4 ms·

> Jonathan Blow took this notion to task when said that the means of production are a $200 laptop you can buy at Walmart. That is bunk, in the current age. The

> Jonathan Blow took this notion to task when said that the means of production are a $200 laptop you can buy at Walmart. That is bunk, in the current age. The means of production is a $200 laptop and a $1B nvidia cluster. > What's really going on is industrial grade existential angst. "If my competitor trains a robot to do this job, they can run their factory 24x7, dramatically lowering their costs This is not exclusive to what I said. All this "lowering of costs" is archieved by a reduced dependence on the working class. No struggle but the class struggle.

CamperBob2 1y ago
This is not exclusive to what I said. All this "lowering of costs" is archieved by a reduced dependence on the working class. No struggle but the class struggle. Well, to the extent you're right, the capitalists are behaving rationally. What would Marx say about that?
- hobs 1y ago
  He woulds say that when capital can no longer reproduce itself through productive labor that system must collapse or end in revolutionary transformation(aka probably a lot of killing). But you seem to be looking for some sort of political argument on top of corrupt and twisted logic, so I don't know exactly what you're looking for here.
dingnuts 1y ago
> No struggle but the class struggle. No, see, there are other struggles. The reason Marxism is fundamentally totalitarian and always devolves into a single party dictatorship is EXPLICITLY because it attempts to explain all suffering as caused by class conflict. Thus: if class is destroyed, utopia is achieved. This is of course farcical. "no struggle but x struggle" is the very the definition of a totalitarian ideology. You really think there's no struggle but class struggle? When you are suffering because a loved one has died of old age, is that struggle the class struggle? Fuck off with that totalitarian nonsense.
- skinnymuch 1y ago
  Marxism isn’t about utopia. Marxism isn’t only about class you are referring to. The people who usually say that sort of thing are white westerners. Marxism is difficult to understand for westerners who center themselves too much like you are doing.

CamperBob2 1y ago

This is not exclusive to what I said. All this "lowering of costs" is archieved by a reduced dependence on the working class. No struggle but the class struggle. Well, to the extent you're right, the capitalists are behaving rationally. What would Marx say about that?

hobs 1y ago
He woulds say that when capital can no longer reproduce itself through productive labor that system must collapse or end in revolutionary transformation(aka probably a lot of killing). But you seem to be looking for some sort of political argument on top of corrupt and twisted logic, so I don't know exactly what you're looking for here.

dingnuts 1y ago

> No struggle but the class struggle. No, see, there are other struggles. The reason Marxism is fundamentally totalitarian and always devolves into a single party dictatorship is EXPLICITLY because it attempts to explain all suffering as caused by class conflict. Thus: if class is destroyed, utopia is achieved. This is of course farcical. "no struggle but x struggle" is the very the definition of a totalitarian ideology. You really think there's no struggle but class struggle? When you are suffering because a loved one has died of old age, is that struggle the class struggle? Fuck off with that totalitarian nonsense.

skinnymuch 1y ago
Marxism isn’t about utopia. Marxism isn’t only about class you are referring to. The people who usually say that sort of thing are white westerners. Marxism is difficult to understand for westerners who center themselves too much like you are doing.