Vanguard News Network

I don’t know if Marx himself would have approved of all the weird, sick degeneracy that has been perpetrated in his name, including Cultural Marxism. I think in many ways Marx was a rather respectable 19th century bourgeois and probably would have been just as appalled at “same sex marriage” and court-ordered school desegregation as any of us WNs are. I don’t what Marx’s views on Zionism were but Lenin, one of his most enthusiastic disciples, did not support it.

Eerie connections: Marx was born in Prussia — Marxism originated in Germany — His brand of communism originated in Germany — Communism destroyed Germany — Marx praised Lincoln in personal letters — Lincoln used Prussian soldiers from the kingdom that Marx was born. Communism took hold in the North in the 20th century.

Was Marx a monster who believed in monstrous fratricidal wars in America and Europe to spread his ideas? Maybe I could chase him down in an H.G. Wells time machine and ask.

The people who followed on the heels of Marx may have used his ideas for personal gain.

Marx said he was motivated by the “ideals” of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, Brotherhood. The non-negotiable part of his passion was the Equality part; in his thinking, it made possible the other two parts or at least supported them. He was a leveler at heart.

The “scientific” part of Marxism, aside from all the footnotes and research he did (some of which has been shown to be fraudulent) was his labor theory of value. Everything “scientific” in Marxism comes out of his labor theory of value. But anyone with any common sense can see through that theory after a few minutes of reflection. The theory is best explained by a simple example. Say you’re a rural self-employed guy who makes some product and you make $10 for every unit you sell. Now a Capitalist comes along; he owns a factory that makes the same product, and he offers you a job paying $15 for every unit you make. The reason he can pay you so much is that he has figured out a way to get $35 for each unit. Now Marx’s labor theory of value says that the Capitalist is ripping you off. The units are “really worth” $35 each, but he is only giving you $15 each. (The $20 difference Marx calls the “surplus.”) In fairness, Marx says, you should get the whole $35 per unit because you made the unit. The fact that the Capitalist is pocketing $20 means that he is “exploiting” you. But now think about it. You couldn’t get $35 per unit on your own. You could only get $10 per unit. By going to work for him, you get $15 per unit, a better deal. The $20 the Capitalist keeps is his payment. He didn’t make the product, you did (with his tools). But because he’s a better salesman and better organizer, he boosted your return on your labor. The $20 difference between what he sells a unit for and what you are paid for it is like a fee that you pay him to boost your productive value more than you could. (It’s also how he stays in business in the first place: he can’t work for free, either.) (Economic activity is a form of cooperation, not war, although workers may have to organize to ensure that the spread is within a reasonable bound which is good for all parties.)

Believe it or not, Marx’s labor theory of value, or theory of “exploitation” (and all the pilpul about it that fills thousands of fat volumes in libraries all over the globe) is the oh-so-“scientific” excuse for killing millions of people under communism. It’s the core rationalization for the mountains of corpses the commies piled up in the 20th Century. And it is SHEER HORSE SHIT (see explanation above).

Marx’s fame rests almost completely on those two things–his passion for equality, and his labor theory of value. He was, in short, a jew charlatan who was poison to the world, as the jew always is.

Sean Gruber:

Yes, Marx was full of crap. Consider this: let’s say that I run into the trunk of an apple tree with my pickup truck. As a result, hundreds of ripe apples fall into the bed of my truck. Now, I can drive those apples to a grocer and sell them to him for, maybe, $10 or even $15 dollars.

But, according to Karl Marx, those apples are worth nothing. Zero. Why? Because there was no labor involved in my actions. Only labor produces a value on a product. No labor? Then no value.

—

Sean: First, I understand you are just trying to explain Marx’s labor theory of value.

So, about that widget factory in your example above:

If $$$ is the only consideration, then the capitalist and his factory are the way to go and, indeed, capitalism is good. If however the self-employed maker of the product (who was making only $10 a pop) rather likes the idea of working for and by himself on his rural property, with the kids helping out, that muddies the waters a bit, doesn’t it. Maybe the extra $5 profit on each widget doesn’t compensate for having to march to the factory every day and kowtow to his betters.

In theory, those of us who make and sell things should be able to have a nice clear choice and so should buyers. But the presence of all those capitalists and their every-expanding factories makes it difficult for small entrepreneurs. Yes, yes, I hear about how automation & assembly line made it possible for everyone to have a car and ultimately all the comforts and stuff we take for granted today. And what did that lead to? Crass materialism, consumerism, overpopulation, degradation of nature and on & on. And so here we are. Getting everything we want is not always a good thing.

We’ve reached the point of the greedy wife in the German tale of The Fisherman and the Flounder.