Comments by "Kamper Foelie" (@TheKamperfoelie) on "Jared Henderson" channel.

@_jared you stand by Marx in the A tier? Preposterous.
34
@theyescapedtheweightofdarkness and what pearls of wisdom has Marx provided? Aside from showing the world he was allergic to work?
11
It’s surprising that you say Marx had an insight in work, and how it felt to be a worker, since the man has not worked many days of his life. He was a disturbed manchild who liked liquor, extracting every possible money from his family for his drinking fits, and imagined people showing up spontaneously at farms doing work for nought so he could keep drinking and not working. It’s a travesty that you put him above the lowest tier, and that is without even considering how many hundreds of millions of lives were killed and wrecked and thwarted by people who based their worldview (which bottled down to grabbing the power and suppressing everything else) on his works. If your ‘work’ leads to such perversions, you need to go down silently with shame, not being praised over. Marx is not worth the paper it’s printed on.
8
Oh so that was what you’re doing? Have you taken a good look at his career? The two very very short publishing jobs he had, and how few he published? The ‘original goal posts’ as you call them was that it is strange to say that he had an ‘insight in work and knew how it felt to be a worker’. Strange because the man worked so few days of his life. Or do you think writing rubbish is comparable to working to support your family in the ‘good’ old days? The man was allergic to work, and that was the root of his rumblings, not his ‘feelings’ and ‘insights’ about how it was to actually work. Moreover, what fantastic insight do we have from Marx? Other than everything goes to shite if you base ideology on his rumblings? Now what was that BS again you were talking about? Was that your intention, to hurt my feelings? What a great incentive to comment.
5
Ah yes, and what a legacy he has. 200 million deaths, many more lives thwarted.
4
@evanrayswenson really? On what moral trip was that conceived? Rand makes a tremendously important point. That your first convenant is with yourself.
4
@eoin8450 yeah? Do tell, what good came from Marx? Because the list of catastrophes and human suffering because of Marx is practically endless.
4
@owabowa lol no, what are the great insights we got from Marx? I know of a lot of catastrophes, should we rate ‘philosophers’ on how much catastrophes they cause? Hitler would like a seat on this tier too then.
3
@owabowa I’m not talking about biology, that would be silly. Capitalism was developed naturally, it is something that existed before it was written about. It served a purpose, it evolved naturally. Marxism and its interpretations is the overthrowing of the order, seizing the means of production (or are you saying that Marx didn’t say that?) and create a workers parad.. well, actually a top down state that directs everything from above. And we just hope it works? Because well, without any proof of it working, but what the hell, and don’t mind all the dead people. And in the process, everything is ripped apart, the fabric of society that evolved naturally, the economy, the free market, freedoms and to be replaced with something that is completely synthetic. And in the process invite tyranny. Whether that is on the level of a communist state or in your words ‘a system of analysis bla bla’, which is a total cop out of course, because god forbid lets not REALLY LOOK at where marxism was applied, it remains total, intellectual, bullshit. It doesn’t work, it looks at things in a way that does not contribute to anything that actually constitute progress, just destruction of what is. But just on the safe side for you, what is the ‘method of analysis bla bla bla that actually has provided something that is usefull and does not fail completely the moment it is actually implemented? Actually produces something beautiful? Marxism isnt a method bla bla bla, it is a intellectual mind excercise, thought up by a drunk who didnt work more than a few months to support his family, but dreamt up the religion of the jealous, and the church of intellectuals, who simply take the place of priests telling us what they dreamt up (without any sort of evidence) is the way to the promised land (which no one has even seen before, and of course, doesn’t exist), but provides a means for those ‘intellectuals’ to thrive and live of the back of others.
3
@owabowa you can run around and putting up fallacies all you want, talking about ‘my definition of work’ all you want, but the fact remains, Marx didn’t have a particular ‘insight in working or how it felt to be a worker’ since the man was allergic to work and did everything he could to NOT have a job that could support his family. Instead he leached off his family. He didn’t have ‘work habits’, he simply detested working, and wrote his rumblings imagining a world where he didn’t have to work. I can tell you are a believer, in disregard of the failings of his theories, if you can call them that. Substance eh? What substance does Marx bring to the table? Wholesale death and misery, a ‘classless world’ huh? And as a true Marxist, of course you try to shout and bully people into silence by any means possible, through shaming and saying they lack substance, Mao would have been so proud of you.
