Skip to main content

The Way Marxists Think



Sometimes when I am lacking in the level of initiative and motivation I need to sustain to achieve all my goals short term and long range, I go onto message forums and Facebook groups and join in some debates with Marxists and socialists to get my head right.

Just to think, if I keep staying unmotivated and uninspired long enough, my mind could atrophy so badly I end up like one of these blighted souls! It's a real gut check.

Well recently some one started off a debate asking for some Marxists to justify their belief that wage labor and the employer-employee relationship are inherently exploitative.

One happily obliged:

"Wage labour pays only a fraction of what it's worse. [I think he meant to type "worth"] That's where the exploitation happens. Your wage isn't the whole value of your work, most of it is retained by the boss as surplus, or profit."

To which I responded:

"Of course the labor is worth more than the wages to the employer. That's why the employer willingly exchanges the wages for the labor.

But by the same token, the wages are worth more than the labor to the employee. That's why the employee willingly exchanges the labor for the wages."

And a fellow economic literate and clear thinker agreed further down the discussion:

"Wesley's first comment ends the entire thread tbh."

But the Marxist would not relent. Here's how Marxists think:

"Wesley, you're ignoring the threat of homelessness and starvation. There's no willing exchange in the majority of employment"

My obvious answer:

"Who's making that threat? The employer? No that's the default human condition. Our ancestors came down from the trees. They had to work to eat too. A LOT harder than we do."

The Marxist's retort:

"There's nothing natural about poverty. It is man made and can be undone by men, it is capitalists and their system which benefits from it

Default human condition, same thing. I think we're a bit too late on in history to try and compensate for our downfalls with cave dweller logic"

And my final answer was:

"I guess you're right that the worker must work or face homelessness and starvation, but that's a cry against the nature of reality, not a critique of employers and employees exchanging wages for labor.

The employer has to keep paying workers and exchanging goods for payment or else go out of business and be homeless and starve, right? No willing exchange on her side either? No body engages in willing exchange? Because we all have to make an effort to live?

That's a cry against God take it up with him."

The Marxist stopped commenting after that.

Popular posts from this blog

Occupy Mordor or Destroy the Ring?

There has been mixed responses to Occupy Wall Street by libertarians. Some see the movement as a positive, while others see them as little more than lazy hipsters. But libertarians must be sensitive to why people feel the way they do about issues. The occupiers point out a legitimate concern that "the 1%" control vastly more power and wealth than "the 99%", and corporations have accumulated more power and privilege than is healthy for an open society. Some other concerns and demands are absurd, but the heart of the matter is on track. The question is why has this happened? While many on the left are quick to blame a nebulous thing called "greed", or lack of regulation, the matter is more complicated than that. This calls for a Lord of the Rings metaphor. Let's say that Sauron, the big cheese bad guy of Lord of the Rings, is the corporate hegemony. The 1%. Most people in Middle Earth agree that this is a problem, but there are a few differ...

I've Been an Outspoken Critic of Censoring Conservatives, But I'm Not Leaving Patreon Over Sargon of Akkad's Ridiculous Remarks

By: Wes Messamore The Humble Libertarian Photo: Gage Skidmore

Were The Founding Fathers Aided By Aliens?

Photo: Sebastian Bieniek, Dollarfaces https://www.b1en1ek.com/works/bieniek-paint/2015-dollarfaces/
–––As Featured On–––