Memes of production

ITT, we discuss your autism about "seizing means of production".

Workers don't share the risks, investments and intellectual effort involved in creating the business, so why do they think they should be able to kick porky out and split the profits? do you know that many workers leave the business, unite and start a similar business and make greater profits? it happens everyday. If porky is a parasite for not doing anything (other than initial investment/planning/risk/..etc) then workers are parasites too because they are working within a system they didn't create. Without the porky you call parasite, the job wouldn't have existed.

I think it really comes down to jealousy. You are jealous that some people are filthy rich and you are poor. If we reset the world and all kids get equal education and parenting, there would still be classes. People are different. Some are naturally smart, others are naturally stupid. Some are naturally lazy, others are active and passionate. You hate that, you want everyone to live as shitty as you do. You are the jealous kid who destroys/steals the toys of richer kids in the class. You just cover all that shit with big words and pretend it's deep and intellectual. Face it, leftism is about jealousy.

Obviously, English is not my first language. Also, I'm not a Holla Forumsack, a business owner or white.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=SGJ5cZnoodY
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

surplus

value

You are a fucking faggot op, f anything a major workers co-op is going to be better at controlling risks than the individual

Didnt even read your shit

seizing the means of production is what the USA did when they entered ww2.

yes, because cognitive dissonance is not pleasant.

They are free to unite and start their own business. Also, I'm free to run the business I created however I want. Low risk, high risk, ..etc it's my creation. My baby.

We don't think anyone should have to take those risks. Just because you got fucked in the ass, doesn't mean you get to fuck someone else in the ass. I don't care how hard they fucked you.

most of those things are done by hedge fund managers, not even the actually capitalists these days

I'll try to answer your points seriously OP even though we've heard them all before.

Because porky isn't compensating workers for the full value of their labor.

If you mean they start a business and become porkies themselves that's obviously not what we want so it doesnt matter. If they start a co-op or some shit you should keep in mind that a) that's hard as fuck and b) they're more or less exploiting themselves insofar as they have to screw themselves over to run a business like that (by firing each other to cut costs, working obscene hours, etc). Luxemburg talks about this in chapter VII of Reform or Revolution.

Not sure what this means. How is the worker a parasite? He or she is providing something to the boss for less than what their worth.

Under capitalism this is sometimes true, but this wouldn't be the case under communism.

I can't speak for anyone else on leftypol but I'm pretty smart and I go to a prestigious American university. I don't have the social background or the charisma to become a mega-porky but if I went into finance I could probably be comfortably petit-bourgeois (as long as I was willing to screw people over).

Leftist thought has a rich tradition, it's fine if you don't agree with it but we're not all pseuds (well everyone on leftypol kind of is but that's not true for the ideology as a whole).

Don't care.

what? no one else is doing any fucking. Just because your skills are shitty or very common and are not worth much, it doesn't mean I'm fucking you. I'm offering you a job at market price. You think it's fucking? don't take it lol

Didnt ask about yourself

Sorry, but the decisions taken by yourself inside your buisness affects everyone, externalities son

...

Extracting surplus value, collecting rent, and the banking system are all examples of buttfuckery.

My skills are so valuable that you faggots had to bribe the government to let H1B visa workers in and to collude with each other to keep wages down. Your business also wouldn't exist without us. On the other hand, people that are into IT are increasingly realizing that they don't need you to self-organize and run themselves for themselves. You are an unnecessary parasite and we can already see that. Soon everyone else will too.

While manipulating the market and stealing surplus value on top of that.

We won't, and we'll hang you just to make sure. It's only a matter of time now.

I think the main point of disagreement is the "value of labor". Let me ask you a question, If there are two identical cities with only one difference, the ratio of doctors. Do you think doctors in both cities should be paid the same? and who decides that value? Do you recognize supply/demand at all?

What gives you the right to the land and resources your company works with?

let's take h1b workers out of the picture. If you have a country that bans visa and immigration, would you recognize supply/demand? who decides the value of the job other than the market?