3
@Lonaticus indeed, as the quote from Orwell goes, some ideas are so stupid, only intellectuals believe in them.
3
@owabowa so, nothing useful then. Right, that leaves the catastrophes. Quite a record
2
@owabowa how would you know? I haven’t found anything useful, so I’m asking what you find useful, and the only thing you come up with is ‘a method of bla bla’, and nothing about class, equality, the abolishment of private property, the seizing of the means of production, so I’m sure YOU haven’t read him. But I understand why as a Marxist devotee you won’t go into discussion about that, and instead resort to nonsense, because that is the only area you feel comfortable discussing anything, since you won’t need to actually talk about anything real. Because in the real, everything Marxists is a catastrophe. Every ‘intellectual’ spouting Marxists or derivative stuff is someone who wants to de part of an elite warding over everybody else, using moral and virtue as to hold people in their place. Just like the priests of old, and just like Marx wanted to keep drinking and not work, but wanted other people to spontaneously pop up at places that needed work.
2
@owabowa hahaha sure, what about his wish to make the world come crashing down without a viable alternative, something that takes the human condition into account? Don’t bother with the rest, you don’t have to google all those things on my account. Besides, found any Marxist theory that actually works? Or do they all just kill millions the moment you implement them and turn the country into a beggar house were everyones lives takes a huge turn for the worse? So what good are they? Great theories buddy, what a great great ‘philospher’ he was.
2
@christophermalaby9661 People in the 19th century were perfectly aware of different classes of people, like lower and middle class. You really think people needed a sorry excuse for a philosopher to know to which part of society they were in? What Marx got wrong and the people themselves got right was that there was interplay and mobility through classes. People were already quite aware of their situation and had been organizing protests, strikes, and uprisings for better wages and working conditions long before Karl Marx wrote about class struggle. During the early Industrial Revolution, workers formed mutual aid societies, trade unions, and engaged in strikes, often at great personal risk. The Luddites in early 19th-century England protested against job losses due to mechanization, and workers across Europe and the U.S. fought for shorter working hours and better conditions. He didn’t create or define class struggle. He just formulated it in a way that gave it an ideological basis.
1
@dr.depressiv5250 I didn’t say Marx’s ramblings didn’t influence things, I asked what pearls of wisdom he provided. So far, I still fail to see them. In my view, Marxist influence is to see all things in a perspective of (class) struggle for power, or how capitalism creates certain situations. The first is a terrible limited and cynical way of looking at the human condition, and Marx’s solution for that has been proved to be an absolute hell on earth, the likes of which we have never seen (well perhaps the 30 years war, but communism was equally terrible for the people involved in peacetime). The second is hardly rocket science. I think a lot of influence that Marxism had on those fields you listed are mostly due to intellectuals needing to have a novel approach to make a name, so they posited Marxist interpretations, which are generally just book filling in cabinets. So yes, influence, suuuure. Wisdom? Quite the opposite. I think Marxism is one of the things that is most responsible for idiocy, simple mindedness and general inefficiency. It has made careers out of idiotic ramblings with no practical application, and has dumbed down huge swats of people, and killed millions upon millions. For the most part, where people lived under communism, it has wrecked and thwarted countless lives and degraded societies.
1
@owabowa hahaha, sure buddy, a believer who hasn’t even read Marx. They’re all the same. You kinda like his vision huh? Not having to do any work and instead play ’the intellectual’. Marx wrote down his fever dreams without any regard for the human condition. His ideas fail, and with a huge crater of collateral damage, giving tyrants the tools to reign. The true classlessness of his idea’s is that tyrants no longer needed legitimacy through class. I gather you think Adam Smith is the devil. At least capitalism has given the world progress. Marx just wanted it all to come crashing down with no viable alternative.
1
@owabowa hahaha a Marxist that hasn’t read Marx, they’re all the same. I suppose that attracts you in his ideas, you must fancy a life with no work, just play ‘the intellectual’.
1
@owabowa lol a Marxist that hasn’t read Marx, they’re all the same.
1
@owabowa do you know what went on in 20th century soviet union, china, cambodja, north korea, cuba? You know, all those fun places to be back then, the places were the dregs of humanity thought, well lets give these Marx theories a try? And how succesful they were? Capitalism, free markets, that’s what people evolved doing quite naturally. And it works. Marxism doesn’t. It never did any society good, it just opened the gates of hell. So what are you on about Adam smith while you just have to see the distorted madhouse that was the soviet union, or china, or cambodja. O capitalism so badd.
