https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/18ek4pu/civilians_make_up_61_of_gaza_deaths_from/kcpi5i3/
If you want to deep dive of capitalist occult analysis: https://ianwrightsite.wordpress.com/
Oh man you never heard any of my rants about capitalism as cosmic horror, economists and bourgeoisie and all their followers being priests and acolytes to capital. A death cult devoted to a machine god that is actively consuming their followers, and all life on earth, their own included.
I came up with all that myself before I found this essay which I think you will enjoy https://ianwrightsite.wordpress.com/2020/09/03/marx-on-capital-as-a-real-god-2/
On a level plain, simple mounds look like hills; and the insipid flatness of our present bourgeoisie is to be measured by the altitude of its great intellects.
"For some reason people who study human society almost invariably develop empathy for others instead of worshiping the almighty Economy like any sensible person should. This is clearly the fault of those evil commies."
Ok, so this guy's account history is fucking amazing, just look at this absolute banger:
Orthodox economic practices have existed for millennia, but the concept of "capitalism" was invented in the 1840s by the same people who claimed to have invented a viable alternative.
Think of it like the word "cisgender" that was invented by people advocating something abnormal, without wanting to acknowledge that the alternative is the norm.
Millenia? Really? This guy just thinks capitalism is the exchange of goods
"Why do so many Russians grow their own food?"
Also, half of his posts seem to be about anti-semitism, but then he asks if people in Russia have conspiracy theories specifically about Jews, so i'm thinking
You need to understand that everything bad that has ever happened was because of Russia
They don't want you to know this, but you know the Sea Peoples? Yeah, well their army ran off of shashlik and Stoli, if you know what i mean.
Orthodox economic practices have existed for millennia
Like what, hunting-gathering and primitive communism? Considering humanity exist for hundreds of millenias, and thousands if you include pre-humans, it's hard to find more orthodox economic practice.
economics is when there is money. imagine you're on a desert island and you have 5 crabs. another guy has 3 palm trees. that's economics, actually.
yea classical econ is clearly not pseudoscience with recessions happening every couple of years
Hey! It takes years to learn to predict recessions via the flight of birds and analysing animal entrails! It's complicated stuff, you would never be able to comprehend it! You should be thanking the economists!
Half of all economics experiments can not be replicated. If you go to their forums like ejmr you will realize these people are the dumbest dipshits alive. Even they themselves don't believe the bullshit they're peddling.
If you go to their forums like ejmr
I went and checked this place out quickly and in roughly two minutes I managed to come across antisemitism, racism, support for genocide, and some sort of fake university grifters. Amazing.
A community full of money-grubbing gluttons that think ethics are for the weak and regularly plot how to sucker people into doing hard work for them, pay them nothing, so they never have to lift a finger in their lives.
Also thinks that all the environmental damage is worth it to respect 'property rights'
"Hey everyone, I just came up with a joke about how da jooz are greedy penny-pinchers!"
Do anglos not realize that they embody almost every antisemitic stereotype out there? /Pol/ is nothing but mental masturbation about how white people will dominate the earth just because they can.
Do anglos not realize that they embody almost every antisemitic stereotype out there?
Hilarious how even this is something Marx wrote about in 1844
Half of all economics experiments can not be replicated
Is there an actual study which makes this claim, like the one that exists in psychology? Or is this your intuïtion? Not doubting you btw. As a marxist economist, I'd just like the citation.
I might have gotten the psychology study mixed up with a study on economics.
Don't worry, you weren't that far off:
About 40% of economics experiments fail replication survey
Also this; I quote:
Camerer et al. found that two-thirds of the 18 studies examined yielded replicable estimates of effect size and direction. This proportion is somewhat lower than unaffiliated experts were willing to bet...
In other words, ~33% failed to be replicated. Also this pearl:
Now you see it, now you don't: emerging contrary results in economics
...with several (20+) examples of two accepted papers having wildly different conclusions despite using the same dataset for the same purpose.
Yeah, but caring about things is STUPID and is for STUPID BABBIES!. I'm a big boy and know that the multinational corporation is always right. Porky's greed helps us become the best, most productive versions of ourselves to better serve our purpose to porky, if you don't like that then you're clearly not a big boy like me.
/s
Reddit moment.
The right "fucking loves economics" the same way they say we "fucking love science".
