/edu/ - Education

>>9701
This is what he does, he reads articles on stream and he reads them well. What a weak piece of "evidence".

Lots of cope in this thread. Why is this in /edu/?

>>9903
It started out as a relevant thread and then got derailed.

>>9701
The accused person in question does not have many opinions in common with the Infrared Collective except interest in conservative philosophy, which is not very abnormal, even on the far left. Marcuse and Adorno spoke positively of those thinkers, for example. And a germ theory of ideology is a silly sort of cancel culture, that if prosecuted to the end totally would warrant the cancellation of Marx himself.

>>4513
> Post capitalism and we gain no pleasure from our fake relationships with pets, dogs will just go extinct
<Ignoring historicity of animals/human cohabitation
Man, going back through these old threads is like a fever trip. I cant believe I was duped by such a pseud view point

Post >>18236 in the debunk thread has a wide list of sources anon, enjoy.
t.Stalinbro

>>20448
Also here, history of the Soviets/Bolsheviks between 1917 and 1924. Not perfect but a fairly decent set of books

>>20449
Famine of 1932 some basic reading, the first pdf is the most important.

>>20450
Soviet Democracy by Pat Sloan (I used to talk regularly with his son).
And Anne Louise Strong's dismissal of the claim of "Dictatorship"

Pdf 3 is also related to the 1932 famine.

Does anyone have any good sources on War Communism? I just want to learn the philosophy behind it and how it was implemented, and its faults and successes.

Reposting from /siberia/. I don't agree with it wholly but it's an interesting post nontheless
A 'god' does not need to exist or be believed in:
- To be pondered: you have an idea of what a god is.
- To have spread that very idea.
- For one to engage with the question of weather or not it could and/or does exist, or that it couldn't and/or not or doesn't exist. These being the same concept with a different value assigned to it.
- To have pondered the concept of 'belief': you have an idea of what belief is
- To do the previous but in terms of belief
- To occupy in part or in full a train of thought. This doesn't need to be your primary train of thought.
- To be associated with other concepts.
- To, in doing the previous, influence how those that do engage with the previous may engage with a subject, not necessarily with the consent of any involved party.
- To do the previous without other parties knowing that one party contributed to a discussion or done something whilst under this influence.
- To have material interests as an active participant as thus established.
- The aforementioned concepts with values assigned to them do not need specific values assigned to them. A 'god' shaped hole would possibly be even more of a threat, since it would no longer bound by the rules that would apply to it if those values were 'true.'
- To have in it's aforementioned material interests the elevation of it's influence regardless what form it would have after as long as the previous stands.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>2306
>commodity fetishism is magic
<reading marx poorly

Anon you realize that marx does not mean "fetishism" in a manner that is complementary

He's literally calling it a form of misrecognition

ITT people who are bad at critical thinking attempt to justify irrational beliefs with half-assed epistemological relativism and not enough people smack them down

>>2179
Nothing is supernatural. I hate those terms like metaphysics.

>>20545
>>20546
U Mad lol

>>11086
Footage of an attempt to resuscitate the bodies of the Soyuz 11 crew. They were buried in the Kremlin Wall Necropolis near Yuri Gagarin. The Soyuz was extensively re-designed for safety, protocols were updated to require a spacesuit be worn at all times, the Sokol spacesuit was designed in response as well.

I have some good material on Soviet space satellite innovations. I'll post them soon

In relation to space efforts, can anyone post a pdf of Gordon, Yefim; Gunston, Bill (2000). Soviet X-Planes? I'm having a hard time finding it.

>>18236
Forgot to look into, the author linked a reading list as well in the doc.
I found it, along a list of snapshots, and a snapshot to use:
>Original Link
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18LdrYaUtaBsi_sTERnBV2Xj7szwKUAdO8serQAUCS5A/

>List of snapshots
<http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://docs.google.com/document/d/18LdrYaUtaBsi_sTERnBV2Xj7szwKUAdO8serQAUCS5A/*

>Best snapshot
<http://web.archive.org/web/20210530111820/https://docs.google.com/document/d/18LdrYaUtaBsi_sTERnBV2Xj7szwKUAdO8serQAUCS5A/mobilebasic

>Pdf of doc
<File rel

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>20058
"""funny""" how the main google docs link and also the links in the google docs is """unavailable"""

>>18235
>>18236
>>20058
OP here (and the google docs link poster) thanks for finding the stuff, I didn't realize the doc was dead.

>>4269
Is there another link to read this? My browser just keeps resending the captcha. Unless I'm supposed to solve like 4 of them?? Annoying af

>>20526
It's archive.is going to shit. Try opening it in Tor.

>>20530
Checked. I liked No Longer Human when I read it a few years ago. I haven't read anything else by him though.

OBLOMOV

Maybe you're like that because you want to be like that.

>>20528
Well, Goethe's The Sorrow of Young Werther was very influential in it's time. Check out the wiki page on it.

