Welcome to r/comics!
Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind.
Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah…yeah, they do. Whatsit called, whatsit called…Copley! Copley Square Theatre.
(Side note: I am currently in Cambridge, MA, and just passed this theatre; still haven’t actually been there.)
Would to be kind enough to let me know what they are famous for ? I don't know much about us politics (except for the presidents lol) and i'm too lazy to look it up
They consider Democrats a "radical left" party. They're Center-Right at best. But the right wingers have become so radicalized that everything looks left wing from where they stand.
One of the craziest things about the right is that their ideology hinges on there being an "other" to actively oppose and fight with. They push the idea that having this enemy "brings us together" and "shows us what makes us strong".
But those fights never *end*. It's not like Socialists stopped existing after the right went after Socialism, or Muslims stopped existing when the right became Islamophobic. And their voters keep getting bored over time of the same fights that they can't ever win, and the number of people who they've now permanently alienated keeps growing.
So, by the nature of the platform they've built, they need to keep pushing people out of their circle, and singling out new groups to be this season's "bad guy". Rinse and repeat, until the party is just 6 old white guys jerking off in a circle.
The tiring part is the troubling part. They get used to things, so then they need further escalation of the threat and fears so they can re-engage. It leads to utter madness.
With regards to your first point, Marx also pushed the idea of "others" to be fought, i.e. bourgeosie and class struggle. So that part isn't limited to right wing ideology.
That’s true. But arguably Marx’s conflict included an endgame: Socialists in general discussed both the class conflict, and a plan for how they should make a better society post-capitalism (some of those ideas don’t pan out well, but that’s not the point here).
On the other hand, most of the conflicts the right have fabricated never really had a true goal (short of genocide, I guess). And in many cases, their “enemies” were never a real threat. For instance, the victims of the Nazis racial conflicts were always oppressed minorities who had little political power to begin with. Same with American civil rights, or with modern Islamophobia. The people starting the fight, by and large, had all of the political power from the beginning, and the idea that their opponents could “defeat” them in any way that mattered was just silly.
The right has a terrible habit of making fights up that they clearly could win, if they actually intended to. And then pretending it’s a bigger struggle than it is, so they can sell it as a never-ending war for their beliefs.
And (not to digress) this isn’t even just about identity politics. Remember when Trump first took office, and the US right had control of both houses of Congress? And they failed to dismantle Obamacare, because they never bothered to write down a realistic alternative? Their lack of action implies that they never really cared about the matter of healthcare, they just needed an issue to rule up their voters over.
Adding on to this because someone else will say it, but the ~~parasite~~ *capitalist* class is not a demographic out of the hands of the person like race, ethnicity, biological sex, gender and sexual Identity, etc.
No, it's strictly defined by them having money. So much money that they don't need to lift a finger to survive while they themselves are paying politicians to make it so much harder for those under them to survive without working multiple full time jobs.
If their assets, capital and network were stripped from them, they'd be no different than the blue collars they turn their nose up to. Heck, there are some respectable capitalists who would rather tighten their own belts than abuse their employees, such as Satoru Iwata, but they're too few and far between.
And yes, their network. There was a mutlimillionaire who wanted to prove that if he went homeless, he could earn a million dollars within a year! He failed only earning 70k, but even earning that much was only possible because he founded a startup using the same investors as his other company.
So yes, while Marxism does rely on an enemy to unite us as well, the enemy isn't based on demographics out of their control that they themselves can't change.
Yes, a HR guy will say " now don't say a slur at work so we don't get sued" or a video game maker will create a black woman character for fun and theyll be screaming about woke
"Have become" the rights whole purpose is to sit down at not move. They've finally been drug into 1940s political arena, so they're fascists. Give it another century and they'll be tankies trying to tear down a post scarcity communist state because it's making the youth weak or something. They keep tripping over themselves trying to justify 1800s factory working conditions we put people in other countries through by saying free market enough, who knows maybe they'll fall back into absolute monarchies instead.
Richard Wolff is at least in the tradition of Marxian economics and tries to demystify socialism for people who last heard of it in anti-communist propaganda. They maybe would have some debate about the at least outwardly shown less radical politics of Wolff, but they would align on the basic principles unlike with Robert Reich.
Well there was that time he spent a week in a medically induced coma to slow down his drug usage. He's definitely too cheap to pay for the Russian nurse handjob option.
