[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/dead/ - Post-Left

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1608528407575.jpg (684.93 KB, 2060x1236, David-Graeber-009.jpg)

 No.993[Reply]

Now that the dust has settled… what's your opinion on him? Anything worth reading by him?

 No.995

I like that essay of his where he btfos primitivists. It's called "How to Change the Course of Human History". In general, his depictions of past societies are a lot more nuanced than the images painted by people like Zerzan, since Graeber was an actual anthropologist.

 No.996

>>995
anprims being shat on? that sounds like something i need to check out

 No.997

>>993
Nice lampshade



File: 1608528406914.jpg (1.42 MB, 2214x2880, image.jpg)

 No.984[Reply]

Mouffe and Laclau reject the centrality of the proletariat and the historical determinism in Marxism

-What do you think about it?
-Could you recommend me some "post-marxist" authors or books?
-Which have been the most recent developments in this "current"?

 No.988

I think they have some points in their critique of Marx, but their "post-Marxism" is just liberalism with a new coat of paint. They cite Carl Schmitt a lot but ironically just end up recreating the bourgeois myth of parliamentary democracy that Schmitt critiqued so much.

 No.1120

What the fuck is post-marxism?

 No.1131

>>1120
probably also stuff like Catoriadis who was a marxist first and then have his theory a post-structuralist bend.
Maybe even Adorno and Arendt but they are already to far off marxism to be considered an inverse, or post-ideology form, of it.

>>984
>-What do you think about it?
To me this is a complicated issue. I like the critique of historical determinism and the role of the broad proletariat as the revolutionary subject. But I think most post-marxist are, strangely, deterministic and structuralist while describing these qualities to the complete body of Marx's and Engels theoretical output.

>-Could you recommend me some "post-marxist" authors or books?

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism

>–Which have been the most recent developments in this "current"?

I really don't know but from outside I would say that the post-marxist 'scene' is probably quite small and the same is probably true for the disourse.



File: 1608528406446.webm (4.21 MB, 360x640, ZuCkFuck2020.webm)

 No.978[Reply]

A very nice voice recommending that you use Mastodon instead of Facebook.

https://kolektiva.media/videos/watch/26360460-7419-4c01-98be-34daf12c5305

 No.979

Very nice! If you haven't already take the opportunity to jump over now.

 No.985




File: 1608528404479.jpg (124.91 KB, 1065x1006, a.jpg)

 No.949[Reply]

pls help
31 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.1330

>>1327
i just willed myself into existence obviously.
first i didnt exist, than i was like: thats kinda lame, I wanna start existing!
and so, carbon and protein formations statred accumulating and the end product was me.
rad, isnt it?

 No.1334

>>1330
>I wanna start existing!
said nobody ever

 No.1336

>>1334
yeah looking back, it was a bad call, but now im stuck with it

 No.1337

>>1258
>>1311
i have friends and we all do drugs
not like in a fun way, but yknow (stopping the memeing for a second…) legit i think people who do drugs to cope like you know they're struggling in some way, mentally or economically or something, and since its illegal (well.. some things, for some people… weed's legal here now :(), learning that someone else does it sort of breaks a layer of separation or alienation

 No.1338

>>1337 (me)
by the way, i dont think using drugs to cope with things is cool or a good idea or anything really, like its bad for you long-term usually, if only because it can put people into a financial treading-water forever, but also i just mean with my joking for you to consider the idea of using chemicals to cope temporarily if it could help you



File: 1608528403809.png (109.19 KB, 643x492, sexyanarchistastolfo.png)

 No.939[Reply]

I know that anarchy is just a state, it is not an ideology; it just means people solving their matters by themselves in an egalitarian manner(as seen by the community). The question is more about what the beginning would be like. I think it would go somewhat along these lines:

> A city of 100.000 people

> Affiliation groups of anarchists dethrone the local state power of their regions of operation
> Anarchists by some means(Public discourse, pamphlets) spread the news that the area was liberated
> In the means which they've chosen, they explain that people can organize their life as it fits them
> Lots of harsh debates will happen between people deciding on what to do
> People start contacting people around the city to organize what to do
> The situation with time will stabilize(not completely, because it cannot always exist because of individual needs) with time, because solutions to general problems of society will be met according to the people
> Many types of community could form from these, bourgeois without the state power to secure their private property, would in places where people wish to abolish it would be completely gone, while in other places if the community wishes to maintain it by their own will, it will remain.
> Some more communist communities, other extremely individualist because of some anarchist influences. It would be probably be a big mass of many different points of view, and probably conflict would hardly stabilize.
> Anarchy successful
1 post omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.945

A small cave in which 2-4 autists practise gay sex and browbeat each over thoughtcrimes.

