Honest question Holla Forums: why is he unable to read? Why does he keep pimping the same texts in every video (Wage Labor and Capital and Critique of the Gotha Program) instead of branching out?
I know Roo doesn't read (it's obvious by how his responses to critics take the form of terse, highly emotional banter rather than long, knowledge-filled insights), but no one except his 15-year old fans take him seriously. Muke, OTOH, is young and has potential for being a decent Marxist voice, which is why it disappoints me even more knowing he (like Roo) is functionally illiterate.
Roo's better videos were ghostwritten. That's pretty obvious. Were Muke's better videos ghostwritten too, or at least written collectively with him taking all the credit? I'm not trying to spread rumors here but something doesn't seem right.
He seems like a smart kid. He just needs to put in some fucking effort.
he's just some teenager, what do you expect?
Honest question OP: why do you care about dumb ecelebs?
he isn't. I have no idea why you would say this, there is literally no evidence of this whatsoever. I doubt he even has decent grades.
Here you go.
I've observed his livestreams. His brain definitely has room.
Why does everyone on this board hate this guy?
Because some think he backstabbed >us
makes shit vids, holds shit views, wont fuck off.
This, when I was 19 I was a /r9k/-browsing normie who knew very little about politics besides some knowledge of history. People always forget the fact that Muke is just a kid. I don't even know why is he regarded with so much authority to begin with. Holla Forums speaks too much about Muke and too little about Dr. Wolff
Because a couple of weeks ago he shittalked us on twitter.
Holla Forums is a monolith?
We just want successful Holla Forums ecelebs to counter all the awful Aut-right ecelebs. People like Sargon make $10k per month screaming "muh ess jay dubyas" and all the impressionable kids eat that shit up and become fascists.
Do you know if Sargon has any corporate connections? That might explain his success.
Why does he keep pimping the same texts in every video (Wage Labor and Capital and Critique of the Gotha Program) instead of branching out? Because he has read them and he doesn't want to pretend to have read things he hasn't? In that he is very different from A.W. or Rebel. Prot-tip: You can only know that by comparison to works you actually have read yourself, not through hearsay. For instance, in one vid he talked at length about Guevara's thoughts on how socialism should work. I don't claim to know whether he got Guevara right, as I haven't read Guevara. Have you? If you haven't, why would you open your mouth about that? Because some wankers on twitter told you their opinion on that? And have they read Guevara? Did they got it from other guys? And have those read Guevara? Likewise with a billion other topics.
Roo doesn't know what the Enlightenment is. He's a confirmed retard.
there's plenty of actual intellectuals worth listening to. these guys are just molymeme tier shitcunts for the left.
There have been multiple enlightenments throughout history.
A.W. does read, he just reads nonsense and disses anything which doesn't fit his definition of dialectics.
Muke would be better if he embraced his brainlet status and just tried telling centrists, liberals, etc. the most basic elements of Marx. Until he's better read he should avoid the shit like what he did with finbol and roo, just communicating the basic shit instead.
We should set up an ideological "pump" like the right has where people go from normie -> "classical liberal" -> "punk conservative" -> alt-lite -> alt right -> nazi. Muke and his ilk are good for that entry point of introducing people to the basics, where we have basically nobody (people like H Bomberguy and Contra who reference leftism but barely talk about it don't count). We already have a lot of people who are well read. We need people filling in the gaps between there and the normie centrist position.
Verbosity doesn't prove anything except how good you are at being autistic. More is less and less is more.
Roo is definitely retarded. He wouldn't talk to Anal Water about Mao despite having written a book on Mao.
Cus it's your nonsense, and most of you believe it. Somebody has to call it out for being garbage.
I've told you all to stop trying to claim you do something when you don't need to. Just accept you're pragmatists with a dogmatic bent, that's all you need to do. Dialectics are useless.
A.w, what is your take on Yui? He used to post here with you, remember?
Muke does read. Latest books were the anti-duhring and capitalist realism.
This asshole can read all he wants but it doesn't matter. An idiot's an idiot.