Why should the market decide the ratio of doctors?

You are confusing price with value. Doctors should keep 100% of the value they produce. It doesn't matter how you price it.

I bought/rented them. Image there's enough lands for every business. Imaging the business is virtual and doesn't require physical resources.

From who? Who gives them property rights?

The concept of surplus value still applies

You forgot the collusion as well.

You seem to be under the impression that we deny capitalism has certain features. Of course supply and demand are a thing.

You are confusing value and price. Price is merely an index. However, the value of work is what it produces. Anything I make has utility value, and that's a crystallized form of my labor. Of course, my work is easily copied, so the rate of profit easily reaches zero without government intervention in the form of copyright, patents, and trademark law. Capitalism has no way of actually ascertaining the value of something. It's the reason so many useless goods are created when they could create useful goods. Socialism in the past had the problem of information, because price did not exist as an index of perceived value. Now that computers and big data exist, we can more closely manage risk. In fact, this is already being done under capitalism. A bank named Black Rock has a system that does this. It would not take a leap to do the same under socialism.

It's not even about ethics or morality. Capitalism is simply becoming obsolete.

From whom? And what gives them the right to control that property. I say private property is theft, and it's a theft greater than that of an individual because it robs us all collectively.

Everyone would benefit from resolving X contradiction of capital

Insert any critique of capitalism that is your favorite for X

so we are back to the original question, you didn't share the initial risk/investment, why should you be able to keep all the profits with your fellow workers without sharing with porky?


that's another topic, so let's take the physical part out of it and assume we are talking about a website, where different workers run it, software engineers, sales persons, ..etc

So time spent at a company and systemic, biopolitically enforced dependence on this company is nothing?
A market is nothing more than the ability of one party's ability to enforce their economic views and demands on others. The full term for a market is "political economy," where we engage in political battles in order to enforce our economic will on each other, by violence or otherwise. Stop pretending there is any idea of fairness in a market; its every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost. We are working against that here.

It's not even done by them anymore
High frequency trading

as I said earlier, capitalists can pay people to do all those things. and if you really want to go back to the original original investment, that was in feudalism or slavery where the property and power to do so was all inherited.

We didnt share the original risk because you decided not to, nothing stops you from forming working co-ops, as a matter of fact you can offer your employees a part of the company for a price. However we have to share the externalities generated by your company, so we can have a say on how it is run

yes, by paying them they are taking a risk. Many companies still stocks to survive. Without stocks they would have no further funding.

as mentioned in OP, if we reset the society and every kid gets equal parenting and education ,their would be classes in the future. Let's take the source of wealth out of the picture. I just don't find it logical that workers should be able to keep the profits. I know two people who tried to start a business and their lives are almost ruined. They are borrowing from everyone and cutting down their living cost drastically.

there's a risk, it doesn't matter whether you can survive it or not. Only those who share the risk with me should be able to also share the profits.

some business owners do that!

most people prefer low risk low/medium pay to high risk high pay.

Because I do all the work. The notion that I should give you a share for no reason is stupid. I don't need you, and as I said. Organization and investment is increasingly done automatically. Even other capitalists don't need you. You are obsolete. It's only a matter of time now.

Thats what happens when you dont forma co-op


And those buisness owners are our comrades! We want to help them and protect their co-ops from big capital

People dont preffer low pay, they are not educated on investing or bqsic economics, so get scared by the notion of investing in a co-op

Because the historical circumstances that gave rise to porky were coercive and involved pushing people off common land using the state. The concept of the market does not presuppose the concept of the market - being a good parasite and taking a risk doesn't make you non-parasitic.

Then we definitely don't need you. A website can be cloned until our heart's content. Being the idea guy is over.

Take your shitty bourgeois morality and shove it up your arse. I'm a communist because it would benefit me and those few people that I care about, not because of some abstract notion of "fairness". Quite frankly I'm okay with killing people like you in order to benefit myself, which means I'm no more or less "moral" that the bourgeoisie cunts that currently run society, I simply have material interests opposed to them.

