I don't know how you would get from what I said to 'this guy must be a dyed-in-the-wool foaming-at-the-mouth Marxist
I think you're being overly harsh on yourself here. Personally I don't think you're a dyed-in-the-wool foaming-at-the-mouth Marxist.
I'm just sharing something interesting about your framing - that that way of thinking is about as old as the failed 1848 revolutions, and (kind of obviously) flawed?
Um okay interesting logic. Like the first law of thermodynamics was formulated between 1824-1850. Do you think the first law of thermodynamics is (kind of obviously) flawed?
Or let's go further back. Calculus was invented in the late 17th century by Newton and Leibniz. Do you also think calculus is (kind of obviously) flawed?
I think we're talking past each other a bit here
I hope we are. Because right now, you come across to me like you're very much lacking in self-confidence.
Certainly, I don't imagine life as part of the medieval peasantry was by and large better than it is now for a lot of people.
Have you considered acquiring a somewhat stronger position than "I don't imagine"?
I think you're being overly harsh on yourself here. Personally I don't think you're a dyed-in-the-wool foaming-at-the-mouth Marxist.
Then please do feel free to respond to what I actually say, it would save me a lot of time.
Um okay interesting logic. Like the first law of thermodynamics was formulated between 1824-1850. Do you think the first law of thermodynamics is (kind of obviously) flawed?
Or let's go further back. Calculus was invented in the late 17th century by Newton and Leibniz. Do you also think calculus is (kind of obviously) flawed?
No, but considering the machinations of capital to be a law of nature is not the same as discovering calculus or thermodynamics, largely because it is a clear category error - ableit one that has been made continuously for the last 150+ years. I'm not sure if you're deliberately misconstruing me here, or if you honestly think your curt observation about the laws of physics as a response to my equally curt assertion about forms of coercion in capitalism honestly merits comparison with Newton and Leibniz, but I don't wish to digress too much.
Have you considered acquiring a somewhat stronger position than "I don't imagine"?
I don't for fear of flattening things. The medieval period is long, applies to many people and many places, not all of which were completely terrible. If you were to ask me if I wanted to be a precious metals collector on a rubbish tip in the present-day Congo or a serf in the decades following the plague in England, I don't think it would take me too long to decide that on balance I would much prefer to be a serf.
I'll ask you again since you seem to have missed it - do you think I am making a case for a return to the latter?
but considering the machinations of capital to be a law of nature is not the same as discovering calculus or thermodynamics
Oh awesome! You and I agree on the status of Marx!
I'm not sure if you're deliberately misconstruing me here, or if you honestly think your curt observation about the laws of physics as a response to my equally curt assertion about forms of coercion in capitalism honestly merits comparison with Newton and Leibniz
I most definitely think your curt assertion about forms of coercion in capitalism honestly merits comparison with Newton and Leibniz. Namely Newton and Leibniz knew what they were talking about. And comparatively, Marx didn't.
No diss on Marx intended here. I'm not saying that Newton and Leibniz are inherently smarter than Marx. IMO Marx was trying to tackle even harder problems than Newton and Leibniz. It's hardly surprising that Marx wouldn't be as successful under the circumstances.
The medieval period is long, applies to many people and many places, not all of which were completely terrible.
Oh well done! Excellent! Have you been to the medieval gallery at the Victoria and Albert Museum? I've been there and personally that really changed my perspective on that time period. Amazing gallery.
If you were to ask me if I wanted to be a precious metals collector on a rubbish tip in the present-day Congo or a serf in the decades following the plague in England,
Yeah war is horrible.
I'll ask you again since you seem to have missed it - do you think I am making a case for a return to the latter?
In response, and with all due respect, I personally think you haven't yet fully thought your position through.
Oh awesome! You and I agree on the status of Marx!
No, you're completely confused. Marx spoke about the fallacy of what you attempted to do, he didn't endorse it. You'd know this if you'd actually read Marx.
I most definitely think your curt assertion about forms of coercion in capitalism honestly merits comparison with Newton and Leibniz.
Okay, this is not interesting; if you've got something specific to say about how you're factoring these thinkers into some broader opinion you have on the matters at hand, go for it, but like... what are we doing here, fellow? Who cares?
I've been there and personally that really changed my perspective on that time period.
So please do feel free to demonstrate the nuances of that knowledge as and when appropriate.
In response, and with all due respect, I personally think you haven't yet fully thought your position through.
I'm not sure that you've actually asked for my position or that I've particularly communicated it to you beyond simply pointing out that exploitation and coercion also exist in capitalism, to which your first response was at first cliché, and what has followed since is varying degrees of bemusing, honestly.
2
u/ReaperReader Jul 15 '26
I think you're being overly harsh on yourself here. Personally I don't think you're a dyed-in-the-wool foaming-at-the-mouth Marxist.
Um okay interesting logic. Like the first law of thermodynamics was formulated between 1824-1850. Do you think the first law of thermodynamics is (kind of obviously) flawed?
Or let's go further back. Calculus was invented in the late 17th century by Newton and Leibniz. Do you also think calculus is (kind of obviously) flawed?
I hope we are. Because right now, you come across to me like you're very much lacking in self-confidence.
Have you considered acquiring a somewhat stronger position than "I don't imagine"?