[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/edu/ - Education

'The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism of the weapon, material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.' - Karl Marx
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)
What is 6 - 2?

Not reporting is bourgeois

| Catalog | Home
|

File: 1751270001791-0.png (17.06 KB, 334x304, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1751270001791-1.png (21.38 KB, 364x314, ClipboardImage.png)

 

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
Engels’ On Authority is razor-sharp essay of pure scientific fact—1,386 words—that dismantles anarchist utopianism with upmost efficiency. It takes 5 minutes to read and leaves no room for debate: society itself, revolution, all basic social functions, etc., require some form of authority. This is not an opinion; it is observable fact.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/judgesabo-read-on-authority
Yet here we have some terminally online anarchist penning a 52,000-word monstrosity in response. That’s 37 times longer than Engels’ original piece. The anarchist spends 79 hours' worth of handwriting time (LMAO) crafting this screed. The sheer volume of this "refutation" is itself proof of its intellectual bankruptcy. The Ratio of Copium to Substance is vast, as with all anarchist refutation of socialist theory. Endless semantic quibbling, ("But what is authority, really?") endless circular logic, along with citing hundred other liberals culminates in a pathetic monument to ideological impotence—a 50,000-word confession that anarchism cannot refute Marxism on substance, so it must drown the debate in verbosity. Engels needed just 1,400 words to prove authority’s necessity because material reality speaks for itself—factories need managers, trains need schedules, and revolutions need discipline. The anarchist’s bloated treatise, by contrast, is what happens when unsounded petty-bourgeois individualism tries to deny the objective laws of social organization: an embarrassing tantrum disguised as scholarship, its very length an admission of defeat.

Engels was wrong.

theanarchistlibrary is pretty much a blog platform anyone can submit their diatribes to

>>24547
anarkiddie



File: 1733839025907.jpg (2.92 MB, 1904x2797, BetterThanYou.jpg)

 

A financebro friend from my old school called this morning to catch up after some time and I've come to notice uni education is absolutely shit. He asked for investment funds from his family back then and now has a tech startup. We used to scold him for not pursuing higher education and now all of my acquanitances who went to uni are either struggling to find jobs or wasting away in a low pay 9-5.

What went wrong? Did you benefit from higher education? What did you study if it did? What did you study if it didn't? What would you pursue if you had the chance to go to college again? I wanna hear your experience.
26 posts omitted.

>>24381
>I agree and it's why I will never do a trade, particularly when we as a society don't have a sufficient social safety net for anyone who gets a work place related injury. This is why the trades pay even less than what they pay in actuality. Even then, the per hour earnings of a tradesmen suck for quite a few years.

The real reason why trades pay less is because theyre less likely to have student loan debt compared to degrees.
Also while trades aren't guaranteed cushy living, you have more steady employment

The problem is, trades are looked down upon because people think getting a degree will get them big money more efficiently

>The other problem with the trades is that having completed an apprenticeship in {X} is not as transferable as a bachelors degree in {Y}. Many jobs just require the bachelors. Very few jobs require some sort of apprenticeship. It's why I think tech apprenticeships are a horrible idea. If you end up not becoming a developer, that credential is worthless.


Well, Ive heard from a guy who is an IT guy that the main problem with computer industry nowadays is the lack of hardware skills.
Most IT guys are only trained in software but are unable to troubleshoot hardware issues.

>Further, employers are not going to teach you the skills you need to job hop or keep up with the industry for decades like a degree SHOULD by covering the math, theory, etc. of computer science itself. Many CS degrees don't do that THOUGH. I've met people who were straight up failed by their degrees. I didn't even complete my CS degree until after I became a dev so I think I'm qualified to make this claim.


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

>>24527
Ya, I know what an LLM is. A lot of people think these chat bots are literally skynet for some reason. Though, I wouldn't say college edu in the west isnt helpful for getting better jobs. Why else in USA would it be as cost prohibitive as it is? USA needs to do something about school cost. Everyone should attend college. People should know shit, and know how to do it. Western academia is just inundated with a multitude of problems and retarded ass ideas.

>>24543
>Everyone should attend college. People should know shit, and know how to do it.


The problem is, everyone goes to college nowadays.
Irony is, we have more adults spending more time in school than ever before and they still cannot function for shit.

I disagree with this libleft idea that college should be mandatory. It's no different from religion

And the irony is, alot of our educational institutions were funded by the church

>>24556
>The problem is, everyone goes to college nowadays.
You're not American. College enrollment todays at like an all time low.

