/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2016/07/23/not-even-wrong/

By the classical theory, we mean the theory that labour is the source of value. This was generally accepted from the time of Ibn Kaldun through Adam Smith down to that of Karl Marx1. But if you have had an economics course at school or college, this is unlikely to be the theory you were taught. Instead you would have been taught the neo-classical theory which was developed in the late 19th century by writers like Jevons or Marshall. It is arguable that this theory gained its popularity because the classical theory, having by then been adapted by socialist writers, had a rather disreputable image in polite society. The neo-classical theory appeared considerably more sophisticated. It was more mathematical and had a sciency feel2. Its plausibility to young students is enhanced by a beguiling use of diagrams. For those of you who did not do an economics course at school, Figure 1 is what millions of school students have been given as the theory of price.


There are two lines, sometimes they are drawn slightly curved, one is called the supply function the other the demand function. The demand function rests on the commonsense notion that if something is cheap, people will buy more of it, so it slopes down. Teachers have little difficulty getting this idea across to their class.

The other line, called the supply function is shown sloping the other way. What it purports to show is that as more is supplied, the cost of each item goes up. Teachers have more difficulty with this, as common knowledge and experience will have taught students that actually the reverse is the case: as industries ramp up production they find they can produce more efficiently and supply the output at a lower cost. Such objections provoke some hand waving at the blackboard and excuses3.

The great thing about a classic diagram is that it is both memorable and intuitively understandable. If you can present maths this way you leverage the processing ability of our visual cortex to understand it. That is why Venn diagrams are so much easier for students to grasp than axiomatic set theory[Lakoff and Nunez, 2001]. Our brains tell us that if it looks right, it not only is right, but it is real. So having seen the diagrams students come out thinking that supply andPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

(Finding mentions of Jevons in Dickblast articles)

https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/did-marx-have-a-labour-theory-of-value/

Did Marx have a labor theory of value? It seems absurd that one has to answer this question.

It was so thoroughly answered by previous generations of economists in the affirmative[12], that it would seem unnecessary even to examine the issue. But David Harvey has recently posted a short article[6] claiming that Marx was an opponent of the labour theory:

>It is widely believed that Marx adapted the labour theory of value from Ricardo as a founding concept for his studies of capital accumulation. Since the labour theory of value has been generally discredited, it is then often authoritatively stated that Marx's theories are worthless. But nowhere, in fact, did Marx declare his allegiance to the labour theory of value. That theory belonged to Ricardo, who recognized that it was deeply problematic even as he insisted that the question of value was critical to the study of political economy. On the few occasions where Marx comments directly on this matter,1 he refers to value theory and not to the labour theory of value. So what, then, was Marx's distinctive value theory and how does it differ from the labour theory of value?( [6])

It is difficult to take this seriously but as Mike Roberts has done a reply, I probably should do likewise and type a brief response.

Harvey claims that the labour theory of value is generally discredited. But in what sense?

It is correct to say that the theory is not viewed with favour in economics departments, but that is for political reasons – the labour theory of value, since Gray and Marx, came to be associated with socialism. Since academic economists, in general, did not want to be tainted with the socialist label they were at pains to distance themselves from the theory. But none of them ever adduced any empirical evidence to refute it. It was socially discredited but not empirically refuted.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

An interesting comment from the above article:

<Jurriaan Bendien
<August 17, 2019 at 8:39 pm

<Dear Paul,
<I read your article “Did Marx have a labour theory of value”, written in response to David Harvey. I just want to point out, that the real scientific dispute is not really about whether Marx had an LTV or a VTL.

<Marx never referred to his own theory as a labour theory of value for a very good reason, namely he understood quite well, and says so, that there are many assets in society whose value is not determined by labour time or labour costs, and whose value cannot be predicted by related labour costs (such as real estate and financial assets – stocks, securities, deposits, derivative contracts etc.).

<In brief, Marx understood, that NOT ALL value is determined by labour time. The labour theory of value applied only to the production and exchange of commodities as labour products. It did not refer to financial assets and land values, even if labour costs could influence their value to some or other extent.

<It was therefore quite logical, that Marx did not refer to his own theory as a labour theory of value, because that would imply that labour determined the magnitudes of ALL (economic) value. It doesn’t. If Marx really did subscribe to a labour theory of ALL value, this would be an scientific error.

<This simple point has rarely been understood in Marxist circles (I found only one scholarly article so far which explicitly acknowledges that, other than the Harvey/Elson line), which has the consequence that Marxists are at a loss to explain the financial economy, in terms of the LTV. All they can do is talk about “fictitious capital”.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2568106
That's not mentioning the fact that Türkiye pretty much invented drone warfare.

>>2568126
Well, no. That was probably the United States.

>>2567834
>(they manufacture almost everything domestically, including their own cars, steel, textiles, electronics, weapons).
proof of this extraordinary claim?

