[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


File: 1763511549964.jpg (8.03 KB, 310x162, images.jpg)

 

I haven't really been much of a marxist throughout my life because of its somewhat "continental" nature. In essence my thought system has been articulated around the idea of non-domination/non-coercion, similar to most neo-republicans nowadays. Yet, whilst discussing with a friend of mine yesterday, she described marxism as essentially that, except with a broader picture than the individual. Thus my question is, how do you respond to these critiques without falling into some form of left-libertarianism or kantian ethical (like Rawls or Pettit) system ?

>LTV

From my understanding, alienation occurs because the worker doesn't enjoy the full value of his labor, determined by his labor. Without going into economic debates about which paradigm is true, how do you resolve the LTV being arguably false with the alienation incumbent on the workers ? Alternatively, if labor is presumed to not have innate value, how does alienation come about ?

>Historical materialism

Similarly, how does the marxist critique interprets the potential errors that Marx made. If class conflict is the sole driver of history, how do you explain Napoleon or feudal reconfiguration. Furthermore, if the superstructure can affect and influence the base structure, doesn't this negate the broad "justification" of a revolution and that the roles of production aren't everything in a society (perhaps this lies on me, but I hardly see how marxism can be non-work centered).

>Falling rates of profit/crisis theory

It is my understanding that Marx argued that capitalism would inevitably result in crisis which would weaken the working class and express its contradiction. However, the keynesian framework allows for a more robust understanding of these crisis aswell as an integration of consideration for the workers in its system. Similarly, the TRPF has been disproved by Okshio's theory and has been somewhat proven empirically false. If both are true, what requirement is there to fundamentally change system and free ourselves from the free market "constraint" ?

>Empirical cases of "marxist-leninist" states & the ECP

Lastly, how do MLs adress the issue of domination in marxists societies. Essentially, why haven't marxist utopias produced long-lasting results and individual satisfaction ?
And if it's purely due to historical conjunctures, how do marxists adress the issue of the ECP ?

File: 1763512219627-0.jpg (27.71 KB, 402x720, 1396392254068.jpg)

File: 1763512219627-1.jpg (110.54 KB, 1182x1096, 1629332449709-0.jpg)

>>2565531
>LTV being arguably false
???
>TRPF has been disproved by Okshio's theory and has been somewhat proven empirically false
???
>doesn't understand Historical materialism
>Economic Calculation problem never existed
Congratulations on being slightly more intelligent than the average lolbert. Have a (you).

You're not an ultraliberal, Harry. Get the fuck out of here. Don't be a retard.

>>2565541
What's the point of denying the marginalist conception or the Okshio's theory. I'm not super well versed into economics but it seems a bit apparent that, if you genuinely argued for such theories, that you ground them on solid arguments

>doesn't understand Historical materialism

>Economic Calculation problem never existed
Tell me, then. What more to it is there that I haven't understood ?

>You're not an ultraliberal

That would be correct.

>>2565544
>denying the marginalist conception
>ground them on solid arguments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emnYMfjYh1Q
Here's scientific proof of LTV.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmbm3u2r_Cs
Here's clowning on Marshall.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BkMiZze4ak
And Okishio.
Total watch time is… 51 minutes. So I better not see a fucking reply from you before then. Got it?

How does historical materialism fail to explain Napoleon or feudal reconfiguration? Huh? Marx talks about both at length.


Unique IPs: 3

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]