• CyborgMarx [any, any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Watch out people we got an econ 101 grad amongst us, if we're not careful he'll pull out his Mas Colell textbook and start babbling about maximizing utility curves and general equilibrium

    • gowan@reddthat.com
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah you have someone with a political science degree and a minor in econ. I have talked to many people who seem to have no formal education in the listed fields and refer back to things like breadtube as a valid source.

      I can't speak fir your education but I have chatted with someone who claimed to be a Marxist who was convinced that DPRK is a communist state rather than a hereditary autocracy. Not ever Marxist is educated and some are bad at reasoning.

      • Satanic_Mills [comrade/them]
        ·
        1 year ago

        political science degree

        Imagine boasting about having a degree in modern-day phrenology.

        You see, this graph shows the Slavic brainpan cannot comprehend liberal institutions ....

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wish people would just lead with this shit so we'd know to ignore them.

      • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        you have someone with a political science degree and a minor in econ

        Not even trying to dunk, just realize that this is not impressive, and certainly not authoritative. When someone questions your expertise the two acceptable responses are:

        1. Yes, I am an actual expert, with extensive schooling and/or relevant work experience.
        2. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but here's where I'm getting my information, where are you getting yours?
        • gowan@reddthat.com
          ·
          1 year ago

          They said I have 101. I have a greater understanding then that which is what Im replying to. Im not pretending to be an expert and frankly I don't know why you would think that.

          We know where they are getting the information from the problematic people Im talking about do not understand their sources and frequently decide that Marx was right and avoid learning when he was wrong ir when we have gained a clearer understanding.

          For fucks sake some seem to think Marxism ended with Marx

          • CyborgMarx [any, any]
            ·
            1 year ago

            You claim to know something about Marx, ok let's test that knowledge of yours with the simplest possible question

            According to Marx what are the sources of capitalist profit?

              • CyborgMarx [any, any]
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                lmao I expected as much, like a fart in the wind they're gone

            • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
              ·
              1 year ago

              @gowan@reddthat.com

              Just giving you a second chance to answer the simplest possible question about Marx. I'm guessing you didn't see the notification the first time given you've been active after it was posted, and you could very easily demonstrate your knowledge of Marxism.

              You know, cause otherwise people are going to think you were lying about learning about Marxism.

              • gowan@reddthat.com
                ·
                1 year ago

                You are going to have to ask me "the simplest question about Marx"again because the button that should link me to the context isn't working right now. I definitely missed it the last time.

                • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  According to Marx what are the sources of capitalist profit?

                  I thought that was too easy, so bonus question

                  how does automation contribute to the tendency of rate of profit to fall according to Marx?

                  Edit: as of edit it's been 8 hours, with this users last activity being 3 hours ago.

      • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Nah you have someone with a political science degree and a minor in econ. I have talked to many people who seem to have no formal education in the listed fields and refer back to things like breadtube as a valid source.

        So the two most "priesthood class of capital" useless degrees lol.

        Read Capital, the economics you've learned still haven't grappled with it successfully.

        Edit: you claim to have read Marx. Please, tell me how automation connects to the tendency of the rate of profit to drop according to Marx. It's one of the core parts of his analysis so it should be easy to remember.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is extra funny because explaining how neoclassical economics is a religion rather than any form of scientific or even material system is a common criticism made by Anthropologists.

          • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            But anthropology doesn't have the nice graphics and the math that doesn't really have any empirical data behind it, anthropology isn't a real science unlike neoclassical economics!

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        The DPRK is socialist and not a hereditary autocracy. It has been the consistent direction of the head of the executive branch to diffuse authority to other offices, but nearly everything you have ever heard about this country was a lie.

        • gowan@reddthat.com
          ·
          1 year ago

          It literally has handed power down from father to son twice. That is a hereditary system. As the citizens cannot advocate for a change in leaders, a change in direction of the party or an entirely new political system they are authoritarian.

          DPRK is a hereditary autocracy.

            • gowan@reddthat.com
              ·
              1 year ago

              I didn't do that. I explained how the top authority has been handed from father to son in a single family and then demonstrated how they are authoritarian. You might be able to be authoritarian and socialist but you cannot have a hereditary power structure and attempt anything looking like socialism.

              Just because you don't like facts doesn't change them. If that was possible communism would have been achieved multiple times

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            It literally has handed power down from father to son twice.

            It has had sons win elections and then hold the office twice. We can call it dynastic in a sense similar to US political dynasties, but that's different from being literally hereditary.

            As the citizens cannot advocate for a change in leaders, a change in direction of the party or an entirely new political system

            Citation needed

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]
                ·
                1 year ago

                Their elections have been observed many times by different external bodies and are an example of consensus democracy.

                • gowan@reddthat.com
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Do you have a source for that claim because I have only seen the opposite from elections experts. The fact that almost every single person votes is of course a MASSIVE red flag.

                  • GarbageShoot [he/him]
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I believe participation is mandatory, like in Australia, and given the travel limitations (the part of a percent that doesn't vote are usually people traveling), it makes sense that it would be so high. Of course, since we have a wonderful freedom of speech in this country where the rich are free to buy media companies and promote the stories they want to promote, the idea of actually investigating the elections for a purpose other than vilification is hardly going to creep into search engine results. Here's a compilation of sources that attempt to explore it from that angle:

                    https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/socialism_faq.md#is-the-dprk-a-fascist-monarchy

                    Archive of a dead link: https://archive.ph/aMJCI

      • CyborgMarx [any, any]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah you have someone with a political science degree and a minor in econ

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWxn4mrNJxQ

        • MemesAreTheory [he/him, any]
          ·
          1 year ago

          He's got a MINOR in economics! And he's here to tell us all about how beautiful and elegant the math is. You can't really appreciate it unless you step into the rarified air surrounding an econometrics professor, you would understand if you ever tried it.

      • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]
        ·
        1 year ago

        poli sci is literally nothing. I have a background in social and hard science, from either point of view it's bullshit.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          The only field more embarrassing than PoliSci is arguably EvoPsych, with the caveat that most academics don't consider EvoPscyh to be a real field.