>>24113617
>He clearly states that the slave is somehow more dignified and "assured" in his existence than the wage laborer precisely because he is a thing, an object to be bought and sold instead of a free agent who must live in a world of struggle.
Here's what he wrote: "The individual slave, property of one master, is assured an existence, however miserable it may be, because of the master’s interest." Engels doesn't deny the fact that a slave's existence can be miserable. He says that a slave's individual existence is assured because his master needs him. Here's another quote from the same section:
>The slave counts as a thing, not as a member of society. Thus, the slave CAN have a better existence than the proletarian
He CAN have a better existence on an individual level, you fucking retard. Some slaves were treated better than your average proletarian. That's what Engels is saying. He's not saying slaves necessarily have it better than a proletarian. I'll reiterate: you are a miserable liar.
> But he did consider it to be inevitable and he was an economic determinist since he believed that economic modes primarily determine human society and behavior (except when he wanted the superstructure to do it).
You don't understand necessity. Read Hegel's Science of Logic, retard. Necessity doesn't entail a kind of vulgar determinism. Especially not an economic determinism. Also read the quote I posted.
>This is what we call pure rhetoric. Marx believes that the possibilities of human action are severely limited to the road that leads inevitably to communism. It's just soft determinism, which is a convoluted way fir a determinist to say that he is not actually a determinist.
You're a retard. I'll reiterate: an object is a determinate thing. Something cannot exist without being determinate. Your understanding of freedom and agency is what Hegel named "abstract freedom" which is a retarded understanding of freedom as the ability to overcome any limit. As I told you, you fucking pigfuck, cavemen can't build spaceships.
>>24113643
So you've read a manuscript which remained unpublished during Engels' lifetime and decided it was somehow sufficient for a critique of his thought. You fucking faggot, Engels wrote dozens of texts critiquing bourgeois society. Hell even "Principles of Communism" contains critique of some aspects of bourgeois society. Even an introductory text like the Communist Manifesto has two or three paragraphs explaining some of the negative and positive changes brought by bourgeois society. Also Engels advocated for monogamy and said communism would bring a higher form of monogamy. You're a subhuman fuck who's never read him.
>>24113659
You don't understand Marx. Communism isn't an alternative model. Communism uses capitalism as its material basis. The productive forces developed by capitalism are necessary for communism.
>>24113677
You can't hide your insecurities.
>>24113683
Marx was raised in a Lutheran household.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/lit/

Thread:

Have there ever been any good refutations of historical materialism written? Marxists will say that Popper doesn't count because the soviet union…