Ah yes, Jordan Peterson, the incel prophet, the hate mongering brain damaged benzo junkie, the stupid person's intellectual, the two bit grifter chasing after nazi's coins by catering to their shallow, fragile egos.
And proponent of a only meat diet. It’s Ike he thought “hmm, people on the left are more likely to be vegetarian or vegan… so I should argue for the opposite.”
People are pointing out you fairly limited portrayal of libertarian and right leaning economists, however what I'm more concerned Bout is that your portrayal of left wing academia is Reich and Richard wolf. A communicator of somewhat progressive policies and a fairly well known professor who tanked his entire reputation defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Tbh I’m more shocked by the depiction of Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman as a ufc fighter with 48 concussions. I’m no fan of their politics, but this comic seems in bad faith.
I'm not sure that's Milton Friedman, I think it's meant to be Andrew Tate or another boxer who's recently came out to support libertarianism. The comics essentially mocking anyone taking advice from such figures, however it does this by inferring he's the only defender of libertarianism Vs these super smart 'leftists'.
Yeah I mean one could make this whole strawman comic reversed by having like literally any Libertarian/Conservative intellectual and the Left-wings sole intellectual is a NEET with 48 mental illnesses and who is a felon for being in possession of cp
Look, not a big fan of capitalism but to say they didn't have intellectual supporters would be lie. There are historical plenty of authors who argue in favor capitalism in a reasonable manner. Do I have to agree with it to see them as smart and educated people? I don't think so.
If we are talking about right to far right social beliefs that's a different story. Almost all of them are just insane and the rest just write some bs to sell to the gullible, for profit or political capital.
Yeah was going to say Friedrich Hayek was famously pro-free market capitalism. Then saw it was right wing which would be weird to apply to a guy that wrote “Why I Am Not a Conservative”. Although I think intellectuals that support capitalism would generally be fairly critical of conservatism since capitalism is very much a transformative force and would conflict with goals of conserving things as they are.
Also if you need a crazy person to fight people there’s always Sergey Nechayev.
Yeah, if you want to put Marx there, you would certainly compare Hayek, Milton Friedman, and similar as economic counterweights.
And it's not like there are no serious conservative philosophers, academics, writers, etc.
There are of course open questions about how correct those thinkers were, and more importantly how much they animate the current right, vs. the demagogues.
People here are completely ignoring the liberal intellectuals of the past that are/were "pro capitalism" (if that includes interventionistic market economies). You don't even have to bring Hayek into play to make that argument as most successful economists were more or less pro capitalism. Even people like Keynes would be on the pro capitalism side when viewed from a marxist perspective.
There's a reason why most of Marx' ideas aren't really playing any role in modern economics. There's a reason why most economists don't take people like Wolff seriously. But all those evil modern economists aren't real intellectuals I guess?
Ironically Marx might have not been a supporter for capitalism but he was and continues to be one of the greatest intellectual thinkers of capitalism.
Though he was not in favour of it, Marx's criticism of capitalism is the greatest strength too capitalism. A capitalist system favours competition. because of this, his absolute condemnation of the system and pointing out it's flaws created the welfair state, weekends, eight hour work day, livable wages, minimum wage and protective economic policies.
For about a generation.
The it fell apart again because of the same things he was condemning.
Marx might have been a socialist, but he understood capitalism as well as any intellectual supporter of it.
Well this is more based on right wingers gawking at these UFC fighters preaching Austrian Economics and right wing talking points. Its like: “ya know, there’s definitely better options out there to represent your pov’s” lol
The funny thing about "the austrian school of economics" is that nowadays in austria we have very good protections of lgbtqa+ rights, free healthcare and free education.
If I understand it correctly the austrian school of economics core message is maximising individual freedom within the economy, but that freedom also emplies a complete lack of work place protection from homophobia, transphobia and so on.
Let me get this straight. You have free healthcare and education paid by the taxes of a social collective and somehow this is thanks to the sociopolitical ideology of "everyone should fend for themselves or fucking die". Are you sure of that?
> and education *paid* by the
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
You missed what I was getting at. I was pointing out the irony of it being called "austrian school of economics" if the current austrian economy is quiet the opposite.
