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

/edu/ - Education

Learn, learn, and learn!
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

| Catalog | Home

File: 1608528410026.jpg (597.68 KB, 1600x1200, IMG_2100.jpg)


and how do they plan on deprecating money itself? I know labor vouchers is usually the system that’s brought up but it doesn’t seem like Marx himself was thrilled about it, he just said it could be temporarily used in a workers’ state. I don’t understand how he planned on deprecating it afterwards. Cockshott expanded upon this by adding that they could be digital so that people wouldn’t be able to trade with them. but how does the act of trading currency inherently promote labor alienation? I understand how under private property it does, but in a collectively owned means of production I don’t see why it’s a problem, or why it’s any better than the currency system of the Soviet Union.
tl;dr why do orthodox Marxists believe no banknotes at all > labor vouchers > money?
pic unrelated.
18 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Pokemon card are shared and passed around.


All communists want to eventually abolish money. If money isn't abolished, it's not communism yet.


>So there will be no more trading collectable card games in communism?
"Trading" is capitalist degeneracy and anyone found in possession of a scale will go to re-education camps.


Money is how capitalists express their power, we don't like being dominated by capitalism, so naturally we want to change the system that can be used to dominate us, into one where this possibility does not exist.

Labor vouchers are created when workers perform work, and are destroyed when the workers receive the fruits of their labor, that makes workers the beginning and the end of the transactional token. This is how the proletariat expresses systemic power.


From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.

Why do we need money?

File: 1608527940709.png (347.86 KB, 680x730, tmp_14091.png)


Dark edition.
12 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1608528189129-0.png (439.62 KB, 589x752, 1585360081179.png)

File: 1608528189129-2.jpg (263.53 KB, 1078x939, 1585514052845.jpg)


Someone explain pic 2, the graphics are too small for me to discern the joke besides the "upgrade - go back" joke



File: 1632836779741.jpg (85.98 KB, 634x571, 1601076343685.jpg)


File: 1633657145274.jpg (103.19 KB, 926x618, 1629229882144.jpg)

>be me,pre-revolutionary France
>work as a cook in the royal halls of Paris
>Seigneur Louis Hon-Hon sarkozy Toulouse Martinique Oublié Fesses Nique Baise le nichon de Ma Cul de Haute Lorraine l'Autre throws a party for King Hugo LXIX of le Connard Dynasty
>The party is going great and the Seigneur complements the king on his excellent cooking, the king complements him back, especially loving the accent of cinnamon and note of chocolate on the 7000 ingredient plum pudding
>The Seigneur is utterly embarrassed, as the accent was meant to be chocolate and the note of cinnamon
>He flees out of the dining room and attempts suicide in his bedroom no less than fifteen times, finally dying when the bullet was shot out of the gun, bounced on the golden statue, bounced again on the steel plate le butler was holding when he opened the door and accidentally hits him on the back of the head.
>His son, Seigneur Louis Hon-Hon sarkozy Toulouse Martinique Oublié Fesses Nique Baise le nichon de Ma Cul de Haute Lorraine l'Autre l'Enfant swears vengeance for his father
>Raises up a peasant force of 10,000 men, led by le butler
>King Hugo LXIX flees, his personal swiss guard fighting back the host of peasants
>In the pitch of battle, I, the cook, walks out and declares that I've invented 300 new recipes and 30 million variations upon them since the king had arrived, which everyone must try
>The battle ceases and everyone enjoys the new meals, which become the foundation of an obscure cuisine in the remote reaches of Vietnam and Lebanon today
>As thanks, the King shares his private stash of wine made from grapes grown in Hungarian fields sown with pig anal glands and covered with beaver shit before being allowed to ferment
>Casualties: Seigneur Louis Hon-Hon sarkozy Toulouse Martinique Oublié Fesses Nique Baise le nichon de Ma Cul de Haute Lorraine l'Autre, 20.000 peasants from toulouse and britanny,1 swiss guard who died of old age, 7 hundred ostriches and 2 bird species rendered extinct in the preparing of the meal
>mfwPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: 1620188567162.jpeg (41.27 KB, 474x316, digital_archive.jpeg)


I've made a backup of the bunkerchan.net /edu/ and /tech/ boards, since a couple of users mentioned that there were still some useful semi-active threads.
This is a direct offline mirror, those two boards should work properly. To enter, open /edu/index.html or /tech/index.html.
https://anonfiles.com/f4zd85u7u9/bunkerchan-edutech-archive_zip (about 400MB)

Let me know if there are any issues.gentooGentoo


Nice, bumping.