Tankies, be honest, you just deem muke to not have read anything because he says the ussr wasn´t socialist.
he´s literally a market "soc" what do you expect lmao
agreed. the kid is smart.
"one book muke" has been regarded as a faggot long before he became a leftcom.
I had enough of all you hypocritical pieces of shit. Muke does read, and he probably read a lot more than you brainlets. He is also also really fucking sexy, coming close to the beauty of Marx himself. Probably most people here wants to suck his enormous dick and let him fill their throat with that juicy cum, but everyone here just keeps calling him a faggot. Do you know who is the real faggot? You. Yes, you. You and every other nazbol fuck who keeps insulting transgender folks, so just fuck off, ok?
going to start using this great insult
I've read plenty of criticisms of the USSR from ultralefts (like Endnotes, What Was the USSR, When Insurrections Die, the shit you can find on Eden Sauvage, etc) and while they are all somewhat dishonest, some of them are quite interesting. Like, I actually got to contemplate about the stuff that was said. I also read a lot of shitty criticisms of the USSR, mostly from Trots. But I can honestly tell you:
I have never seen a more retarded, anti-marxist and demagogic pile of shit than Muke's hot take of the USSR.
It's pretty clear that he doesn't actually care about the topic at hand. Marxist-Leninists have tried to reason with him on Twitter, like actually make constructive remarks, which dismissed, blocked or left unanswered, only to vomit out another set of Tweets smearing Marxist-Leninists with retarded strawmen. He just wants to appeal to the in-group of left liberals, he sucks their dick at every opportunity, he literally gives money (!!) to annoying narcissist liberals like Contrapoints or drowsy SJW hillbots like Shaun and Jen, he smears actual Marxists all the time, he claims Holla Forums is NazBol, he posts fake images of Jasons Website (the anal water meme) and pretends they are real.
This is not about his age. It's okay that he doesn't have read much or that he doesn't do it, because, he's a fucking teenager. It's about his disgusting character.
He never said that lol
This just isn't true.
I can't respond to everyone on everything. This is not proof of me being whatever you're trying to paint me as.
hiding his power level obviously
In an earlier video you stated that you don't know much about Marxism-Leninism, and referred to FinnBol for further information. This is fine. Why do you feel the need for constantly doubling down on us with retarded accusations?
I mean you can't just stay FinnBol quoted Stalin at you for an hour and then dismiss it. He really didn't do that. He answered to your every argument. That's just shitty behavior man.
but quoting Marx and Lenin is literally quoting Stalin
you have read posts on libcom and revleft to understand marxism
The reason I haven't responded to that video is because it's far too long to reasonably expect me to. Anyone who actually thinks I have time for that is delusional. I've watched it, I know he didn't 'just quote stalin', that was me exagerating on twitter. He didn't however make any arguments that refuted what I said, but even if he did I just don't have to time to deal with all of it, there's way too much.
I quoted Marx way more than he did if you wanna play that game
then just fuckin livestream a reaction you silly fuck
Do a Responce now. And also read capital volume 1.
Live stream a responce and have all your (3 or 4) books on hand.
If he blocked you, you were probably being an annoying cunt and deserved it. Don't be an asshole and expect to not get blocked.
You sound more an more like a rational sceptic. You know that isn't true. If you seriously think he didn't make any arguments you have cognitive dissonance. Have you also seen Comrade Hakim's video on the topic? It's shorter and more succinct.
I mean you read these pamphlets (Wage Labor and Capital, Critique of the Gotha Program) but you actually need to contextualize them. Socialism isn't some "perk points" that you need to materialize. If you further claim that Russia didn't have the correct material conditions for socialism you disagree with Marx himself who said the opposite in his letters to Zasulich. Ironically, that's vulgarization of dialectical materialism which you guys love to blame Stalin for.
I only block nazbols, soooo
Why did you cut off the quote?
