Bernie Sanders Touts Marxist Economists

[bripat9643]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

 

[PoliticalChic]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

" Instead both systems were ignored..."


Kinda the way Franklin Roosevelt and every lock-step Liberal ignored the 100 million men, women and children slaughtered in the failed attempt to enforce the failed agendas called 'socialism and communism'?

Like that?


If you ever make the attempt to educate yourself, begin here:

You may actually appear a bit less of an imbecile.

 

[bripat9643]

[
Claiming Marx advocated for the elimination of useless eaters and not providing the proper citation is not an honest examination.

Demanding that I prove water is wet does not help your argument.

Marx based his view of useless eaters on American social theorist Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929) classic Theory of the Leisure Class. Marx wrote extensively about the Nobles who did nothing but collect rents

{This surplus value is then distributed to the different sections of capital in proportion to their share of the total capital. This process of division takes place through the competitive struggle in the market. If one particular section of capital receives profit at higher than the average rate then capital will move from other sections of the economy to increase the production of the commodity returning the higher rate until its price falls to the “price of production”—that is, the level at which profit is received at the average rate.

The equalisation of the rate of profit across the different sections of capital depends on the ability of capital to move freely. However, there may be conditions which prevent this. For example, if the ownership of land is monopolised, capital will not be able to freely move into agricultural production if profits there were to go above the average rate. This would mean that agricultural producers would be able to charge above the “price of production”. The higher than average return would be divided between the landowner in the form of “rent” and profit to the capitalist farmer.} Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter Thirty-One

You lie and unlike you I can provide the proper citation.

What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.
Critique of the Gotha Programme-- I

Don't be a ******* retard, it's unbecoming.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" (French: De chacun selon ses moyens, à chacun selon ses besoins; German: Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen) is a slogan popularised by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.[1] The principle refers to free access and distribution of goods, capital and services.[2] In the Marxist view, such an arrangement will be made possible by the abundance of goods and services that a developed communist system will produce; the idea is that, with the full development of socialism and unfettered productive forces, there will be enough to satisfy everyone's needs.[3][4]

Friedrich Engels became a socialist after witnessing the horrors of unbridled capitalist exploitation in the UK during the Industrial Revolution.

More Marxist propaganda. The "horrors" of capitalism led to the greatest increase in human welfare ever witnessed.

 

[bripat9643]

[
Claiming Marx advocated for the elimination of useless eaters and not providing the proper citation is not an honest examination.

Demanding that I prove water is wet does not help your argument.

Marx based his view of useless eaters on American social theorist Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929) classic Theory of the Leisure Class. Marx wrote extensively about the Nobles who did nothing but collect rents

{This surplus value is then distributed to the different sections of capital in proportion to their share of the total capital. This process of division takes place through the competitive struggle in the market. If one particular section of capital receives profit at higher than the average rate then capital will move from other sections of the economy to increase the production of the commodity returning the higher rate until its price falls to the “price of production”—that is, the level at which profit is received at the average rate.

The equalisation of the rate of profit across the different sections of capital depends on the ability of capital to move freely. However, there may be conditions which prevent this. For example, if the ownership of land is monopolised, capital will not be able to freely move into agricultural production if profits there were to go above the average rate. This would mean that agricultural producers would be able to charge above the “price of production”. The higher than average return would be divided between the landowner in the form of “rent” and profit to the capitalist farmer.} Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter Thirty-One

You lie and unlike you I can provide the proper citation.

What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.
Critique of the Gotha Programme-- I

Don't be a ******* retard, it's unbecoming.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" (French: De chacun selon ses moyens, à chacun selon ses besoins; German: Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen) is a slogan popularised by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.[1] The principle refers to free access and distribution of goods, capital and services.[2] In the Marxist view, such an arrangement will be made possible by the abundance of goods and services that a developed communist system will produce; the idea is that, with the full development of socialism and unfettered productive forces, there will be enough to satisfy everyone's needs.[3][4]

Friedrich Engels became a socialist after witnessing the horrors of unbridled capitalist exploitation in the UK during the Industrial Revolution.

Engels was the original spoiled frat boy, son of a rich factory owner who's jealousy of a father vastly superior to him drove his hatred. A professional student who never did a days work in his life and thought he was champion of those he viewed with disdain. Johnny Depp of an earlier age.

