?
If you want to go around telling strangers what to think and how they should live their lives then you should go become a priest.
> Whoever imagines that socialism can be achieved by one person convincing another, and that one a third, is at best an infant, or else a political hypocrite
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1919/may/06.htm

 No.14211

Is that something other than Das Kapital you are reading right now?
Oh you've dropped your glasses?
here let me pick them up for you

 No.14212

File: 1686461240267.png (102.42 KB, 826x619, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14206
Capital is a very literary work full of jokes, references, analogies, etc. to 19th century and earlier literature, etc. that no longer "land" on a contemporary audience the way they would on a 19th century audience. For example, Nicholas Barbon, Robinson Crusoe, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, etc. Marx likes to reference those in a very literary capacity that doesn't do that much to bolster the purely academic points he is making about how capitalism works. I'm sure it made the book more entertaining for its time.

 No.14213

>>14210
So the Bolsheviks never did anything to propagandise their party and tell people about socialism? Sure it can't ONLY be preaching but that's definitely necessary

 No.14214

>>14212
The key to understanding capital isn't being able to get the jokes marx makes in it, and google exists so anything a person doesn't get they can easily look up
>>14213
It was never EVER the core of their action, their main efforts were towards labour organising and labour agitation.

 No.14215

File: 1686461425821.png (272.96 KB, 640x1000, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14208
>compressing theory just hurts the movement

 No.14216

>>14215
If you think the first two statement NEED to be explained to anyone the you do think the working class is dumb, compressing theory just hurts those who will want to read further and the movement for when it progresses.

 No.14217

File: 1686461532116.png (296.15 KB, 680x753, ClipboardImage.png)

i want "compressing and summarizing ideas is the same as dumbing them down" anon to write me a whole book why, because clearly one sentence isn't enough

 No.14218

File: 1686461539567.jpeg (17.17 KB, 307x409, images.jpeg)

>>14213
Ok so what is to be done?

 No.14219

>>14216
>If you think the first two statement NEED to be explained to anyone the you do think the working class is dumb
on the contrary you think the third statement is necessary and that the first statement is a "dumbed down summary"

 No.14220

>>14219
Why does the third statement need to be abandoned at all?

 No.14221

>>14135
>proles aren't illiterate folksy morons
yes they are, the internet has destroyed people's attention spans

 No.14222

>>14220
who said anything about abandoning anything?

 No.14223

>>14222
Everyone when they think dumbing down theory,

 No.14224

>>14199
>communism is not a pr campaign
everything is a pr campaign

 No.14225

>>14223
compressing =/= dumbing down. You can get the same amount across in less words. Keep up.

 No.14226

File: 1686462897904.webm (2.88 MB, 640x360, lowattnspan.webm)


 No.14227

>>14174
i've read capital. it's okay to admit you don't want to have a real conversation and you just want to mess with people. you don't need to project.

 No.14228

>>14225
Except you can't, you can't compress capital or else you leave something out
>>14224
No it's not
https://organizing.work/2020/05/you-dont-have-to-be-popular-to-win/

 No.14229

>>14228
>you can't compress capital or else you leave something out

i just threw all 3 volumes into a 7zip archive and they turned out fine

 No.14230

>>14229
What a gay comment

 No.14231

>>14216
>compressing theory just hurts those who will want to read further and the movement for when it progresses
I don't understand this, did anyone in this thread suggest that we should compress theory and then BURN ALL THE COPIES OF DAS KAPITAL? No, right?
People who want to read further can still read, the point of compressing theory would be to reach people who don't want to/can't.

 No.14232

>>14231
no, you don't understand. literally every single syllabe uttered by marx is in the perfect place. the long asides about robinson crusoe, vampires, and the asiatic mode of production are absolutely necessary to understanding and if you subtract even a single syllable of it, you become a degenerated lumpen

 No.14233

>>14231
>the point of compressing theory would be to reach people who don't want to/can't
but texts like that already exist, the manifest was explicitly written for that, if anything else was mean to be summarised and spread like that then marx would have done so like he did with the manifesto, but he didn't because the texts could not have been shortened or else something will be left out. Consciousness is brought by class conflict not how easily one can read a text.

