Scientific alchemy is called 'chemistry.' Marxism is the very definition of a scientific analysis of the economy. Sad how you cannot explain why it's not. That's a clue, that is.
@@antediluvianatheist5262I guess Marx was scientific in the way you might consider the possibility of transforming poop into gold is scientific. Or, if you think that bleeding people was scientific. I guess if you consider a nineteenth century amalgamation of goofy Utopian pipe dreams snowballed together that he and his friend's called "science," then it was science. Me and my friends used to play doctor as a kid, and we called it science. I like your name, it is rare to meet someone who believes in Noah's Ark and the flood, but who is also an atheist.
A very informative and thoughtful lecture. What is also true is that Marx in his later years also began to given thought to the arguments presented by Henry George, that the fundamental systemic problem in almost all societies was "rentier privilege."
I'm hardly an expert, but after a few minutes of research, I can find little to support your claim that he began to "give thought" to Georges arguments. Rather, he's quite dismissive and hostile, as evidenced by this exchange between himself and Engels: www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm
excellent lecture
Fantastic talk. Thanks for posting
Calling Marxism scientific is like calling alchemy scientific.
Scientific alchemy is called 'chemistry.'
Marxism is the very definition of a scientific analysis of the economy.
Sad how you cannot explain why it's not.
That's a clue, that is.
@@antediluvianatheist5262I guess Marx was scientific in the way you might consider the possibility of transforming poop into gold is scientific. Or, if you think that bleeding people was scientific. I guess if you consider a nineteenth century amalgamation of goofy Utopian pipe dreams snowballed together that he and his friend's called "science," then it was science. Me and my friends used to play doctor as a kid, and we called it science. I like your name, it is rare to meet someone who believes in Noah's Ark and the flood, but who is also an atheist.
@@danielswindell125 Why do people on the internet insist on arguing in such pointless, vapid ways?
@@danielswindell125 lol, religious guy cherry picking what is scientific and what is not :D:D
@@antediluvianatheist5262 Marxism is exactly the opposite of that, that’s why it has never worked and never will.
Where are the rest of the talks? I wish SA was at Left Cost Forum
impressive and compelling. Great to listen to Fred Weston.
All the things Fred say are right!
The dirt
Εξαιρετικός!
A very informative and thoughtful lecture. What is also true is that Marx in his later years also began to given thought to the arguments presented by Henry George, that the fundamental systemic problem in almost all societies was "rentier privilege."
I'm hardly an expert, but after a few minutes of research, I can find little to support your claim that he began to "give thought" to Georges arguments. Rather, he's quite dismissive and hostile, as evidenced by this exchange between himself and Engels: www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm