If morality is a spook, then there is nothing wrong with exploitation

If morality is a spook, then there is nothing wrong with exploitation.

It's not in my self interest to be exploited ;^)

True, but if the majority is exploited then the minority of exploiters will need to watch their backs.

Correct. Wrong and right only make sense if you have a moral compass.

That's why you should fuck over the other bastard before he gets the chance to get you.

what if the current environment is not suitable for you to be self-employed (either not enough capital, credit to purchase capital, or too risky)? Given this environment, wouldn't it be in your self interest to be exploited as a wageslave than being self-employed?

In relative terms, but it's even more in your self interest to have exploitation eliminated altogether.

(Also the not insignificant chance that the exploitatory system will lead to the collapse of civilization, which statistically you probably won't survive)

but what if i like the person and respecting them is in my best interest?


objectively, not subjectively. ignoring exploitation even though its in a person's interest is just as much morality as christianity.


why would he not be able to be self employed? why are you obeying a market that's manipulated by capitalists?

If morality is a spook there's nothing wrong with anything, just because murder isn't wrong doesn't mean I'll let people murder me, or my friends, or the cute girl two blocks down.


Your thread sucks OP

He didn't say you COULDN'T, he said it wasn't suitable, because > (either not enough capital, credit to purchase capital, or too risky)

"Exploitation" is not a moral category in Marx.

isnt that the point of violent revolution?


this basically

This is the SocDem in his natural state.

"We cannot change the world! We can only make it a bit better for us!" "We cannot stop having slaves! We just need to ensure that they are treated humanly!"

Yup,pretty much.
Were you expecting an argument?

Go back to your low life gutter and stay there

...

So what you're telling me is stirner was engles lover, not his pen name?

If the environment is not good, we need to change the environment.

Otherwise we'd be still in caves.

as long as you understand the nature of it and as long as it pleases you, then yeah i guess. This is a problem with Stirner

Why? It pleases very very few. Even the exploiters hate it for the most part. How do you feel about wearing clothing made by children who were born within the wrong imaginary lines?

So Engel was a full blown narcissist?

Marx doesn't define exploitation as a moralistic term

Stirner said that if people put up with exploitive behavior, then they fully deserve it. Holla Forums has some cognitive dissonance when it comes to Stirner, a lot of what is posted here has been debunked by him.

you are now WOKE

This is a classic example of someone who has learnt politics and philosophy from memes, and never actually bothered to learn what these buzzwords mean.

Stirner is a right wing philosopher imo. Its morality and lack of it that makes the difference between left and right.

Do you even bother reading the thread, EU tard ?

He's right though. There is no rational self-interested reason for most people in the west to support full global communism/socialism. At best you should support nationalistic social democracy funded by slavery and exploitation in the third world. Pretty much the status quo with a bit of wealth redistribution and less globalism.