Ah, so your position is that you'd be happy to see the conditions of 19th century industry brought back.

fascinating.

Yeah, because if we abolish the FDA, that means penicillin and the polio vaccine will disappear.

You're a moron.

 

[regent]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

 

[Tehon]

Demanding that I prove water is wet does not help your argument.

Marx based his view of useless eaters on American social theorist Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929) classic Theory of the Leisure Class.

Claiming Marx's views were based on a book that was published 16 years after his death doesn't inspire any confidence that you could prove water is wet!

 

[sartre play]

In the 30s communism was very popular in the states, in the 50s it was boggy man time with a commie under every bed. communists are kinda quiet right now, while the left & right battle it out. poor us, the dems & repubs who are looking for some balance in power so that some things can be accomplished. not just the ripping apart of stuff for unknown reasons.

 

[Tehon]

Marx wrote extensively about the Nobles who did nothing but collect rents

{This surplus value is then distributed to the different sections of capital in proportion to their share of the total capital. This process of division takes place through the competitive struggle in the market. If one particular section of capital receives profit at higher than the average rate then capital will move from other sections of the economy to increase the production of the commodity returning the higher rate until its price falls to the “price of production”—that is, the level at which profit is received at the average rate.

The equalisation of the rate of profit across the different sections of capital depends on the ability of capital to move freely. However, there may be conditions which prevent this. For example, if the ownership of land is monopolised, capital will not be able to freely move into agricultural production if profits there were to go above the average rate. This would mean that agricultural producers would be able to charge above the “price of production”. The higher than average return would be divided between the landowner in the form of “rent” and profit to the capitalist farmer.} Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter Thirty-One

Aside from the fact that you still prove unable to correctly give a citation, where in the quoted text does Marx advocate the killing of useless eaters? Or anyone for that matter? Once and for all, prove your words or save face and apologize for employing the death panel tactics that conservative fear mongering bottom dwellers are known for.

 

[bripat9643]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

 

[regent]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

 

[bripat9643]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

 

[regent]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Is socialism communism?

 

[bripat9643]

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Is socialism communism?

Yes, they're the same thing, only in the later case they actually try to implement it, not just do a lot of hand waving.

 

[regent]

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Is socialism communism?

Yes, they're the same thing, only in the later case they actually try to implement it, not just do a lot of hand waving.

I take it then that Scientific socialism, Christian socialism, True socialism, Feudal socialism, Clerical socialism, and all the others are the same? Did Marx think all types were good and all would lead to communism?

 

[usmbguest5318]

I wasn't around when this thread was initiated and I'm not going to read through 130+ posts. I wonder, however, how many people responding to the thread topic actually understand Marxian economics. In all my years, though I've often enough heard laymen deride (in their mind thus utterances) a variety of economic proposals by equating them to Marxian ideas, I have yet to encounter one such person who did so cogently. At its heart, literally everything about Marx' economics is a value theory based critique of capitalism more so than being a comprehensive economic system unto itself. Very few laymen -- none that I've met -- actually understand that.

To wit, every time I've bothered to ask one of the airheads who used "Marxist" to derogate something and in response asked them to explain themselves by comparing and contrasting the allegedly Marxist economic idea with the capitalist alternative, not one of them so much as even mentioned Marx's conception of value theory, let alone draw parallels between Marx's consideration of it and the contemporary economist's ideas they purport to detest. Indeed, at this point, I no longer bother asking; I just don't respond to their comment.

Even at the tactical level, I don't think most folks understand what is and is not apropos to Marxist economic ideas. Consider this: it's conservatives who advocate a return to the gold standard, which Marx embraced and liberals do not. How many conservatives have advocated for a return to the gold standard and have been called Marxist for doing so?


It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a "dismal science." But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
-- Murray N. Rothbard

 

[bripat9643]

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Is socialism communism?

Yes, they're the same thing, only in the later case they actually try to implement it, not just do a lot of hand waving.

I take it then that Scientific socialism, Christian socialism, True socialism, Feudal socialism, Clerical socialism, and all the others are the same? Did Marx think all types were good and all would lead to communism?

