• Zoboomafoo@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The number of times where it becomes clear that a Marxist is arguing from a conclusion is too high to be ignored.

    That’s just how Marxism is, he claimed that our course of economic history is the only way it could have gone with a single data point then concluded that the current system (in 1850) would imminently collapse.

    I don’t know why anyone lends credence to his theories

    • gowan@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because he was correct about some things. Modern neoclassical economics abandoned the stuff that is no longer correct or is not relevant after the movement towards empiricism.