Trying to download it but it keeps sending me to pop ups and downloads random shit


For real? I swear that site was fine last time I checked. Sorry.


When I have JavaScript turned off, it didn't give any ad pop-ups but if I have JS enabled it did until I clicked again. That site used to be the go-to but now it's flooded with ads and google trackers.
Anyone know a better long-term upload site?


File: 1633626221860.jpeg (201.14 KB, 2000x1432, nothingtoseehere.jpeg)

>The file you are looking for does not exist!


Any one else seen of the scandel that collegeboard has gotten itself into?

Long story short, because of coronachan, they did AP exams online, problem is that they had every person in the world take them at the same time, including international students who had to take them very early in the morning like 2 AM.

What should be done about this? Collegeboard also seems to have monopolized education because of the fact that every university and college requires people to take the SAT which collegeboard owns

My idea would be for the government to not recognize it as a nonprofit anymore by taxing the shit out of them.
If they end up raising the prices of their tests, it would prove our point that they are a greedy company in disguise, or its gonna force them to just plain admit that they are a company, and that they will cut back on test costs to gain their nonprofit status back.

Either way fuck this greedy company, Collegeboard is one of the higher powers that is fucking up the American education system
4 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


It ain't free once you get to college bud.


>what is community college
>what are scholarships (that you can get from CC and the fucking SAT)
you know, thats actually the best part about the US education system. you can get scholarships and stuff for *free* at a time in your life when your choices are the most conscious and under your control. you can also go to college easily if you dropped out.
compare this to a lot of countries in yurop, where if you didn't get good grades in an even more arbitrary exam than the SAT that is not free in access (only accessible through the school system), you get fucked out of your scholarship AND have to frequent high school again for at least another year so you get accepted into college. this easily happens if you're poor, have a bad environment, abusive parents, etc; literally outside of your control. so much for meritocracy right?


>AND have to frequent high school again for at least another year so you get accepted into college.
because you're expected to know some things before university. a third of college graduates in the US are illiterate. not even joking, look it up.


Yo i'm trying to look this up and im not finding anything that links to the study. Help??




nevermind i found it. Holy shit.

File: 1632842296161.jpg (167.45 KB, 2058x1672, e3a.jpg)


Give me a guide to learning philosophy, starting with the Greeks all up to our current era. Preferably, I would stick with the most prominent thinkers of their epoch. You guys probably have an infographic for that, right?
1 post omitted. Click reply to view.


I'll check that out


File: 1632852823901.pdf (2.29 MB, 232x300, lit-guide-phil.pdf)

This one has good recs. Maybe pick and choose from it since it's so extensive.



I'm in the process of reading this, but what should I do afterwards?


File: 1630868237667.jpg (952.98 KB, 1458x1977, Trofim_Lysenko_portrait.jpg)

 No.7295[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

i'm curious to learn about him, how catastrophic was he for soviet agriculture or was he actually not all that bad? i'd appreciate some reading material about this matter too thanks
155 posts and 29 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


This person is very naive. Mainly, in assuming that scientists who opposed Lysenko were honest scientists who pursued their own theory. No, they were careerists who got put under the charge of a honest scientist who promoted other honest scientists, instead of careerists and cronies.

Stalin's great transformation of nature, digging of many new channels, raising dams, new hydroelectric plants, shelterbelts along those new waterways, huge growth of forests all over the South and into the Kazakhstan to combat hot winds from Soviet deserts - all of that was one big policy, Lysenko was an integral part of. Remember how randoms come all the time to these threads with the "lol planting together multiple trees will murder most of the seeds! Look how dumb Lysenko was!", meanwhile in real reality, the idea was to create a treeline sturdy enough to withstand and alter winds near the ground, so, planting trees closely in experiments produced tightly-knit crown that did exactly what was needed, so, henceforth Soviets planted treelines between their fields closely, multiple kinds of trees and shrubs in a certain order, highly-scientifically. They dug ponds to for enriching the soil, breeding fish and cooling the ground.

