Do any of you actually study economics or have a good understanding of it and still support Marxism and Socialism?

Do any of you actually study economics or have a good understanding of it and still support Marxism and Socialism?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/-KKg500WPEA?t=39s
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxian_economics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_neoclassical_economics
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Don't start a thread with a negative question.

Rephrase your question in terms of what Marxist economics lacks with regards to mainstream economics.

polite sage

Imo Marxism lacks a good 150 years of development. People are still stuck talking about Das Kapital and Gramsci's work. Yes, some problems in our society stood the same, still, where is the Marxist plan for today's society?
Who knows if Marx himself would think Das Kapital is still applicable today.

That's why I'm asking if there's people actually studying economics, because I think they are important to the Marxist "movement" today.

"Stuck" talking about Das Kapital? Maybe because it is still highly relevant, and its criticisms and theories are still proven and form the basis of why people are against the capitalist form of production.

People, let this shitpost die. Sounds like OP doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, and yet puts that on us.

angry sage

Let me add that Das Kapital, as good as it might be, is a critique of 19th century capitalism.
It is an important piece, but I don't think it will solve today's working class problems.

The relevance of Das Kapital in today's society could be summed up in a 10 page long pamphlet.

I did an economics undergrad degree at university.

Reading Capital gave me better theoretical tools to understand the reality of political economy than any of that formal economics I was taught.

However, some study of "mainstream" economics is of course useful.

I beg to differ on that. Of course it needs to be modernized but market socialism is a stepping stone, not the goal.

Deleted my post because I didn't mean to post as the "board owner".
I'm the BO of a different board and it was still in the name field.
If the actual BO's are watching. Don't worry, I'm not trying to imitate a BO.
Anyway, here's my original post again.

Was a libtard for a while so I have a pretty good understanding of Austrian economic theory and the arguments for it (not that, that's anything to brag about since it's pretty elementary shit). Never learned Keynesian economic theory but I took two microeconomics courses in college so I kind of understand the basics of neoclassical economics. Probably most knowledgeable in Marxist economic theory but some of the higher level stuff (the transformation problem for example) still escape me.

I do not. But I think it's funny how this type of question always gets asked when you profess radical leftist beliefs.

Apparently being a liberal or a conservative without knowing basic econ isn't a problem at all.

Most people regardless of ideology don't know economics, because it's extremely convoluted and often arbitrary.

Unfortunately, lolberts think they're experts on it despite being utterly clueless outside of Austrian retard-babble, indicating severe Dunning-Krueger.

Das Kapital actually holds up pretty well in the modern day because the fundamentals of capitalist political economy haven't actually changed all that much.

Marxism isn't a system, it's a philosophy and critique of capitalist political economy.

I'm currently mastering economics and still believe consider myself a Marxian Economist.

Awesome, we need more people like you

I have a batchelor's degree in economics.

Do you still support Marxism? Are you going to go for a Masters degree?

I'm planning on getting a Ph.D. but I fucked up with taking some time off. I'm an anarchist. But my favorite Econ professor was a Marxist. He was awesome.

Literally the first class in my freshman year, he said: "the supply and demand theory of value is basically bullshit". Everyone in the class was like

I really dont give a fuck about marx's personal opinions. The works he produced are the basis of marxism, not marx as a person.

The concern that Marxism as an economic science hasn't really advanced for 150 years is a legitimate one. But it's not like it's something that Marxian economists themselves haven't grappled with. There have been Marxists that reject the LTV, for example. It's not as straight forward as some people seem to think.

in what way does marx's analysis in Capital prove inadequate for todays struggles?

The fact that you somehow think Economics is some monolithic field already speaks to how much you know about it.

Yeah, I did a dual program in physics and economics. I spent my first semester just arguing with the professor about how the supply/demand curve is not well defined and couldn't have predictive power. Little did I know at the time that the basics of economics which I found so counter intuitive had already been largely destroyed in academia. It was really the lack of rigour in economics coupled with my desire to understand the world that turned me towards Marx. I buy it all wholesale but I can't for the life of me deal with other marxists and socialists, nor can I deal with liberals and fascists. The sheer ignorance on display in the political discourse that surrounds me makes makes me want to die.

If you wanted "rigour" you'd major in math, not a fluff subject like economics.

Neo-liberal, and Keynesian Economists today are the main intellectual vanguard o teh bourgeoisie.

Please explain to me how math would be useful than to engage and call our enemies out for their bullshit.

Working towards a bachelor's in economics and listening to the arguments for capitalism is what pushed me towards socialism.

The rigorous formalism that is inherent in mathematics can help you deconstruct the application of rituals and theories of social truth to the number that is written on your paycheck. I don't see any reason to waste your time and money for a formal education (I should say "brainwashing") on the cults of economics, rather you should study it in your spare time.

Most working Marxian economists actually have to read and teach mainstream neoclassical and 'mainstream' heterodox thought.
youtu.be/-KKg500WPEA?t=39s

I have studied about a year nonstop reading on capitalist economics. It has given me more centrist approach on markets.

...

I study economics in a university setting, yes. It's not so much that i have some vision in my head about some ideal socialist world, but rather i'm interested in critiques of the capitalist system.

Well, Marx himself was an economist, and he might be right on a lot of issues, but full-blown Marxism is a bad idea.

muh praxeology

This. Even professors at UMass Amherst gave to teach a good amount of Keynesian economics.


Obvious bait but I can't not take it - Marx didn't propose any socialist economic system, his entire canon is devoted to an analysis and critique of capitalism. Marxian economics were later interpreted by the Soviet Union to devise their planned economy but there's no such thing as 'Marxist economies'.

And yes OP I have a double econ and philosophy major, the former heavily Marxian.

Not entirely true. He doesn't have a single work where he systematically outlines what a socialist economy would look like, but you'll find bits and pieces of it in his writings.

...

They don't?


Never said he did.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxian_economics

No contradiction to be seen.

No, they don't.

But they do.

This is Marxist economics as descriptive, not normative socialist economics.

*as descriptive science

This thread got me confused about the supply/demand theory and its validity. Can someone explain me whats wrong with it or link me to any critics?

I read "Economics In One Lesson" and it was like a window into the mind of lolberterians, what with all the rants about logical fallacies and muh wealth generation

see

Seen, but what's there to see?

There's no such theory, but there's a theory of general equilibrium.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_neoclassical_economics