>>2567834
>While America loves Israel, it's still possible the US might sit out on this one.
Not possible. American support for Israel extends far beyond realpolitik, shared interests or shared ideologies, it is based in religion. A very large portion of the most influential American capitalists and politicians are either Jewish or Judeo-Christian(the type of protestant that probably values Jews more than other Christians) and aggressively Zionist, either for "God's Chosen People" reasons or "Jesus will come back if we help Israel rebuild the temple" reasons. Their support for Israel is irrational and these particular elements of the government will sacrifice literally all of America's other interests to ensure Israel remains. As long as America is still significantly religious and Abrahamic, they will back Israel against any rival.

>>2568443(me)
Remember that the Christian belief system is not grounded in material reality at all, they believe that the only thing that matters is scoring brownie points with God to ensure they get into heaven, that is the number one priority in life for the most ardent believers, and for this specific type of Christian said brownie points are scored by helping the Chosen People hold onto the Promised Land. It is very much a cult and they will act like a cult.

>>2562128
>as long as westoids don't get their hands on the north
russia is a western country so take that as you will

>>2562689
Russia has not gotten it's hands on DPRK Though.

>>2562682

There probably wasn't a famine in the 90s though; The demographic data just doesn't support it.

That said the 90s were indeed terrible for the DPRK; Specifically 96-02.

DPRK understands the western world order is over. I respect that the DPRK has had the analysis and nimbleness to see that the old-world is over and mobilise towards it's own interest with speed instead of inertia. They understand their mision.
Statement by North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui
The full text of the statement released by North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui on the 13th, “The G7 has no right to go against the sovereign choice of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” is as follows.

Recently, in Canada, the G7 foreign ministers issued a joint statement that disregarded and violated the Constitution of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, calling for "complete denuclearization" by anyone.

I express my strong dissatisfaction and regret at the blatant hostile actions of the G7 foreign ministers, which constitute a direct violation of our national constitution, and I firmly condemn and reject them using the strongest rhetorical expressions.

The G7's inert obsession with "denuclearization," a concept widely acknowledged as impossible to achieve, only serves to push itself to the margins of the international community and prove that it is a marginalized minority interest group in a corner of international relations.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea's current status is not influenced by external rhetorical claims, and in today's harsh geopolitical environment, possessing nuclear weapons is the most accurate option for deterring the most dangerous and hostile states.

No one has the right to force us to change the Constitution, and no one should attempt to change the Constitution.

The way to ensure peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the Asia-Pacific region lies not in advocating unrealistic "denuclearization," but in respecting the Constitution of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2562689
>russia is a western country
Russia is as western as Turkey is

>>2564817
lmao i loved this game. super simple and open source too so you can add your own things. very fun.
Hope you sent Erik out at the beginning to pan-handle you some funds!

The three worldisms summarized

>>2564870
>Hope you sent Erik out at the beginning to pan-handle you some funds!
on nightmare mode the death squads just execute you for panhandling lol

>>2567679
There's no "2nd world", there's only china.
All the "2nd world" countries are bourgeois rump states who find themselves temporarily aligned with the cause of anti-imperialism, but would much rather be aligned with it, if only west-sempai noticed them

>>2568406
>There's no "2nd world"
Wrong.
2nd world = China, Russia, DPRK, Vietnam

>>2568347
here's that trekkie mayor on the day all good things got broadcasted btw

Smedley Butler
Silas Soule
Hugh Thompson Jr.

>>2566991
>what are your national heroes like?
what you would expect from burgerland. the canonized ones from the founding like washington suck but I prefer the later ones from the civil war and gilded age anyway

>>2567130
Hobesbawm called Garibaldi the Castro of bourgeois revolution

>>2567693
please make some screenshots next time you come across one because this is ridiculous if true

>>2567693
palestinians or palestinian-americans?
important distinction

>>2565029
>>2565100
Sorry, clankers, but THOU SHALT NOT MAKE A MACHINE IN THE LIKENESS OF A HUMAN MIND

>>2568402
Petite bourgeois mentality

>>2568359
>two retards fighting
I don't care

>>2567814
the contradiction which is identified amongst workers by marx and engels is ethnicity or nationality, yet the international effort did not intend to subsume contradiction in a higher abstraction (e.g. one race, the human race), but rather, that the working class operate best when they work as different peoples toward a mutual interest (i.e. socialism). that is my own interpretation, and the alternative idea of a hodgepodge of a cramped and cosmopolitan working class in one city is a capitalist concept, directly contradictory with the stated aims of independence. now, marx qualifies this by correctly stating that chauvinism is false consciousness, since it forces the native proletariat identify with the bourgeoisie (while it is the bourgeoisie which has caused the problem), yet the alliance of the working class he characterises as an expressly national struggle, not a local struggle.

do you have any comment on this? (as i relate in the original post, fascism literally begins by french anti-immigrant activity in 1893 against italians, leading to the neologism of "national socialism" in 1898, so the effects of this crisis appear unresolved to this day).

