Mathematics, the Labor Theory of Value Can Certainly Be Criticized!

Recently, Chuanliu, Yunguzi, and others have been criticizing Marx's labor theory of value. I've been debating with them, because in my view Marx is correct, and I naturally have the right and obligation to defend Marx. This is purely for the sake of truth, just like my defense of Miss Chan's correct assertion that "all human thoughts cannot possibly be stored in computers"!

But today, Mathematics suddenly came out and said "Forum user Yunguzi's main purpose online is to attack Marxism as fallacious, which is actually unconstitutional speech." He also said "Regarding the labor theory of value, there's actually nothing to criticize about the definition." This kind of talk only invites the contempt of those genuinely discussing issues.

If there's a problem, lay it out. In the academic sphere, the concept of "attack" doesn't apply. Is Yunguzi, based on his own research, criticizing the labor theory of value now illegal? This can only be classified as academic discussion -- there's no question of illegality! Unless he engages in extreme behavior. The constitution guarantees freedom of speech. If one doesn't even have the freedom to criticize the labor theory of value, Marx would laugh at this, because Marx wrote the best article on freedom of speech in history!

Yunguzi, Chuanliu, and Mathematics can all have their own views, but none of them should appoint themselves as judges to define others' behavior. So statements like "Forum user Yunguzi's main purpose online is to attack Marxism as fallacious" -- such language should not appear in normal academic discussion. This sounds more like something a judge would say, and who appointed Mathematics as judge?

The biggest error of Chuanliu, Yunguzi, and others is treating their misunderstandings of Marx as Marx's own words. If this is unintentional, it's a matter of intelligence and academic level. If it's intentional, it's a matter of academic ethics -- it has absolutely nothing to do with the law! Just as I am a steadfast supporter of Miss Chan and also a steadfast supporter of Marx's labor theory of value, I can accept any challenge regarding either of them. But I would absolutely never appoint myself as judge to pass verdict on anyone, because I don't have that qualification, and no one in the world does, unless they are an actual judge facing a suspect confirmed through proper legal procedures!