/edu/ - Education

Orwell is based, was based, and always will be based.

Soviet Union sent NKVD agents to kill anarchist leaders (which is part of the reason anarchists were defeated) and purge the republicans. Fucking Soviets always worried about their ideological purity and absolute loyalty.

>>4831
orwell was a disgusting pedo

OP, I was typing up a response but found a much more comprehensive answer on Reddit to your question. Here's the link: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/8caypg/in_homage_to_catalonia_orwell_portrays_the_soviet/


tl;dr The USSR had no way to solely support a socialist revolution. Instead, the USSR's strategy was to defeat fascism via a Popular Front that included communists, socialists, and liberals. From the POV of the Communists, the POUM was undermining the war effort by pushing for revolution instead of political unity.

I'd also like to add that the militia system was retarded and the Communists were the only faction on the side of the Republic that resembled a real army.

>>4867
Absolutely based read, thank you anon

>>4756
If you really want to start from zero, you have to start with the greeks. You can skip between the greeks and marx.

History of Philosophy from Copplestone is good. It has like 11 volumes lol, but the first one is the most important.

You can also listen to History Of Philosophy without any gaps. It's really good.

After that, IMO reading some secondary lit on hegel is key.

Then read Marx. If you're not too interested in the economic stuff, you can skip vol 2 and 3 of Capital. There's a lot to read.

At this point you should be radicalized. It is honestly hard not to see things as Marx and Hegel saw them.

Anti-Duhring was the main introduction for people in ML parties for a long time, so it's a good start imo. Lot of stuff about what dialectical materialism means that western marxists miss.

>>4757
fixed spelling

>>5054
Imagine reading Manufacturing Consent instead of Inventing Reality

>>5054
just noticed you have Erich Fromm on there fucking based

>>6583
high school biology

>>6622
Mental disorders are real but only in relation to society. It only truly becomes a disorder once it negatively impacts your functioning in daily life. If big pharma and corpos didn't dominate medicine, you'd see more of a focus on treating the disorder as a symptom of coping with social life rather than a problem inherent to the patient. Most psychologists and psychiatrists otherwise accept a nuanced biopsychosocial model of mental behaviour.
There will still be mental disorders under socialism, but different kinds and frequencies. Hopefully they will be treated differently as well.

>>6622
Checked?allendeAllende

>>6622
Leftwing moment.
Tell us more how hearing voices telling you to murder someone isnt a real illness.

Also: reminder to edit and add these debunks onto leftypedia instead of keeping them in ad hoc infographs.

>>4661
Why does the holocaust matter? Fascism is inferior on an ideological plane prior to any 'sins' of deed.

>>6787
>Why does the most horrific and large scale genocide matter lol?
<Why does history matter!?
<Why do real life issues of fascism matter!?
Imagine being this much of a retard

Dont care didnt read didnt happen

>>6820
At least you're sincere when it comes to admitting your immunity to reason

>>4623
>Does he think the transitional state be exactly the same as the state that precedes it?
It’s core function of class domination is the same, because class domination is the defining feature of the Marxist understanding of the state. The difference is that it now works to secure the proletariat as the ruling class.
>because "state" does not adequately describe the dictatorship of the proletariat that is to be present in the transitional stage.
Why not?

Ruling classes' power needs constant maintenance, therefore it constantly needs a state, therefore letting the state wither one day would be full retard.

>>4625
What if there's no ruling class?

It means the dictatorship of the proletariat is not about freedom, it is about destroying bourgeois power. Therefore it will be "authoritarian," "totalitarian," "oppressive," etc. There can be no freedom until classes cease to exist and the state fades away.
We need to realize that his has been a weakness in previous attempts at socialism. We need a reign of terror that will make Stalin look like a pacifist.

>>4624
>It’s core function of class domination is the same, because class domination is the defining feature of the Marxist understanding of the state.
Then why did Engels say the Paris Commune ceased being a state?
>the Commune, which had ceased to be a state in the true sense of the term.
If the Commune was a DotP according to Marx, how can Engels say it had ceased to be a state?

States arise as forms of class domination 'out of' class struggle, but does that necessarily mean that what we consider a state is the 'only' form of class domination? For example, why can't a band of workers in a city get together and kick out, kill, exile all the land owners and appropriate their wealth? Is that not class domination in the absence of a state?

>Why not?
I don't know. Engels said the word "community" should be substituted for "state". I am asking why? Surely he didn't mean it as a stylistic choice, there must have been a reason why the word "state" and its definition became poorly suited for the task, for Engels, after the Paris Commune. Did Engels want to expand the definition of the "state" to include other forms of governing or did "state" refer to a particular historical form of class domination?

>>4625
>Ruling classes' power needs constant maintenance, therefore it constantly needs a state, therefore letting the state wither one day would be full retard.
That's close to what I'm getting at. Humans will always need some sort of organisation, a system of reproduction of society. Unless we're all gonna become a linked super-brain and humans will coordinate and build society together just as easy as we lift a glass of water and drink from it alone Why does organisation always have to be called a state, especially when Engels was ready to drop that term in 1875?

