decentralized monetary policy call it the confederal reserve

crypto bros dont flame me i have no idea what im talking about

gotta love the footnote ratio

damn she was just here and then poof bye bye cya later jules

fellas, get yourself a girl like this

as much as i adore the idea of having an archive of our conversations, i think the record would reflect poorly on me as a partner

artisans prolly

left wing market anarchists 🤝 marxist leninists "socialist commodity production"

The obscure man falsely attributes to me the view that “the surplus-value produced by the workers alone remains, in an unwarranted manner, in the hands of the capitalist entrepreneurs”.

In fact I say the exact opposite: that the production of commodities must necessarily become “capitalist” production of commodities at a certain point, and that according to the law of value governing it, the “surplus-value” rightfully belongs to the capitalist and not the worker.

yea this is what i mean when i say the disagreement is philosophical, because marx’s method, following hegel, is not about asserting axioms and seeing what follows in classic logical form. he has a historical dialectical method aimed at analyzing one form of social totality.

there were a group called analytical marxists that tried to reduce him to that, but i don’t regard their work positively at all and throw away what is essential in marx.

it’s difficult to convey in few words but for example here is harvey’s mapping of the argument in capital. it’s not intended to be syllogistic in a way that would make a non-continental happy

oh yeah btw this was the piece in particular that inspired the lukacs comment things like centralization being more efficient are basically incidental and discardable theses in marx’s work, the central thing is his method of analyzing social totality.

which is why it feels so premature for miroslav to proclaim that we’ve moved beyond marxism without engaging philosophically and rather merely empirically

oh yeah i read those first i actually liked the earlier stuff a bit more :P lotta the c4ss stuff i either didn’t need convincing of or i had no stake in tho lol

i will say that’s the fun part about reading lwmas - going from things i take to be obvious truisms to the most backwards thing i’ve ever heard back and forth lol it’s fun

i think i can be excessively agreeable in my communication sometimes, in an obfuscatory way

“how can you be sure you’re a woman?” oh, you know, i’m a conflict avoidant little bitch

hehe dw i won’t be too disappointed, im having a good time either way. and to be clear its not all bad, i am an anarchist after all and im finding a fair amount to appreciate. coming across as critical bc i’m choosing to grapple with the content i find discordant

but that’s kinda the main point, capital is always already nascent capital accumulation, and the valorization circuit of money->commodity->money+ inherent to generalized commodity production. i don’t see how one could enforce simple reproduction, especially without a state

though i’ll hold my tongue until i get through carson, i really am hopeful that he has something insightful to say

yeah i’m hopeful for it though also worried it will use the crude understanding of LTV (which granted, i’d wager most marxists operate under) if i’m being precise marx has a value theory of labor rather than an LTV, isn’t interested in creating a price theory, and decries “fairness” as moralism

that’s a fair concern, but i’m not really sure how else to interpret the tucker. his main concern is inequality here, and is comfortable condemning everyone to wage labor (which i regard as a negative fate).

on the compensation point, it seems like he is implying that capitalists steal what rightly belongs to labor, but doesn’t posit any theory for determining what fair value could be. marx does, and i find his account convincing. ill have to check back in after Carson though

this is kinda why i cited gothacritik, since i saw parallels in tucker’s “full wages” and lassalle’s “undiminished proceeds of labor”. i imagine carson is much different than both though, given he’s writing after the marginal revolution

“Not to abolish wages, but to make every man dependent upon wages and to secure to every man his whole wages is the aim of Anarchistic Socialism.” • universal proletarianization ._. • equality is a worthless political goal • laborers’ wages are already the full value of their labor-power

how many times do we have to teach you this lesson, old man?

to date the most sense i can make out of the left wing market anarchist position is that they deeply care about interpersonal domination, but are not interested at all in abstract social domination. i wonder if anyone from the c4ss crowd has written anything on (post-)postone thought

also i wish more of them would read lukacs (at the very least “what is orthodox marxism?”) the strawmanning and lazy disregarding is a bit nauseating

oh yeah sorry that wasn’t meant to be a substance contribution, just showing history lol and thank you!! i’ll take recs anytime :)

lol turns out i had his page bookmarked in 2022 i'm so lazy lmao

hey @technojo4.com i finished everything from miroslav what’s your fav kevin carson text?

i want out

maybe it’s due to a particular weakness in constitution, but i can’t help but see myself as nietzsche’s stoic nowadays

lol holy shit wait twitter knew

yea of course, happens all the time

(in case it’s hard to read)

my bad

real asf

angrily shaking fist

oh my god i’m gna scream

at least it’s not the american “nee-chee” or “nitzy” neet-chuh

haha yea sorry again about that, hard not to slip into jargon i can really appreciate the CS brand market anarchism for its problem solving, and i do think they do a lot of innovative political application of concepts from other domains that pol theory generally fails at

holy shit @borealgoth.net is nietzsche confirmed

yeah lwma is a fairly big tent and there are plenty of folks i have a good amount of respect for (especially considering basically every single ancom is an illiterate moron and can’t begin to answer many of the legitimate challenges by lwma’s

i’m just very strongly influenced by the marxist tradition that understands markets as existing a part of a given capitalist social totality, that they can’t be cleanly individually preserved, and that in turn there are good reasons to believe the law of value would remain in the systems proposed

i need to get around to more mutualist stuff i’ve had in my backlog for years but same as you i’ve slowed down a lot also when i read them sometimes it makes me soy out lol