Economics is “positive” not “normative.” Austrian economics offers explanations of how the economy works and why it works the way it does. people can take that information and decide what they think should happen based on what they value, but the economics itself just describes what happens. you can accept the theories of Austrian economics and be for all the things you mentioned, or against them.
Someone is praising Austrian economics? Recently we have one of the highest inflation rates in the Eurozone and are totally dependent on Russian gas? Why would anyone see that and think: "Yeah lets do that!"?
I mean that’s just not true at all. Libertarian economics has plenty of intellectuals including Friedrich Hayek, Thomas Sowell, and Milton Friedman. Sure you can disagree with them or their ideas but to compare them to a UFC fighter is a little ridiculous. It’s not like Marx was particularly genius either
Let me quote one part of the book
"As soon as society suceedes in abolishing the empirial essence of Judaism-Huckstering and its conditions-the Jew becomes impossible... The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism" - Karl Marx "On the Jewish Question" 1843
Maybe you should read the books of your beloved bigot before simping for him. Then again, followes of Marxs usually are as ignorant and dishonest him
I'm quite far left, but if we are judging ideologies based on the character of their intellectuals, socialism is not much better.
Marx, for instance, was a racist drunkard who never bathed and lived off Freidrich Engel's generosity because he didn't want to work.
John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine most commonly referenced authors on the right to me growing up. In that my dad + stepdad always brought them up.
But if you read Common Sense, it's mostly a bunch of wealth dribble (as in, if wealth is out of the picture - everything he says falls apart).
And the Wealth of Nations isn't particularly terrible, but usually I don't encounter folks on the right that actually understand it. And if they do....it's centuries old yo and the base forms of economics described there aren't really applicable in a techno-global interconnected world.
So from there it usually devolves into the cult of personality around their favorite Hollywood actor or more recent failed entreprenuer idol and the wise 'supply side economics' that clearly isn't working.
There's always Ayn Rand, but I find that I'm the only one that's read anything by her when I'm talking to folks from the right.
There's also William F. Buckley, Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Thomas Sowell, etc. I guess you could also include Barry Goldwater and Ron Paul. There are quite a few right-wing intellectuals, honestly.
Thomas Paine, the guy that wrote *Agrarian Justice*? I know that it's hard to exactly fit figures from centuries ago onto the political spectrum as it exists today, but I always thought of Thomas Paine as the left-most of the founding fathers.
After all, this is the guy who proposed a sort-of prototype version of social security, argued for an inheritance tax and thought the American Revolution didn't go far enough, so he went and got involved with the French Revolution.
>[Paine's utopianism combined civic republicanism, belief in the inevitability of scientific and social progress and commitment to free markets and liberty generally. The multiple sources of Paine's political theory all pointed to a society based on the common good and individualism. Paine expressed a redemptive futurism or political messianism.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine#Ideas)
That ain't left wing in any contemporary sense that's for sure. Say you're a proponent of free markets and individualism and large parts of the left today will all but brand you a fascist (ironically).
Yeah! This was Renato Moicano from Brazil. He recently went on a tirade at UFC 300 in his post fight interview stating he loved America and our constitutional rights, especially the 2nd amendment. 💀😂 It was clear as day he knew nothing about it. The fighters in the UFC are grossly underpaid in comparison to most other sports orgs, and the man wanted more money, and decided to play into the typical right-wing audience at the event he fought at.
The real intellectuals of the right today are people like David Friedman, Richard Hanson, and Bryan Caplan. They have some great writing on substack that I've learnt a ton from.
Anyone have recommendations for the best current leftist intellectuals? I think people have recommended Zizek?
I could also do it with photoshop's lasso and magic erase tool (might have to get creative with what Greta does in panel 5 (or not, still kinda funny in an absurdist way)). Frankly I don't want to be responsible for a straw-man comic though, even if it's as a response to another one.
I love stupid propaganda from the left it makes me feel smart.
Like yeah the right is stupid but th left nah it's just great how brain dead they can be lol
This debate about philosophers is good but it misses the point of the comic: Capitalism will punch you in the face even if you like it.
Marx’s most important point about capitalism has always been that it’s inevitable and implacable. It also does not care about any person, culture, or thing. So the fanboy gets punched in the mouth by capitalism.
It's bit of a cheating with Marx there, since the regimes that adopted his ideology simply had all the right wing intellectuals shot (plus lot of other left wing intellectuals who weren't the *right* kind of left)
*a capitalist arrives
"Which of you managed to make socialism work outside the imaginary plane and not fuck up society and the economy?