>>2568264
No shit.
Western Socialists and the Left are just ignoring the overwhelming wealth of data that shows that mass hodgepodge diversity leads to absolutely worse life and social indicators in every single aspect.
The hilarious thing is the only place this is controversial is in the West, go outside of the West, and it's just considered basic common sense fact among all Sociologists. Literally 100% of Sociologists and Social Scientists in China for example believe different ethnicities and yes >races< (biological race is again a concept that is uncontroversial outside of the west and accepted by most non-western sociologists and genetic scientists) work better in homogenous groupings and mass diversity leads to worse outcomes. One study found it was "uncontroversial among all generations of social scientists" outside of the West.
https://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf
https://www.puttingourdifferencestowork.com/pdf/j.1467-9477.2007.00176%20Putnam%20Diversity.pdf
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61403
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-11-19/the-paradox-of-diverse-communities
Of course the shitlibs in this thread will just cry everyone but them is literally hitler and that Bougies actually hate mass migration despite bougies and banks literally spending the entirety of Covid demanding the borders be opened and who cares the human life cost.

>>2568264
Urban centers kinda always have been very diverse until nations became a concrete thing with capitalism and frank borders were established. I'd say the idea of population and cultural control to create peace is mostly a modern invention of the bourgeoisie although the ancient city state slavers did some of that too with settler colonialism.

>>2568264
>yet the international effort did not intend to subsume contradiction in a higher abstraction (e.g. one race, the human race), but rather, that the working class operate best when they work as different peoples toward a mutual interest (i.e. socialism).
I think we agree about the point not being to subsume contradiction in some higher abstraction, but I wouldn't use a presupposition like "the working class operate best when." I think Marx's idea was to have different parties / unions / organizations in different countries, and they cooperate with each other towards a shared end. But there's no high command ordering the respective working-class parties what to do or dictating the form of the movement. What is socialism? More specifically it's the economical emancipation of the working class by the conquest of political power, and then use of that political power to the attainment of social ends.

>that is my own interpretation, and the alternative idea of a hodgepodge of a cramped and cosmopolitan working class in one city is a capitalist concept, directly contradictory with the stated aims of independence.
I wouldn't say "concept," but more of a product of capitalism. But actually the proletariat is also a product of capitalism.

>now, marx qualifies this by correctly stating that chauvinism is false consciousness, since it forces the native proletariat identify with the bourgeoisie (while it is the bourgeoisie which has caused the problem), yet the alliance of the working class he characterises as an expressly national struggle, not a local struggle. do you have any comment on this?
Well he characterizes a revolution in national terms in Ireland, yes. But I don't think you can impose a single universal template. Remember that Ireland was existing under severe repression. He talked about Poland in similar terms, and supported the national independence struggle of Poland. But the specific historical conditions were different in those places at the time.

Now look at a country like the UAE or Qatar. Who are the workers there? What do you do when 90% of the population isn't even from there and you're trying to impose a particular model for working-class organization that precludes organizing people if they're not from a Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Like I don't think it's really an "idea" to have a cosmopolitan working class or not. Or that's the correct frame to look at it. Like we just debate these ideas and that's how history plays out. I don't think so because in reality, you just look at the development of capitalism over the past century. That has become a reality in many places, it's not some abstraction. Capitalism creates a proletariat because it needs a proletariat to work in factories. Would you be, like, "the proletariat is a capitalist concept." Capitalism once rose up in the U.S. with the slave trade, do you send the slaves back to Africa? There were proposals to do this but what ended up happening is a civil war that resulted in the emancipation of the slaves. At any rate I think this anti-immigrant sort of socialism is really a kind of petit-bourgeois socialism.

>>2568264
>(as i relate in the original post, fascism literally begins by french anti-immigrant activity in 1893 against italians, leading to the neologism of "national socialism" in 1898, so the effects of this crisis appear unresolved to this day).
A portion of the Communist Manifesto:
<While this “True” Socialism thus served the government as a weapon for fighting the German bourgeoisie, it, at the same time, directly represented a reactionary interest, the interest of German Philistines. In Germany, the petty-bourgeois class, a relic of the sixteenth century, and since then constantly cropping up again under the various forms, is the real social basis of the existing state of things. To preserve this class is to preserve the existing state of things in Germany. The industrial and political supremacy of the bourgeoisie threatens it with certain destruction — on the one hand, from the concentration of capital; on the other, from the rise of a revolutionary proletariat. “True” Socialism appeared to kill these two birds with one stone. It spread like an epidemic … It proclaimed the German nation to be the model nation, and the German petty Philistine to be the typical man. To every villainous meanness of this model man, it gave a hidden, higher, Socialistic interpretation, the exact contrary of its real character. It went to the extreme length of directly opposing the “brutally destructive” tendency of Communism, and of proclaiming its supreme Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2568087
boring and not dialectical

ok fine ill do something already

>>2568298

>Mahdick=Blasted

SOME REAL OG NYUKKAS SHIEET
DAMN SON DAS MA SHIEET

>>2568120
>disregard for material conditions
>in reality most people are willing to make sacrifices and don't mind hardship if you give them a plan or an idea
the hardship has to come first for most people to even start considering major change, and this doesn't mean that they're "apathetic" at all

>>2567007
You have any counter proof, mayo pecker?

