Isn't liberalism from the 1700's?
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
102 points (99.0% liked)
Slop.
349 readers
630 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
no liberalism was created when this guy was born, along with the rest of the universe
If everyone is a capitalist, then capitalism does not exist. That is so fucking basic. Someone has to own the means of production and extract labor value from others, without that then there is no capitalism
What if we all own our own means of production and also exploit value from each other 
I kind of respect doing this bit, but for liberalism, with marx.
Wealth inequality is at or near the highest level in US history. Globally, 85% of all wealth is owned by 10% and the bottom 50% own less than 1%. Everyone has been becoming a worker or lumpen as wealth concentrates in the hands of fewer and fewer capitalists.
Yet another take on Marx from someone who's never read Marx
Marx living in the 19th century is a psyop to hide that he actually is a classical writer.
Not everyone wants (or needs) to dropship bullshit from China or do crypto scams which is what these dipshits always have in mind
"before he saw the rise of liberalism" lol, some people really think liberalism was invented in the 1900's
Or the 1990's even
This right here. It's some end of history bullshit of liberals patting themselves on the back right before the shit they threw in the fan starts to fly back in their own faces. Oh liberalism solved all the problems and everything is going to get better now? What's all the stuff you rammed under the rug before I walked in?
It's incredible to see sometimes because if you read between the drier lines about linen and such, Marx had such an accurate view on society that persists even now over a century later
I forgot which piece it was but there's a piece where he talks about the worker being asked to reduce all their non-essential expenses and just become automatons who sleep, eat, and work, and it is nearly identical to modern Bloomberg and FT articles about how workers should get rid of Netflix and other entertainment expenses instead of getting higher wages
Sure I steal the value of your labor and my vast wealth has doubled over the pandemic to be the equivalent to hundreds of thousands of you, but have you considered no more coffee in the morning? Stoping one of your few simple pleasures in this hell-world that you manage to enjoy before walking into the place you despise to do work you're alienated from for people you hate? I promise it'll solve all your money problems. And if you can't manage that, then clearly all of your problems are your fault and not mine.
how are people this stupid
I'm a simple yeoman factory owner with my multinational homestead.
Every home doubles as a small factory, that way everyone is a Capitalist and a Worker
there was a bit more context to be fair, they were saying that because robots will "do everything" in the near future ("if not already today"), and somehow (through the power of friendship and liberalism?) everyone would have their own robot that works for them, thus everyone would be owning class 
That fantasy has always irked me somewhat. I do love the idea of automation having solved the need for work (though we are almost there already, the amount of people needed to make anything is so low. But we gotta consume instead and we gotta give money to the pigs), but when it's talking of robots it always makes me think of how the word originally meant "slave". Ugh.
That only works under fully automated space communism. Otherwise, the capitalists own all the robots, and thus everything else. How do they expect us all to buy robots when they're taking all our jobs? Why would the capitalists share all their wealth when we're less productive? That's basically communism. Except liberals think we can get there purely through vibes and technological progress without changing the oppressive systems we live under.
And who builds the robots? Who maintains the robots? Who mines the resources that are necessary for the production of robots?
Ah see, it’s robots all the way down.
Great Leap Foward
"A world where everyone is a capitalist" AND YOU DONT SEE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THAT? 
Marx obviously didn't forsee the block chain and everyone owning Bitcoin 
Genuinely curious what quirk of fate caused this person to develop an understanding of the world along these lines. This isn't standard western brainworms.
based on the reply chain, he's some kind of libertarian - pro-elon/bezos (ethical billionaires), but anti-kings/warlords/dictators (unethical billionaires). super heavy on the "great men with great ideas", and capitalism/workers being the enabler for making their ideas happen. he was also posting this in r/neoliberal, if that helps (it doesn't)
bonus round:
Ya this sounds very Randian.
I've never seen 
as great as that.
Very silly.
