[ 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


so what does this board have to offer
15 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


This board mainly offers books


any recommendations


File: 1616535254024.png (530.23 KB, 1920x1080, MIA marxist introduction.png)



Faggot, please!!!!read_a_fucking_bookRead a Fucking Book


Whatever happened to the free/open culture movement?
In the late 00's there was this big push against copyright law and in favor importing/adapting the values of free software to general culture and media but once we entered into the 10's it puffed away like if it had never existed.
I made this same thread on lainchan months ago and one of the answer said that "Copyright law became more flexible and managed to adapt to the internet making Creative Commons and the like irrelevant" and that's truth, the issue now is if a free culture is still worth fighting for when it seems like content creators are protective as ever.
24 posts and 3 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


But the difference is that the rights you surrender are legal fiction while your computer is material reality. See the post above yours.


your ISP threatening to blacklist you and withhold service is also material reality


>Gavin Mueller
In a recent interview he compares the FOSS movement to the Luddite movement. While this is a take I've never heard before, the more I think about it the more it makes sense. https://novaramedia.com/2021/03/26/luddites-hackers-saboteurs/


Apparently Johan Söderberg shared similar sentiments in his 2008 book, Hacking Capitalism: The Free and Open Source Software Movement and later from Mueller's colleague, Maxigas in the Journal of Peer Production. Both are/were associated with the P2P Foundation.


File: 1617002109074.jpg (40.26 KB, 577x668, EJrdrChXYAIKzUF.jpg)

So in the end is an free culture still worth fighting for?

File: 1616267834768.jpeg (169.3 KB, 739x1024, download.jpeg)


Did the Renaissance change art only for the better?

For example, are there any negative things to say about the way music evolved during that period?

All I hear and read about Renaissance art (hell, anything to do with the period, for that matter) are positive things or at least it's talked about in a positive light. Zero criticisms of it whatsoever.


Kant and Heidegger critique Renaissance philosophy if that’s something you’re looking for

File: 1616265186692.png (69.81 KB, 753x326, ClipboardImage.png)


I've seen in a lot of leftist YouTube videos Communists typically respond to the "tragedy of the commons" argument by referring to the history of Europe and how lands that were actually held in common ownership had private property introduced by force to alienate people from their means of production. are there any books that elaborate on the history of private property in detail, with reference to specific political leaders, parties, and events?


I have a vague sense Maupin wrote a book on that but I could be wrong


I don’t see it. almost all of his books seem to be about modern politics based on their summaries, except City Builders which happens to reference (literally) ancient history. are you getting it mixed up with something else or is that it?


Ah isn't a book coming back to the thought I think it was a rant about the horrors of the seizure of the commons in one of his talks

File: 1616123613759.png (1.13 MB, 1280x1824, ClipboardImage.png)


spoonfeed me books on learning mandarin



File: 1616108617322.jpg (18.81 KB, 400x400, GTnUpITb_400x400.jpg)


how do I convince zoomers that watching YouTubers and streamers is not a substitute for reading original texts?
10 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1616591080921.png (1.02 MB, 2048x1409, 1615374445051.png)

This is essentially the question of how to get zoomers to understand their brains and their minds have been shattered by a universe of superfluous approaches to anything even slightly intellectual and constant flashing lights designed to distract them, and also how to help them break that cycle of distraction and start toughening their minds up to be able to handle anything more complex. Whether the topic is socialism or any other, watching youtube videos or streams is and always be an inadequate substitute for the real intellectual and mental nourishment found in books. I mean, really, the only meaningful course of action would be to find a way to help them improve their lives in general unironically. This can't be done over the internet. So, maybe approach zoomers in real life and try to impact their lives?!?
The fundamental fact about this kind of zoomer is that they HAVE to believe watching Vaush or Shaun or even listening to Chapo (as clear and straightforwardly as they present their content as purely entertainment), because reading for them is genuinely harder than for anyone who already has built that habit or just isn't stuck in the whirlwind of ADHD internet content! And, also important to remember is that reading probably it's gonna seem even harder than it really is before they actually do it, cause the human brain naturally recoils at being challenged to do something harder than it is accustomed to. Plus, many of them will have been presented with an exaggerated estimation of how hard reading actually is their whole lives, or at least have created that estimation for themselves in order to have an excuse to not do it.
Finally, it's good to regard that reading doesn't mean you have to read every volume of Capital (although the first is pretty mandatory IMO), all of Althusser's work, along with all of Cockshott, Hegel, Lenin, and all of Zizek and Chomsky to boot. Only some people will have that much interest and motivation, but really reading Capital Vol1 shouldn't be built up like some fuckin Everest only to be climbed by big-brains, it's really not that hard really.


