Karl Marx - the coolest guy ever ?

synd

Das Kapital - a very insightful book on profit accumulation :D:D:D
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...7-c1/index.htm

Time Magazine

Are you trying to create a discussion or are you just posting a link to your favourite highly-flawed outdated book on economic thought?

10000maniacs

Marxism is not the answer to our economic woes. Marxism tries to change the human behavior, and it is a flawed concept.
The human traits of self interest and the need to acquire capital are built into the human genes and are not there because of capitalism.
There are rich and poor people in China, Cuba and North Korea, so it does not work.

Ostrom

10000maniacs wrote: »

The human traits of self interest and the need to acquire capital are built into the human genes and are not there because of capitalism

Oh god....

segaBOY

efla wrote: »

Oh god....

Capital G my friend

10000maniacs

efla wrote: »

Oh god....

Stupid and still able to use a computer. Well done. Bless

I think you need to elaborate.

sink

efla wrote: »

Oh god....

Not 'Oh god...', rather 'Oh evolution by natural selection...'.

Black Swan

While Marx may have been useful to initiate a discussion of the issues back during his time, his two dimensional class system suffered from the limitations associated with dichotomies (see Jacques Derrida), and he did not anticipate workers becoming stock and bond equity holders, thereby confounding his division between owners and workers.

Given this, I do like his concept fetish capitalism, especially as it pertains to the description of people that buy petrol inefficient SUVs as status symbols, hardly ever or never taking them off road.

10000maniacs

sink wrote: »

Not 'Oh god...', rather 'Oh evolution by natural selection...'.

Oh God, I think I insulted a few commies.:eek:

eamonnm79

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

While Marx may have been useful to initiate a discussion of the issues back during his time, his two dimensional class system suffered from the limitations associated with dichotomies (see Jacques Derrida), and he did not anticipate workers becoming stock and bond equity holders, thereby confounding his division between owners and workers.

Given this, I do like his concept fetish capitalism, especially as it pertains to the description of people that buy petrol inefficient SUVs as status symbols, hardly ever or never taking them off road.

Marx is one of the greatest economic minds the world has seen. Mainly because he tries to something most economists do not even see as part of their remit. He tries to see a way to create a "civilised" society (Im not saying he thought it should be done in a civilised way).

Did his theories have flaws due to the fact that things change over time? Of course!
Were some of ideas instremental in rebalance of power from the merchant classes to working classes between 1850 and 1970? Yes

Did the last 30 years of "Eat your own young" american capitalism push power back towards the elite? Yes.

Is it a lot more complicated than my gross simplifications? Obviously.

Ostrom

10000maniacs wrote: »

Oh God, I think I insulted a few commies.:eek:

I hate 'commies' almost as much as people like you who pretend to have read it, take whatever pop references stick out most in your mind, combine them with the complete antithesis of Marx's argument (which should be evident from any of his key texts, including the basic manifesto) and use them as an argument against.

The 'oh god' covered everything from your common assumption that 'marxism' constitutes a roadmap to 'the brain surgeon and the binman's equal earnings......' to your determinism.

I use Marx's approach as a framework, and have little time for those who try to derive directions for non-existent (systems, modes of production, communism, whatever you wish to call it) from his work, or people such as yourself who go one further and make groundless assumptions

Ostrom

synd wrote: »

Das Kapital - a very insightful book on profit accumulation :D:D:D
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...7-c1/index.htm

And on topic; yes, with qualifications and 100+ years of commentary considered, the method of Das Kapital remains insightful

10000maniacs

efla wrote: »

I hate 'commies' almost as much as people like you who pretend to have read it, take whatever pop references stick out most in your mind, combine them with the complete antithesis of Marx's argument (which should be evident from any of his key texts, including the basic manifesto) and use them as an argument against.

The 'oh god' covered everything from your common assumption that 'marxism' constitutes a roadmap to 'the brain surgeon and the binman's equal earnings......' to your determinism.

I use Marx's approach as a framework, and have little time for those who try to derive directions for non-existent (systems, modes of production, communism, whatever you wish to call it) from his work, or people such as yourself who go one further and make groundless assumptions

Thanks for the clarification, and I agree with some of the things you say in the reply, while some of Marx's theories are flawed by their practical humanisation.
By the way could you not have posted the above the first time instead of posting "Oh God"?

Ostrom

10000maniacs wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification, and I agree with some of the things you say in the reply, while some of Marx's theories are flawed by their practical humanisation.
By the way could you not have posted the above the first time instead of posting "Oh God"?

I should have, my bad

Apologies!

synd

I use Marx's approach as a framework, and have little time for those who try to derive directions for non-existent (systems, modes of production, communism, whatever you wish to call it) from his work, or people such as yourself who go one further and make groundless assumptions

The framework is good - his analysis of socio economic relations is accurate, however if we accept his findings we also have to deal with the implications. In fact the reason Marx is so often smeared is because of the (implications) inherent in his work as opposed to the (supposed) shortcomings.