OurToothbrush

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Denying entry to random people is different than telling someone to leave?

Imagine the difference between a bar with a bouncer at the door and a bar without, and then apply that principle at a much larger scale.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Why would I read Sowell when I already know about neoliberalism and what it did literally everywhere it was tried?

Sadly, you will scoff at and ignore my advice right now, but perhaps you’ll remember this some day and are able to integrate the knowledge better after some life experience. Good luck and remember: you don’t have to be a communist. You can choose to be something much more. It’s never too late to change.

Breaking news: Pigeon shits on chess board, flies off.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Literally whether you can control human migration between territories.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Theyre still a power that benefits from colonialism. There is a material component to it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Exile as punishment for a crime and keeping slaves is distinct from having a border with border controls.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (8 children)

They’d kick you out and burn down your house or kill you for being an invader?

That is a complete anachronism, unless you actually were an invader. Have you actually researched this or are you just taking your assumptions and trying to apply them to history?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (10 children)

They couldn't effectively police borders, so they didn't. Technology and population density influences the way the state works and whether they could do borders as they existed in the 20th century and exist in the 21st century.

The argument isn't against technology, it is saying borders as they are understood here are a relatively recent technology relying on other technologies

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (12 children)

There is a massive difference if you can practically establish who is allowed into and out of a country

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (14 children)

Literally the free movement of people? Borders used to be "the zone of control of a government" and couldnt really exist as checkpoints for people moving back and forth over the border.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (17 children)

Yeah, and that is not equivalent to modern borders.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Yes, well, some people are braver than others, and are thus able to declare what they believe in. What do you believe in?

Literally a communist, something that could actually get me targeted by the state instead of being a "no step on snek" cosplayer.

I don’t know why you would bring Marx into this. He was a philosophist, not an economist or a politician

His magnum opus is literally an economic analysis of how capitalism functions lmao

Historical materialism & class struggle for instance. He describes the change from feodalism to capitalism as it happened but then goes deep into conjecture land in fantasizing the future change to socialism and communism. When this was violently experimented with in 1900s, it didn’t go at all as he described. The class struggle is not inevitable at all, and only happens with a combination of bad leadership and agitation (check lemmygrad.ml for practical modern examples of latter). His idea of classless society was basically speculative science fiction, and still is.

Okay, so you haven't read his work and you buy into the idea that "all socialist projects have failed" despite all their successes, and the continued survival of many projects.

I disagree with many points of his critique of capitalism. For instance, the value of a product or service is not derived from the labor put to it, but the value of the product or service to whoever is buying it. Thus surplus is a valid concept.

So you favor a more shallow understanding of where value emerges from, and you haven't read what Marx has actually said about subjective value. What makes the product valuable to whoever is buying jt? Subjective value wants you to believe it is just arbitrary.

I disagree that wealth concentration is a fundamental problem. In the grand scale, more individual wealth leads to more individual happiness, so the important thing is that everyone’s wealth increases. If my neighbor gets 100x richer in real wealth in the time I get 2x richer, I will still be 2x richer. It only becomes a problem if those figures are 100x and 1x or worse, or if he uses his 100x wealth to buy an army to take my stuff, and my claim is that this is not happening in most of the capitalist world.

Okay, so have you read anything about surplus labor value theory? Anything about alienation under capitalism?

Also the notion that were all getting richer at different rates needs evidence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (7 children)

You're literally a self described libertarian lmao

Anyway, stop dodging the question. What economic writings have you read from Marx that you're basing your opinion of Marxist economics on? What problems did you have with them?

view more: ‹ prev next ›