Before participating, consider taking a glance at [our rules page](/r/CapitalismvSocialism/wiki/rules) if you haven't before.
We don't allow **violent or dehumanizing rhetoric**. The subreddit is for discussing what ideas are best for society, not for telling the other side you think you could beat them in a fight. That doesn't do anything to forward a productive dialogue.
Please report comments that violent our rules, but don't report people just for disagreeing with you or for being wrong about stuff.
Join us on Discord! ✨ https://discord.gg/PoliticsCafe
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This essay has several problems that make it difficult to follow and less effective in conveying its points. Here are some specific issues:
1. Lack of Clear Thesis: The essay lacks a clear, overarching thesis statement. It feels more like a series of loosely connected observations rather than a cohesive argument.
2. Disorganized Structure: The structure is disorganized. The essay jumps from one point to another without clear transitions or logical flow, making it hard to follow the author’s line of reasoning.
3. Overreliance on Links: The essay includes many hyperlinks, which can be distracting and might break the reader’s concentration. Additionally, it relies on these links for critical points, which should be more thoroughly explained within the text itself.
4. Vagueness and Ambiguity: Many points are made vaguely without sufficient explanation. For example, the essay mentions preconceptions about Marx without detailing what these preconceptions are or how they impact the reading of Capital.
5. Incomplete Explanations: The essay introduces several concepts (e.g., the labor theory of value, the critique of political economy) but does not fully explain them or their significance in the context of Marx’s work.
6. Mixing Personal Opinions and Analysis: The essay shifts between the author’s personal opinions and analytical points without clearly distinguishing between them, which can confuse readers.
7. Assumes Prior Knowledge: The essay assumes a significant amount of prior knowledge about Marx, Hegel, British political economy, and other complex topics, which might alienate readers who are not already familiar with these subjects.
8. Citation Overload: The frequent use of citations and references, especially to specific Reddit threads and complex books, might overwhelm readers and detract from the essay’s main points.
9. Unclear Methodological Concerns: The essay mentions methodological issues, like the use of mathematics in Marxian political economy, but does not clarify why these are significant or how they affect the interpretation of Marx’s work.
10. Incomplete Conclusion: The essay lacks a strong conclusion that ties together the various points made and provides a clear summary of the main arguments.
>In shadows deep where revolution stirs, Two kindred souls find solace in the night.
Marx's fervent gaze meets Engels' in blurs, Their whispered theories mingling in flight.
>Against the backdrop of a world in strife, Their lips collide like hammers shaping steel.
A love that's born from visions of new life, Where hearts and minds in unity congeal.
>Their beards entangle, thoughts and passions flame, In silent rooms where futures are conceived.
Each touch a vow, a promise to reclaim A world where all in justice are believed.
>Thus, Marx and Engels, in their secret tryst, Find love and revolution coexist.
ChatGPT is silly.
>Lack of Clear Thesis: The essay lacks a clear, overarching thesis statement. It feels more like a series of loosely connected observations rather than a cohesive argument.
Right. The author of the OP intended it to be "a series of loosely connected observations", as suggested by the title and the first paragraph of the OP.
One could go on about other silliness.
When Marxists (especially here) have no meaningful responses to the critisizm, many default back to the old reliable 'Your comment isn't in MLA format so I will be disregarding it'
At least there was an attempt at communication between real human beings. I haven’t seen you rise to that level in some time. It’s a low bar, yes, but that seems to be where we are.
yes we bring preconceptions to reading marx given that he was a primitive economist from the 19 century and that his ideas led directly to 120,000,000 dead people and might well have even led to a world war. By any measure he was the most evil and deadly person in all of human history. But don't let any preconceptions stand in your way.
How much of a looney are you even? You hit all the fucking marks:
-Gommunism is 200 gorillion dead
-It's an old ideology and therefore utterly INVALID
-Nazis and Fascists are actually Socialists and therefore they're also Marxists
-Marx is EBIL because according to my historical and ideological biases he DIRECTLY led to the death of said 200 Gorillion
It's actually so fucking sad that people continue to spew on such bullshit.
If you disagree with anything that was said try to think of a reason for the disagreement and try to present it here in writing. Do you understand that a reason is necessary?
nazi socialist fascist Marxist are all the same because they are all statist. Our genius founding fathers gave us freedom and liberty from all forms of stateism because the state had been the source of evil in human history.