1
@owabowa so, according to you, marxism cannot be criticized, even by the world events and peoples actions inspired by marxism. There cannot be identified where marxism has made differences, for better pr for worse. So according to you, there can then also be no proof of it working for the better, or for the worse. Then what is the use of it? And what is it then, according to you, anything else than a mumbo jumbo ‘intellectual’ nonsense, that has moved into the indistinguishable? Very simple, because in the real world, it only brings catastrophe. That’s why it’s a ‘method for bla bla’, because of it is spoken of in concrete terms, it’s humanities worst construct. Yes, capitalism evolved naturally, in the world, out of a wish to share risk. Marxism is a thought out set of schemes to well, ‘seize the means of production’ among others. or do you claim Marx didn’t write that? Because you can talk all you want about thesis and anthesis makes synthesis, bla bla, but it does the same thing in society as the hugely impactfull catastrophes that were inspired by Marxism. Oh no, Marxism can’t be criticized, because bla bla method.
1
@owabowa because it is idiotic to think man is a tabula rasa, that hierarchies are unnecessary, or even unwanted. Look at how the communist experiments fared. Misery and death, and a fast lane to (no, immediate) totalitarianism. True dialectic is engaging conversation with someone that can challenge your ideas, not some ‘formula’ where you get a resolve when you hammer two contradictions together in your attic.
1
@owabowa nah, the fact remains, Marx didn’t have a particular insight in work or how it felt to be a worker, since he simply wasn’t one. As for his writings, no, I don’t see anything that is worth the paper it is printed on. You can name a thousand fields which Marxism Influenced, it doesn’t make it better, or more useful. It’s just clutter in a cabinet, providing novel ‘fields’ for people which have nothing useful to bring to the table, but still want to be an ‘intellectual’.
1
@eoin8450 yes, I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down on that shit. You guys seem to ‘think’ Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough (thinking is dubious in this context). Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in stupidity, but you managed it! By the way, stupidity is defined as repeating the same action expecting different outcomes. Perhaps you could benefit from that knowledge. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka, selling out your fellow man and your own soul.
1
@eoin8450 yes, I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down on that shit. Do you ‘think’ Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough (thinking is dubious in this context)? Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in stupidity, but hey, you have proven it is possible! By the way, stupidity is defined as repeating the same action expecting different outcomes. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka.
1
@eoin8450 I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down on that shit. You guys seem to ‘think’ Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough (thinking is dubious in this context). Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in stupidity, but you managed it! By the way, stupidity is defined as repeating the same action expecting different outcomes. Perhaps you could benefit from that knowledge. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka, selling out your fellow man and your own soul.
1
@eoin8450 yes, I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down. Do you ‘think’ Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough (thinking is dubious in this context)? Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in the opposite of being bright, but you managed it! But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka, selling out your fellow man and your own soul.
1
@eoin8450 yes, I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down on that shit. You guys seem to ‘think’ Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough (thinking is dubious in this context). Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in stupidity, but you managed it! But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka.
1
@eoin8450 yes, I know people like you actually exist, that would like to double down on that shit. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot simply didn’t go far enough to your taste? Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. It takes superhuman efforts in stupidity, but you managed it! By the way, stupidity is defined as repeating the same action expecting different outcomes. Perhaps you could benefit from that knowledge. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka.
1
@eoin8450 Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka, selling out your fellow man and your own soul.
1
@eoin8450 i know there isn’t anything of note that is part of education nowadays, except blind activism of course, but the definition of stupidity is still this: performing the same action more than once, expecting different outcomes. Do you fancy a cozy job in Lubyanka?
1
@eoin8450 At least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka.
1
@eoin8450 Yeah, indeed huh, why would people even mention the 100 million + deaths and the multitude of that number in suffering and thwarted lives caused by communism. It is so trivial right? But at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. But maybe you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka.
1
@eoin8450 Sounds like you fancy a cozy job in the Lubyanka.
1
Eoin8450 at least you have something novel, I haven’t yet encountered a situation where ‘Bolsheviks’ and ‘good’ are mentioned in the same sentence. Sounds like you fancy a nice job in the Lubyanka
1