I said >He didn't however make any arguments that refuted what I said
He made arguments, I just don't think they were good ones.
yea idk how tankies can stretch the fact Marxism is a science this much. What makes Marxism a science is that it looks at the real world now, not an idealized version like say ancaps might do, and then explains why and how it will inevitably lead to something else - not that it should, not that it is moral that it does, but that it will.
If you start altering what that something else is, you're creating a new theory - and that's perfectly fine, if you believe that there have been differences in the material conditions that Marx analysed, and these would therefore change what the current state of things will develop into, then fine, make your argument for that and why Marx was wrong, or why Marx is out dated. I mean, he's not, but these people seem to think so.
Don't however do that and then keep calling yourself a Marxist.
The same could be said about your response. You quoted that Japanese article in the first video, and in the second video you just quoted the exact same article. That's pretty redundant. The thing is that we claim that the law of value didn't regulate production in the USSR, and you disagree, but you haven't delivered an argument why you think it did.
A theory has to explain what happens in reality. You can't have it the other way around. If Marx said for example the socialist revolution would happen in the most advanced industrial countries, then it doesn't (it happens in backwards countries like china/russia). Then you have two options, either saying well I guess Marx was wrong about that one small part (modify theory to meet reality) or say 'history didn't turn out like marx predicted, and since what he says is absolutely true, it was NOT REAL SOCIALISM'. You may laugh, but this is essentially what is being claimed. Basically turning historical materialism from a method for examining history into abstract idealism or even an un-falsifiable religion.
I repeated my arguments in the response because finbol made arguments in his that had already been addressed in my original video.
The point isn't if it regulated production or not (it did) but even giving you that assertion, the point is that value existed at all. Marx and Engels explicitly say value will no exist, not that value just won't have as much influence over things as it does now.
Your logic seems to be simply because there was a Socialist revolution at all, whatever that revolution produces is inherently Socialist.
So the result of any movement calling themselves socialist is always socialist? If instead of the USSR was got something more similar to modern china wouldn't you say the revolution failed and not that dengism is just what socialism looks like in reality?
What implementations of Socialism in reality show us in relation to Marxism are the means to which Socialism is attained, much like the Paris Commune, but not the ends of what Socialism actually is - that's already been pre-defined as more or less everything Capitalism is not.
Thanks for the (You)
That's actually pretty fucking important. Whether or not the surplus of labor (not surplus value, just the surplus) is used for social needs or not, whether or not production is for exchange or for use, is like, the whole point of socialism? You seem reduce Marx and Engels to dogmatic hacks. They didn't say it like that. You can't consciously abolish an abstract concept which is descriptive, not prescriptive. The USSR couldn't abolish value because they were just one country. Because of the fact other countries existed, value existed. I urge you to read Marx' "Critique of Political Economy" and the first chapter of Capital
Muke is actually pretty good when it comes to criticism of capitalism and conspiracy theories. He shouldn't be sectarian, thought. It alienates potential leftists.
yes Not really, historical materialism is using Marx's methods not his conclusions. It's so obvious that all of this dogmatic autism coming from muke & leftcoms etc is basically a post hoc justification for trying to disavow the soviet union. Muke doesn't like the USSR and then he works backwards from that to claim its 'not real socialism' More or less. If there's a different mode of production that evolves in real life and its slightly different than what Marx predicted, what are you going to go by - actual historical reality, or what Marx wrote
You are confusing acknowledging something as socialist with praising it or holding it as ideal/mission accomplished. Socialism is not a utopia. It is possible to call something socialist while saying it had flaws and should be improved upon.
No, but the USSR was far from merely 'calling' itself socialist, it actually did abolish almost all private property.
God no. Your describing an extreme social democracy, where social programs are funded by profits rather than taxes. This is obviously much better than 'regular' capitalism, but none the less not Socialism.
Socialism is the abolition of the concept of profits and value. THIS is the whole point, the abolish capital and the value form - that's the only way we could ever produce for use, if what we produce have no conceivable value to be used in any form of exchange.
Engels basically word for word did. Watch my response to finbol. Hell even Marx word for word did in critique of the gotha.
