Big Book → Capital, I’ve only read vol 1 though (2 & 3 are like a jillion pages 😭)

I started writing my complaints, but it’s taking longer than I thought. I’ll drop an update if I finish writing it. My issues are mainly about the assumptions Marx makes about the topology of production networks (particularly regarding cycles), and the classification system used to produce nodes (is a node one particular spindle, or all spindles generally: this has implications). I haven’t read any newer theory so IDK this has probably been adressed.

There’s also the transformation problem. I don’t think that’s as big of a deal as it’s made out, since you wouldn’t just be slotting these Labor-Theoretic Values in place of Market Values, but people do often suggest doing this and it’s really weird to me.

To be fair, I think my understanding of the theory has some errors in regards to the interaction of Work Intensity, Labor, and Productiveness, so I’ll have to do some more thinking. Might change my complaints.

Regarding Vanguardism, I don’t have a particularly sophisticated critique as I haven’t read the lit. The Vanguard’s position would change as a result of joining the Vanguard (now holding state-like power), this changes their relationship to the revolutionary masses and their stated mission, and would inevitably change their actions in much the same way that holding Capital would (i.e, probably they’d go mad with power). But again I don’t know if that’s been addressed.

I’m some kinda new-wave radical centrist, can’t call myself one after reading your big book. I believe in a lot of the criticisms and measures, but I think LTV & Vanguardism are the literal dumbest shit ever. But good luck with them, and thanks for taking an interest.

ok commie

Yeah idk I removed those because it’s not a very good introductory text imo.

Hello, different person here. It’s understandable that you’re confused by this tbh, but there are real proposals.

Broadly, there are two basic suggestions:

1. All businesses would be nationalised. You would develop the machine as part of your job, or sell the rights to the government.
2. There are still independent businesses like now, but they’re controlled by the people that work and use them. As a Kingdom is to a Democracy, an Owned Company is to a Participatory Company (Communists call them cooperatives, Corporatists call them corporations). The former country/company is controlled by the people that own it, whereas the latter is controlled by the people that are affected by its decisions (at least in theory). In real life people don’t really buy manufacturing machines, they do it through a company. So your sale would be the same, it’d just be to a different kind of company.

It’s not one or the other and they’re often combined.

It isn’t fair for a king to control an army and do what he likes with it, that’s dangerous. The army has to be controlled by the people of the nation. But, if you and your friends want to privately own guns, that’s fine. So long as you aren’t organising into a militia, it does little harm.

Critics say, likewise: if your machine is small, who cares. But if it’s sufficiently powerful, if it could concentrate wealth and power in your hands, create mass unemployment (maybe even allow you to wield military): that’s harm. A machine like that should be controlled by the people.

will never see their home firebombed

Don’t count those chickens just yet!

Oh, first off to be clear the wealth is transferred to the shareholders, not the CEO (though the latter is often the former). I can’t recall if I was trying to be evocative by saying CEO, or if it was just a slip of the tongue. Skill issue.

Cart pushing might sound like a silly example, fair enough. Though here it’s important as a debate battleground for the reality of labor struggle, I really doubt customers pushing carts is going to decisively shift the balance of power & destroy western civilisation. There is also the fact that the people doing this work might not be aware of their interests, and might get annoyed by people leaving carts out. That does harm.

You’re right that in theory the externality is split between the customers & shareholders. However, in reality when the costs are reduced the shareholders are generally able to pocket the difference as profit, since customers don’t have access to perfect information about how they’re being screwed. In theory this is counteracted by the free market’s ability to produce efficient prices (competitors will compete). But in reality it isn’t: Look around. Everything’s going up. They’re taking it.

It sucks that there’s low quality work. But what do you think will happen if that work isn’t available? If someone had that job, they could pay for rent & food. Without it? They will starve. That’s what happened in the 19th century. They. Just. Died. We, fortunately, haven’t seen what that looks like because the west is broadly still protected by the social welfare systems built in the 20th. My friend worked as a Walmart cart pusher, without that job he’d have had nothing.

Edit: ok basically you. Mr Walmar, cuck chair

I’m creating jobs. When you push the cart you’re pushing wealth from the cart pushers to the CEO of Walmart.

Commie-site keys??? LIBERAL!!! GUT IT!

Nah, they are supposed to be unique. If it was that it’d at least be a design choice potentially worthy of criticism. But consider, who’s more likely to have fucked up a database task: Musk? Or the designer, someone with a degree (a real degree) on this topic?

Don’t worry: since he’s so big on transparency, I’m sure he’ll release the schema so we can check his work… 🙄

Sounds like he got confused looking at a view of a join.

SELECT holder_name, amount
FROM account JOIN transaction ON transaction.account_id=account.id;

-- WTF!! THERE'S DUPLICATES!!!

real 😭