Considering that other bit of context, my guess would be privileged tech person, someone who only sees that things are good for them and assumes that this can work for everyone in the world
Unfortunately an increasingly common type of person.
Ubisoft Marx is the real timeline.
Marx's antics playing the stock market would blow this dweeb's mind
Imbiber trading
The idea is for everyone to be a worker-owner and to make one indistinguishable from the other.
God, has anybody ever heard of Hegelian dialectics?
fun fact, he finished it (The Phenomenology of Spirit) the day that the french entered and looted his Town (Jena) right before the Battle of Jena-Auerstedt that would happend the next morning and then send his only manuscript in the middle of this Mayham , where he also saw napoleon riding around.
"I saw the Emperor – this world-soul [Weltseele] – riding out of the city on reconnaissance. It is indeed a wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrated here at a single point, astride a horse, reaches out over the world and masters it."
Marxist-Cutcoism
It's been awhile since I read the 'festo, but doesn't Marx explicitly call out petty booj "socialists" whose idea of socialism is when everyone become a booj?
Yeah, Marx has a whole section dedicated to them in the Manifesto
...this form of Socialism aspires either to restoring the old means of production and of exchange, and with them the old property relations, and the old society, or to cramping the modern means of production and of exchange within the framework of the old property relations that have been, and were bound to be, exploded by those means. In either case, it is both reactionary and Utopian.
A, somewhat, recent article from Red Sails, The Case for Socialized Ownership explains this critique of petit bourgeoisie socialism. As production under capitalism is already becoming more and more socialized, the answer is to fully socialize the means of production through collective ownership, instead of making everyone 'business owners'. Quoting Engels,
With social production conditioned by modern large-scale industry, it is possible to assure each person “the full proceeds of his labour,” so far as this phrase has any meaning at all. And it has a meaning only if it is extended to mean not that each individual worker becomes the possessor of “the full proceeds of his labour,” but that the whole of society, consisting entirely of workers, becomes the possessor of the total proceeds of its labour, which it partly distributes among its members for consumption, partly uses for replacing and increasing the means of production, and partly stores up as a reserve fund for production and consumption
By the way, cool profile picture, I'm a big fan of Snorlax!
thx! i like your extra wide vaporeon. i'm a bit of a poser when it comes to pokemon tho. it took me a couple searches and way too long to remember yours' name just now - mudkip came to mind first lol. i've always rly liked snorlax and poliwhirl though (and more recently, azumarill 
)
I'm a little surprised that someone doesn't remember the Eeveelutions, I thought Eevee and its evolved forms (Vaporeon, Flareon, Jolteon, Espeon, Umbreon, Leafeon, Glaceon, Sylveon) would be Pokémon that every PokéFan knows, like Pikachu. But it's fine! I forget a lot of things, too
Mudkip was my partner in Pokémon Mystery Dungeon, so ever since, I like Mudkip!
And Snorlax is relatable cuz I'm also fat and tired
May I ask, what is your relation to Pokémon? Do you play the games? Watch the anime? Do you just like to look at pretty pictures of Pokémon (I used to do that a lot before I found the anime)?
haha trust me, the eevee-lutions are in there, they just get a bit buried in the rubble since i don't often see pokemon content these days. and my memory do be shit on the best of days. i feel u, snorlax pretty much my spirit animal. i can't really say i'm a pokemon fan, i've played a few of the games, but haven't finished any. my first one was crystal on my gameboy advance, think i still have the game cartridge stashed away. i've seen some of the anime too, mostly on TV as a kid though. i have had the BW season (16) downloaded since a few years ago (heard it was one of the better recent ones, and i liked the style), and did watch a few of the episodes, but it's since been relegated to my hoard of media that i may one day get around to watching. oh and i think i have a cool (but worthless) poliwhirl card laying around somewhere that i picked up from ebay years ago. he's been my favorite pokemon the longest, so i thought it'd be cool to have something collectable with him