 No.14234


 No.14235

>>14233
>the manifest was explicitly written for that
no it was written to agitate workers during the 1848 revolutions. it was not written to summarize theory. it was specifically an agitation pamphlet

 No.14236

>>14235
It was specifically for workers and is not a text that was exclusively applicable to the 1848 revolutions

 No.14237

>>14236
It's a proposal for a party program suggesting many reforms we would now call socdem, such as a progressive tax
Revolutionary for its time, but only edging historical materialism is not enough theory to be enough.
Why is the discussion always between Das Kapital and that expired pamphlet? Weren't there plenty of books in-between?

 No.14238

>>14237
>It's a proposal for a party program suggesting many reforms we would now call socdem, such as a progressive tax, Revolutionary for its time
The property tax is revolutionary insofar as it leads to the abolishment of property as a whole by ensuring that property is not handed down by inheritance, it's not a monetary tax its the revocation of property as a whole, that's not socdem, that's society in the process of turning private property into social property.
The manifesto is not fundamentally lacking and if still very applicable, which begs why people want to condense down texts when there is zero need to do so?

Also you only say 'Das Kapital' if you're speaking german

 No.14239

Fuck you OP, nobody is ever going to read capital again now that you've written this. Your actions have doomed the workers of the world to an eternal spiral of ever harsher wagecuckery. You imbecile. Goddamn you to hell.

 No.14240

>>14238
I've had more use out of reading the kapital manga than that pamphlet.
Sure the pamphlet has some spirited writing, but it tends to state that capitalism is failing without going into why it is.

 No.14241

>>14240
>kapital manga
Shove a live grenade into your mouth

 No.14242

File: 1686473405292.png (298.01 KB, 414x603, Che1.png)

>>14241
you mad

 No.14243

>>14228
>No it's not
ridiculous article, he's talking about some unions organizing (and they're definitely not doing it under the banner of socialism) not a reordering of society and implementing socialism
it's like giving advice about birthing babies when the closest you've come is pushing out a turd

 No.14244

>>14242
Nice Che'

 No.14245

>>14243
>he's talking about some unions organizing (and they're definitely not doing it under the banner of socialism
til the workers movement has nothing to do with labour organising

 No.14246

>>14241
>ignoring the power of the marx beam
infantile and undialectical

 No.14247

>>14245
tyl that you're braindead

 No.14248

>>14247
I'm braindead for showing you how consciousness comes from class conflict, not how well drawn the manga of capital is?

 No.14249

>>14248
well where is it already? how much longer until some of that "consciousness" sparks something? not until every single diner in america has been unionized, eh?

 No.14250

>>14249
Considering the fact that this year has seen some of the biggest labour organising in recent memory across the board i'd say you should just look at the news
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/06/06/west-coast-ports-labor/

 No.15425

>>14135
What does capital help if you're arguing with someone

 No.17856

>>15425
It's a thick and heavy book, good for hitting people in the head.

 No.17981

File: 1686685294775.png (135.03 KB, 474x353, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.17983

>>15425
Don't argue with morons. Very helpful life advice

 No.17986

>>14227
So you've apparently read Capital yourself, but you don't want other people to educate themselves with it? Is this supposed to make you look good?

 No.17988

>>14206
> why would it be "modernised"
A rewrite of capital with modern examples would actually be interesting and useful. One of the most common dismissals I hear of Marx from liberals and social democrats, and so forth, is that Marx's analysis of Capital was accurate to the time/place in which he was writing, but not now. They basically try to pretend it's all just Victorian England and that things have reformed to be better. Obviously that's not true but it would be helpful to draw on contemporary data to make Marx's points again. Marx obviously draws on a lot of data.

I remember long sections of Volume 1 drawing from English factory data from the 1840s and 1850s, talking about the devastating conditions that factory workers in England experienced, especially children. But lately I see conditions in the USA for example declining to that level. Children in slaughterhouses and so forth. Also Marx's language is often erudite and literary and very of its time. It can be confusing or alienating to modern readers who aren't used to reading things from the 1800s. The English language has changed a lot since then.

>Capitalism has not fundamentally changed


fundamentally, no, it is still about workers selling their labor power as a commodity to a capitalist who buys that labor power for less than it is worth, and pockets and/or reinvests the surplus. The circuits of capital Marx identified are still the same. But the particulars have changed. The geopolitics have changed. The tricks the bourgeoisie use to prevent class consciousness from emerging and to mask class antagonism. have gotten more elaborate. I think a re-write of Capital would highlight these changes to the particulars, or at the very least mention them in a foreword or afterword. Marx himself while he was still alive released a second edition of Capital volume 1 that was different in its particulars than the 1st edition.