Also:
It's objectively impossible for classes to exist when property is held in common, since classes are defined by your relationship to the means of production. It doesn't matter if some people are geniuses and others are drooling retards. It doesn't even matter if some earn more than others, if everyone has the same relationship to the means of production then society is classless.

some software engineers try to do that and succeed., others fail. some reasons for failure: the initial site is famous, the software engineers who decided to leave don't have all the know how, they don't have enough money to keep it alive, ..etc

other people who aren't working in the website try to copy to, some succeed like Facebook (copying hi5, myspace, ..etc) and some fail.

Why do you want to fuck that up? it's a great system

please see and read full OP. it's inevitable to have classes even if we reset the society and start equally.

...

No, because class is based on your relationship to the MOP. Not how much money you have. See and read a full book. Anything really.

Someone post the webm about Wolff explaining silicone valley co-ops

Also, if you are seriously interested into it, read stuff like Proudhon, Tucker, Bookchin and other mutualism/market anarchism theorists

You really think if we reset the society, give everyone equal education and parenting, and give them the same amount of resources, their would be no classes? you are delusional.


thanks for being honest. That's the point of the thread. All leftist posts I read try to claim to be rational or moral while it's just about interest. You represent most leftists. Why don't they acknowledge this? are they or in denial? or practicing leftist taqqiya ?

They are spooked, the left is based on self-inteest, ignore the altruist liberals

I got you famrade

well I'm not familiar with terminology, what I meant is that some people will be rich and poor. The poster was justifying his opinion by saying the rich became rich through wrongful methods, so I asked him to imagine a scenario where this is not a factor to see what he is objecting to really.

We will eliminate that under communism. There will be no need to try and risk everything. Communities of people will get together to hire a programmer to make software for them, and then the software will belong to all, and this includes things like websites. We are already heading in that direction. The idea of profit just doesn't work in this context, but the programmer will be paid either way.
Facebook is going to fail sooner than later. The future is decentralized again. We do not need a company hosting user content to sell data. We have no need for big data.
You think facebook is great and that redundancy is good when it simply wastes resources? You're an idiot or insane.

Class is defined by relationship to the means of production, not by income. Nobody said everyone had to make the same amount, retard.

I can totally respect that, but I can't respect someone who claims to be rational/moral and he is not.

Dumbass. Communism isn't about morality it's about rational self-interest, and once people become conscious of class, it is inevitable. Capitalists are also engaging in rational self interest, but we are opposed to each other. It's an antagonistic system.

In the words of Kalr Marx: "We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror."

Finally, some concrete discussion.


by hire you mean pay? how much? who decides what ideas get implemented? according to what priority? what if my genius idea gets ridiculed as stupid and no one decides to put work and time into it?

Thanks fam

Documentary related if anyone finds it inteesting

m.youtube.com/watch?v=SGJ5cZnoodY

You got half of it right. Poverty will be made impossible under communism. Nobody will starve or be homeless or denied an education. You will always be able to have more, but never less, and never at the expense of others.

thanks for admitting you are not different than a thief who steals because it's good and easy for him. This is the point of the thread. So why there's a board dedicated to leftism? you don't need 100s of discussions to say "I want your shit"

Poor and rich have nothing to do with how hard you work, some people might get lucky and some might be the next Zuckerber, the majority however wont, its not hard to see why it is a rigged system

is it really theft if you're taking back what was taken from you in the first place

so now you are trying to rationalize it? make up your mind, is it about morality or just self-interest?

why does theft suddenly become a bad thing when communists do it? you didn't have a problem with it when you and your cronies were doing it

Property is theft to begin with

theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen

Being against theft is not a moral judgementt, but one that comes from a purely egoist one

I dont want to be a victim of theft

I gave you two scenarios where source of property is not a factor
1- we reset society, give everyone equal education, parenting and resources
2- a website

There's no such thing as a moral act, all things are self interest.

I lay claim to my property, which is all things.

