Three days and I haven’t found anything which fundamentally shifted the end destination I’ve arrived at. That’s pretty unusual. I’ve dived through UN, Chatham, CFR, WEF, Atlantic, Brookings, various governance institutes and everything aligns. It’s just a matter of perspective, because theirs is from the inside of the machine.

But let me just conclusively shut every exit before arriving there…

What if the labour theory of value is actually a blueprint for a system that measures everything in labour hours, controlled centrally?

https://escapekey.substack.com/p/the-ricardian-labour-theory-of-value

PDF

haha yesterday google+twitter+facebook drove 0.87% of my substack traffic.

still ended the day +20 subs.

almost out of runway. almost out of runway.

… Marx builds the material base (Maschiah ben Yosef), then Ashlag installs the fuel (religion) that makes it permanent (ben David)…?

... and that religion is the baha'i faith?

the are no contradictions in marxism, when you treat it as an architecture of accounting

there’s no liberty either

in some regards, kimi is still a touch light weight, but it doesnt suffer from gemini/chatgpt/copilots increasing tendencies to just continuously weasel out of any controversial conclusions

working like a mad eejit to finish the final part of my essays on marx, and it summarise these fairly well

in fairness, i have not summarised it as such, but its conclusion is correct -

marxism, in essence, works to eliminate capital formation. it’s about stripping liberty, and replacing it with complete dependency.

last one, i promise

but when viewed in light of systems theory, all internal contradictions of marx dissolve.

marx, in essence, was a hyper-manipulative crook. and his scam appears to have gone unnoticed for almost 180 years.

there's no way it wasnt by intent if it resolves ALL internal contradictions in this fashion, or at least, the odds are long

not forgetting that the entire hess, marx, bogdanov, lenin lineage continuously added missing technical layers to the same structure.

it’s no coincidence, because it was by intent. an incredibly long con.

lenin, perhaps, is the least dishonest. accounting and control is too straightforward to be misunderstood. well, apart from bogdanov perhaps, but he was a somewhat ignored geek, so there’s that.

just a few of the things which resolve cleanly when you interpret Marx through a systems theory lens

just one more essay to go, then consider Marx’s steaming pile of horse manure done

as for all those who seek to refute on grounds of marx’s alleged ‘intent’, explain in concrete terms of how the state will wither away - no abstracts please. i can - can you?

version 2

full rez