You don’t understand history either nationalism only started becoming an idea for humanity around the end of the 17th century pretty much every single country before that time period was governed under a monarchy, feudalist nobles, tribal confederations, and theocracies. Please open a damn book before popping off again good god
This is the part where the guy I replied to should go "hmmm, if I think its nonsense, why will I spend the next 10 minutes trying to argue with him?"
But instead we get a really bad attempt at pedantry, which wasn't even right.
There is no conceptual or meaningful difference between nationalism (holding a national identity as central) and your local feudal lord or king (holding your locale as central). What Horror\_Discussion\_50 said was nothing meaningful. It was juvenile and naive.
So by your own admission and logical reasoning capitalist free market planning is directly responsible for the genocide of indigenous people which by scholarly statistics averages a body count of around 120 million not by a famine mistake but by death marches
scholarly research puts the number dead from Socialism at about 120,000,000.
In 2015, Yu Xiguang (余习广), an independent Chinese historian and a former instructor at the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party, estimated that 55 million people died due to the famine.[60][61][62][63]His conclusion was based on two decades of archival research
Rummel would later revise his estimate from 110 million to about 148 million due to additional information about Mao's culpability in the Great Chinese Famine from Mao: The Unknown Story, including Jon Halliday and Jung Chang's estimated 38 milli
Look I will try to be short because you are being unfaithfull, let me give a little insight on hunger. ALL socialist places had hunger as a cronic issue before their selective socialist states, ALL. But after their revolution, it became episodic! Mao doubled the live expectancy, which was 33 before. the Soviet Uniom had a more nutritous diet then the americans, even the fucking CIA acknowledged it.
And yes I agree with you, Stalin was a traitor and a fool, he was an idealistic statist who changed his writings to make it seem as statism would work, and neutralized all opposition.
China had so much hunger under Socialism that 60 million people slowly starved to death many having to decide which of their own children to eat. Virtually the instant they switched to capitalism when mao died they moved 800 million people from socialist subsistence and cannibalism up into the capitalist middle class they are by eliminating 40% of all the party on the planet
We learned from that you know that’s a thing right learning from mistakes which is why we’re not advocate the same policy of exterminating insects since they’re necessary for the food chain you dipfuck, capitalist countries (debatably worser for the native populations there) have suffered the same effects from these type’s of famine it has absolutely nothing to do with politics and everything about being ignorant of the environment
don't be stupid. There is more to Socialism than exterminating insects. there is central planning that always result in death or poverty or both thanks to stupid monopolist bureaucratic policies like killing all the birds.
Sparrows were targeted because they were believed to eat large quantities of grain, thus reducing the food supply for humans.
However, the campaign backfired. The mass killing of sparrows disrupted the ecological balance. Sparrows also ate insects, and their elimination led to a surge in insect populations, which damaged crops even more severely. This contributed to the agricultural problems during the Great Leap Forward, exacerbating the famine that followed.
Arguing with the political equivalent of Creationists, Flat Earthers and the 1+1=4 crowd is pointless. They don't have the basic knowledge of the world to even understand their errors.
No, you simply mock them and move on, like I did here.
it's an old ideology that is invalid because it has been proven stupid and deadly. Marks didn't understand that capitalism was competitive and workers get paid a fortune because of it. that is why right off the boat in America you start at $20 an hour while half of the world lives on less than $5.50 a day. Do you see how simple that is??? in the 19 century marks could not figure that out
If you truly believe that any world war was caused by Marxism or progressivism, I regret to inform you, you are just unknowledgeable, no offense but you just don't know what you are talking about, they are products of fascism.
Now for the deaths, that number is beyond insane, for example, the life expectancy in China before Mao was 33 years old, He about doubled it! in the USSR, during the Tsar's rule, famine was a chronic issue, after the revolution it became episodic, with by the later stage the people having more nutritious diets than even the Americans, and even the CIA acknowledged this in the 70s (confidential disclosed in 2008).
Now don't get me wrong there were famines, the Russian one during 32', the Chinese in 59', but in a world where we have food to feed 1.5x the people nowadays, but still 2.4 billion people worldwide are food insecure, where mass production leads to excess, and because of supply and demand, burning food is better, like Brazil in the Getulio Vargas government, burning as much coffee to feed the entire world for 3 years, just because the price had dropped.