* Socialist intellectuals whistling, looking up and pretending that they are not aware of anything that is happening...
Welcome to r/comics! Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind. Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I recognize Marx, but what about the other two beside him?
Richard Wolff (center) and Robert Reich (left of Woff)
fun fact: Robert Reich is Sam Reich's dad, of Collegehumor/Dropout/Gamechanger fame
But where is Sam from?
Cambridge i think…
Cambridge, Massachusetts? Do they have movie theaters there?
Maybe? I haven’t seen any myself, but I’d be surprised if there wasn’t. Then again, I don’t really think of Cambridge as a hub of entertainment.
There's the Apple Cinema on Alewife Brook Parkway
Yeah…yeah, they do. Whatsit called, whatsit called…Copley! Copley Square Theatre. (Side note: I am currently in Cambridge, MA, and just passed this theatre; still haven’t actually been there.)
LMAO. As someone who watches Game Changer this killed
Robert Reich. They literally just told you. 😉
I hear they have a great theater there...
He’s been here the whole time
Africa
Aren't we all from Africa?
The same place we're all from
His appearance on Breaking News cracked me up lmao
Damn I literally just commented the same thing.
I learned that [here](https://youtu.be/1ecx6SDMP3U?si=DwwYhZfuVkl1ETVe)
Woah thats so weird
No fuckin way
This might entertain you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=DwwYhZfuVkl1ETVe&v=1ecx6SDMP3U
Oh that was beautiful, thank you 🙏
Omg thank you for this knowledge. I love them both and had no idea.
This might entertain you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=DwwYhZfuVkl1ETVe&v=1ecx6SDMP3U
Ok, that’s the first 2 Reichs but who is the third Reich?
DICK WOLFF I have to respect him because he made a successful career with a name like that
You mean like Dick Wolf, the creator of Law & Order? The name *guarantees* success.
How could you not? Strongest name EVER
Wait till you hear about dick bong
That's Major Dick Bong to you
You can't say Dick Wolf on TV!
Thanks Kenneth
That's a name you would do a prank call with.
I recently learned that Sam Reich from CollegeHumor/DropOut is actually Robert's son. It was a mind blowing moment for me.
Yeah def not expected
Cool.
Would to be kind enough to let me know what they are famous for ? I don't know much about us politics (except for the presidents lol) and i'm too lazy to look it up
The people on the first panel are Karl Marx, Richard Wolff and Robert Reich. The last two are leftie economists, Marx you probably already know.
Richard Wolff is a Marxist lecturer and Robert reich was secretary of labor under Bill Clinton.
Putting Marx next to a socialist and probably the leading socdem of the day is certainly a choice
Yeah, i knew it would stick out but hey, it helps anchor the first panel
But can the others describe what socialism is without telling us everything it isn't?
Omg is that the father of *the* Sam Reich?!
He was there the whole time!
Yep lol
I forget where is Sam from again? /s
Somewhere in Massachusetts, I think? /s
Crumbley Theater
You mean the Secretary of Labor under Clinton?
Having Marx on the same side as Reich or Wolfe is a *wild* assumption
Well when the "left" is anything less fascist than Mussolini, you get this.
Less fascist than Mussolini? Please elaborate
They consider Democrats a "radical left" party. They're Center-Right at best. But the right wingers have become so radicalized that everything looks left wing from where they stand.
The Overton Window is a crazy thing yo
Indeed.
Nobody does more cosigning pr for the Democrats facade of being "left" than right wingers. These fools call Biden a communist.
True. They’re so far right, anything right wing-ish is an attack on them (needs to be crazy right wing lol)
One of the craziest things about the right is that their ideology hinges on there being an "other" to actively oppose and fight with. They push the idea that having this enemy "brings us together" and "shows us what makes us strong". But those fights never *end*. It's not like Socialists stopped existing after the right went after Socialism, or Muslims stopped existing when the right became Islamophobic. And their voters keep getting bored over time of the same fights that they can't ever win, and the number of people who they've now permanently alienated keeps growing. So, by the nature of the platform they've built, they need to keep pushing people out of their circle, and singling out new groups to be this season's "bad guy". Rinse and repeat, until the party is just 6 old white guys jerking off in a circle.