>>20532
Oblomov is a beautiful novel I wouldn't be opposed to reading again. I recommend it any anons reading this.
>>20534
Meme answer. I read that one in high school (of my own choice, not assigned reading). If you can't sympathize with or relate to Werther, it becomes very dull reading, which was the case for me.

If one considers Nazi Germany socialist for using dirigisme during a war, then one must consider the Allied powers just as if not more so; therefore, the word "socialism" loses all practical meaning.

>>20514
I remember hearing once that Hitler supposedly claimed in a dinner that the result of the five year plans Stalin introduced created an industrial goliath "greater than even the Reichswerke Hermann Göring."

Now, presuming this is real it's not entirely out of the ordinary and reflects the frankly bizarre relationship Fascism had with the USSR; it was equal parts realpolitik and also the arbitrary whims of the various Fascist dictators. ᴉuᴉlossnW, for example, claimed that Stalin had essentially created "Russian Fascism" or "National Bolshevism" during their initial years trading with one another. Funny enough I think ᴉuᴉlossnW even claimed that Stalin's own purge of his political enemies was not all that different from his, the difference was that Stalin being the Russian "Leader" was thus influenced by some "Mongol Spirit" and was reflected in him ordering mass executions, whereas Italians used the more "refined" and "civilized" method of forcing individuals to drink castor oil and shit out their innards in order to publicly humiliate them.

It should be noted that Fascists tried to apply at least some kind of bizarre "Fascist Analysis" to Stalin. For example, I believe it was Ribbentrop who excitedly claimed that, in fact, Stalin was a nationalist who was going to build a "Great Russia" of sorts. He elaborated (or maybe it was Hitler himself) that there was in fact a wedge within the Communist movement that on one side had Stalin as some sort of "modern day Genghis Khan" (the context in which it was in implied that was a positive thing) who would expand Russia's power and territory, versus Trotskyist "Internationalists" who sought to ferment global revolution and were part of some international Jewish Conspiracy. Essentially they saw "Socialism in One Country" as not altogether contradictory with what Fascists wanted, and Fascists themselves liked to think they were "pragmatists" who could take bits and pieces from liberalism or socialism to "make it work."

Hitler's own opinion on Stalin, while colored by the fact that he was on meth and would vasscillate wildly between one statement or another, was that himself, ᴉuᴉlossnW, and Stalin were the three most historically significant figures of the 20th century. Which, I mean, given the level of power Stalin was perceived as having within the USSR, makes sense from a Fascist perspectivePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>Stalin and Hitler were the same
We’ve known this

Hitler praised everything from Islam to the British Empire to the America's westward expansion. He was, like many modern fascists, a fanboy for everything perceived to be strong/masculine with no regard for ideological consistency or coherence.

Stalin was BASED. Stalin's "dictatorship" was exaggerated by CIA. Stalin rejected his own cult of personality and viewed it as a relic of Russian peasant backwardness, but the party forced it on him anyways. Stalin wanted to form an anti-fascist alliance with the capitalist states of Europe, but they rejected his olive branch, because they were thirsty for the genocide of slavs, jews, roma, and the death of socialism in general. They allowed hitler to commit the holocaust to own stalin, and then at the last minute, when stalin bought time with the M-R pact, while fighting fascist Finland, those same capitalist states created a myth that Stalin and Hitler were best friends. Nothing is more devious, more reactionary, than the myth that Stalin and Hitler are twin dictators. You might as well be a holocaust denier and a nazi if you suggest this, so blind do you have to be to history.

>>11097
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing. He is notably understanding in his statement on the growing civil war, even though he gives reserved support for Garcia. Of course from the PCP's point of view, they found this non-sufficient, as they were building force to overthrow the bourgeois state of Peru.
>>11417
Pointless to throw around words you can't define

>>10832
Thanks anon, some nice pdfs right there

These books are expensive as shit on Amazon Kindle, even for us in the Philippines.

These are Ka Joma's writings, by topic. They go from the 1960s to before his death in 2022.

Parts 1-3 are easily findable online so I won't upload them.

>All the members of an Iroquois gens were personally free, and they were bound to defend each other's freedom; they were equal in privileges and in personal rights, the sachem and chiefs claiming no superiority; and they were a brotherhood bound together by the ties of kin. Liberty, equality, and fraternity, though never formulated, were cardinal principles of the gens. These
facts are material, because the gens was the unit of a social and governmental system, the foundation upon which Indian society was organized…. It serves to explain that sense of independence and personal dignity universally an attribute of Indian character. xvi
I do have my issues with Graeber, but here a turn to him is apt.

Graeber is well worth reading, I'll find .epubs or .pdf's in a bit hopefully.

If anybody has Graeber .pdfs and would dump them here that would be much appreciated.

As Graeber says the europeans did not invent the enlightenment, you can trace its origins back to Native Americans

Fug

Bit late, but I'm going to keep grovelling through Chapter 3, there's always more depth with this book.