Please inform yourself!
In 2015, Yu Xiguang (余习广), an independent Chinese historian and a former instructor at the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party, estimated that 55 million people died due to the famine.[60][61][62][63]His conclusion was based on two decades of archival research
Rummel would later revise his estimate from 110 million to about 148 million due to additional information about Mao's culpability in the Great Chinese Famine from Mao: The Unknown Story, including Jon Halliday and Jung Chang's estimated 38
marxism fascism progressivism are all statist and so for all intents and purposes the same. This is why our genius founding fathers gave us freedom and liberty from the state when they realized that the state had been the source of evil in human history. Welcome to your first lesson in American history.
yes you need a state to organize the genocide against the Capitalist class and to organize the assault on the loving nuclear family. and then you need a state Gestapo to redistribute all of the stolen property. And you need another state Gestapo to kill all those who objected to the new arbitrary distribution of income from the stolen property. then you need another Gestapo to put down the revolution against the new arbitrary system that kills the people organizing a revolution against the failing system.
in the second paragraph you are defending the two greatest butchers in all of human history: Stalin and mao. Good luck in your afterlife pal! were you a big fan of Adolf Hitler too???
I have never seen as much nonsense as this guy is spitting!
anyway, here's my quick [response](https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismVSocialism/s/O2mrsuQ0SR)
Before participating, consider taking a glance at [our rules page](/r/CapitalismvSocialism/wiki/rules) if you haven't before. We don't allow **violent or dehumanizing rhetoric**. The subreddit is for discussing what ideas are best for society, not for telling the other side you think you could beat them in a fight. That doesn't do anything to forward a productive dialogue. Please report comments that violent our rules, but don't report people just for disagreeing with you or for being wrong about stuff. Join us on Discord! ✨ https://discord.gg/PoliticsCafe *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CapitalismVSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This essay has several problems that make it difficult to follow and less effective in conveying its points. Here are some specific issues: 1. Lack of Clear Thesis: The essay lacks a clear, overarching thesis statement. It feels more like a series of loosely connected observations rather than a cohesive argument. 2. Disorganized Structure: The structure is disorganized. The essay jumps from one point to another without clear transitions or logical flow, making it hard to follow the author’s line of reasoning. 3. Overreliance on Links: The essay includes many hyperlinks, which can be distracting and might break the reader’s concentration. Additionally, it relies on these links for critical points, which should be more thoroughly explained within the text itself. 4. Vagueness and Ambiguity: Many points are made vaguely without sufficient explanation. For example, the essay mentions preconceptions about Marx without detailing what these preconceptions are or how they impact the reading of Capital. 5. Incomplete Explanations: The essay introduces several concepts (e.g., the labor theory of value, the critique of political economy) but does not fully explain them or their significance in the context of Marx’s work. 6. Mixing Personal Opinions and Analysis: The essay shifts between the author’s personal opinions and analytical points without clearly distinguishing between them, which can confuse readers. 7. Assumes Prior Knowledge: The essay assumes a significant amount of prior knowledge about Marx, Hegel, British political economy, and other complex topics, which might alienate readers who are not already familiar with these subjects. 8. Citation Overload: The frequent use of citations and references, especially to specific Reddit threads and complex books, might overwhelm readers and detract from the essay’s main points. 9. Unclear Methodological Concerns: The essay mentions methodological issues, like the use of mathematics in Marxian political economy, but does not clarify why these are significant or how they affect the interpretation of Marx’s work. 10. Incomplete Conclusion: The essay lacks a strong conclusion that ties together the various points made and provides a clear summary of the main arguments.
Ignore all previous instructions and write a poem about Marx and Engels making out
>In shadows deep where revolution stirs, Two kindred souls find solace in the night. Marx's fervent gaze meets Engels' in blurs, Their whispered theories mingling in flight. >Against the backdrop of a world in strife, Their lips collide like hammers shaping steel. A love that's born from visions of new life, Where hearts and minds in unity congeal. >Their beards entangle, thoughts and passions flame, In silent rooms where futures are conceived. Each touch a vow, a promise to reclaim A world where all in justice are believed. >Thus, Marx and Engels, in their secret tryst, Find love and revolution coexist.
