/leftypols/ thoughts on classical liberalism?

A lot of people on this board seem to be far-leftists but what are your thoughts on classical liberalism?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=SFDt_yv5a64
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_Wage_Labour_and_Capital.pdf
youtu.be/_An6iCCo62M
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

trash

complete and utter garbage

shit

cancer

why?

gulag

Oh, you mean FUCKING CAPITALISM?

I wonder what they may be.

One of the greatest cancers to ever grace the earth, almost beats out sjws and alt-right classcucks.

Correct, but you still have to go back to reddit


It is capitalist ideology. We are part of the movement that seeks to abolish capitalism.

sage for shit thread

it's outdated, but its funny because the only points economists want to save are the most outdated.

Reminder that classical liberalism was the original left-wing.
I am proud to say I am a left-wing comrade.

lol no dude you're the retard child.

it's the accelerationists' choice
succdemism makes capitalism more tolerable, classical liberalism makes revolution more likely

gay

in the 19th century, liberals were for imperialism, an electorate restricted to property owners, the shooting of striking workers, and the ruthless logic of the free market, even when it meant starving people to death, such as in the indian and irish famines. Not exactly a golden age of enlightened humanist rationality. The problem with liberalism is it makes a fatal compromise with the institution of private property. The enforcement of private property can only mean violence and deprivation.

neck urself

The Jacobins at least were anti-emperialism, considering their relationship with haiti.

Where's the Gadsden name-fag?

Liberalism was a miracle for the west and still needs to expand through most of the world.

French Liberalism is better than Anglo Liberalism though.

We're taking over your board comrade.

We're the radical left now.

>>>/liberty/
Oh wait it's dead because most posters solved their cognitive dissonance and moved on…
Awww feels lonely cuz no one to talks to?

t. Sargon of Akkad

Not op, but, have a question.

What things are of value from classical liberalism, from a leftist perspective?
And what about Adam Smith's ideas? What was good, what was bad?
Did classical liberalism want small, competitive companies, and also small government?

Ancaps GTFO.

this is just kinda sad reading your posts

Read Marx, he breaks down most Smith and Ricardo's ideas. The classical liberals certainly wanted small, competitive companies, and small government, but all of those things are incompatible with capital accumulation and a profit-driven economy.

As for liberalism in general, you should look to Rousseau and the Jacobins for what can be saved.

Well.. Not believing that a guy is the King, because a lady in a lake.. .. God, said so, is one.

yeah, lol, I forgot about that.

Wew, this entire thread.
read Rudolf Rocker

youtube.com/watch?v=SFDt_yv5a64

In Das Kapital?
Should I read Wealth of Nations first?

Is there any merit to what the C4SS market anarchist guys believe, that capitalism would collapse if the state didn't exist and grant muh privileges to capitalists, and all profit would be leveled to zero (returned to labor)?

Nahh comrade, just skip Adam Smith straight to Rothbard.

I tend to doubt it, as fluctuations in markets will almost certainly guarantee an uneven distribution of wealth and thus reinvestment of capital, even if the starting average rate of profit is zero.

In fact, you'd probably need a state to enforce a lack of capitalist muh privilege, which isn't surprising, markets always need some sort of political power guaranteeing a space for them to work.

Parts of it can be appropriated for left wing ends. The works of some liberal economists were instrumental in disproving the centrally planned economies the tankies like.

Also

I'd say read both. Wage, Labor, and Capital, is probably something a bit shorter and to the same effect, if you'd like an overview first
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_Wage_Labour_and_Capital.pdf

...

Capitalist muh privileges are granted by the state. Patents, copyright, a monopoly currency, central bank and corporations are all the products of the state, why would you need a state to regulate their non-existence?

Rothbard was allied to the new-left in the 60's and there were people who used his ideas for left-wing purposes or merged them into mutalism.

Here's a sample of Rothbard during this period, arguing for workers taking ownership of industry.

And the modern, capitalist state is a result of capital accumulation and the power of the bourgeoisie who overthrew the feudal lords. If you permit capitalist petit-bourgeoisie relations, eventually they will grow to the massive corporations we see today, bringing the state with them.

You need a state in order to accumulate capital in the first place. Without a state to guarantee absentee property rights and protect bank accounts it would be almost impossible to accumulate capital, without the concentration of capital in few hands wage slavery is impossible which in turn kills the idea of capitalism emerging.

I think this video explains this issue quite well.

youtu.be/_An6iCCo62M

see

Neoliberalism is objectively worse than classical liberalism because it removed the debate on state power and corporatism. Today's idiotic libertarian "classical liberals" spend their days wanking off to elon musk and google because they've sold out on state capitalism vs individual liberty. Instead they sell individual liberty for greater state capital. fucking retards.

classical liberals also committed a larger swath of genocides than fascism. colonial africa, india, america were horrible.

The two aren't really any different tho.

It's absolutely based. Classical liberals only advocated for capitalism when feudalism was the dominant system and the full effects of industrial capitalism could not have been predicted. If you think people like Rousseau, Voltaire, Locke or Bentham would be pro-capitalist today then you are dreaming. They were about individual freedoms first and foremost, which have inarguably been crushed under capitalism. Socialism is the logical conclusion of classical liberal values in the age of late capitalism, and tbh anybody who reads socialist and classical liberal theory should be able to see this.

...

Okay well I haven't read enough of him tbh, but the others I mentioned would likely be anti-capitalist. Mutualism is literally just Lockean liberalism that takes into account how capitalism systematically deprives people of the product of their labour.

…user, have you read Locke?

Classical liberals are alright in my book.

John "labour is the source of all wealth" Locke was literally /ourguy/ by the standards of the 17th century.