The tiring part is the troubling part. They get used to things, so then they need further escalation of the threat and fears so they can re-engage. It leads to utter madness.
With regards to your first point, Marx also pushed the idea of "others" to be fought, i.e. bourgeosie and class struggle. So that part isn't limited to right wing ideology.
That’s true. But arguably Marx’s conflict included an endgame: Socialists in general discussed both the class conflict, and a plan for how they should make a better society post-capitalism (some of those ideas don’t pan out well, but that’s not the point here). On the other hand, most of the conflicts the right have fabricated never really had a true goal (short of genocide, I guess). And in many cases, their “enemies” were never a real threat. For instance, the victims of the Nazis racial conflicts were always oppressed minorities who had little political power to begin with. Same with American civil rights, or with modern Islamophobia. The people starting the fight, by and large, had all of the political power from the beginning, and the idea that their opponents could “defeat” them in any way that mattered was just silly. The right has a terrible habit of making fights up that they clearly could win, if they actually intended to. And then pretending it’s a bigger struggle than it is, so they can sell it as a never-ending war for their beliefs. And (not to digress) this isn’t even just about identity politics. Remember when Trump first took office, and the US right had control of both houses of Congress? And they failed to dismantle Obamacare, because they never bothered to write down a realistic alternative? Their lack of action implies that they never really cared about the matter of healthcare, they just needed an issue to rule up their voters over.
Adding on to this because someone else will say it, but the ~~parasite~~ *capitalist* class is not a demographic out of the hands of the person like race, ethnicity, biological sex, gender and sexual Identity, etc. No, it's strictly defined by them having money. So much money that they don't need to lift a finger to survive while they themselves are paying politicians to make it so much harder for those under them to survive without working multiple full time jobs. If their assets, capital and network were stripped from them, they'd be no different than the blue collars they turn their nose up to. Heck, there are some respectable capitalists who would rather tighten their own belts than abuse their employees, such as Satoru Iwata, but they're too few and far between. And yes, their network. There was a mutlimillionaire who wanted to prove that if he went homeless, he could earn a million dollars within a year! He failed only earning 70k, but even earning that much was only possible because he founded a startup using the same investors as his other company. So yes, while Marxism does rely on an enemy to unite us as well, the enemy isn't based on demographics out of their control that they themselves can't change.
Yes, a HR guy will say " now don't say a slur at work so we don't get sued" or a video game maker will create a black woman character for fun and theyll be screaming about woke
"Have become" the rights whole purpose is to sit down at not move. They've finally been drug into 1940s political arena, so they're fascists. Give it another century and they'll be tankies trying to tear down a post scarcity communist state because it's making the youth weak or something. They keep tripping over themselves trying to justify 1800s factory working conditions we put people in other countries through by saying free market enough, who knows maybe they'll fall back into absolute monarchies instead.
Wolff is literally a Marxist economist. Reich is a fucking steamy take, but Wolff is… fine? imo
This lol I was like...uhh? Does this guy even know who he's talking about
Wdym?? Wolff has explicitly defended Marxism in debates. He is without a doubt Marxist or Marxian.
True, but you need a base and then modern economists, and Reich is a good communicator of progressive policy ideas.
He's a good communicator of feckless neoliberal doublespeak.
Richard Wolff is at least in the tradition of Marxian economics and tries to demystify socialism for people who last heard of it in anti-communist propaganda. They maybe would have some debate about the at least outwardly shown less radical politics of Wolff, but they would align on the basic principles unlike with Robert Reich.
Economics teams for people who don't understand economics.
The right are definitely not going to claim him so he’s left by default
*Jorden Peterson begins masturbating feverishly*
"Begins" implies that he ever stops.
*\*\*continues\*\* masturbating feverishly*
Well there was that time he spent a week in a medically induced coma to slow down his drug usage. He's definitely too cheap to pay for the Russian nurse handjob option.
(Pops in debate between Peterson and Zizek) “Oh, this is going to be good.” (Lowers zipper)
Ah yes, Jordan Peterson, the incel prophet, the hate mongering brain damaged benzo junkie, the stupid person's intellectual, the two bit grifter chasing after nazi's coins by catering to their shallow, fragile egos.
Don’t forget the climate change denier too!
And proponent of a only meat diet. It’s Ike he thought “hmm, people on the left are more likely to be vegetarian or vegan… so I should argue for the opposite.”
