Behold the most misunderstood piece of writing in mankind's history

Behold the most misunderstood piece of writing in mankind's history

Everyone who base their ideology from this book apparently didn't read any single page of it, since they got it all wrong.

Nietzsche for people who have an even bigger main character syndrome

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

The Kind of Tired That Sleep Won’t Fix Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    is it worth reading this, even just for background knowledge

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No, its pseudo-garbage written by a bum.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Absolutely not, it's written by someone with brain damage, pollutes the mind with useless ideas and in turn makes you less of a person.

        coping, seething, did not read the book

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Uncle Ted says that you should dilate and get a job.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >posting the ramblings of an MKULTRA'd troon
            Kek

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >posting this hot piece of indoctrination
            >expects people to read it
            >in a thread about another type of indoctrination
            wew, this thread's really getting hot and heavy!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Ted literally had no actual beliefs, he just wanted to seem smart to morons because he was a malignant narcissist.
            All he wanted was to live innawoods and kill random people for shits and giggles.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            he's talking about american progressives, what marxists would call 'liberals'. ignoring how illiberal they are, and how most marxists also hold their social views ever since 1968, there's different types of leftists in the sense they all want to go down one path in a certain way.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Of course, just don't end up taking everything he wrote for granted or you'll end up being a ideological zealot

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Absolutely not, it's written by someone with brain damage, pollutes the mind with useless ideas and in turn makes you less of a person.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. Marx was a smart guy and his book is worth reading. He was also a bit of a bum, and Engles had to finish the book for him. The only problem I have with Kapital is that the labour theory of value is not correct. What is value? From whence is it derived? I think most "marxists" do not read this book, and I think he would be ashamed of most modern people who call themselves "marxists". Anyone who is interested in economics can gain something from reading this book. I would also suggest reading wealth of nations. You may be surprised to learn that Marx appears to hold Smith in fairly high regard.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >What is value? From whence is it derived?
        such deep intellectual issues being posed, none of which you'd have been able to deduct without reading this trash

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >>Marx was a smart guy
        >Majored in philosophy
        Lmao, pick one. Also value comes before labour, watch as all the leftoid seethe and shit their pants.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          in philosophy
          what?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >>Marx was a smart guy
        >Majored in philosophy
        Lmao, pick one. Also value comes before labour, watch as all the leftoid seethe and shit their pants.

        >What is value? From whence is it derived?
        >value comes before labour
        marx agrees. capital is about the organisation of labour according to the optimal expenditure of labour both past and present, not a theory of labour. it's a critique of political economy as something which treats value as an abstract essence rather than the metric by which the labour of society is coordinated and which compels people to work, of which the class system is a product. the analysis of commodity fetishism is central to marx's critique
        there are better explanations of this than i can give, i recommend looking into marx's philosophical background in w/r/t hegel, feuerbach, bauer, stirner etc but ig that's too much work for most people. michael heinrich does a decent job

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >which the class system is a product
          Another reason why he is a literal pseud. Wishing for some egaltarian fantasy land. Not to mention the abolition of private property shows that he was just a loser seething that he was too poor to afford property of his own but the majority of people arent. The more you study his garbage the more you will realize that he was just a envious loser.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >but the majority of people arent

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Seethe all you like but cheap property exist all over the world, issue is that everyone wants to live in high-priced ares like NY, London or Switzerland where it is stupid expensive. That still doesnt change the fact that im right. Get a job Black person.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >just move to a soul-sucking shithole where half the people in every town are alcoholics and/or methheads
            some people want more out of life than all the excitement of watching paint dry for several decades.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That seems like such an unremarkable conclusion that isn't as Earth-shattering as some people make it out to be.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >You may be surprised to learn that Marx appears to hold Smith in fairly high regard.
        Anyone who ever claims otherwise has never read any Marx. Marx and the LTV literally never contradict Smith.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >What is value? From whence is it derived?
        It's funny you ask this. Because Capitalist theory, i.e. orthodox economics, is totally incoherent on this question and seems to prefer to say "value" isn't real at all, or divert attention and say it's not something worth talking about. At least that's my experience. When it obviously should be something you have a definition and idea on, and a core element of... economics. Economy without value is like physics without a coherent theory on matter.

