>> ^NetRunner:

Anyone who likes the philosophy of Fight Club is a Marxist.
No, really. I'm not kidding.
If you think Karl Marx and all his associated works were some sort of Satanic verse, perhaps your affinity for Fight Club should make you rethink that assessment, because it's essentially one and the same.


So if we agree with a main premise of the movie that "we are not our labels" then we are necessarily labeled marxists?

Anyone who likes the philosophy of Fight Club is a Marxist.

No, really. I'm not kidding.

If you think Karl Marx and all his associated works were some sort of Satanic verse, perhaps your affinity for Fight Club should make you rethink that assessment, because it's essentially one and the same.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Marx-Brothers-Chico-and-Harpo-play-piano-together

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by ctrlaltbleach. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

>> ^quantumushroom:

You forgot to first thank dystopianfuturetoday for associating personal responsibility with libertarianism.
As for my reminder, enjoy the gift. Next week's discussion is Puppies: Cute Distraction or Karl Marx's Foot Soldiers?
>> ^kymbos:
Thanks, QM, for reminding us that this is really about big government and, um, socialism.
Hippies.



Whenever you demonstrate that you're able to not take yourself seriously, it's like... A breath of fresh air. Inbetween choking sessions. Fap fap.

You forgot to first thank dystopianfuturetoday for associating personal responsibility with libertarianism.

As for my reminder, enjoy the gift. Next week's discussion is Puppies: Cute Distraction or Karl Marx's Foot Soldiers?

>> ^kymbos:

Thanks, QM, for reminding us that this is really about big government and, um, socialism.
Hippies.

There seems to be a general misconception by those on the right that Socialism is about helping lazy people benefit at the expense of those who work hard, while ignoring the fact that the rich got rich by stealing the wealth generated by the labor of those who worked hard. Even Marx agreed that those who don't work, don't eat. Socialism and liberals aren't about helping those who are too lazy to help themselves, but putting power back into the hands of those who are doing the labor who presently in the US have no power or voice.

The income line in most companies isn't a slant (/) from the start to the top, but a very slightly curved backwards L with very few people are on the top bar, and fewer still past the point where that slant and backwards L would cross if we were to imagine spending the same amount for payroll between the otherwise equal income distributions. Everything to the left of that cross point, below the slant and above the bottom of that backwards L is labor that has been stolen to feed those to the right of that cross point. Imagine if you will Company A and Company B. Both have the same number of employees in each position, and both spend the same amount a year on payroll. Company A bottom is about $15k a year, while the CEO makes $22 Million (they are the typical backwards L). Company B's top is $250k a year and their slant goes down from there. Now how steeply and where Company B's bottom is depends on a number of factors, but no matter what, the bottom will likely be higher, or at the very least their benefit package is much greater. But very few companies operate like B, most operate like A.

<snip a long and rambling rant to better summarize with:>
The problem, it should be made clear, isn't Capitalism. It is greed. When Socialism fails, it isn't because of Socialism itself, it is again, greed. Greed is the problem. Nearly every failure in society comes down to greed and some would argue religion, which itself could be argued is a greed issue. The bigger problem the right faces is that they are loving greed now, and think it is the answer to everything, when it is in fact the very thing that is causing problems.

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.

Of course you're going to blame "capitalists" for socialism's downfall, what choice do you have? Norway? Great example! The were smart enough to stay OUT of the EU. However, in 30 years, when the oil runs low...

As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.

The quote is quite apt. A king decides who may and who may not prosper in his kingdom. A US President daring to decide the same? TYRANNY.

And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!


Everything I've written about marx is accurate. Please point to some real-world examples of free, prosperous marxist nations.


>> ^ChaosEngine:

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.
As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.
And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!
>> ^quantumushroom:
Not overly interested in whether my comrades here think I sufficiently understand marx, he's the left's savior, not mine. Not only was marx a lousy human being and horrible in his personal handling of money, he thought the profit motive could be stripped from the system and it would work just as well.
Then we get this from His Earness:
“You don’t have some inherent right just to–-you know, get a certain amount of profit."
Words more befitting the late, ungreat kim ill-dong
Is 3.5 years of this idiot's failures not enough for ya? You need 4 more? Hey, Siftberals, take a peek at socialist Europe, broke as a joke and falling apart. THIS is the crap you want for the US?
Anyone-But-His-Earness 2012

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.

As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.

And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!

>> ^quantumushroom:

Not overly interested in whether my comrades here think I sufficiently understand marx, he's the left's savior, not mine. Not only was marx a lousy human being and horrible in his personal handling of money, he thought the profit motive could be stripped from the system and it would work just as well.
Then we get this from His Earness:
“You don’t have some inherent right just to–-you know, get a certain amount of profit."
Words more befitting the late, ungreat kim ill-dong
Is 3.5 years of this idiot's failures not enough for ya? You need 4 more? Hey, Siftberals, take a peek at socialist Europe, broke as a joke and falling apart. THIS is the crap you want for the US?
Anyone-But-His-Earness 2012

Not overly interested in whether my comrades here think I sufficiently understand marx, he's the left's savior, not mine. Not only was marx a lousy human being and horrible in his personal handling of money, he thought the profit motive could be stripped from the system and it would work just as well.

Then we get this from His Earness:

“You don’t have some inherent right just to–-you know, get a certain amount of profit."

Words more befitting the late, ungreat kim ill-dong

Is 3.5 years of this idiot's failures not enough for ya? You need 4 more? Hey, Siftberals, take a peek at socialist Europe, broke as a joke and falling apart. THIS is the crap you want for the US?

Anyone-But-His-Earness 2012

>> ^artician:

>> ^quantumushroom:
taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.
I'd vote for Kook Paul over the marxist.

Have your read Marx? I just want to know if you understand what that means, or if you're just talking out of your ass.


QM thinks Karl Marx was the one who honked a horn instead of talking.

>> ^quantumushroom:

taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.
I'd vote for Kook Paul over the marxist.


Have your read Marx? I just want to know if you understand what that means, or if you're just talking out of your ass.

Suggestion for alternate title: "Yes, but can Steve Jobs do THIS?" <-- Awesome Groucho Marx reference.

Noted YOUNG historian? Was that a slam?
Love the part about how capitalism is morally right because its chief parts are wholesome and good, and compatible with god's laws and the teachings of the bible.

Karl Marx and his silly prediction about concentrated wealth at the top. What a mad man.