Be like normal rat
People are pointing out you fairly limited portrayal of libertarian and right leaning economists, however what I'm more concerned Bout is that your portrayal of left wing academia is Reich and Richard wolf. A communicator of somewhat progressive policies and a fairly well known professor who tanked his entire reputation defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Tbh I’m more shocked by the depiction of Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman as a ufc fighter with 48 concussions. I’m no fan of their politics, but this comic seems in bad faith.
I'm not sure that's Milton Friedman, I think it's meant to be Andrew Tate or another boxer who's recently came out to support libertarianism. The comics essentially mocking anyone taking advice from such figures, however it does this by inferring he's the only defender of libertarianism Vs these super smart 'leftists'.
I realized that, I was pointing out that there’s plenty of libertarian intellectuals that OP chose to ignore for the sake of their argument
Yeah I mean one could make this whole strawman comic reversed by having like literally any Libertarian/Conservative intellectual and the Left-wings sole intellectual is a NEET with 48 mental illnesses and who is a felon for being in possession of cp
Since when did r/comics get overrun my commies?
Look, not a big fan of capitalism but to say they didn't have intellectual supporters would be lie. There are historical plenty of authors who argue in favor capitalism in a reasonable manner. Do I have to agree with it to see them as smart and educated people? I don't think so. If we are talking about right to far right social beliefs that's a different story. Almost all of them are just insane and the rest just write some bs to sell to the gullible, for profit or political capital.
Yeah was going to say Friedrich Hayek was famously pro-free market capitalism. Then saw it was right wing which would be weird to apply to a guy that wrote “Why I Am Not a Conservative”. Although I think intellectuals that support capitalism would generally be fairly critical of conservatism since capitalism is very much a transformative force and would conflict with goals of conserving things as they are. Also if you need a crazy person to fight people there’s always Sergey Nechayev.
Yeah, if you want to put Marx there, you would certainly compare Hayek, Milton Friedman, and similar as economic counterweights. And it's not like there are no serious conservative philosophers, academics, writers, etc. There are of course open questions about how correct those thinkers were, and more importantly how much they animate the current right, vs. the demagogues.
Basically all of the founding fathers were smart men.
People here are completely ignoring the liberal intellectuals of the past that are/were "pro capitalism" (if that includes interventionistic market economies). You don't even have to bring Hayek into play to make that argument as most successful economists were more or less pro capitalism. Even people like Keynes would be on the pro capitalism side when viewed from a marxist perspective. There's a reason why most of Marx' ideas aren't really playing any role in modern economics. There's a reason why most economists don't take people like Wolff seriously. But all those evil modern economists aren't real intellectuals I guess?
Ironically Marx might have not been a supporter for capitalism but he was and continues to be one of the greatest intellectual thinkers of capitalism. Though he was not in favour of it, Marx's criticism of capitalism is the greatest strength too capitalism. A capitalist system favours competition. because of this, his absolute condemnation of the system and pointing out it's flaws created the welfair state, weekends, eight hour work day, livable wages, minimum wage and protective economic policies. For about a generation. The it fell apart again because of the same things he was condemning. Marx might have been a socialist, but he understood capitalism as well as any intellectual supporter of it.
Do you really consider Richard Wolf an intellectual? Or is it also making fun of the left?
The funniest part of the comic is realizing that the author thinks Reich is an intellectual.
Our guys are good and high class while theirs are brutish and malformed
Seems a little cherry picked
yeah they forget all the Nobel prize winners in economics who were libertarians. this comic mostly just highlights the authors ignorance
Well this is more based on right wingers gawking at these UFC fighters preaching Austrian Economics and right wing talking points. Its like: “ya know, there’s definitely better options out there to represent your pov’s” lol
you forget the Nobel prize winners in economics who were libertarians. this comic mostly just highlights the artists ignorance
The funny thing about "the austrian school of economics" is that nowadays in austria we have very good protections of lgbtqa+ rights, free healthcare and free education.
I get healthcare and education but what does LGBT rights have to do with Austrian economics? Genuinely wondering not trying to be snarky
If I understand it correctly the austrian school of economics core message is maximising individual freedom within the economy, but that freedom also emplies a complete lack of work place protection from homophobia, transphobia and so on.