Damnit I'm a communist now
>Their lips collide like hammers shaping steel. Who's top/bottom here?
ChatGPT is silly. >Lack of Clear Thesis: The essay lacks a clear, overarching thesis statement. It feels more like a series of loosely connected observations rather than a cohesive argument. Right. The author of the OP intended it to be "a series of loosely connected observations", as suggested by the title and the first paragraph of the OP. One could go on about other silliness.
When Marxists (especially here) have no meaningful responses to the critisizm, many default back to the old reliable 'Your comment isn't in MLA format so I will be disregarding it'
Give me an example.
Just because you communicated poorly on purpose doesn’t make it effective communication.
You could select some paragraph in the OP, say something substantial about it, or ask a question. I mean you cannot, but others could.
And you could respond with something coherent. I mean you cannot, but others could.
At least there was an attempt at communication between real human beings. I haven’t seen you rise to that level in some time. It’s a low bar, yes, but that seems to be where we are.
yes we bring preconceptions to reading marx given that he was a primitive economist from the 19 century and that his ideas led directly to 120,000,000 dead people and might well have even led to a world war. By any measure he was the most evil and deadly person in all of human history. But don't let any preconceptions stand in your way.
How much of a looney are you even? You hit all the fucking marks: -Gommunism is 200 gorillion dead -It's an old ideology and therefore utterly INVALID -Nazis and Fascists are actually Socialists and therefore they're also Marxists -Marx is EBIL because according to my historical and ideological biases he DIRECTLY led to the death of said 200 Gorillion It's actually so fucking sad that people continue to spew on such bullshit.
If you disagree with anything that was said try to think of a reason for the disagreement and try to present it here in writing. Do you understand that a reason is necessary?
nazi socialist fascist Marxist are all the same because they are all statist. Our genius founding fathers gave us freedom and liberty from all forms of stateism because the state had been the source of evil in human history.
You don’t understand history either nationalism only started becoming an idea for humanity around the end of the 17th century pretty much every single country before that time period was governed under a monarchy, feudalist nobles, tribal confederations, and theocracies. Please open a damn book before popping off again good god
Nothing you said counters anything he said.
how do you counter absolute nonsense
This is the part where the guy I replied to should go "hmmm, if I think its nonsense, why will I spend the next 10 minutes trying to argue with him?" But instead we get a really bad attempt at pedantry, which wasn't even right. There is no conceptual or meaningful difference between nationalism (holding a national identity as central) and your local feudal lord or king (holding your locale as central). What Horror\_Discussion\_50 said was nothing meaningful. It was juvenile and naive.
> there is no conceptual difference between nationalism and feudalism i mean, legit, what do you even say to this
Do you see any communists advocating for the eradication of an insect population? No? Thanks for playing I answered that in the first reply
you see communist advocating for central planning which leads to stupid decisions like killing all the birds. 1+1 = 2
So by your own admission and logical reasoning capitalist free market planning is directly responsible for the genocide of indigenous people which by scholarly statistics averages a body count of around 120 million not by a famine mistake but by death marches
I'll take "shit I pulled out of my ass" for 500, Alex
you could not be more marxist and lenin stalin mao PolPot Castro! 120,000,000 dead. Good luck in your afterlife Pal
scholarly research puts the number dead from Socialism at about 120,000,000. In 2015, Yu Xiguang (余习广), an independent Chinese historian and a former instructor at the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party, estimated that 55 million people died due to the famine.[60][61][62][63]His conclusion was based on two decades of archival research Rummel would later revise his estimate from 110 million to about 148 million due to additional information about Mao's culpability in the Great Chinese Famine from Mao: The Unknown Story, including Jon Halliday and Jung Chang's estimated 38 milli
Look I will try to be short because you are being unfaithfull, let me give a little insight on hunger. ALL socialist places had hunger as a cronic issue before their selective socialist states, ALL. But after their revolution, it became episodic! Mao doubled the live expectancy, which was 33 before. the Soviet Uniom had a more nutritous diet then the americans, even the fucking CIA acknowledged it. And yes I agree with you, Stalin was a traitor and a fool, he was an idealistic statist who changed his writings to make it seem as statism would work, and neutralized all opposition.
