smarterthanone Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 When you deal with retards, sometimes you need retarded arguments. Here is one for you to use when you talk to someone spouting the Marx LTV. 1. Only labor creates wealth 2. Metal ore in the earth is not inherently valuable, metal ore dug up and refined is the value. It comes from the labor. 3. Labor only exists in the present, when the labor is being acted out. 4. The refined metal is the value created by the labor the person. No capitalist should be able to steal the metal from the laborer because their physical labor is now converted into the metal. 5. Workers are entitled to 100% of their labor, therefore the metal is private property owned by the laborer. (*The only place you will probably get some push back due to use of term private property*) 6. The laborer builds a machine out of the metal with his own two hands. 7. Nobody else is entitled to the machine (MOP) because it is the workers labor. To do so would be theft according to Marx LTV. I have used this argument on commie retards before with decent success. Almost everything Marx says supports capitalism if you really think it through.
RamynKing Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 there's nothing specifically immoral about the doctrine you've laid out. this scenario is perfectly plausible right now, under western governments. a labor-minded individual can go out and mine some ore, make some metal, build some machines etc. no boss needed. but if you tell a commie this, that they already have a nonviolent path to their workers' paradise, they will claim that it can't work now, because the capitalists got here first and seized all the resources. you could try to then point to small startup opportunities they might be able to access, but they will respond that it's too small, and even if they do manage a start, the cappies will then smash the threat with all their power. so basically, there is no discussion to be had along this line. also, i don't think that convincing them that property rights aren't bad will help much either. they may have cognitive dissonance here. they believe that property is wrong only because they don't have the property they want. some of them might even accurately imagine the chaotic, primal world we'd get without property, and they accept it out of misplaced spite for humanity. i'm always interested in possible lines of argument to convert commies to cappies. but a lot of them are probably just mentally ill and not actually interested in better philosophy.
smarterthanone Posted July 6, 2017 Author Posted July 6, 2017 18 minutes ago, RamynKing said: ...a lot of them are probably just mentally ill and not actually interested in better philosophy. Unfortunately this. But its been said, that its a beautiful sight to behold, when you see a spark in their dark, dead eyes and they turn on like they are a new Christmas toy you just shoved batteries up its derriere.
smarterthanone Posted July 7, 2017 Author Posted July 7, 2017 Marx said all sorts of random junk. I wrote the argument. Is that what you are asking? A decent number of commies will follow this argument though. Try it in your favorite facebook anarchist group. Just make sure you keep saying you are a strict supporter of Marx when delivering it and they will eat it up.
smarterthanone Posted July 8, 2017 Author Posted July 8, 2017 3 hours ago, ofd said: Where does Marx say that only labour creates wealth? Not sure specifically. It is a common argument by commies. Something about factory output is not produced by capital but by labor, that is why he argues all profits should go to labor and not capitalists. I am aware he specifically states somewhere that wealth can come from natural resources but he still assigns all output to the labor due to its mix with the natural resources.
Siegfried von Walheim Posted July 8, 2017 Posted July 8, 2017 On 7/6/2017 at 2:47 PM, RamynKing said: there's nothing specifically immoral about the doctrine you've laid out. this scenario is perfectly plausible right now, under western governments. a labor-minded individual can go out and mine some ore, make some metal, build some machines etc. no boss needed. but if you tell a commie this, that they already have a nonviolent path to their workers' paradise, they will claim that it can't work now, because the capitalists got here first and seized all the resources. you could try to then point to small startup opportunities they might be able to access, but they will respond that it's too small, and even if they do manage a start, the cappies will then smash the threat with all their power. so basically, there is no discussion to be had along this line. also, i don't think that convincing them that property rights aren't bad will help much either. they may have cognitive dissonance here. they believe that property is wrong only because they don't have the property they want. some of them might even accurately imagine the chaotic, primal world we'd get without property, and they accept it out of misplaced spite for humanity. i'm always interested in possible lines of argument to convert commies to cappies. but a lot of them are probably just mentally ill and not actually interested in better philosophy. Well, I used to be a Communist back when I was indoctrinated in high school, and eventually I grew out of that into AnCap. However I have to concur that the rationale for being a communist is far more personal and twisted than a matter of reason. The rationalization is merely an excuse to hide the underlying crazy. 1
ofd Posted July 8, 2017 Posted July 8, 2017 Quote Not sure specifically. It is a common argument by commies. Something about factory output is not produced by capital but by labor, that is why he argues all profits should go to labor and not capitalists. Compare that with Quote The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as “an immense accumulation of commodities,”[1] its unit being a single commodity. Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity. The first two sentence of Das Kapital and then a cursory glance to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_(Marxism) and you will realize that your presentation is subcomplex to the issue at hand. 1
zmilne27 Posted July 12, 2017 Posted July 12, 2017 On 7/8/2017 at 8:07 AM, ofd said: Where does Marx say that only labour creates wealth? The labor theory of value posits that value is derived directly from the labor it took to make it. If labor creates value, and wealth is an accumulation of value, then I think it's fair to assert that under the LTV, labor is what essentially creates wealth.
Jsbrads Posted July 15, 2017 Posted July 15, 2017 Marx argues for the use of force to be used upon people, what else do the soft headed commies need? if labor in factory is 100% of value, then why build factories. The laborer can get 100% of the fruit of his labor if he does all his labor individually without capital. Punch trees until you have the wood you need, punch holes in the ground to attain ores needed... #Factorio
Recommended Posts