As Marx notes in the afterword to the second German edition of Capital, Marx's different editions of Capital reflect his reworking of published material especially in the presentation of the work particularly on the theory of value.

And then of course there is the matter that Capital is an unfinished work. Kautsky obviously released Volume 4, but that is controversial for obvious reasons. Perhaps we need a Marx in our age to finish what he died doing?

 No.17989

>>17986
>you don't want other people to educate themselves with it
[citation needed]

 No.18022

ITT: people so horrified at the prospect of reading that they have to hide behind imaginary illiterate workers (because all workers are retarded, apparently) to justify getting their info from sixth-hand sources, and retards who think socialism is something that happens when you get enough people to believe in socialism (I think that's what Marx and Lenin said idk I can't read)
Anyone that has time to post on this site has enough time for a book, zero excuses

 No.18023

>>18022
Damn, I wish I could read, because that's probably a good post.

 No.18028

File: 1686963780809.png (587.66 KB, 736x736, ClipboardImage.png)

>>18022
>people so horrified at the prospect of reading that they have to hide behind imaginary illiterate workers (because all workers are retarded, apparently

everyone you have accused of this ITT has denied that they are saying this over and over again and yet you keep bringing this assertion to the table because the possibility of the conversation being about anything else is an affront to your perception.

 No.18029


 No.18030

>>18028
You denying it means nothing, the very existence of this thread and all others like it is proof. What was this thread meant to achieve? The people that did the reading already can explain things in plain english (and if they can't, further study is required) and the things people here think needs to be "explained" to workers are either common sense or grasped intuitively – the only explanation for threads such as this is people looking for an excuse not to read and consume the simplest information possible and still call themselves communists, and thus discover that hiding behind the illiterate, retarded image of workers they have in their head is the way to go. I've seen this plenty of times with anarchists in particular, I got told "read Marx" is ableist because not everyone has time for that, as if their schedule of browsing reddit and playing videogames would be severely affected by 30min of reading every day. That is already beside the fact that people here think there is anything that needs explaining in the first place, as if the working class needs to be "convinced" of socialism, which would go against literally everything Marx and Engels stood for (not that anyone in this thread could tell, nobody reads, especially not Marx). Workers don't need to spend their ever second reading Marx, and the ones that choose to do so don't need much help, Marx is not a complicated read (unless you've had your brain turned into paste by the internet, not naming any names). Dumbing things down serves no purpose and is every bit detrimental, that's how you get "literacy is fascist" anarchoids and Richard "Co-ops = Communism" Wolff and people that think Marx just thought the gubbmint needed to invest in healthcare some more. Good work for the dude at >>14199 but he made the mistake of thinking he was talking to likeminded people rather than hobbyists that might as well have the mental capacity of a concrete wall
TL;DR fuck modernizers fuck falsifiers read a fucking book

 No.18036

>>18030
>you are guilty of what i accuse you of because i have decided to interpret anything you say in the least charitable way possible

two can play at that game

 No.18037

>>18030
>TL;DR fuck modernizers fuck falsifiers read a fucking book
so TRVE bestie. I trust you read Capital in the original German and not one of those filthy translations?

 No.18038

File: 1687034943228.jpg (243.41 KB, 1200x1200, cuba basado.jpg)

>>14169
>The US has 80% estimated literacy, and that's low as far western countries go
to be fair even though most americans have basic literacy (can sign their name, can read and write the most common words in their language's vocabulary), the majority of Americans struggle with reading comprehension beyond a middle school (13 year old) level and in fact, literacy is on the decline if you consider reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.

 No.18039

>>14156
Is this bait? Most of the things in OP are actually said in Capital, albeit with significantly more nuance and specificity and elaboration.

 No.18246

File: 1687328403655.png (273.16 KB, 1154x651, ClipboardImage.png)

Engels in 1868 extolled Marx to write a shorter edition of Capital for workers. I think this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the work was a highly technical work of Political Economy, not intended for working class people who lack the time and energy (not lack the intelligence!!!!) to dedicate to it.

This is aimed at everyone ITT who mocked the idea of simplifying things and suggested that OP is suggesting that workers are "stupid."