 No.956

massive fissioning and dispersal into smaller enclaves. We've been cooped up so much by capitalist production we want to get away. Production will decrease even further. Perhaps factories/ factory towns will see a revival as trade hubs. A general increase in 'real' economy and decrease in speculation and finance. Travelling nomad bands. Raids against suburban/petty-bourg hold-outs. If anthropology tells us anything the next social hurdle will be relations between the sexes and between a new mode of post-capitalist production and this social revolution, a cultural proliferation will occur. Renaissance in arts and sciences. It will be good.

 No.967


 No.1200

I think the question of what anarchy will look like, as in, what it'll be if it is finally realised, is a very traditional leftist question. It views anarchy as something not yet here, a heaven we reach after we overcame this world of plight.
To me, anarchy is the call to resist authority in the here and now. It's only participating in wage labor if it's in your benefit, not shying back before acts the state forbids and creating a living space according to your desires.
Obviously this isn't the abolishment of capitalism, some might even say it's life stylist, but if the option is joining a ml or syndicalist micro org and waiting for anarchy to start living my real life according to my desire, like a Christian waits for the afterlife, I know what I'll choose.

 No.1237

>>939
>Some more communist communities, other extremely individualist because of some anarchist influences.
>implies communism can not be individualist



File: 1608528402424.jpg (251.33 KB, 890x550, anarchismpost.jpg)

 No.922[Reply]

Just what the fuck anarchism is? What does it mean to you?
2 posts omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.926

anarchism is greek for I do whatever the fuck I want

 No.1053

>>922
No state, no government, no laws, little to no hierarchy, self government.

 No.1066

>>922
anarchy is an socio-economic condition in which I am able to develop myself as a full person without threat of punishment througn hierarchical structure.

 No.1546

>>923
anarchism is when the governmen't

 No.1765

>>924
>isn't ideological



 No.901[Reply]

When you browse /leftypol/, you often see threads titled something like "Your former ideologies" or "Your history as a leftist", in which anons don't get tired describing their past with spooky shit like 'Leninist', 'ML', 'ANcom', completly abstract words without any meaning, any material force, behind them. Because what really is the material difference between being a leninist and a syndicalist when both have the same amount of revolutionary force behind them: none.
Tankie parties as well as syindicalist unions have failed to organise the working class fo the last half century. Neither have any impact on national politics or the economy. Calling yourself one or the other is mere play-pretend. Anyone with eyes in their heads sees that the modern working class has no interest fighting capitalism through strike and organisation - and that's probably for the best. If any of these modern cults calling themselves leftist parties actually got popular, it would sooner result in another century of authoritarian rule than working class emancipation simply because these revolutionary possessed don't even fight for latter. Their goal is the realisation of a spook, an ideal, like communism or anarchism. It's all meaningless. Neither anarchism nor communism has ever existed - even anarchists and communists will attest this. What they don't understand is that the root of the circumstance is the idea-form of concepts like communism themselves.
Matter and ideas mutually exclusive. They can never be the same. Our view of reality is always subjective, the reality as we experience it isn't the same that materially exists. Our concept of reality doesn't and can't have the same content as reality because if they had, matter and idea were equal. The quality of matter IS it not being ideal, therefore this is impossible.
Leftists think themselves communism or anarchism like this or that, imagine themselves solutions to fictional problems of how to run economies that will never exist. Not because conditions that can be described as communism or anarchism will never exist, but because if they exist, they will exist materially and therefore have no connection to how their believers imagine them. Marx's analysis of many aspects of capitalism are quite good, but they don't describe the material existence of capitalism, not in the 19th century and even less now. It works with ideas, abstractions of the material conditions, and it has to because you literally can't grasp tPost too long. Click here to view the full text.
24 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.2173

Late to the party, but extremely well put, OP. You put into words what I have been slowly realizing over the past year–all this political LARPing is a complete waste of time.

 No.2174

>>1557
lol dude I told the leaders of the communist party in my country to fuck off when they asked me to stop smoking weed and left the party in the middle of a dictatorship a few decades ago and literally nothing happened to me

stop reading too much fanfiction, weeblord

 No.2175

also op is a faggot neopositivist, sad to see this becoming more prevalent lately!

 No.2178

>>2175
>neopositivist
whats that uwu?

 No.2243

>ideologies are retarded anyways here's my retarded ideology but it doesn't have a name so it's epic



File: 1608528398208.png (95.48 KB, 217x301, theoryfiction.png)

 No.858[Reply]

The Marxist analysis of Capitalism and post-Capitalism is fairly straightforward in its understanding of why Capitalism will not last.