Now then, with all this context, imagine a scientist attacking Lysenko. Why is that scientist so dumb that he doesn't understand what Lysenko was working towards, and producing results in? How can a honest scientist be so hell-bent on attacking the dumbest strawman possible? Just look at what happened INSTEAD OF Stalin's - and Lysenko's - transformation of nature - Virgin Lands campaign, headed by those scientists finally freed from Lysenko's tyranny!

<“As a result of many years of work, Dubinin“ enriched ”science with the“ discovery ”that in the composition of the fly population among fruit flies in Voronezh and its environs during the war there was an increase in the percentage of flies with some chromosomal differences and a decrease in other fruit flies with other differences in chromosomes.

Look at this shit. Those are honest scientists who merely pursued their own theory, alright.


File: 1632278240424.png (4.59 MB, 1334x750, Senegal Permaculture.png)

Speaking of all this feel free to read the page I werked on: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Plan_for_the_Transformation_of_Nature
and add to leftypedia in general, a Permaculture page is needed >>>/edu/6950


Regardless of how vindicated or not you think he is, isn't it a bad idea to bet your agricultural produce on a largely untested and unproven method? Like, we all knew about ways that would work in the meantime. Even if his ideas had merit it makes more sense to first test and refine them.


>bet your agricultural produce on a largely untested and unproven method?
None of Lysenko's ideas got put into widespread use before, during or after the 1932-34 famine, and the Great Patriotic War interrupted further things until 1947.


Why was this shizo thread moved here? Are the jannies infracels?


Not quite short enough to be reused easily, and not quite long enough to be a novel. Any overly-long greentext can go here too, I guess.

On Technodefeatism

>I’ve noticed in the past few years that there’s a trend among both libertarian socialist types and even supposed ‘anarchists’ which I’ve come to call “technodefeatism”. Broadly, the tenants of technodefeatism are as follows 1. Revolution is not coming, 2. Technological advances in fields like automation will soon bring about a post-scarcity society 3. Therefore, our goal should be to make things livable until that post-scarcity society comes about through things like environmental protection and social welfare. Technodefeatism is a cancerous trend that must be catalogued and extirpated as it tempts discouraged activists away from revolutionary activity and towards lethargy. I’ll attempt here to outline the tendency and give some thoughts on how best to combat it.

>This pessimism on its own is familiar to most people on the left. It’s what’s known as ‘doomerism’; a sort of intense, all-encompassing pessimism regarding the future. Technodefeatism goes further than mere doomerism, though, because it purports to offer a solution. This solution is to do… nothing! That’s the beauty of technodefeatism: it doesn’t require any major change from the status quo. It doesn’t ask anything of us; it doesn’t require us to risk anything. It presents itself as an inevitability; as a ‘safe bet’ (as opposed to the very unsafe bet of armed struggle).

>This confidence comes from its adherence to a principle which is, at its core, liberal in origin. Namely, that capitalism spurs innovation which leads us inexorably towards greater progress. The main focus of technodefeatism is automation and robotics technology, although AI plays a role in some technodefeatist thinking. The idea is that as capitalist society moves towards greater and greater automation, the need for wage labor will slowly dissolve given the availability of cheaper robotic labor. Because nobody needs to work anymore, and because capitalists no longer need to extract surplus value from humans to profit, we will be able to live in
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


How many times from 1850 to 1990 did America engage in coup d’états of foreign states?

Overthrow of Hawaiian government in 1893.

Organized regime change in Puerto Rico and Cuba in 1898.

Organized regime change in The Philipines 1899.

They were a part of the coalition that crushed the Chinese boxer rebellion (1898-1901).

They helped to "cut" Panama from Colombia.

From 1900 to 1925 - invaded middle America states numerous times, especially Honduras and Nicaragua.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


I can write about Yugoslav resistance movement. But I will give a broad picture so everything can be understood better.

