Welcome Wordforge posters

[Lanzman]

Marx was too optimistic about human nature. Rand was too pessimistic.

 

[Charlemagne]

Marx was too optimistic about human nature. Rand was too pessimistic.

A guy I knew on Discord called them "two sides of the same nutcase".

 

[Phil Collins]

lmao, no they aren't. Go read Marx, he can be insightful and funny (and right which is why they don't expose kids to his writings). Halfway between "maybe workers should own the means of producing shit together instead of funneling most of the proceeds of their labor up a handful of rich people's assholes" and "Fuck you, got mine! This is the best of all possible worlds!" isn't an inherently reasonable position, no matter how much slickly produced liberal media likes to claim otherwise.

 

[Charlemagne]

I've read some of Marx. The problem with him isn't with his diagnosis of rich assholes (when it came to them and the problems they cause, he was spot on), but that the solutions he offers are completely detached from reality - something even other socialists in the 19th century pointed out, especially Mikhail Bakhunin. For fuck's sake, the guy was a drunken leech who mooched off of Engels. Not to mention that his idea of a stateless, classless, moneyless society would only be feasible with post-scarcity tech, and he completely ignores the fact that every life-form that has ever lived only spends energy on actions if there is incentive to.

The solutions he offers sound beautiful... but completely fall apart the moment you actually factor in psychology and biology.