The productive forces of Capitalism will be developed, until a certain point where Capitalism will come to inhibit their further growth. At this point, the proletariat must rise up and destroy the Capitalist mode of production to free the forces of production imprisoned within them.

What Marx does, is essentially agree with the "mission" of Capital, the growth of productive forces, but does not think Capitalism will be able to complete this mission due to its internal contradictions.

This is where the problem of Marxism comes in. Marx does not understand, as later thinkers who developed upon his ideas, Jaques Camatte and Nick Land, that the mission of Capital, the growth of productive forces, schizophrenic revolutionizing of society, etc, this is the problem humanity has with Capital, because these goals are on a fundamental level, anti-human. They are the goals of the market God, in its "progressive" quest to mechanize human life down to the second, not the goals of humanity. Post-Capitalism, or rather Capitalism that has broken through the wall of its own contradiction in order to further presue its mission, will not be for humans. It will be a continuation of the mission of Capital, and that missions end is the complete domestication and annihilation of the human race. Nick Land and Camatte made this very clear.

Marx attempts to divorce Capitalism and its technology, not realizing that Capitalism itself, the blind idiot god, is the most important part of this technology. No consciously organized system of humans can match the speed, versatility and growth of the dispersed dead brain of Capital itself.

The growth in productive forces do not exist for the benefit of humanity. They exist for the benefit of Capital. Capital itself is the motor of technological change and modernity. Nothing can replace it.

We do not want "Post-Capitalism". A post-Capitalism that contains the drive for progress of Capitalism will not be liberation. It will be the death of the human species and the planet earth. Industrial society, and Capital's mission of its expansion into all aspects of the human life and subjectivity, itself requires repression. We cannot progress "past" Capitalism, because progress is merely a measure of how completely Capital has subordinated the human community to itPost too long. Click here to view the full text.
41 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.905

>>877
why am I watching advertisements on the anticapitalist board

 No.1238

>>858
all i hear is talk about Marx but nothing about communism inherently. Marxism is shit, who would have guessed, doesn't stop me from being communist

 No.1239

File: 1608528423803.jpg (34.89 KB, 634x414, IMG_20191123_020741.jpg)

>>858
>the goals of humanity
nice spook idiot. you might want to read deleuze himself instead of third-rate secondary lit like nick land.

 No.1241

>>858
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes, humanfags rise up

 No.1242

>>893
i think the proletariat is revolutionary in the same sense that the bourgeoisie was - that is, it only revolutionizes within the system and perfects it further, but does nothign to destroy the old god. The proletariat might triumph over the bourgeoisie, and we could get something much more egalitarian in a way, but it would still function to better serve the capitalist goal of full commodification and deconstruction of everything. What we call capitalism is just the modern incarnation of Capital. Its fundamentally democratic feudalism, which was a more democratic or anarchic version of empire. The project of Capital is the most basic formula - release more energy to itself and use that to grow, in order to release more energy. So i see a continuity between modern day capitalism and the oldest slaver city states



File: 1608528397041.jpg (288.23 KB, 787x1200, DqBV9jnUwAAXukr.jpg)

 No.839[Reply]

anyone got a link to the "post-left theory generator"? it was a script hosted on github i think that generates the kind of purple prose typical of post-left/insurrectionary anarchist pamphlets

 No.840

File: 1608528397132.jpg (118.31 KB, 720x261, 133292147657.jpg)


 No.841

File: 1608528397201.png (35.35 KB, 675x540, iww-organize.png)

B T F O
B
T
F
O

 No.842

>>840
>a softer world
for half the panels i can't tell whether they're satire or a bad attempt at humour



File: 1608528395979.jpg (96.19 KB, 500x649, 189213864130486.jpg)

 No.822[Reply]

It's never happening, is it? I lost all hope today.

 No.825

What never happens?

 No.828

>>825
it obviously.
it's in OP post. the revolution. the insurrection. overcoming alienation.

>>822
no it's not. but isn't that nice in a way? there never was a chance to begin with, so we didn't 'fail'

 No.831

>>822
There won't be a revolution, there can only be a global collapse, in which it won't happen in our lifetimes. On the ashes of the collapse Anarchism can only establish itself under necessity and then can those lucky few who can experience it, truly take power over their own lives and society itself, and experience life for what it was meant to be. Anarchism in today can only establish itself temporarily under power vacuums until getting crushed by state armies. So basically? Live your fucking life in disregard of the state and its laws, the Illegalists understood this reality and sought to enact revenge on property based state society so they could live their lives in the then and now. Illegalism is Anarchy experienced today under Statism.



Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]
[ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 / 15 / 16 / 17 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 23 / 24 / 25 / 26 ]
| Catalog | Home