> Through his theories of alienation, value, commodity fetishism, and surplus value, Marx argued that capitalism facilitated social relations through commodification and the exploitation of labor.
This is remarkably close to the views expressed in the article, but I guess you're being downvoted because you hit a nerve.
There's no such thing as a Marxist labor camp and I'm well aware of the cluster fuck that every would-be dictator of the proletariat was starting with Lenin. I'mean not a Marxist, and especially not a Marxist-Leninist. That doesn't mean I can't take Marx's economic ideas seriously.
Also, you probably don't care about the fact that there are labor programs at US prisons where workers are paid cents for the hour to do labor. I think your moral challenge is in bad faith.
I didn't downvote myself and also have no intention to further explore the works - awful vague pompous stuff that they seem to be from the few pages I've read.
It's terribly vague and offers no insight as to which things Marx might have been right about. There's a child comment that's a bit better, but it dumps a lot of Wikipedia links out with little in the way of explanation.
In short, on HN it's better if you can explore ideas more thoroughly, rather than simply tossing out short quips and assuming everyone is on the same page.
It would be better to write something along the lines of 'When the article says __, this illustrates what Marx was talking about when he defined __ and that ties in with...' or such so there could be more discussion about ideas and less noise about voting or simple opinions.
