and no being a businessman won't allow you to know what the kuznets curve is, for instance

keynesianism

makes

more

sense

than

free market capitalist

economics

idc what makes more sense

that wasn't the topic

well

Nothing worthy was created in economics after Marx

@Advocatus Diaboli nothing worthy was created in Ukraine after the Holodomor

anyways a cruical thing about marx the labour theory of value

Lol wut

Austrian school and their theory of marginal utility is shit

was agreed on by economcists of the time

like adam smith

so uhmmm 🤔

@Adoring Fan How is this relevant

We're talking about economics

i wonder what that says about marxist theory 🤔 if adam smith agreed with labour theory of value

it is relevant because your comment has as much bearing on the discussion as yours did

Adam Smith lived prior to Marx

also

not an argument

NoT An ArGuMeNT

>man agreed with it

>therefore it's correct

yes but why did adam smith agree with it?

because LTV makes economic sense

idc, i don't support adam smith's views

>man agrees with x
>why? because x is correct

not

an

argument

but you said there was no economic basis for marxism because marx wasn't an economicist or whatever but when economicist like adam smith agree with things like LTV it shows there is economic basis of marxism

Any economist would tell you his views originated from Smith's views

Smith is a founder of modern economics

adoring

"NOT AN ARGUMENT."

Wait Adam Smith wasn’t even alive when Karl was around

He died in 1790

but his theories literally are based in LTV

But that’s different you said Smith agreed with him

But they both were supporting LTV

I can agree with a minimum wage. And say that we need the minimum wage to be $500/hour. Economists agree with the fact that there should be a minimum wage.

But that does not mean there is an economic basis to my beliefs

therefore

not

an

argument

and i'm off for now

Please just stop saying not an argument

WTF we weren't even talking about wages and stuff

It makes your argument seem weaker

that makes no sense because Adam Smith and Karl Marx both supported LTV in their strict sense smh

>ukrainian intellect

>fascist coherence

tbh @GermanEastAfrica is a pretty ok fascist

Thanks?

To be honest I find this server to have much more intellectually stimulating discussions than I’a seen elsewhere. When it’s not shit flinging of course

Pretty nice to see fascists debate like civilised persons I must say

my main issue is that idealism is being thrown around in a lazy fashion, idealism in a philosophical sense is quite nuanced tbh.

Most of them

Im going to talk about Aristotle's conception of idealism

Idealism in the Aristotelian sense is that every in the world is imperfect

and that we can imagine a more perfect version of everything in this imperfect world

I find it ironic that our sides fight so heavily when we want the same thing in different flavors, or at least some of us do

marxism is not like that we don't 'imagine' a more perfect world we want to look at how the material world is an make a prediction based on our observations of what will occur next

marxists who are 'imagining' are not actually marxists but Utopian socialists

And in a certain sense so does fascism but we take in account the family and old culture

And the end results are different for both

That seems to be the most big divides i’ve seen

the issue here is that family and culture are not thngs we consider as part of the 'economic base' as in the material things that shape everything but as things that are shaped by our economic base.

I’m going to be honest I’ve learned quite a bit from talking with you folks

as in

family may be family always

I see, you’re more focused on the straight shot economic values

but how family is conceived as an idea depends on how economics are at the time

i.e

we live in very nuclear families under capitalism

under say primitive communism/tribalism

they lived in less nuclear famlies

and more 'communal living'

I see

this was because communal living was better for the tribal setting

while nuclear family is better for the capitalist setting

this is ultimately what i mean when i say 'the base shapes the superstructure'

I believe it works well under a fascist system as well

And that’s why we value it

It’s also formed from the recent state of the family and how we see it falling apart under this current system which is leading to complications

Which I think helps the drive to protect the nuclear family idea

@GermanEastAfrica so what i want to say is that marxists are not against marriage or family as things people do
but the specific forms of marriage and family inherent to capitalism

@LoJ Wait for the Congress to convene

Like the fact you need a license for marriage

well more like marriage is a way for often men to control women

i.e in feudalistic times

marriage was all about

how can i obtain more land?