 No.18605

File: 1688904343701.png (47.77 KB, 560x347, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.19012

>>18605
Your quote has nothing to do with anything the other guy said, unless your point is "a-ha, proles ARE retarded!"
Frankly, the quote goes against your own point since Marx clearly states workers acquire consciousness through their own actions, and thus dumbing down theory in order to preach to them is useless

 No.19013

>>18246
There's a world of a difference between a shortened version of Capital written by Marx himself and a "Marx summary" written by someone who themselves probably gets their info from youtube or some shit. Literally in the pic your posted:
>If it is not written, some Moses or other will come along and do it and botch it up.
Lmao
The Cafiero one is the best and got Marx's seal of approval, but even that one gets some things wrong vis-a-vis Marx.

 No.19021

>>19013
nobody ITT has suggested
> a "Marx summary" written by someone who themselves probably gets their info from youtube or some shit.
so there is a "world of difference" between what this thread is suggesting, and what you're pretending the thread is suggesting.

 No.19022

>>19013
>The Cafiero one is the best
the cafiero one was the earliest

 No.19023

>>19012
>unless your point is "a-ha, proles ARE retarded!"
no the point is anon was simultaneously putting the proles on a pedestal and accusing anyone trying to make their lives easier of "thinking proles are stupid"

 No.19043

>>19022
These are all shit

 No.19044

>>19022
… Which of these were even meant to be summaries? Did you just post FOUR books without having read a single one of them?

 No.19045

>>14131
sorry if i'm crashing ur thread
may i ask you OP when this was useful, like do people appreciate this or is this just a way they can comprehend what you're saying….

because honestly i think most people get like 95% of this, but it doesnt actually give actionable knowledge, it just tells how the situation is messed up, unfair, and contradicted (and contradictions are difficult to understand - its difficult for people who read marx even… actually it was difficult for marx as well! reproduction schemas are needed in order to understand how something so contradicted functions most of the time… so the big picture stuff is gonna be more confusing than anything even in a simple format)

I know there's the basically ubiquitous conception that communism develops out of the labor movement specifically, but history has proved this to not be the only way communism becomes relevant. It's imo an outdated conception from the 1800s labor movement, kept alive by dogmatic (no shade) leninism just owing to the fact that this is part of Lenin's apparent model of communism and its relation to the working class. In a democracy, politics already exists for the people (even if there's suppression and widespread disdain and distrust of politics), there's no need to move from the economic to the political. The political is directly relevant in so many ways (i think everyone gets this so i wont even mention specific issues, but i can if it's not clear what i mean; i'm talking about all the various progressive issues that impact people's lives profoundly). There's much more room to activate someone into the wider movement by explaining the situation around some of these issues, and maybe directing them towards an organization, or resources, or just providing some roadmap… but idk this is how i feel, i wonder if anyone else sees it like this

The "you're exploited!" and "capitalism can't go on forever!" always rubbed me the wrong way; theyre correct but what bearing does this have on someone's life? "you could be getting more money if you unionized and fought the boss for it!" everyone knows that, but a problem in this era is that oftentimes they'll just close a workplace down or wait you out and give extremely minor concessions (that amount to keeping your pay the same, rather than a decrease). There's also retribution and blackballing that happens to organizers, in modern times (where finance takes a majority of the profits, and you take a personality quiz before getting hired, and employers can all easily share databases of problem candidates, and a felony bars you from most work…) companies don't need to deal with problem workers. There's chronic joblessness and instability that's maintained by the government and Fed. The workplace struggle isn't what it once was. (still important …. i just wanted to epmhasize how its not the only vector arriving at socialist politics. The varied progressive movements, of which the economic struggles are one part, as well as the communities and cultures of oppressed groups, whose oppression is just as necessary today in the imperialist stage of capitalism as it was in the colonial era. (if u dont buy that look at nazi economics, how the economy can be stabilized (for some) by dispossessing people of othered identities))

 No.19046

>>19022
You know there's a modern rewrite somewhere in >>>/edu/

 No.19047

>>14214
>and google exists so anything a person doesn't get they can easily look up
wow what a fucking retarded thing to say, anon

 No.19885

File: 1689744277783.png (87.37 KB, 620x277, ClipboardImage.png)

>>14135
> German workers read the first edition of Capital voraciously.
It took me over a month of occasionally looking into this to finally find sales details for the first edition of capital in germany.