I know, that's why it couldn't attain Socialism. It did the best it could, but that's not enough.
It didn't abolish the internal logic of market exchange. If a socialist revolution leads to a system similar to capitalisms hould we just say that s what socialism looks like in real life?
Yes, and then if you have to examine how it got to that point by looking at the conditions, the decisions, the political and economic limitations, etc. Rather than using the cop out of all cop outs, 'oh, they just didn't understand muh true marxism, nothing to reflect on here guys, if i had been in charge we would have abolished 100% of commodity production and gone to full communism day 1. Lenin/whoever were just closet capitalists/didn't understand marx/not real socialists' puh-leese. The not real socialism argument is supreme arrogance and intellectual laziness because it absolves the user of all need for analysis by simply claiming the people in that historical society either didn't understand or want to do 'real marxism'
second of all they did abolish the internal logic of market exchange for all goods/services covered by the central plan which actually did directly allocate resources
"Newtonian mechanics is about using Newton's methods, not his conclusions. Therefore I can use integration to show that humans can fly."
I addressed that ridiculous claim by finbol in my response to him - I actually like the USSR, I think it was a great place that did great things. It just wasn't Socialist by Marxism's standards, and if we are to understand Marx, we must acknowledge this.
That's ridiculous. Like absolutely ridiculous. So, if a mass movement formed, replaced the state and called itself Socialist…is that Socialism? By this logic, the Nazis were literally Socialism. Even if we don't wanna use the nazis, we could say the NEP was Socialism even. Fuck, this is so dumb.
The we can agree. If a socialist revolution creates a capitalist society then the revolution has failed. Not because of lenin being a moron or something but because of material conditions.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of socialism. Profits didn't exist in the USSR. Period. Production wasn't for profit. To claim that surplus of labor = profits is just showing you don't actually understand the terminus technici Marx uses. Damn those tribesman in the stone age hunting down a deer and giving it to their family, they must be social democratic revisionist capitalists! But why? Where does Marx say this? He wasn't a historical determinist. You know, that's not an argument against Marxism-Leninism. You are implying they did the best they could, but you don't really offer an alternative.
the socialist revolution creates a socialist society, if it has flaws those are because of material conditions. You are simply classifying everything which doesn't 100% comform to an ideal as 'capitalist' how is this not exactly the 'muh not real capitalism' argument that ancaps use?
This is a total cop-out. "Because of material conditions" my ass, tell us exactly what material condition it was that made it impossible. You're just repeating things you have picked up somewhere without any kind of understanding.
Commodity production existed, therefore surplus value existed and therefore capital expansion. Profit in the regular sense didn't exist, so sure excuse my use of the term, but none the less my original point still stands without getting into semantics.
Because when we produce goods with value involved, the only way value can exist is because there is exchange taking place. Therefore, if we produce for use, value does not exist, as no exchange happens. Value existed in the USSR, exchange took place, goods were produced for this exchange.
I'm not trying to offer one. In fact, MLism was the best Russia could had got. That still doesn't make it Socialist.
yea that tweet was inspired by this thread a little
Yes. Humans can fly, its called an airplane. Something newton never thought of, although obviously the engineers that designed it used his equations. self own No, calling itself socialist is one part, they would have to establish an actually different MOP, which the soviet union did even though it didn't 100% conform to what Marx said in gothakritik. Are you literally claiming Stalinist central planning is the EXACT SAME MOP as a western capitalist country like America? Yeah, read that again please.
It was not capital expansion, only expansion of the MOP, which is a supreme good, it means we have more means of production to meet our needs with. Without "capital" (really you mean the MOP but don't know any better) expansion, there is no growth in the productive forces of society.
Oh my god you're a fucking retard.
Now you're getting it, but you're also contradicting your previous statements - you're saying the socialist revolution actually has to do something for it to establish socialism, rather than just say it's socialism.
Production was done for exchange.
mop is capital.