>and they still cannot function for shit.

Cant speak for your country, but that's just the default state of your average American today. College or not.

>It's no different from religion

Lost me there too. College is supposed to actually teach you shit. Not molest you and teach you a form of shamanism.

>>24558
>You're not American. College enrollment todays at like an all time low.

Except I am. Even if not, everyone is going to college nowadays. "All time low" just means relative to a boom-bust cycle.

>Cant speak for your country, but that's just the default state of your average American today. College or not.


It's not just America. It's the average postmodern adult.

>Lost me there too. College is supposed to actually teach you shit. Not molest you and teach you a form of shamanism.


And a lot of molestation does happen in college.
Also, professors will fail you if you dare to correct them or have different methods of problem solving.

And a lot of people working within industries often complain about the incompetence of college educated folk.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.



 

I will be very concise, since I know a long, boring post will make you just lose interest.
>fairly normal life, but im extremely bitter against (succubi) m*dels, the glamour, ease,wealth, luxury and globe-trotting they are gifted just cause MUH FACE
>Im in a country that has free university, including med school\ doctor's college, I wouldn't lose any money if I ended up failing
>I tell myself a lot, that only saving others is good enough reason to keep myself alive
Please give me an honest assessment of this conundrum. I AM willing to go through the pain that is med school, AND a career as a doctor- I talked to several people in either field, so I know what it will be like.

Having a medical degree is a sure way to never have to worry about money again as long as you don't go full retard with your spending.

Didn't you post a few months ago? I rember something similiar I thought you definitely were going to med school. Maybe it was someone else

>fairly normal life, but im extremely bitter against (succubi) m*dels, the glamour, ease,wealth, luxury and globe-trotting they are gifted just cause MUH FACE


This is a dumb reason.
I don't feel any jealousy towards those kind of people.
Those celebs have to deal with groomers and corporate assholes trying to steal their rightful pay.



File: 1751269648189-0.png (18.94 KB, 364x314, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1751269648189-1.png (17.06 KB, 334x304, ClipboardImage.png)

 

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
Engels’ On Authority is razor-sharp essay of pure scientific fact—1,386 words—that dismantles anarchist utopianism with upmost efficiency. It takes 5 minutes to read and leaves no room for debate: society itself, revolution, all basic social functions, etc., require some form of authority. This is not an opinion; it is observable fact.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/london-anarchist-federation-the-problems-with-on-authority
Yet here we have some terminally online anarchist penning a 52,391-word monstrosity in response. That’s 37 times longer than Engels’ original piece. The anarchist spends 79 hours' worth of handwriting time (LMAO) crafting this screed. The sheer volume of this "refutation" is itself proof of its intellectual bankruptcy. The Ratio of Copium to Substance is vast, as with all anarchist refutation of socialist theory. Endless semantic quibbling, ("But what is authority, really?") endless circular logic, along with citing hundred other liberals culminates in a pathetic monument to ideological impotence—a 50,000-word confession that anarchism cannot refute Marxism on substance, so it must drown the debate in verbosity. Engels needed just 1,386 words to prove authority’s necessity because material reality speaks for itself—factories need managers, trains need schedules, and revolutions need discipline. The anarchist’s bloated treatise, by contrast, is what happens when unsounded petty-bourgeois individualism tries to deny the objective laws of social organization: an embarrassing tantrum disguised as scholarship, its very length an admission of defeat.

wrong link other thread is fixed one



File: 1747398137347.png (45.83 KB, 334x500, ClipboardImage.png)

 

Is this book worth reading? Finishing up on What is to Be Done? and feel as if it is pretty straight forward. The book is also like 600 pages long
>“If we are honestly to assess the lessons of the Russian Revolution, then it is essential that we unpick the real Lenin from this shared Stalinist and liberal myth of ‘Leninism’. It would be difficult to praise too highly Lars Lih’s contribution to such an honest reassessment of Lenin’s thought. At its heart, Lih’s book aims to overthrow, and succeeds in overthrowing, what he calls the ‘textbook interpretation’ of Lenin’s What is to be done? Lih thus adds to and deepens the arguments of those who have sought to recover the real Lenin from the Cold War mythology.”
Paul Blackledge, author, Historical Materialism and Social Evolution

If you're just getting into studying the USSR then I recommend you read E.H. Carr's books and/or Charles Bettelheim's Class Struggles in the USSR.

