Results 1 to 20 of 54
If Marxism is a science, so is Austrian economics
a number of people here have made the excuse that, because Marxism is a "social science" it doesn't need any substantial predictive or explanatory power
that's the same excuse Austrians make for the failings of their pet economic theory; see here e.g.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...pseudo-science
so if Marxism is a science, then so is Austrian economics, by the criteria of many people on this board
how is that? answer me, clever trousers!
I don't know whether Marxism is a science (I don't think so, but what do I know), but the Austrian school rejects the scientific method of using empirical evidence to verify a thesis so it is by no means scientific.
Austrian economics have been proven false time and time again in the past.
this stupid notion that a laissé faire market is preferable ignore the fact that market cannot survive without regulations.
Marxism on the other hand aknowledge that market couldnt exist without governement and regulations.
it dosnt support market but aknowledge that their existance require a regulating body, something the dumbass austrian will not do, despite the mountain of historical evidences proving the contrary.
WHY kléber, WHY!!!!!!!
Marxism is most assuredly scientific. The parallel I like to draw is between Marxism and Chemistry.
Chemistry seeks to investigate matter so it begins at its most basic unit, the atom.
Marxism seeks to investigate Capitalism, so it begins at its most basic unit, the commodity.
It does'nt matter if you call marxism or austrian economics a science or whatever.
Austrian econmics has been proven wrong over and over and over again, Marxian economics has yet to be proven wrong.
Austrian economics are lol.
That is all.
Never say, you weren't warned
When they come to drag you away
To silence the dissident hiding in us all
They clench the fist of ordained might
From which side of the barbed wire
Do you want to see your life pass by?
Markets have existed without government and regulations.
Well that certainly isn't the consensus among economists.
How about some demonstration?
I mean, this is an empty assertion which really doesn't elaborate anything.
FKA LinksRadikal
“The possibility of securing for every member of society, by means of socialized production, an existence not only fully sufficient materially, and becoming day by day more full, but an existence guaranteeing to all the free development and exercise of their physical and mental faculties – this possibility is now for the first time here, but it is here.” Friedrich Engels
"The proletariat is its struggle; and its struggles have to this day not led it beyond class society, but deeper into it." Friends of the Classless Society
"Your life is survived by your deeds" - Steve von Till
I could care less if Marxism or Austrian economics were scientific or not. I'm still a communist.
Adventures of a Pagan Anarchist
I see you haven't beat idiots in the head with that sack of door knobs. Get to work slack ass.
Where and when? Where and when was the market the internal system of distribution amung a society WITHOUT government and regulations?
Well amung neo-classical, keynsian, institutional, Marxian and so on, Austrian economics is basically rejected. Austrian economics has been dissproven time and time again empirically, and even logically.
When it comes to Marxian economics the arguments are always agaisnt the implied solutions, not the analysis itself.
They have, but for how long? Markets have been proven over and over again to abolish themselves without intervention. They simply cannot support themselves.
the most ''free'' market that ever existed was in medieval middle-east, when it was actually legal to stab the guy who defrauded you to death.
But even then governement instaured various politics to stabilize the market, fixing the price of certain item despite the strong opposition of ''the market''.
Even in a libertarian dreamland without food and safety regulation, in a world where it would be actually legal to kill or execute the one who defrauded you, the intervention of the governement was needed to keep the whole thing from crashing down like the goddamn hindenberg.
WHY kléber, WHY!!!!!!!
Somalia, Anarchist Catalonia if you consider that stateless, any period of statelessness after the emergence of barter. It is true that without the government markets tend to be less developed, but there are still markets.
There have been many critiques of the analysis itself.
You are confusing market exchange and human cooperation.
WHY kléber, WHY!!!!!!!
None of those areas have internal markets being the main system of distribution, Somalia, where there is not government, is basically a command economy with warlords, Anarchist Catalonia was more of a mutualist system.
Such as? (I'm not saying there are not, but I've never seen a strong one).
Markets are the main system of distribution in Somalia. The warlord situation is overplayed by the media. IN Catalonia there were still markets, even though they were not the main form of distribution. Just goes to show the staying power of markets that they still exist even when authorities actively try to destroy them.
For me the critiques of the LTV are convincing. Some elements of Marxism I agree with however. I think Marx made a lot of great social insights.
Marxism is viewed as a science because it is based on the study of the structure of societies - that is, it looks at what actually exists and studies its laws of motion. The Austrian school of economics looks at axioms and working from them, a 100% different model of analysis. At least neoclassical economics has its models, as intrinsically flawed as they inevitably are; Austrian economics doesn't even have the pretense of being scientific.
That's the exact opposite of a science.
No, its not. Austrian economics rejects empiricism in favor of their pseudoscience "praxeology". We are a science because we use observations from the real world, try to understand root causes, subject our ideologies to rigorous tests, and have a comprehensive analysis of history which doesn't conflict with our views.
“How in the hell could a man enjoy being awakened at 6:30 a.m. by an alarm clock, leap out of bed, dress, force-feed, shit, piss, brush teeth and hair, and fight traffic to get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else and were asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so?” Charles Bukowski, Factotum
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as 'right-to-work.' It provides no 'rights' and no 'works.' Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining... We demand this fraud be stopped." MLK
-fka Redbrother