There is still value in that kind of system, which can be expressed in terms of opportunity cost. We can only produce so many not-commodities at the same time, and have to regulate how many of what, which depends on where our preferences lie. It's just abstracting exchange into a more rational approach, it does not abolish value BECAUSE YOU CANNOT ABOLISH A CONCEPT, it's stupid to even talk about doing so.
Well then expansion of capital is good. Do you oppose increasing the productive forces of society by increasing the MOP?
Now you're just redefining value away from how Marx uses it.
MoP doesn't have to be capital. It becomes capital under certain circumstances.
Why are you throwing around moral arguments. Marxism is about what will happen, not what should. Capital will, eventually, cease to exist. MoP will still be expanded upon, but not for the purpose of creating more exchange values, like it is under Capitalism and by extension the USSR.
and these circumstances were all present under the USSR
Yeah, that's like, totally what we argue.
What the actual fuck man.
Surplus value isn't equivalent with profit either. That's not just semantics. And no, surplus value didn't exist. Show me where Marx says that when you have commodities you have surplus value. What the fuck? I've never heard about Marx saying this. And yes, I did read him. Marx writes in the Gotha Program about socialism:
Muke Surplus =/= surplus value. Every society, except hunter gatherer society, has a surplus how else can you repair/maintain the MOP and build new machinerys, or pay for non producing members of society such as elderly retired, students, disabled, etc.
You know muke with all this effort to shitposting on leftypol you could actually make a video response or two.
Verily a most vile heresy. Can you muster rational arguments, please?
You don't seem to grasp identity. Two things that are the same cannot cease to exist and expand at the same time.
Marx himself wasn't a Marxist. That's Weltanschauungsmarxismus. Marx made a critique, of capitalism, he didn't even describe socialism except 3 paragraphs in Critique of the Gotha Program
Sounds like your only problem with ML's is that they tend to call the USSR socialist. That they use the word socialist to describe a society that has had a revolution, and taken steps to make the means of production collectively owned, organized production according to a plan, etc, but where some features of capitalism still exist, such as commodity production (although in a somewhat modified form). You actually seem to agree with most of the actions ML parties have taken historically, and don't seem to disagree with ML's on what needs to be done today (as far as I know).
To me it sounds like your disagreements with ML's aren't really that huge in reality?
No its an autistic semantic debate. Basically Muke is like most leftcoms who seem to think calling socialist is the same as saying it was the height of what can be hoped for, rather than one possible result of attempting to implement socialism in reality. Socialism, nor any 'future' mode of production is not something that can be defined a priori by a laundry list of criteria
Muke, let's just be honest: It's not about all the theory or semantics of commodity production. Let's stop pretending this is what you care about in regards to Marxism-Leninism.
The reason you have a hateboner for tankies is that you want to appeal to a more normal, left-liberal audience, and are convinced that dropping Stalin scares the fuck out of people, You know what, I'd even be fine with that. Just be honest about it. I know this because you said yourself that LARPing as NKVD ruins the left. Just don't try superhard to be one of these Leftcoms when you havn't concerned yourself with the history of the USSR or read capital. Like, I don't even care if you do or not. Nobody forces you to read Capital. Nobody forces you to read the immortal science of Grover Furr together with a speech of Kim Il-Sung every morning.
But then don't fucking talk about it either.
The only thing which triggers Muke more than tankies is pic related
Muke doesn't cares about ML anymore and rightly so. He is gaining more fans this way.
Stop being jealous he is gonna surpass Jason "The Virgin" Unruhe in popularity.
Only a matter of time.
And where’s the proof?
It really doesn't matter if the USSR was socialist with flaws of not socialist beause of the flaws. As long as we acknowledge those flaws and the fact we need to that we need to learn from the USSR's successes and failures it doesn't matter if they were socialist or not. The only incorrect positions would be "it wasn't socialist so I don't have to think about it or learn from it" or "It was perfect and we should just do the exact same thing again.
This is a good post.
'tis a real ban, but it's not because of the post. He admitted to having a grudge against the board and only posting to spread misinfo.
Bekieve whatever makes you feel good about yourself. I don't have a grudge against this board. You people are fun to make mad just by simply posting.