>The fundamental fact about this kind of zoomer is that they HAVE to believe watching Vaush or Shaun or even listening to Chapo (as clear and straightforwardly as they present their content as purely entertainment)

Meant: HAVE to believe watching Vaush or Shaun or even listening to Chapo (as clear and straightforwardly as they present their content as purely entertainment) is an appropriate substitute for reading actual theory because reading for them is genuinely harder than for anyone who already has built that habit or just isn't stuck in the whirlwind of ADHD internet content!

>And, also important to remember is that reading probably it's gonna seem even harder than it really is before they actually do it

Meant: reading is gonna seem even harder than it really is, TO THEM before they actually do it


I'm building on the premise of interpolation.

We've all been raising under Capitalism and have, as a result, had the profit motive deeply ingrained into us. Here I slightly part from rigid marxist line, and say that the profit motive here isn't only economic; it's also libidinal, psychological. The question one asks once they look at a book is, is it worth it? Even if they know, and admit in conversation that they should read it, they won't. To appropriate a Marx qoute "they don't know it, but they're doing it" one could argue today, in a different context, that they do know, yet they're still not doing it. How do we get people to read, I think good videos do inspire the viewer to want to learn. It's somehow getting them to take the "plunge" which seems to be the insurmountable task.



Tell them that many of the key ideas of the books are already discussed in the internet, thus, making it easier for them to catch up. For example, telling them to take their time to learn some important economic concepts instead of diving right into Das Kapital; showing them what they'll encounter in a certain book; just preparation in general, makes it easier for them.


This is why starting them on a beginner text is good

File: 1615764846657.jpg (21.73 KB, 200x267, v.jpg)


I have a mate who's an Eastern European. He perceives himself as "self-made" because he escaped from childhood poverty in the 90s and he thinks other people could do the same if they "really" wanted. He also hates BLM because "African Americans have it better than any ex-USSR Slav just because they live in the US."

He's not a hardline right-winger, but a "classical liberal" who thinks it's meritocracy out there and laissez faire is cool and good for "resource distribution", while governments are obstructive and corrupt. He is open to learning, but I struggle to offer anything coherent beyond "read these 20 transcripts of the episodes of Citations Needed".

Please share some medium-sized books on:

1. How poverty kneecaps people on every level and becomes a vicious circle;

2. How the US keeps segregating and repressing its black population even after the Civil Rights movement (he's against slavery but thinks Black Americans could do better "if they wanted" because Slavs also had it bad a century ago);



For the memes Sakai, but there's Prejudential, and also plenty of books on how blacks were denied houses or driven out of places.


Has anyone read this book or knows something about it?
I heard about it some time ago and read a small part of it about bipolar disorder. It sounded fascinating but for some reason the book costs like 80 bucks so I cant afford. Is anyone able to provide a pdf or knows a place where one could get the book cheaper?


Have you tried libgen?


Not that anon, but I just checked and it is on libgen. Looks very interesting.
> An essential issue here is the continuing contested nature of “mental illness,” for there remains no proof that any “mental disorder” is a real, observable disease. Consequently, the “experts” still cannot distinguish the mentally ill from the mentally healthy. In fact, a recent attempt by the APA—the most powerful psychiatric body in the world—to defi ne mental illness was bluntly described by one of their most senior fi gures as “bullshit” (see discussion below). Accordingly, it also follows that no “treatment” has been shown to work on any specifi c “mental illness” and that there is no known causation for any disor-der. left_communismLeft Communism


kek, abandoning Freud wasn't enough to gain status of empirical science I see


Found it thx
I'm gonna read it and make an effortpost here


I just finished uploading scans of Andrew Hemingway's Artists on the Left: American Artists and the Communist Movement, 1926-1956 to the internet archive and thought some of you might appreciate it.