They love it because even though neoclassical economics was discredited nearly a century ago during the Great Depression, it still lives on as conservatives’ understanding of what “economics” is. But all they do is argue from pseudo-psychological first principles like “people are always selfish” or “people always maximize their utility” and try and construct an entire reductive science around that, wholly unconstrained by empirical evidence. And that science conveniently fits in with their conservative political ideas like “giving poor people money will only be wasted”.
Meanwhile Marxian economics is the opposite. The idea isn’t to create “first principles” and try and determine everything from that. It’s overdeterministic. The point isn’t to be able to explain every aspect of the economy like why a basketball autographed by an NBA star is worth more a normal basketball when the socially necessary labor time of both is the same (we actually can, but that’s beside the point). Marxian economics tries to explain the broader trends like commodity production but is flexible enough and open to there being exceptions to the rules.
If you are involved with a real science like physics, you will understand why the first (conservative neoclassical economics) is not a science and the second (Marxian economics) is.
neoclassical economics was discredited nearly a century ago during the Great Depression
And they’ve replaced it with neoliberal economics, which is even wronger.
Marx wrote in Capital that basically entire classical economy since John Stuart Mill junior was reactionary intellectual masturbation focused on denying the LTV. And fast forward 150 years and it's exactly right, pre-Marx proponents of LTV are almost entirely forgotten and Marx is painted as literal Satan and anathema to all that is good and proper in economy, because they weren't able to silence his writings.
Weirdly enough I feel like physics and Marx should attract similar people. Physics is about discovering the fundamental laws underlying seemingly disparate phenomena. The average physicist gets a half chubb talking about the unification of electricity and magnetism as a single force. Why shouldn’t every physicist also read about commodity fetishism and the reproduction of an inverted ideology in which social relations between humans appear as relations among things? It’s beautifully elegant.
he thinks social science and sociology are different things i think. like sociology is when you do social science, but also you hate america.
This is the most reddit comment I've ever seen
Holy fuck, this part especially is just
the entire subject of sociology is nothing more than a conduit for Kremlin propaganda
B you live like this?
Some people really do have a mental interior resembling a hot couch room
It's basically social science infused with anti-western Marxist pseudoscience, minus economics because Marxist economic propaganda has been discredited beyond repair
Lol. Lmao even
Someone tell this to my sociology professor who used sociology as a proxy for market research.
When studying something reveals that the only right thing to do is abolish it, some insist that the student should be abolished instead.
Funnily enough in my experience if you talk to anyone in academia outside of econ, it's the first field anyone makes fun of (because in it's current state it's not a serious field of study)
Even the STEM assholes I've met usually take sociology at least just as or more seriously than economics (at least as a major, they still believe in their own investment strategies)
It's the extreme rigour with which they perceive themselves, and the sentiment I've always seen of, "I know how the world works, it's money"
I don't see the need for the condescension. My background was in biology, I spoke to another friend about how competition is inefficient and cooperation is more fruitful from an ecological (read: natural science) standpoint. And he started to debate me, my claims are empirical, they don't rely on axioms on what human nature is as argued by philosophers of old (not hating on them, it's the superficial interpretation some econfolk seem to have which is what I find erroneous) and what it means to be rational. I did not bother to try and explain, the Um, akshully they came at me with was so off-putting.
Ah but you see, you failed to take into account my economic model that says you're wrong! Nevermind the fact that my model fails to represent reality in all but the most constructed tests, that's not important.
Nevermind the fact that my model fails to represent reality in all but the most constructed tests
Jokes on you, the orthodox capitalist model also fails at its own most specifically crafted to be ideal conditions experiments, leading to its "researchers" literally going "ah well, nevertheless it's still intuitively correct" and learning nothing.
The economic model that likely excludes humans as too variable to predict.
It's the extreme rigour with which they perceive themselves
To get into any econ PhD program essentially requires a math degree. Which is funny because afaik the only other programs that might require that much math are like, physics and math itself.
They then proceed to develop all these intense models, which is what they say the math is needed for. And yeah, sure, the models themselves are complex. But they’re all bullshit. It’s like building some quantitively rigorous model that “proves” intelligent design or that climate change is a hoax. Just because you use a lot of high level math doesn’t mean you’re actually using that math in a correct or useful way.
Epicycle models of the solar system were also mathematically complex; at least those approximated real-world patterns.
than those with Western economics degrees.