/edu/ - Education

>>21009
all of Mao
Zhijiang Xinyu
Political Theology, Schmitt
Ho Chi Minh - Report On The National And Colonial Questions At The 5th International
Doctrine of the Mean
Nixon in China libretto

>>21010
Already knew this was going to be first post.
We need more obscure maoists!
>>21542
I have seen books triying to rationalize their actions (and inactions) but being Pro, not even from them tbh.

>>21210
Seconding this, just replace Gonzalo with Cockshott.
Also crazy this hasn't been linked yet (MLM library canon of ebooks, has hosted virtual conferences interviewing prominent Maoists internationally, check their youtube): https://foreignlanguages.press/

>philosophy
Lol. This is pretty much the only useful thing written by Althusser.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1964/marxism-humanism.htm

>>21693
Bitch, did you read anything after the first dot?

>>21693
There's nothing marxist about talking of colonization when the whole world has already achieved a capitalist mode of production nor is simping for a country against another country just because they're poorer.

David Harvey is an economist, he calls himself a geographer because that's who employs him. Marxist economists get kicked out of economics departments, so they establish themselves in geography. There are lots of Marxist geographers, who are just economists that draw pretty maps of economic stuff from a Marxist lens.

>>21696
a bad economist and an even worse marxist lol

>>21679
read lenin retard

The reason Taiwanese Aboriginals today predominantly live in the highlands is that, when the Han Chinese settled Taiwan, they killed and expelled the ones in the lowlands. For hundreds of years, the Chinese in Taiwan killed Aboriginals. They even ate their flesh, believing it had medicinal properties: https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%AA%E8%86%8F (use Google Translate). As you can imagine, this bred resentment among the Aboriginals, who therefore vote for the KMT against the Benshengren-dominated DPP.

Also why does this Ainu man look like a mixed Native American/Polynesiasn?

>>21846
some Taiwanese Aborigines weirdly look more caucasoid than typical east asians

>>21815
put me in the screencap

>>21526
> Like another anon said, insofar as there are children in need of legal guardians for natural reasons, then allowing queer couples and individuals to adopt is helpful to the problem. [no i dont have studies :,( ]
It's actually a much bigger deal than that (prepare to get mad when you learn this). As it happens, people seeking to adopt children (heterosexual couples primarily of course), one of the main factors in deciding to adopt is the desirability of "fashionability" if you will of the child in question. Prospective adopters are NOT SHY about telling agencies or the foster care system what kind of children they DO NOT WANT - disabled, nonwhite, "problem" behavior, history of trauma, etc. It's OVERWHELMINGLY the LGBT couples who are willing to adopt children in the "undesirable" category, presumably because, you know, we can relate.

>>21826
>There is a reason why every single corporation support gay rights and BLM.
They do not. You made that up.
>They don't hurt profit. An united working class does.
Even assuming this is strictly true, that doesn't really say anything about what the socialist movement should have to say/do regarding LGBT people, or anything else for that matter. Being concerned with "hurting profit" isn't even really a socialist concern - what matters is fomenting and leveraging the conditions that will lead to proletarian revolution and an overturning of capitalism. "Hurting profit" is at most subordinate to that goal, and using it as a criterion to dismiss a group of people (who by the way tend to be on average a lot more radical than the typical worker) is an extreme vulgarization and stupid on its face. What an embarrassing thing to think, let alone post.

>>21460
> Do we talk about "cancer patient liberation"?
yeah it's called health care

>>21460
>Transgender is a term for a medical condition called body dysmorphia
It's called gender dysphoria, not body dysmorphia, those are distinct disorders with different symptoms and are classified differently in the DSM-5. To put it shortly, body dysmorphia is excessive worrying about someone's body and this may or may not coexist with gender dysphoria.
According to the DSM-5, body dysmorphia is classified under "Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders" while gender dysphoria is given it's own heading.
Please refer to the DSM-5 for more details.
>for which the best treatment we have now is gender re-assignment surgery
There is no "best treatment" for gender dysphoria, and SRS is not an appropriate treatment for all patient, in fact SRS is the last treatment that is offered to patients when all other treatment options fail:
<It is important to understand that, at reputable gender identity clinics, sex reassignment is not the first treatment offered to patients, but rather, it is the last. At the CAMH Gender Identity Clinic, for example, patients are required to live full-time as the opposite sex for two years before they are even considered eligible for surgery; our requirements further specify that patients must work, attend school, or perform bona fide charity work in the cross-gender role during this trial period, and that they must provide us with documentation proving they have done so. This requirement alone screens out the 80% of new referrals whose gender dysphoria is clearly not strong enough to merit sex reassignment, and gives the other 20% plenty of time to decide whether life in the cross-gender role is, in fact, a substantial improvement over life in their original gender role.
Source: http://individual.utoronto.ca/ray_blanchard/psychiatry_rounds.pdf

>>21725
Glowpedia source doesn't require refuting

If he was a retard then why did the GDR make that cool ass movie about him with the great ending? Didn't think of that, did you OP, you faggot?

>>8223
Source? Also, I'd like to learn how the transition from parliaments to soviets happened and how it work.