Yugoslavia was under the dictatorship of King Alexander since 1929 and until his death (he was assassinated in Marseilles in 1934). Before and after that the Yugoslav "democratic" system was weak. For example the elections after 1934 looked like this: the voter came to the polling station where he had to say his name out loud and who he was voting for and then the members of the voting commission registered his vote.

There was also the great depression which affected Yugoslavia deeply, also the peasant population (more than 70 % of the population back then), there was civil unrest and many strikes in 1935-1936, there were also national tensions, primarily between Serbs and Croats. Also, communists existed (that will be very important later on) and had a great illegal network of operations because they were banned as a party and many of its members were assassinated by the government and many others were brutally tortured in what were basically concentration camps.

The state relied heavily on France and Britain (WW1 allies of Serbs), but in the 30's it also started leaning towards Nazi Germany, however each government tried its best to stay neutral in the European conflicts - but by 1941 the government gave up under the pressure and signed the tripartite pact with Italy, Germany and Japan. Massive protests of the population sprung up because of this and a coup was carried out by a Serbian general, backed by the Brits. This pissed of Hitler and Germany decided to invade Yugoslavia. The fighting was over in like 14 days, the army saw many sabotages (Croatians were killing their Serbian officers, Croatians officers gave up weapons immediately or instructed their soldiers to just go home). Yugoslavia was divided among Hungary, Italy and Germany and it basically ceased to exist de facto. The Germans and Italians also supported the Croat Ustaši and they supported their state NDH (Independend Croatian State), which was pretty much a puppet state. Similarly, all Slovenian "legal" parties decided they don't wanna fight against nazi and fascist occupation, but that they want to work together with them - but they didn't even get a puppet state, Slovenian lands were de jure and de facto incorporated into Italy, Hungary and Germany.

The communists were the only force that called out to the people to start an armed rPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


The instability in the Balkans goes back to the falling might of the Ottoman empire since the 19th century. Balkan nations and then the states they established fought over the questions of borders - 1st Balkan war, 2nd Balkan war. Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia were part of Austria-Hungary and they fought for the central powers in WW1, while Serbia fought on the side of the entente (it is true that many south slavic volunteers from Austria-Hungary joined the Serbian army).

After the war the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was established, which was renamed into the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1929 when king Alexander established a dictatorship. The Serbian elite saw this post war state as a means to achieve a "Great Serbia" and this always clashed with the autonomy tendencies of Croats and Slovenes. Serbs wanted a strongly centralized state while Croats and Slovenes wanted a federal state. The tensions were particularly high between Croats and Serbs which culminated in the assassination/murder of the Croatian political leader Radić by a Serb mp, who was tied strongly with the court. Dictatorship was established after this incident and many thousand political prisoners were murdered and brutally tortured by the regime.

By this time also the Croat ultra nationalist ultra catholic movement called The Ustasi gained prominence and together with other groups they orchestrated the assassination of King Alexander in Marseilles in 1934. The Ustaše wanted an independent Croatian state. Their leader was Ante Pavelić, living in fascist Italy in exile and was influenced by Italian fascism. By 1939 the Serbs and Croats came to an agreement to grant huge autonomy to Croatia.

When Yugoslavia tried to sign the tripartite pact mass demonstrations broke out and a coup was carried out by a Serb army general with the support of the British. When Germany invaded Yugoslavia, which had a relatively massive army, the Croats sabotaged the military as they saw this invasion as a means to destroy Yugoslavia and establish an independent state. And an independent Croatian puppet state was indeed established (NDH), ruled by Pavelić's Ustaše and the catholic church. The Ustaše regime carried out horrible crimes and violence against Serbs, also Romas, jews and others - the Ustaše commited the worst war crimes of the war, at least in Europe, but probably even worse than what the Japan unit did in China. They slaughtered people, the Ustaše catholic priests carriePost too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1633003492067.png (62.46 KB, 600x600, wadidijusread.png)

>socialist regimes


it was as question posed by a liberlul

 No.670[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

What is your favorite book?

What book influenced you the most?

What do you like about books?

what are you planning to read?

What are you reading now?

Saw this in /hobby/ but thought it fit more here
185 posts and 35 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>What is your favorite book?

That's cliché, but the first volume of Capital. It really is a total book that reunites all my fav. "genres" : at the same time victorian scientific investigation, historical study, full of Hegel influence coupled a caustic but militant style and even unconscious apocalyptic undertone.

