1st paragraph calling US proxies that received billions in aid "natural experiments" is pretty rich. 2nd paragraph has absolutely zero scientific evidence and is definitely wrong w/ regards to China 3rd paragraph is black book bullshit

lmao how the fuck to people have more kids if there isn't a surplus? You can't make something (such as a child) from nothing meaning there has to be product in excess of what one needs to survive. Then there's two people who can work twice as much and could theoretically produce twice as much food.

Human societies thus remained within the social dynamics originally analysed by the Rev. Thomas Malthus (1766–1834) of population tending to increase to consume the food available.

LITERALLY A FUCKING SURPLUS

Yes there was division of labor (more human niches) this made life easier and more productive and was only possible BECAUSE THERE WAS A SURPLUS OF FOOD! The carpenter does not grow grain, and yet he eats BECAUSE THERE IS A SURPLUS

Technological and commercial surges in available resources provide complications that need not detain us.

I wonder if a division of labor might impact such resources somehow? Literally just handwaving division of labor

The whole rest of it is anti-dialectical metaphysical gibberish.

States are typically not creations of class structures. Typically, they have been the dominant creators of class structures.

What would give rise to a state that creates a class structure, but a class structure? Does the state emerge from thin air?

In each case, the ruling regime seized the state, atomised society and restructured society to serve its own power and purposes, thereby creating the class structure of its society. Marx’s theory of class proved to be self-refuting by Marxism.

This is exactly what Lenin says to do, based off of analysis of Marx, Engels, and the Paris commune

Marx’s theory of value claimed that surplus came from exploitation of labour by landlords and capitalists. So, if you abolished such exploitation, you abolished class. Marxist regimes abolished such designated exploitation by concentrating all social power in the hands of the ruling regime via the state: the actual historically dominant extractor of surplus and creator of class structures. So, of course Marxism-in-power created murderous tyrannies run by elites who extracted the surplus from society for their own ends.

Only an idealist imbecile thinks this transition happens overnight and Marx is very clear on the distinction between lower and higher stage communism. Read Critique of the Gotha Program

Literally doesn't even engage with the first chapter of Capital distinguishing use and exchange value. This dumbass is critiquing Marx without reading his magnum opus. Did fucking Peterson write this?

So, moving to an exchange economy, you put land, labour and capital together in the hope of creating more value than was consumed. Suppose you fail. That is, you make a loss. Who covers the loss? Who is in the best position to cover the loss?

If you produce anything from this equation you have produced something, that is to say you have not lost. Land does not produce value on its own. Again they pretend to acknowledge the difference between exchange and use value but fundamentally do not understand it.

If all the value of production is returned to the workers in an enterprise, how do you pay for upkeep of land, acquiring and maintaining capital, managing risk, discovery processes? No enterprise can operate for any length of time by returning all the value it produces to labour. So, burbling on about “return to labour that labour does not receive” is nonsense on stilts.

This is specifically why we talk about the surplus reaped by the capitalist, workers owning and maintaining the means of production, and Marx even calls for taxation. This dumbass read the Wikipedia page and thinks he's disproving one of history's greatest political economists.

Chimpanzees conform much more to the predictions of game theory in strategic games than do humans

Lmao humans don't actually behave how they should according to game theory, but monkeys do and that's why game theory is correct.

When Western states gave up their territorial colonies, they switched from colonising other people’s societies to colonising their own. (We call this process of internal colonisation “the welfare state”.)

You need to find this person and put them out of their misery. They're too stupid to survive. I'm not doing the rest of this atrocity but I'm sure there are other gems in this heap of shit.