Whats the fundamental flaw of Marxism?
Whats the fundamental flaw of Marxism?
Humans
The flaw of Orthodox Marxism is that its incomplete.
Human nature and the evolutionary mechanisms for which we are capable of conqouring
jews
>Material dialectic
>Viewing everything through socioeconomics
>Throwing aside things like religion, philosophy, race, ethnicity, history, and all else not materialist as "idealism" or "imperialist/bourgeoisie/capitalist/Nazi/fascists/racist/white supremacist/white/oppression" ie not important
>Can't learn from mistakes like Ukraine, Kronstradt and Tambov, or Bukharin
You have to be 18 to post
Karl Marx didn't take into account genetics and blood relation. All the people of the past who lived in "communism"to him, were treating each other like family, because they were a literal family. All of them were blood related. Retarded economy too. Communists still haven't calculated how much a carrot should cost.
>Whats the fundamental flaw of Marxism?
It's a jewish movement, jew.
>Marx was born on 5 May 1818 to Heinrich Marx (1777–1838) and Henriette Pressburg (1788–1863). He was born at Brückengasse 664 in Trier, a town then part of the Kingdom of Prussia's Province of the Lower Rhine. Marx was ethnically Jewish. His maternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi, while his paternal line had supplied Trier's rabbis since 1723, a role taken by his grandfather Meier Halevi Marx. His father, as a child known as Herschel, was the first in the line to receive a secular education. He became a lawyer with a comfortably upper class income.
People will cut their noses to spite their face. People will burn down the ship to kill the captain. People aren't rational and people don't cooperate.
kike
It's that the democratization of labor will never work and the consolidation of power will never persist.
Nonsense pulled from inside the ass of a jew. it even became a cult with a holy text, a bearded jewish messiah and some sort of "second cooming".
A persons wants vs needs is subjective. Simple as fuck.
Marxism supposes that the value of all labor is the same. That because person A and person B both work hard, that any difference in their pay is unjust. It usually points this out in owners vs. workers, but it's equally true for workers vs. other workers. Marxism does not allow for the possibility that different kinds of work have different values, and that the the decision to pursue one kind of work over the other might mean that the person in question deserves a bigger reward for their choice.
The most fundamental example of this in Marxism is when Marx begins any kind of economic analysis, which almost always involves describing profit as "theft". In reality in profit is the wage of the owner, who uses their managerial skill and risk analysis to decide whether something is worth pursuing. For simple workers, it doesn't seem conceivable that someone who spends 10 hours a day doing paperwork and planning is providing more value than someone who spends 10 hours a day doing menial physical labor, because the physical labor is hard and tiring and the paperwork and planning seems easy. This is why "Marxism" as an ideological school is ridiculous nonsense. Marxism should be treated at best as a political philosopher who is predicting that communist movements should emerge, since his works are really an extrapolation of a mental process low-level workers often already have. The fact that Marxist ideology even as a concept is so laughably and provably wrong is probably one of the reasons why communists and socialists increasingly call themselves by those very terms, and not "Marxists".
Evolution is one of the main arguments for marxism.
As a doctrine which interprets history and all social phenomena solely in economic terms, it predicates the primacy of gold over blood.
There is no practical proven approach to implementing this utopia. The only thing that commies can do is kill tens of millions of innocent people
It's a jewish supremacist ideology that's the end result of enlightenment liberalism. Like capitalism, communism seeks to centralize all labor and production under jewish control. The bolshevik coup was nothing more than a minority grievance movement against the Russian Orthodox majority
Materialistic, just like liberalism.
>people will be equal if they have the same amount of money and same opportunities
Some people are tall, others short, some smart, some dumb and so on
Exist.
This more or less. Reminder that Marx wrote an essay titled “On the Jewish Question”
See: and Marxism, inherently, discourages individual productivity, competition, and prosperity - dooming the collective.
It just doesnt take into account that some humans are only happy when others around them are not.
>Material dialectic
>Viewing everything through socioeconomics
>Throwing aside things like religion, philosophy, race, ethnicity, history, and all else not materialist
Are we talking capitalism here or are you just retarded?
Finite resources.
>tossing aside millenia of accumulated implicit knowledge
>enviromental determinism
>(((sociology)))
>central planning the economy in hopes of social engineering the socialist man that way
but most of all
marxists
pic related is what most marxists are about these days
movement is dead
Allende wasn't Jewish tho.
Jesus isnt real.
Marxist simply do not understand incentives, economic or otherwise.
We don't have the technology
the calculation problem
In a communist system you literally don't know what the price for an item or labor should be
Marxism
and this
I bet it feels great pumping lead into thots that talked back to you.
All this picture does is make me grin.
Literally everything
LTV was wrong
TRPF was wrong
historical materialism in his view was not only wrong but the concept itself was unoriginal
99.9% of the Marxist pathology is Christianity for atheists and Jews
Well yeah, you're a kike so of course you think that'd be great.
It attracts degenerates.
If by Marxism you mean the totalitarian larps that dressed themselves in hammers and sickles, the problem is all of it.
If by Marxism you mean the notion that the means of production should be distributed and serve the common good, the issue is that central planning will only be plausible after significant technological advancement. It was at least 150 years ahead of its time, and it's still at least 50 years off today.