        Meanwhile, Marxism provides a totally clear headed and rational explanation on what value is in the first chapter of Das kapital (which I haven't read because I scrubbed out. But I started reading once upon a time

        Value is the commensurable (big but useful word) element between two or more items in economic exchange - ideall in a system of one e.g. a market. An apparent and emergent phenomenon. 5 socks = 1 coat. 2 coat = 1 quilt. Therefore 10 socks = 1 quilt. The value is the even divisible commensurability between items here that allows universal exchange, regardless of personal use of the items.

        It's easy to see an analogy here. The value or commensurability is seen in money. Any item, regardless of subjective personal use or (careful not to get mixed up here) valuation of an EXCHANGEABLE item, has a fairly consistent measure of X money to the greater system of exchange. It's just important to note money is not the same thing as value, nor does it always match perfectly. If you believe that you might confuse yourself.

        If we admit this happens, and that there seems to be a pattern to it, e.g. shirts tend to be of less "value" than cars, then it stands to reason there is a rational material explanation for the pattern and that it has an origin. An objective one, like gravity. Cars are more valuable than pencils for a scientific reason.

        Anyway, that's value, as I understand it. Don't mix it up with the English general word value. Like the value of a mothers love, or your personal value of fine wines. We are talking about an economic phenomenon here.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It's not as complex as you're trying to make it. Pretty much what you need to consider something that has value, is related to among other things, the necessity of the item, or as is commonly referred to, the demand. And even then, value is not strictly related to demand, as the cost of things previously thought of as essentially useless, can still have a value almost entirely fabricated. As an example, I was talking about inflation, and its consequences. One of the main aspects about inflation, is that, despite everything changing prices, essential products such as food or clothing, still remain mostly the same value, regardless of whether the prices fluctuate or not. Production cost ''increases'' but only to match the lowering value of money, all of a sudden, workers need more to do the same thing, in theory, at least. But the value of the product, for the most part, remains constant throughout inflation. Hence, why stuff like investing on a business that creates a product, is a wise thing to do, seeing as regardless of the economy and stuff like inflation, the value of a product nearly always remains the same, given there's customers willing to buy the product. You could factor in things like consumers having less purchasing power, various other influences, but putting those concepts aside, and saying that you have a product that will get purchased no matter what, you can start to understand how some of these things work. There's an adjustment that happens during inflation, due to the fact that there's competition with other brands, value will remain the same for the most part as before.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Literally only the first few chapter are worth reading until you get to the part where he introduces LTV and then you realize he was actually moronic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Read Adam Smith and then Marx

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Everyone who base their ideology from this book apparently didn't read any single page of it,
    most marxism is based on his other writing and its reinterpretation. few people read capital, despite it being of central importance. heinrich gang

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wagner was the superior Young Hegelian and had a better critique of capitalism.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Karl Ellara
    wdhmbt

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it's Kurrentschrift - a form of cursive that originated in late medieval Germany.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        not even

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          pardon?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Behold the most misunderstood piece of writing in mankind's history

    It doesn't matter in what way you understand Marx, whiteboi. It is dialectically evolved History that makes your perception of a misinterpretation of Marx' work actually the true objective, real understanding thereof.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's been resolved since then

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is Das Kapital even necessary for Communist movements?

    It seems that it's the fact nobody reads it shows that it's pretty irrelevant.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I've never read Capital so I think it'd be pretentious to call myself a Marxist. I'll just be an anarchist instead and plan on riding around in war-rigged dune buggies in the desert while the eggheads handle the economics.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    "to each according to his need..." - Hegel
    all lies

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >have to pay for a copy
    Fricking hypocrite

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Everyone who base their ideology
    You didn't even read the subtitle: "A *critique* of political economy."

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yet Marxism exists as an ideology, ergo people who support it based from those writings never really read them

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, It's utopian hegelian fiction, written by a hateful NEET israelite, that doesn't work in real life (100+ years of expirements with 100% failure rate)

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *