Project 429
(?)Community Member
- Report Post
- Posted: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 01:29:02 +0000
Le Pere Duchesne
Project 429
Memette
So in conclusion: Who CARES if he shoplifted cigars or not? Who CARES if he struck the officer first? Why are we debating this? Why was there property to be purchased in the first place? And what was the cop doing protecting an exploitative class of people to begin with?
Look, you put down a lot of s**t in that post so I'm going to save us both the time and cut straight to the end of your argument. Marxism is dead from the neck down and it will never rise again outside of academia because it's entirely contingent on a man's (who was comically terrible with money) misunderstanding of what purpose a market serves.
You have apples. I have a moneys. For a transaction between the two of us to occur there must be (and this is where Marx and Aristotle both faceplanted) mutual inverse subjective valuation of the capital being exchanged. This is the only condition in which a voluntary transaction occurs and thus every voluntary transaction is a betterment of society. This is why societies without a functional market fail.
I'm not really interested in going on about this for ten pages. There are better threads.
OK, this post is dumb. You don't get to criticise Marx, claiming he didn't understand 'what purpose a market serves' when even saying that shows that you don't understand the Marxist critique of political economy. s**t ain't about the 'purpose of markets' ( "muh ducats" ) but the critique of the categories in political economy and the explanation of capital as a social relationship. Even talking about a transaction as an exchange of capital is alien to Marxism, as for you it just means cash or value. For Marx capital is a social relationship of value vaporising itself.
Long story short, don't criticise s**t on the basis of it misunderstanding s**t when your own knowledge of what you are criticising is obviously empty. But this is a derail, and I'll stop here.
This would be great if I used capital and market interchangeably or had presumed he shared my definition of capital.
I don't understand why you think no one but other Marxists have read Marx. He's mandatory literature in entry level collegiate courses I've taken. His work has been in public domain for a very long time. It's actually easier for me to say you aren't knowledgeable about what you're criticizing. For example, your signature isn't even halfway right - critics of Marxism have described his "historically inevitable" society as dystopian for as long as the criticism has existed.