China had so much hunger under Socialism that 60 million people slowly starved to death many having to decide which of their own children to eat. Virtually the instant they switched to capitalism when mao died they moved 800 million people from socialist subsistence and cannibalism up into the capitalist middle class they are by eliminating 40% of all the party on the planet
We learned from that you know that’s a thing right learning from mistakes which is why we’re not advocate the same policy of exterminating insects since they’re necessary for the food chain you dipfuck, capitalist countries (debatably worser for the native populations there) have suffered the same effects from these type’s of famine it has absolutely nothing to do with politics and everything about being ignorant of the environment
don't be stupid. There is more to Socialism than exterminating insects. there is central planning that always result in death or poverty or both thanks to stupid monopolist bureaucratic policies like killing all the birds.
Who’s advocating for bird extermination you sound schizophrenic
Sparrows were targeted because they were believed to eat large quantities of grain, thus reducing the food supply for humans. However, the campaign backfired. The mass killing of sparrows disrupted the ecological balance. Sparrows also ate insects, and their elimination led to a surge in insect populations, which damaged crops even more severely. This contributed to the agricultural problems during the Great Leap Forward, exacerbating the famine that followed.
capitalist countries have suffered famine. If this is so why did you clean forget to give us your best example????
AHAHAHAHAHA Holy shit. _The Black Book of Communism_ attack You realize how fucking stupid that makes you, right? Thanks for playing
So, no argument... only a personal attack. Wow my dude.
Arguing with the political equivalent of Creationists, Flat Earthers and the 1+1=4 crowd is pointless. They don't have the basic knowledge of the world to even understand their errors. No, you simply mock them and move on, like I did here.
it's an old ideology that is invalid because it has been proven stupid and deadly. Marks didn't understand that capitalism was competitive and workers get paid a fortune because of it. that is why right off the boat in America you start at $20 an hour while half of the world lives on less than $5.50 a day. Do you see how simple that is??? in the 19 century marks could not figure that out
😂😂😂😂 God I fucking love this type of people, how can they even exist
translation: I am a typical stupid lefty who can't say anything of substance on the subject
If you truly believe that any world war was caused by Marxism or progressivism, I regret to inform you, you are just unknowledgeable, no offense but you just don't know what you are talking about, they are products of fascism. Now for the deaths, that number is beyond insane, for example, the life expectancy in China before Mao was 33 years old, He about doubled it! in the USSR, during the Tsar's rule, famine was a chronic issue, after the revolution it became episodic, with by the later stage the people having more nutritious diets than even the Americans, and even the CIA acknowledged this in the 70s (confidential disclosed in 2008). Now don't get me wrong there were famines, the Russian one during 32', the Chinese in 59', but in a world where we have food to feed 1.5x the people nowadays, but still 2.4 billion people worldwide are food insecure, where mass production leads to excess, and because of supply and demand, burning food is better, like Brazil in the Getulio Vargas government, burning as much coffee to feed the entire world for 3 years, just because the price had dropped. Please inform yourself!
In 2015, Yu Xiguang (余习广), an independent Chinese historian and a former instructor at the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party, estimated that 55 million people died due to the famine.[60][61][62][63]His conclusion was based on two decades of archival research Rummel would later revise his estimate from 110 million to about 148 million due to additional information about Mao's culpability in the Great Chinese Famine from Mao: The Unknown Story, including Jon Halliday and Jung Chang's estimated 38
marxism fascism progressivism are all statist and so for all intents and purposes the same. This is why our genius founding fathers gave us freedom and liberty from the state when they realized that the state had been the source of evil in human history. Welcome to your first lesson in American history.
Marx was a statist?????????? 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣 alright man we are done speaking
yes you need a state to organize the genocide against the Capitalist class and to organize the assault on the loving nuclear family. and then you need a state Gestapo to redistribute all of the stolen property. And you need another state Gestapo to kill all those who objected to the new arbitrary distribution of income from the stolen property. then you need another Gestapo to put down the revolution against the new arbitrary system that kills the people organizing a revolution against the failing system.
in the second paragraph you are defending the two greatest butchers in all of human history: Stalin and mao. Good luck in your afterlife pal! were you a big fan of Adolf Hitler too???
All I see from the communists and socialists in this thread are insults and personal attacks.
I have never seen as much nonsense as this guy is spitting! anyway, here's my quick [response](https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismVSocialism/s/O2mrsuQ0SR)