Now you're just lying.
I've been here so long, and have said the same thing about you all, that I just know you banned be for no reason other than that your pseud brainlet ass was one of the people I've called out lately.
Pro tip: don't say anything as a reason if you're too stupid to make up an even half assed believable reason.(USER WAS FORCED TO ACTUALLY READ CAPITAL FOR THIS POST)
so A.W. finally got banned. … heh
There's nothing to learn that anarchists didn't know before.
Don't you have books to lie about reading and accepted scientific theories to misunderstand, brainlet?
he is not getting banned you idiooooot AAAAAAAAA can't tell if ironic or not.
also his name makes me thirsty for AW rootbeer, thats the only thing that triggers me about him
Currently planning a channel for this exact purpose
Hey Muke big fan! Love how you stalk threads and lie! how does it feel to be a woman hateric snake? How does it feel to poison the well of leftist discourse? how does it feel to concede to and legitimate clowns like Sargon who platforms fascists? How does it feel to be a coward and an opportunist? Does it feel good? Does it get you off?
Why not help Muke instead of always bullying him?
I'm going to rape you Tankie because I know you're still a virgin loser. You need to get raped tbh fam.
MUKEGang confirmed advocates of sexual violence(to be expected) ¡Fuera Sionista! ¡Fuera Imperialismo! ¡¡¡Fuera MUKE!!!
te voy a violar por pendejo
this aint a game of call of duty in the late 2000's fam rape threats are just needlessly edge at this point and in all honesty played out stop beating a dead horse
people have tried to help him here in the past. It doesn't stick.
do his new twitter friends know about this yet?
Please stop being retarded.
true. but tankies are sex starved, getting raped would benefit them smh
Stop projecting your sexual pathologies on me it kinda weird also why do you think tanks don't get mad fuck most of the left gets mad fuck except maybe egoists and armchairs (egoists because they're awful conversationalists and armchairs don't like going out and would rather drink tea with a book)
The other day I saw Jason Unruhe in Canada. He is fat as fuck.
Cool! Still doesn't change what I said
His mom is just like him too. When Holla Forums called his house they said his mom responded and she was obnoxious as fuck, like a female Eric Cartman.
It's clear that Unruhe grew up amongst absolute white trash. I feel sorry for him. People call him dumb but comparing him to the environment he grew up in he is a fucking scholar.
For the left it should be: normie → liberal → Bernie/succdem → anti-Soviet Marxist and/or Trot → ML
I specifically linked these gems so you brainlets could learn a thing or two.
So liberal > liberal > socdem > leftcom or socdem > socdem
9000 subs vs 31000
Muke, when will you stop calling yourself a Leninist. Everyone knows you aren’t one.
Roo has been online since 2009 though.
So? Ruhe may be a memelord but at least he covers actual news once in a while, as opposed to muke becoming an unbearable sectarian leftcom
this is now anti muke gang thread
his last video was just idealism. He also never uses materialism to build his arguments.
If you looked up the time Holla Forums doxed him, you'll find out he's bourgeois. That's why he is incapable of arguments and theory, he is not apart of the proletariat to speak from experience, from truth.
Marx's partner was a 19th century Mitt Romney or Donald Trump, would you say that Engles was incapable of arguments and theory? muke is incapable because he's a fuckwit who only read a baby tier list over 2 years, not because of his background.
In what ways?
I don't disagree But assuming one is a Marxist, one will have great respect for Engles who was a top-tier porky.
this is actually really fucking interesting thanks
I don't remember "leftypaul" doxing him at all tbh, I think user is pulling this out of his rear.
Muke shouldn't be reading Descartes.
He should just read this instead. Literally everything he needs to know about philosophy is in this book.
ADHD and aspergers.
Muke did/said nothing wrong.
Shut up muke.
he already knows more than 50% of the board just by reading those two
leftypol intellectual elite patreon when
because he's a fucking autist that embodies most of this board
why are you posting about him instead of reading?
Change "muke" to "Roo" and your statements would be accurate.