Sharty, foodist Nazis, leftysoy….

What the fuck does any of this mean? It can't be recruiting any real number of young bigots if the language is all complete nonsense. Am I supposed to understand what all these inside code words mean?
I'd like to learn more but there's quite a barrier with all the jargon you're throwing around. Someone should translate everything you're concerned about so the rest of us "normies" can help you.

>>2412782
An entire website just to celebrate the kinds of incels who write "LE HECKIN SCIENCE, GOY!" and post the stupid simple MSPaint drawings of fat, bald men with their mouths gaping in disbelief??

You're worried about those people being a powerful force of hardcore nazis? These are the new skinheads for the modern age??

These are just bitter virgins who live at home still. They contribute nothing and refuse to stop bitching about Covid vaccines from 5 years ago.

>>2518242
>hurr durr rightoids exist because the world is le shit
Don't make me laugh. Rightoids worship everything destructive about humanity that makes the world shit. You love living in shit.

I dunno, maybe the left should have spent the past 10 years as fucking massive insufferable racist and sexist wokescolds towards white males and maybe a fucking board called leftist POLITICALLY INCORRECT shouldn't have fucking pathologically thin skinned fucking loser leftard users who run to the mods every time they see someone have a different opinion on them that goes against some shitlib/Pomo shibboleth, or frankly, a mod team that constantly bans people for having positions that don't 100% match Tumblr.
>>2412785
Because the Western Left is a fucking lame as fuck counter-culture of oikophobic losers addicted to rage and being smug. The right actually have a political project.
As I have said 1000 times here. If this was 2005, the vast majority of "Leftists" would instead be scene kid emos slitting their wrists. Millennial/Zoomer Leftist "politics" is just about virtue signalling and religious original sin shit based in Idpol as a form of counter-culture gatekeeping.
>>2412703
It doesn't help that the Left still REFUSES to engage in the topic in good faith because the Modern Western Left have no concept of self-criticism or daring to admit that BPD tier black and white thinking on every issue isn't actually particularly helpful with real world issues.

>>2567806
It's very weird. They'll release two dozen Rowling & Linehan-esque statements throughout the year saying trans people are mentally ill freaks who are a threat to women, but then during pride they'll flip the switch and say they stand with trans people and get slaughtered in the replies. What is their endgame???
And I still laugh at that footage of the YCL cosying up with police after doing their little balaclava wearing black bloc style march too. It's all just a LARP to them. A big ol clown brigade.

>>2567349
he's being sued

The destruction of the CPB is the only credible task before the British proletariat.
Keir Starmer could be a mid tier PM if he deported the lot of them to Afghanistan for their cringeworthy behaviour. Good right-wing press headlines, deporting "communists", though admittedly MI5 might be upset to lose their dumbest agents and MI6 might be upset that MI5 agents are muscling in on their territory.

>>2567618
Because the UK is the only Western country that had a serious fucking Socialist movement that survived into the 1980s/1990s with very serious Socialist and Feminist figures that actually had at least, major public profiles.
This means that among especially British Boomers, you have a swath of older Socialists who ACTUALLY READ THEORY and ENGAGE IN STRUCTURAL AND CRITICAL THINKING unlike the current retard Millennial/Zoomer shit for brains left, and could see TRA shit for the disingenious, incoherent post-modernist, misogynistic slop it is.
Btw, even TRA Tumblr ""Feminists"" admit the reason that so many UK feminists are anti-cult, is because UK feminism was far more developed in actual feminist theory, instead of being attached to a general liberal "civil rights" movement like it was elsewhere.
>How did these brainworms emerge, and why specifically Britain?
Pretty sure the brainworms are you retards that literally believe that biological sex isn't real, lesbians are bigots if they don't want to have sex with men and that women went through all of human history as subjugated figures out of choice.
>>2567885
Will BE ever stop being a fueding dramacow and just focus on the actual more academic shit he's decent at?
>>2567663
Still love how you disingenious retards still can't actually argue a coherent point and always go running to the mods like pathetic little shameless cowards you are.

>>2568342
I didn't no Rowling posted here. What's up Joe.