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

What about green eyes

Thanks for sharing this, I've had trouble with alcohol before and this is really interesting

>>4759
According to the study green eyes are light like blue eyes so they'd also have higher rates of alcoholism

this sounds like bro science tbh

>>4489
obligatory dumbass tankie post

>>4490
Not him but what's so dumb about it? And I hope, that you know Zetkin and Kollontai are not Tankies

>>4490
>Hurr ur tankie
1) That's not an insult except in the minds of childish thorylet ankids and their infantile fantasies
2) There is no argument. Feminism is a goal, not a method, and to practice it is to practice identity politics and therefore, go against Socialism
3) The practical results of the USSR demonstrate success. In the USA the Suffragettes barely achieved anything other than 'voting' and 2nd/3rd wave feminism was mostly liberal contrarianism that porky used to pit men against women creating sectarian divides based on mostly bourg pseudoscience. In the USSR women had maternity leaves and accommodations for them, they could take ANY work they wanted but were also not pressured to choose tradionally masculine labour just to be contrarian. They had equal rights and their place in the labour force appropriately complimented men, just as men complimented them, rather than competing over nothing. Women in the Red Army were usually nurses but NOTHING stopped them from being ordinary soldiers and killing Nazi scum, nothing stopped them from leading factories and being awarded for heroism and labour.

That is real women's rights, and not some imagined whining.

>>4492
>only "theorylets" dislike MLs
lol

>>4494
Leftcoms and ancoms who aren't bad faith idealists disagree with MLs and may oppose them, but do not resort to petty emotional "hurr ur tankie", in-part because this argument is easy to flip right back at them and also in part because it is immature and not an argument, as you still don't have one.

Based. I'm a maths grad and am free to help if you reach any impasses.

>stewart's calculus
>not keisler's infinitesimal approach
take the hyperreal pill

>>4461
3. 2x(x-5) = 2x^2 -10x
4. (4-3x)x = 4x - 3x^2

>>4480
How is this possible, did you just rote memorize the algebra rules you needed in Calc?
You need a decent grasp on Algebra to pass Calc.

>>4613
Took Algebra 1 for 4th time in college and moved up literally all the way from there until Calc 2

it was really hard because I basically gave so little of a fuck past the 6th grade I still struggle with some basic calculations even after 2 years of non stop mathematics

I'm jelly of first worlders, they can get books for so cheap. Everything here is expensive, even used books in tatters.

Does that mean the Penguin classics catalog will get bigger?

>>4449
They should burn all the Chodehouse books if they are going. Chodehouse is baby crap. I don't read it and I don't need it shoved down my fucking throat cause manbaby will pee pee his pants if you don't read it.

>>4527
>shopindie
unfortunate word choice

I truly can't stand hearing about Chodehouse. Try talking about something I actually care about. Even just one page. Everyone here backs me up too. They don't want to hear some fat geek recite his favorite Chodehouse gags. Try to read and discuss somethin I fucking care about. Chodehouse peeves me off to no end.

>>4431
>What is the primary contradiction inside Academia?
wdymbt

same as rest of the society from what I hear, profitability versus productivity.

>>4435
Yeah but judging from that alone, you can't differentiate the various Disciplines

The contradiction in academia is disagreement on how best to reproduce the bourgeois and labor aristocracy

>same as rest of the society from what I hear, profitability versus productivity.
ding ding ding, although this takes on particular forms in academe

Since the middle ages academe has always been defined in large part by an attempt by intellectuals to wrest themselves independent of the control of territorial and economic powers and their demands so that they can think. You can condemn this as a bunch of elite nerds trying to evade social responsibility so they can jerk off, or celebrate it as the human spirit trying to comprehend higher things and achieve species-being against the petty squabbles of local elites, but either way it's been a pretty consistent feature of how academia has developed, and in particular struggles over what institutional forms and so on are adopted. (Actually you can see this struggle extending back even further into monastic organization, at least in the West and I would very strongly wager in Sufi lodges and Buddhist monasteries as well though I'm less familiar with those.)

Over the past several decades the autonomy of the universities has been very thoroughly eroded:

1) The usual funding mechanisms - an exponentially increasing number of paying undergrads, with little overhead - has disappeared.
2) Outside political forces want the university to justify itself in outside terms - contributions to innovation in the economy, and so on. Partnerships with various actors for funding has resulted in the usual alternative to the autonomous university/monastery to seep in - private patronage.
3) Internal "productivity" metrics have gotten more and more standardized for research academics (# papers published and citations gotten, in journals whose impact rating has been similarly quantified) and teaching (with teachers, just like other service workers, getting rated by students-cum-customers). You're seeing some pretty blatant attacks on the spirit of tenure done under the heading of wokeness (a heading which in most cases I suspect mostly masks attacks on academics who find themselves unpopular for far more petty reasons), but either way economic forces are eroding tenure anyway.

My idle hope is that people who want to think will be able to build new institutions that can withstand this (a tension that will be easier, but still a struggle, to realize under socialism) but if you look at the internet, 1) censorship cynically justified as merely an attack on a fPost too long. Click here to view the full text.