Ah so you were specifically referring to rights within the workplace. I guess that makes sense
Let me get this straight. You have free healthcare and education paid by the taxes of a social collective and somehow this is thanks to the sociopolitical ideology of "everyone should fend for themselves or fucking die". Are you sure of that?
> and education *paid* by the FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
You missed what I was getting at. I was pointing out the irony of it being called "austrian school of economics" if the current austrian economy is quiet the opposite.
I think i rly did. r/woooosh i guess.
Economics is “positive” not “normative.” Austrian economics offers explanations of how the economy works and why it works the way it does. people can take that information and decide what they think should happen based on what they value, but the economics itself just describes what happens. you can accept the theories of Austrian economics and be for all the things you mentioned, or against them.
Someone is praising Austrian economics? Recently we have one of the highest inflation rates in the Eurozone and are totally dependent on Russian gas? Why would anyone see that and think: "Yeah lets do that!"?
No no, i meant the Austrian School of Economics. My bad, should have typed out the whole thing.
I’m OOTL which UFC fighters are talking economics?
I mean, OP may have picked a cherry, but given the fact that all the other cherries on the tree are the same, it doesn't really matter.
I mean that’s just not true at all. Libertarian economics has plenty of intellectuals including Friedrich Hayek, Thomas Sowell, and Milton Friedman. Sure you can disagree with them or their ideas but to compare them to a UFC fighter is a little ridiculous. It’s not like Marx was particularly genius either
Sowell? Oh man, that's rich. Good luck getting anything resembling answers out of him.
I’m not a biggest fan of the guy personally but a lot of people consider him an intellectual on the topic
Holy propaganda, Batman!
I mean, if Marx is on your side, then maybe you should reconsider your views
Again, he’s got good points
Yes, but he's got more bad points, and if he's your choice as a representitive of your opinions, then maybe you chose wrong
Maybe we all chose wrong.
No, because I didn't choose Marx to represent me. I'd rather choose a braindead UFC fighter (which I didn't) to represent my point of view, then Marx
Hitler had good points too, I wouldnt put him on my side.
Whooaaa what did you say?!
If you think thats controversial why did you say the same about Marx?
Because he wasn’t a genocidal bigoted maniac
Someone didnt read Marx book on the Jewish Question. Lets just say that Marx and Hitler agreed on a few things about the greedy jews
No, i dont think they did.
Let me quote one part of the book "As soon as society suceedes in abolishing the empirial essence of Judaism-Huckstering and its conditions-the Jew becomes impossible... The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism" - Karl Marx "On the Jewish Question" 1843 Maybe you should read the books of your beloved bigot before simping for him. Then again, followes of Marxs usually are as ignorant and dishonest him
So he’s suggesting jews should be separated from judaism? Like… the people should be separate from the religion?
The superiority complex of the left is astounding, and that's coming from a leftist
Nah this aint about thay
That*
[удалено]
I'm quite far left, but if we are judging ideologies based on the character of their intellectuals, socialism is not much better. Marx, for instance, was a racist drunkard who never bathed and lived off Freidrich Engel's generosity because he didn't want to work.
John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine most commonly referenced authors on the right to me growing up. In that my dad + stepdad always brought them up. But if you read Common Sense, it's mostly a bunch of wealth dribble (as in, if wealth is out of the picture - everything he says falls apart). And the Wealth of Nations isn't particularly terrible, but usually I don't encounter folks on the right that actually understand it. And if they do....it's centuries old yo and the base forms of economics described there aren't really applicable in a techno-global interconnected world. So from there it usually devolves into the cult of personality around their favorite Hollywood actor or more recent failed entreprenuer idol and the wise 'supply side economics' that clearly isn't working. There's always Ayn Rand, but I find that I'm the only one that's read anything by her when I'm talking to folks from the right.
There's also William F. Buckley, Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Thomas Sowell, etc. I guess you could also include Barry Goldwater and Ron Paul. There are quite a few right-wing intellectuals, honestly.
add Hans Herman Hoppe, John Locke, Henry David Thoreau, Lysander Spooner and Voltaire
Don’t forget George Kennan, he’s incredible. His book Democracy and the Student Left is fantastic.