I read it a couple of months ago and enjoyed it. I found the discussion about the term ”professional revolutionary” especially interesting.

>>24344 (me)
I have almost finished his Lenin biography, so I can recommend that book and this one also because Lars knows historiography and uses up-to-date sources from the archives released in the 90s.

Better than the ones where Lenin touches upon nationality, for sure.



 

I'm looking for any books that will actually educate me on the Iranian revolution and why it resulted on the state that still exists to this day. I've heard many different stories that the Revolution was hijacked by Islamists and turned Iran into a theocratic dystopia but I really don't know if I can believe that fully. So I would love some good books that would give me a good explanation on everything that happened during the overthrow of the Pahlavi regime.
3 posts and 1 image reply omitted.

>>24204
Marxallah, we found a liberal I was just speaking of your kin.


>>24204
>Tudeh was a minor player in the actual revolution in 1979. The Soviets actually quit funding them because they thought they were a useless non-entity with little actual influence in Iran.
This misunderstands Abrahamian's perspective. By the time of the Iranian Revolution, the Tudeh had indeed become marginalized, but this wasn't always so. I find his focus on the Tudeh interesting precisely because it is important to analyze the historical developments that caused its demise, all while Iran continued and intensified its process of industrialization, modernization and, crucially, subordination to imperialist interests.

It was never a bad idea for a Marxist to ask oneself the question "what the fuck just happened?" after a religious national-bourgeois revolution when conditions were ripening for a communist one. In Iran, often considered the birthplace of modern Islamist politics as a mass movement, the question is yet more urgent.

>>24516
I feel like its possible the Tudeh party was never as popular as people like Abrahamian tell us it was and this is a result of historians like him focusing too much on Tudeh at the expense of other groups in Iran. Abrahamian is an old fashioned new left Marxist and for him the victory of a socialist faction is how history should have played out but didn't. So he goes looking for the biggest Marxist faction (Tudeh) and tries to ask "why did it fail?" and you do that you wind up developing tunnel vision.

>It was never a bad idea for a Marxist to ask oneself the question "what the fuck just happened?" after a religious national-bourgeois revolution when conditions were ripening for a communist one. In Iran, often considered the birthplace of modern Islamist politics as a mass movement, the question is yet more urgent.

The problem is the way in which Marxists approach this history. They are too teleological and misapply Marx's theories. Marx warned the Russian socialists not to take his history of capitalist development as a universal model that could be applied to Russia because his own work was based on studies of Germany, France, and Britain. But Marxists try to interpret Iranian history through Marx's history of Western Europe. "Well, socialist revolution is the next stage, so why didn't it happen? Maybe Iran was too feudal? was Khomeini a bourgeois nationalist or a fascist?" These are the wrong kinds of questions to be asking because Iran isn't Western Europe and stickers like "feudal" or "bourgeois nationalist" aren't something you can just paste onto every human society.

Iran also is a problem for Marxist historians because it defies their theories of revolution. Before 1979, the Iranian economy was growing, inequality was a serious issue but poverty was decreasing etc. The revolution wasn't motivated by socioeconomic grievances. Khomeini himself once declared that 'we didn't overthrow the Shah because of the price of bread.' Before 1978, US diplomats saw Iran as an island of stability. Nobody predicted the revolutionary outbreak between 1978 and 1979. I'd also say that Islamist mass politics really begun in the 1910s, anti-colonial movements based on Islam go all the way back to the 1900s. Foucault's writing on Iran have always been controversial because he pointed these things out. Islam was a drivingPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>24203
Why are you sperging out at someone you don't even disagree with?



 

Stephen Krashen on Language Acquisition
you know all. Volume I of thread dedicated to Neo-China Silk Road II - Belt and Road takeover of the World.

Questions and answers:
>Q: Why should I learn Chinese?
<A: To appreciate the internet culture and humor, prepare for migration, modernize and adapt for employed labor under China.
>Q: China will fail, why should I bother?
<A: Don't think.
>Q: I have other affairs in life, I don't have time for this.
<A: Silly person, chase ducks in the lake.

To all other eager learners, welcome, to the CLLG (China Language Learning General) edition I. Here you will watch videos with pictures, animations, movies and combine yourself to adapt with the Chinese language.
Academic journals, tutors and other outdated methods will give you boredom and headache! Learn with fun.
All you need to prepare for a Kung Pao Chicken tin assembly line factory and life in Neo-China world.
42 posts and 14 image replies omitted.