Ultimately depends on what they want. In all reality, it will work like free software does now. A programmer is paid for his work, then people are free to use it and copy it. They can always ask him to help more, and in some cases, the programmer will be a user as well. As for payment, it could be labor vouchers, or some sort of as of yet undefined currency, or access to production or something else entirely. We do not yet know because we have not yet built these systems up. We will have to figure it out when we get there.
The people who hired him. Though, of course, someone else could always pay to fork the work, and then we have two versions or more, or we could have one version with features that can be turned on and off.
Whoever. You can always hire another programmer to work on the same thing if you personally want something done. Or you could use your own labor to get the good that you want.
Then it probably wasn't a good idea, but because you live in communism, you have your entire life to learn programming and implement your genius idea. Of course, nobody will protect your idea from copying, so don't expect to get rich from having an idea.

At least I'm not as bad as the capitalist that not only steals from his workers, but the world at large by denying the use to the entire human race of property that is rightfully theirs. Remember, you only own things because the rest of us agree that you do. We gave you property and we will take it away.

I really don't think you're getting this, In a communist society you will not be able to buy the means of production or accumulate capital, and therefore you won't be able to employ anyone or own a business. It's literally impossible for classes to emerge under such conditions, you would literally have to violently overthrow communism and re-implement property by force in order for classes to emerge. Something I don't think people would go along with, anymore than people going along with a plot to re-implement feudalism in today's society.

For starters, rationality and morality are completely different things, it's quite possible to be complete rational while being utterly amoral, if anything you cannot be truly rational if you are a moralist (especially of the bourgeois persuasion) since moralists actively work against their own interests.

As for why many leftists are moralists, it's simply because most *people* are moralists. It's a symptom of living in a bourgeois society.

I beg to differ, "stealing" the bourgeoisie's shit is a much more complex task than you seem to think.

We dont want everyone to have equals amount of private property, we want communal property

I dont understand, the creators of the website get the profits, not the shareholders, investors and so on

We live in the real world, retard. It's also already been explained to you that a website will not make you rich under communism. There is no state to protect your "intellectual property"(another retarded capitalist idea).

It's funny actually. How would a website make profit under communism? It wouldn't. There isn't anything to advertise, or data to sell for this purpose. Software is actually a type of commodity under which the rate of profit is nearly 0. You can copy software free of charge and you only have to pay the programmer once. If it wasn't for the state, software would not be able to be sold by the copy. This capitalist retard doesn't seem to understand this.

I am not a commie so I wouldnt know, but a website can profit in a market anarchist environment, while software can be copied, the labouring process of coding the original still exists, and the demand will determine if the programmer gets paid or not

Nobody is going to work for free in hope of a profit. We already have a model for this. Look at free software. You can pay the programmer without a profit motive.

Well thats true, as profit comes from surplus value

My mistake there

Surplus value

I'll go ahead and go down the line of conversation
With things like golden parachutes this is no longer the case for most of the bourgeoisie. In fact, Porky is more likely than anyone to profit from the failure of a business while the workers lose their livelihoods. At the very worst, all Porky risks is his social position, he'll be cast back into the ranks of workers if he fails. This is why the Sword of Damocles argument doesn't really work.
The success of worker cooperatives prove this wrong. Porky needs his workers, they don't need him.
Our problem with capitalist relations of production is that they're based on exploitation. To us, no amount of virtue entitles you to exploit others. The supposed virtues of the bourgeoisie no more justifies their positions than being virtuous would justify someone owning slaves.
You're still enslaved to capitalism as a system, choosing the manner in which you are exploited and alienated is no justification for exploitation and alienation. The bourgeoisie are, themselves, little more than servants to the inner logic of capital production and reproduction.

Second, this is an increasingly out of touch opinion as the working class is put under ever more of a squeeze, they simply don't have the means anymore to start their own business, as everyday is just a fight to keep their heads above water.

Third, at this point in the argument you've stopped defending capitalist relations and are simply coming up with various flimsy "frontier options" to get around capitalism without directly confronting it.