> What book influenced you the most?

See above.

>What do you like about books?

I learn stuff and I like to be emotionally moved by a good prose.

>In fiction, probably Germinal (yeah i never read it…), in essays empiriomonism from Bodganov.

>What are you reading now?

I reread a book from Georges Darien called "the Pharisians", basically a satire of Edouard Drumont. At the same time I read the awful best-seller of the most famous far-right french journalist and soon presidential candidate Eric Zemmour.


Off butchered my post, oh well


I'm dying fuck
fr why is the op image arousing


Zamenhof was a handsome man.



>In the study of language, description or descriptive linguistics is the work of objectively analyzing and describing how language is actually used (or how it was used in the past) by a speech community.
A language, its rules and words should be determined by the collective people who use it and not by academic institutions and scholars
ignore the semi-cringy comic btw it was the best pic I could find as OP
7 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Descriptive > Prescriptive but I think what >>356 said is right as well. To learn a language you need prescriptivsm. But having a purely prescriptive approach in language teaching is cancer.




>A language, its rules and words should be determined by the collective people who use it and not by academic institutions and scholars
Yeah no that's inane bullshit. Words do not arise from nothing and neither do their meanings. Linguists and academic definitions of language are used to determine the etymological origin of a word and thus it's original meaning. For a new meaning, a new word based on the rules of alphabets, language and their spelling/grammar a priori.
This "fugg uthority" idea on language is childish liberalism that is completely ignorant on the process of language and definition formation.
Obviously academia is riddled with ideologues that can make imprecise definitions and the like, but that does not discount academic definitions in and of themselves.
The comic is cringe, but also goes directly against your OP idea, and rightly so, those that use words without understanding their meanings are inane or ignorant.

Caring about ANOTHER language =/= dismissing definitions in a dictionary.


>A language, its rules and words should be determined by the collective people who use it and not by academic institutions and scholars
The OP is probably gone, someone bumped the thread. The ignorance I see still surprises me. It would have taken OP twenty seconds to look up how dictionaries, especially OED, are constructed.

The OED was a crowd-source attempt to catalogue every word in the English language, its etymology and its use/definition throughout the years. People were asked to send in words, their definitions and the context in which they appear, as well as the written work were they appear. Even today, dictionaries do not dictate how words are used, only dweebs say they do so they can argue semantics. Dictionaries reflect the language in use. For example, Merriam-Webster has "ya'll" in the dictionary because of its widespread use in the southern United States [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/y%27all], while Oxford English Dictionary has the word "yeet" in it, because people use it/write it [https://www.lexico.com/definition/yeet]

>Words do not arise from nothing and neither do their meanings. Linguists and academic definitions of language are used to determine the etymological origin of a word and thus it's original meaning. For a new meaning, a new word based on the rules of alphabets, language and their spelling/grammar a priori.

This "fugg uthority" idea on language is childish liberalism that is completely ignorant on the process of language and definition formation.
This is a bunch of hogwash, because language and its definitions are determined by its speakers/users, not by academics in ivory towers. That poster doesn't know what they're talking about.


File: 1632798167777.png (3.21 MB, 1224x909, ClipboardImage.png)

So, if discard a dictionaries' definition of, say, socialism, how then i'm an supposed to define it? Under Marx's view? Under the view of utopian socialists? According to Hitler, Mises, boomers or 14yo me? Based on what most people currently think?

File: 1613867468946.jpg (29.77 KB, 363x480, cat.jpg)


Thread for PDFs related to the 'Anti-Anglo reading group - left deviation'
75 posts and 75 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Van Horn, Mirowski, & Stapleford (eds.) – Building Chicago Economics. New Perspectives on the History of America’s Most Powerful Economics Program (Cambridge; Historical Perspectives on Modern Economics, 2011)



Later Ionian & Athenian Thinkers, Part 2 [Atomists] {cor.} (Harvard; Loeb Classical Library 530, 2016)



Gerson & Inwood (eds.) – The Epicurus Reader (Hackett, 1994)

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 ]
[ 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 / 27 / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 ]
| Catalog | Home