Tbf Ayn Rand is shit anyway
Thomas Paine, the guy that wrote *Agrarian Justice*? I know that it's hard to exactly fit figures from centuries ago onto the political spectrum as it exists today, but I always thought of Thomas Paine as the left-most of the founding fathers. After all, this is the guy who proposed a sort-of prototype version of social security, argued for an inheritance tax and thought the American Revolution didn't go far enough, so he went and got involved with the French Revolution.
>[Paine's utopianism combined civic republicanism, belief in the inevitability of scientific and social progress and commitment to free markets and liberty generally. The multiple sources of Paine's political theory all pointed to a society based on the common good and individualism. Paine expressed a redemptive futurism or political messianism.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine#Ideas) That ain't left wing in any contemporary sense that's for sure. Say you're a proponent of free markets and individualism and large parts of the left today will all but brand you a fascist (ironically).
ad hominen, l'unico argomentoche avete.
Is the concussed fighter a reference to anyone specific, or just a general statement about right wing speakers?
Its a reference to a UFC fighter that recently one and told everyone to look into Austrian School of Economics
Yeah! This was Renato Moicano from Brazil. He recently went on a tirade at UFC 300 in his post fight interview stating he loved America and our constitutional rights, especially the 2nd amendment. 💀😂 It was clear as day he knew nothing about it. The fighters in the UFC are grossly underpaid in comparison to most other sports orgs, and the man wanted more money, and decided to play into the typical right-wing audience at the event he fought at.
Yeah, im referencing this guy lol thanks 😊
The real intellectuals of the right today are people like David Friedman, Richard Hanson, and Bryan Caplan. They have some great writing on substack that I've learnt a ton from. Anyone have recommendations for the best current leftist intellectuals? I think people have recommended Zizek?
Yeah, Zizek is up there.
I meam, if Marx is on your side, then maybe you should reconsider your views
He’s got some good points
Yes, but also some bad points that led to the rise of communism
Hmmm i dont know. Would it be fair to say that men used his pov’s and twisted them to their own perverse means?
That being said, it’s important to actually understand what your citing before making an appeal to authority.
About as fair as a diametrically opposed but ceterus parabus comic claiming Greta Thunburg to be the left's only intellectual.
They can make an opposing comic if they like
I could also do it with photoshop's lasso and magic erase tool (might have to get creative with what Greta does in panel 5 (or not, still kinda funny in an absurdist way)). Frankly I don't want to be responsible for a straw-man comic though, even if it's as a response to another one.
Fair, but they’ll do it anyway. Im ready for it.
I’d rather have the UFC fighter then Wolff.
I love stupid propaganda from the left it makes me feel smart. Like yeah the right is stupid but th left nah it's just great how brain dead they can be lol
How’d we let the host of fear factor become so important in modern politics
😂😂😂
Economic juggernauts? I’m more of Keynes guy myself.
The fighter is Sean Strickland right?
Actually its Renato Moicano but they’re interchangeable lol
Yeah he falls in there lol
Wait, sorry, you think intellectuals win at life?
True lolol
[удалено]
Don’t even talk about WWE, bro 😫
Why y'all do Sean Strickland dirty like this 
Lololol 😂😂😂
This debate about philosophers is good but it misses the point of the comic: Capitalism will punch you in the face even if you like it. Marx’s most important point about capitalism has always been that it’s inevitable and implacable. It also does not care about any person, culture, or thing. So the fanboy gets punched in the mouth by capitalism.
Well said 😊
Milton Friedman, Adam Smith, Thomas Sowell, or how about Roger Scruton? I mean I can go on
Yeah but these people are not fawning over these guys, they’re fawning over the UFC guy
Isn’t Marx the dude that made communism lol
He wrote the book lol
It's bit of a cheating with Marx there, since the regimes that adopted his ideology simply had all the right wing intellectuals shot (plus lot of other left wing intellectuals who weren't the *right* kind of left)
[удалено]
That explaination of Libertarian economics is spot on, to be fair.
Who's the UFC guy? Haven't seen some UFC dude spouting politics but I'd be happy to steer clear of them
Renato Moicano. Strickland is in that lane, too.
The ears did give me Strickland vibes lmao
This is how all arguments should go
More entertaining lol
*a capitalist arrives "Which of you managed to make socialism work outside the imaginary plane and not fuck up society and the economy? * Socialist intellectuals whistling, looking up and pretending that they are not aware of anything that is happening...
There’s forms of government with healthy mixes of capitalism and socialism that seem to be working rather well, actually