In practical terms they are all pretty much the same. The only form that is significantly different is called syndicalism, which is where the workers of each factory make decisions independently about how run it. Of course, they are all doomed to failure. All give enormous powers to the state and set up a country for totalitarian dictatorship. Disaster usually follows shortly after that.

 

[bripat9643]

I wasn't around when this thread was initiated and I'm not going to read through 130+ posts. I wonder, however, how many people responding to the thread topic actually understand Marxian economics. In all my years, though I've often enough heard laymen deride (in their mind thus utterances) a variety of economic proposals by equating them to Marxian ideas, I have yet to encounter one such person who did so cogently. At its heart, literally everything about Marx' economics is a value theory based critique of capitalism more so than being a comprehensive economic system unto itself. Very few laymen -- none that I've met -- actually understand that.

To wit, every time I've bothered to ask one of the airheads who used "Marxist" to derogate something and in response asked them to explain themselves by comparing and contrasting the allegedly Marxist economic idea with the capitalist alternative, not one of them so much as even mentioned Marx's conception of value theory, let alone draw parallels between Marx's consideration of it and the contemporary economist's ideas they purport to detest. Indeed, at this point, I no longer bother asking; I just don't respond to their comment.

Even at the tactical level, I don't think most folks understand what is and is not apropos to Marxist economic ideas. Consider this: it's conservatives who advocate a return to the gold standard, which Marx embraced and liberals do not. How many conservatives have advocated for a return to the gold standard and have been called Marxist for doing so?

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a "dismal science." But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
-- Murray N. Rothbard

Sorry, chump, but favoring the gold standard doesn't make you a Marxist any more than believing 2 + 2 = 4 makes you a Marxist. He did believe the later, didn't he?

Your "logic" is idiotic.

 

[Tehon]

During the red scare it seemed essential that Americans understand what socialism and communism were all about. Instead both systems were ignored in schools and classrooms and McCarthyism, politics and fear took over. For a time it was a Republican bonanza with that party able to label anything it didn't want, such as Social Security as leading directly to communism.

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Marx didn't only criticize the capitalist mode of production. He was a critic of socialist movements as well. In his criticism of the German Workers Party platform we can get a clear sense of what Marxist socialism is and what it is not. We can clearly see that he refutes all of the modern day conservative conceptions of what socialism is.

And as was pointed out by another poster in this thread we can see that the modern conservative has more in common with Marxist thought than they would care to admit, including but not limited to, criticisms of the oppressive state, excessive taxation, national debt, elitism and government redistribution.

 

[bripat9643]

Fear of Marxism is the result of understanding what it is, not of ignorance.

How many Americans know what Marxism is or are ignorant? Notice the times bullshit or you're a moron are used as post responses.

The Americans who are the most ignorant about Marxism are the same ones who are trying to push it on us at all possible speed.

Can you name any country that practiced Marx communism?

Marx never specified what his utopia would be like. He restricted himself to attacking capitalism.

Of course, you're just using the old Marxist trick of pretending no one ever tried to implement socialism. That's a lie, of course. They tried as hard as anyone could, but you can't draw a triangle with four sides.

Marx didn't only criticize the capitalist mode of production. He was a critic of socialist movements as well. In his criticism of the German Workers Party platform we can get a clear sense of what Marxist socialism is and what it is not. We can clearly see that he refutes all of the modern day conservative conceptions of what socialism is.

And as was pointed out by another poster in this thread we can see that the modern conservative has more in common with Marxist thought than they would care to admit, including but not limited to, criticisms of the oppressive state, excessive taxation, national debt, elitism and government redistribution.

Apparently you and the rest of the Marxists can't state what his conception of socialism is because you never do.

Dolts like you claim to be hostile to the state, yet your every action has the effect of building it up and making it stronger. That's how we know your protests about the state are total bullshit. You also have never seen a tax you didn't like or hesitate one microsecond to pile on to the national debt.

Just like Marx himself, you're all full of shit. No wonder you admire him so.

 

[whitehall]

"Marxist economy"? Isn't that an oxymoron? Sanders enjoys his outcast bad-boy socialist persona but it's just a facade. Sanders is just as much a crooked capitalist as the next democrat but he knows he can't get elected by advocating the thoughts of comrade Marx during the campaign so he picks it up later for the benefit of the idiotic MSM and the shrinking democrat base.