>>24425
>Every time you post, it will be at the top of the overboard. Just fucking post in the thread regularly without saging and people will see it.
Why don't you do it then?

>>24429
Huh? I already am bumping this thread when I could be saging it. It's not my thread either, I have no care if it lives or dies, but I am helping you keep it alive at this very moment.

>>24430
Ok bro keep bumping and educating all 0 IPs per 10 years

>All you've done so far is link to youtube videos anyone could find by searching: "Learn Chinese" on youtube.
guy posting baby sensory videos: "its over, I've given up all hope, you can continue if you want, I don't see the point if no one takes my contributions seriously as a geopolitical project that actively avoids touching any school or library"

你们有人会说中文吗?我已经学了八年了。。。



File: 1750362767784.png (725.97 KB, 967x804, RDT.png)

 

Is it seen as too idealistic? Misguided? Does it come off as playing into capitalist or nihilist logics? Or is it about how some factions (like right-accelerationists) co-opted the term?

I'm personally interested in left-accelerationism — the idea of using technological/cultural momentum to push beyond capitalism, not reinforce it. But I want to know what the actual criticisms are, especially from other leftists. So if you're critical of it, I want to hear why.

>>24499
Nobody wants to hang out with guys being like 'hur I hope things get way worse'

>>24500

i want to build momentum for change, not break shit and celebrate like a nihilist

>>24501
if by 'shit' you mean, breaking the ruling institutions' toys, that is much better than just jerking off to things getting worse.

Capitalism had two centuries to collapse, it just won't do it on its own.

>>24500
>>24502
Irony is, "accelerationists" don't really want things to change for the better. They wanna benefit from the system without having to square.
Accelerationists are attack dogs for capitalism.
They can be dismissed as lumpenproles.



File: 1750633213526.png (291.25 KB, 800x597, 800px-RP-sixclassics.png)

 

Since June 2024, we have been building a communist encyclopedia, Revolupedia, to provide easily-understood explanations to Marxist theory and allow for further study.

Overtime, our project and community has expanded to maintain hundreds of articles, a library of texts from Marxist thinkers, and detailed quotations.

We welcome all communists to join our effort to build a revolutionary compendium, whether anti-revisionist Marxist–Leninist or Maoist!




File: 1749996283189.png (981.83 KB, 1200x528, ClipboardImage.png)

 

Former alt-right here, what books and content can I read up upon to educate myself besides the typical "Karl Marx" content?
The past few years have been really eye-opening to me especially as someone that has had to deal with the threat of homelessness, and the general prevalence that more vacant houses exist than homeless people. I'm conscious of the fact that the problem has inherently been the american system itself rather than any outside forces. We should care more about our own damn people than any random person from another nation. We have a massive military budget that could be used for better things.
4 posts omitted.

>>24488
>>24480

tbh most our so called "third worldist" posters are prolly white first worlders who think the rest of the world is as annoying and entitled as there suburbanite peers, think abt all the threads of people who actually live in the global south pissing these posters off by attempting to explain that being a resentful r9k poster with some vaguely marxist jargon added in is just annoying, counterproductive and really just an elaborate cope for there own inability to talk with members of the public abt socialism in a constructive manner. just tell them to post wall socket+hand+timestamp next time they go on a rant abt how there one of the good ones and the rest of us are just uncouth orcs.

>>24490
This. Most imageboards are just mainly post-adolescent males whining about how life sucks because they didn't get laid with hot virgin teenage girls.
They don't wanna do any serious work at all.
They just wanna have a hobby career.

>>24480
If you're serious about actually understanding Marxism—not the liberalized, toothless version that treats worker co-ops as the end goal—you need to ground yourself in foundational theory, not vague market-friendly nonsense.

Start with Engels for a solid orientation:

"Principles of Communism" lays out the basics in Q&A format: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

"Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" helps contrast real scientific socialism with moralistic daydreams: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Engels_Socialism_Utopian_and_Scientific.pdf

Before diving into Capital, it's worth getting a grip on Marx’s political economy:

"Value, Price and Profit" — dissects surplus value and wages under capitalism: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/value-price-profit.pdf

"Wage Labor and Capital" — earlier and simpler, good to pair with the above: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/wage-labour-capital.pdf

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

Read the short list for beginners here https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/sw/index.htm

>>24488 holy bait



Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ 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