It took 5 years, 1867-1872 for Capital to sell only 1000 copies in Germany. I stand by my point. It was not "voraciously" consumed by working class people, it was purchased by political economists and intellectuals of the 1st international in a limited circulation. Perhaps later on in the East German Republic it was consumed voraciously by workers because it was prescribed as part of a standard school curriculum, but in Marx's life time the book actually received the best sales in Russia. But still, those "best sales" were merely 3000 copies. This was not a widely circulated book outside of explicitly political circles until the 20th century, and it certainly wasn't read widely by non-partisan workers until actually existing socialist states made it part of an educational curriculum.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/DD7A28DA6B069F8E794696759DF72C41/S0037677900144924a.pdf/div-class-title-span-class-italic-das-kapital-span-comes-to-russia-div.pdf

 No.19886

>>19046
1. we're in /edu/
2. where is it?

 No.19887

>>19885
Noooo my memes about the heckin German factory worker gigachads reading Capital during their breaks!

 No.19888

>>19887
well it's frustrating because so many anons were trying to bad jacket my suggestions about making capital more accessible to workers by saying I think the workers are stupid, workers have always been buying and reading this book like it was nothing, crushing it in a weekend, yada yada, and that was not only bad faith, but there was contrary evidence.

 No.19889

>>19885
This is only talking about the first German edition. The second German edition was a major overhaul, too, and the 3rd and 4th are the ones which most people have read and which almost all translations are based off of.

 No.19890

>>19886
In the pinned thread on Capital I think

 No.19895


 No.19896

>>19889
>This is only talking about the first German edition

Yes. I was responding to someone who said that the German working class read the first edition of capital voraciously as soon as it was released. That's simply not true. It is a dense text on political economy with a ton of specialized philosophical background and I'm tired of larpers pretending it's easy and the average downtrodden and education-deprived person working at mcdonalds or some shit can just pick it up and know what marx is talking about when he goes off about hegel or ricardo or malthus or mill.

 No.19901

>>19896
Meanwhile in reality the simple fact of the matter is that they can.

Anybody have that screencap saved of the bartender pulling out Capital when a social reading group turned up?

 No.19902

>>19901
That's not a good example, most bartenders have college degrees.

 No.19904

>>19902
Fair enough
In that case I reference this example from
>>>/siberia/428887
>I dropped out at 17 and I could read it. It is of course still a complicated work and influences almost all social/political criticism onwards, but getting through it on its own is very much achievable. The thing you have to realize is that it has almost a literary quality to it, and isn't just dry theory. There's a very specific kind of didactic method throughout it.
The historical records show that workers can and did read things like; Capital, and The Origin of Species.

Assuming literacy, so we're disregarding the USA here a downtrodden worker can pick up Capital volume 1 and understand it.

Marx wrote it with that intention.

This is a simple fact.

 No.19918

File: 1690330624291.png (394.66 KB, 779x763, jacobin.png)

>>19901
The goalposts keep moving. The original claim was, and I repeat, the German working class "voraciously" read the first edition of capital, as soon as it was released in 1867. The fact that only 1000 copies were purchased of the 1st edition in Germany shows that this is not true. It had limited circulation among political economists and gentlemen of the first international. I have that image saved btw. A bartender reading Capital today makes perfect sense because it is an easy job to read at. If you work in a factory 12 hours a day in the 1800s for a paltry wage barely above your means of subsistence, and come home to your seven crying children, you are not going to have time to read Capital. And yes, I'm aware the German workers were unusually literate for the time.

 No.20050

>>19885
You're ignoring unofficial copies being spread. Abridged versions of Marx's and Engel's texts were very popular in Russia.

 No.20054

>>20050
> Abridged versions of Marx's and Engel's texts were very popular in Russia.
Wow. the very kind of text people mad at OP were arguing are "useless"

 No.21587

Some of you should go tabling sometime.

 No.21590

File: 1708141094255.jpg (57.23 KB, 495x600, 1700104572299102.jpg)

Nice thread OP. I've been becoming a leftist only very recently mostly because of youtube videos and truth be told I rarely if ever feel like reading nonfiction. To me reading ten bazillion pages of theory just feels beyond fucking boring, so stuff like this is what I live for. Thanks.

 No.21592

>>21590
if you don't want to read capital, then just read "Wage Labour and Capital" which was specifically made for working people to have a brief idea

 No.21593

>>14166
>When people demand higher wages prices go up anyways
<he hasn't read Value, Price and Profit

 No.21594

File: 1708173036065.jpg (71.49 KB, 741x900, 1707440662205.jpg)

>>21590
I've been on this board for like 6 years and never read anything but the manifesto, you'll be fine :^)


Unique IPs: 58

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]