1 post omitted. Click reply to view.


muy basado


Cool stuff comrade, but I somehow thought you meant Ernest Hemmingway. Though if I remember correctly, Ernest was a Leftist too?


>Though if I remember correctly, Ernest was a Leftist too?
He was but as far as I know he never explicitly supported the clandestine communist movement at the time. Like most people in orbit of CPUSA's mass organizations, he could best be described as a fellow traveler.


As for Andrew Hemingway, he's written extensively on British and American Art. If anyone is interested in developments in Social Realism or American Modernism in general (concurrent with the rise of Abstract Expressionism; more specifically with regards to CPUSA's approach to 'revolutionary' or proletarian art and lack of coherent cultural program before, during and after the Great Depression) then they'll find that book of great reference. Hemingway has continued writing on the themes discussed therein. In 2013 he published a book with Periscope Publishing titled The Mysticism of Money: Precisionist Painting and Machine Age America (which I may scan at some point as I actually own a copy). Additionally, he's published a few articles: one in Wiley-Blackwell's 2015 A Companion to American Art and the other in a 2016 issue of Kunst und Politik respectively, both of which I've attached to this post.


Lastly (and I don't mean to shill), if you're interested in his commentary on British Art then check out Brill / Haymarket Books' Landscape Between Ideology and the Aesthetic: Marxist Essays on British Art and Art Theory, 1750-1850. I haven't read it yet, but looks good.


File: 1615510745768-0.png (86.94 KB, 380x328, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1615510745768-1.png (305.71 KB, 216x1014, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1615510745768-2.pdf (2.4 MB, 195x300, heidegger1977.pdf)


The Age of the World Picture

Essay by Heidegger.
18 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Preface: A Philosophical Fantasy – Steven Shaviro. 2009. in « Without Criteria: Kant, Whitehead, Deleuze, and Aesthetics » (MIT)

This book originated out of a philosophical fantasy. I imagine a world in which Whitehead takes the place of Heidegger. Think of how important Heidegger has been for thinking and critical reflection over the past sixty years. What if Whitehead, instead of Heidegger, had set the agenda for postmodern thought? What would philosophy be like today? What different questions might we be asking? What different perspectives might we be viewing the world from?
The parallels between Heidegger and Whitehead are striking. Being and Time was published in 1927, Process and Reality in 1929. Two enormous philosophy books, almost exact contemporaries. Both books respond magisterially to the situation (I’d rather not say the crisis) of modernity, the immensity of scientific and technological change, the dissolution of old certainties, the increasingly fast pace of life, the massive reorganizations that followed the horrors of World War I. Both books take for granted the inexistence of foundations, not even fixating on them as missing, but simply going on without concern over their absence. Both books are antiessentialist and antipositivist, both of them are actively engaged in working out new ways to think, new ways to do philosophy, new ways to exercise the faculty of wonder.
And yet how different these two books are: in concepts, in method, in affect, and in spirit. I’d like to go through a series of philosophical questions and make a series of (admittedly tendentious) comparisons, in order to spell out these differences as clearly as possible.

1. The question of beginning
Where does one start in philosophy? Heidegger asks the question of Being: “Why is there something, rather than nothing?” But Whitehead is splendidly indifferent to this question. He asks, instead: “How is it that there is always something new?” Whitehead doesn’t see any point in returning to our ultimate beginnings. He is interested in creation rather than rectification, Becoming rather than Being, the New rather than the immemorially old. I would suggest that, in a world where everything from music to DNA is continually being sampled and recombined, and where the shelf life of an idea, no less than of a fashion in clothing, can be measured in months if not weeks, Whitehead’s question is the truly urgent one. Heidegger flees the chaPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


For a second I thought that the one on the pic is Luka


>All of these are on libgen lol
Oh, I must be blind then. Thanks again


File: 1616259861413.png (189.05 KB, 916x885, ClipboardImage.png)

wtf is going on here


Heidegger was a nazi opinions discarded wont read anything he wrote

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