>>8221
>>8225
>>8227
>>8228
Ooooh boys I love this debate, this is the real heart of the thread. Too bad it's a short argument. These two lines indicate wildly diverging strategies going forward; on the one hand, independent working class institutions that must be based only on their own strength and able to weather the severe repression and reactionary climate they will engender, versus mixed class institutions with a working class mass base, the goal of which being the channeling of working class needs and desires, for immediate gains, including immediate control of the wider political climate, which they hope to keep mild. Isn't this basically THE political question of our time? (and also of a century ago…)

IMO it's wrong to say that the social democrats built up proletarian institutions; they were supported by unions, and they offered concessions which helped their mass base, but they were not interested in revolutionizing their members, or in actively building the infrastructure necessary for proletarian rule. They were more or less populists, drawing on a proletarian base, but a base of supporters rather than a base of members. The leashed left is ultimately on a deadline, because their politics won't be relevant forever. Eventually the compromise that undergirds them will fall apart, as they threaten bourgeois power. Either they threaten from a position of revolutionary proletarian power, independent institutions, or they do it from a position of bourgeois power, and that can simply be taken from them [and a third option, which they went with, was to try to maintain the concessions granted while not further antagonizing the bourgeoisie. This failed, and left both workers and bourgeoisie unsatisfied]. If the limp left chooses option one, they accelerate the freefall into violent repression. If they choose option two, they lifelessly allow it, but potentially spare themselves and let the communists, minorities, and international working class take the hit for them.

Ultimately I think we should look in the far opposite direction - rather than a wide class coalition betwPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

The KPD became politically useless after the 1923 insurrections failed and the Weimar Republic became more and more right wing and authoritarian. After that point, it was only natural for the Stalinists in the Comintern and idiots like Thalmann to take it over and steer the party in an increasingly wacky, revisionist direction. If they hadn't, then someone else would have.

P.s. By materialist i mean left like leftypol

>>21759
some parties or orgs publish theses, these will have been worked on by multiple people before being agreed upon. That's where I'd look.

>Can there be a proletarian nationalist revolution
no
>according to lenin
if so then he'd be a revisionist
>I've seen people argue that nationalism is reactionary
it is
>and that it advocates for class-collaboration instead of workers revolution
not inherently, but even with that it'd be useless

nationalism is gay. if you are a nationalist you like men and u are gay. you like pride parades, flags, butch dudes marching, and idpol and big manly leader to overpower u. thats gay. GAAAAY. u are a faggot OP.

>>21811
I agree!

>>19846
I'm onto volume 2 and there's nobody on here to discuss it with

>>20045
I'd rather not wade through it again, to be honest my comprehension of it is lacking compared to volume one, but I probably should.

I think this topic is worthy of sending a thread off the bottom of the catalogue.

Want to make a new thread about it here in /edu/?

i already read entire Vol1 more than year ago. I have no started Vol2 still. Probably lot of anons in same situation. Lets start with Vol2 now

What is relative surplus value? Idk, it sounds like something to do with prices but I can't really wrap my head around how it is different from normal surplus value.

Reposting an effortpost from a while back about Super-Profit

Let’s say that the average television takes 1 hour to make. 1 hour is the SNLT for televisions. But the owner of the ACME TV factory invests in some fancy new machines that make his workers twice as productive. They can now make a television in 30 minutes. They are producing way below the SNLT. This allows ACME to produce twice as many televisions in the same amount of time.

Now if ACME sold their new TV at half the old price they wouldn’t make any more money than before and there would have been no point in investing in all that new stuff. Rather than sell them at their individual value (30 minutes) they continue to sell them at the SNLT (1 hour), or perhaps just under the SNLT in order to out-sell their rivals. Because the price of TVs hasn’t changed significantly there is still the same demand from consumers for TVs, but now there is a giant surplus of TVs on the market because ACME has been making twice as many TVs. ACME’s rivals won’t be able to sell all of their TVs. Part of their product will go unsold. Meanwhile ACME will sell most of their TVs at the SNLT, making not just their normal profit, but an additional “super-profit” because they sold their TVs above their individual values by selling at or near the SNLT.

Profit vs. super-profit

Profit comes from exploiting workers. The only way to turn money into more money is to invest it in workers, or to be precise, in labor power, the only commodity which can produce more value than it costs. (This is all covered in the video “Law of Value 5: Contradictions”.) When ACME sells TVs at under the SNLT they don’t just reap their normal profits from exploiting workers. They also get super-profits: profit appropriated in exchange because their TVs are made at under the SNLT.

It is this race for super-profits that drives much of the technological dynamism of a capitalist society as capitalists compete to constantly lower SNLT. By doing so capitalists don’t just exploit value from workers. They also appropriate value in exchange.

https://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2010/09/21/law-of-value-6-socially-necessary-labor-time/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hb6dPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>21744
Does your own consciousness exist?

>What is consciousness?
An unknown process crafted by natural selection, that is necessary for our mind to function properly.
>>21744
I think we can assume its existence, because we can all experience its symptoms. The goal should be to observe the process.

If anyone could post a time machine link to the previous threads that would be great.

>>21769
Ah thanks, I totally overlooked that.
Also a link to the first thread https://archive.ph/LSgow