[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/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
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

| Catalog | Home

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


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



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.


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

File: 1615438936415.jpg (58.59 KB, 389x595, capvol2.jpg)


The Bunkerchan (rip) Capital Reading Group recently finished Volume I and will be reading Volume II starting the second week of April! If you wish to join grab a copy of Penguin classics and be able to commit to a once a week discussion on Sundays - we are all US based and typically meet around 9 EST.

Expect to read 50-80 pages a week. We will not be covering the introduction or preface, but you are encouraged to read it before the group officially starts.

We will be reading Volume III after our reading of Volume II. And I wouldn't mind tacking on Marx's Grundrisse as well.

Group channel:

5 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Cool and gentle reminder to pick up Vol II (or use libgen) if you are planning on joining, we start next week.accelerationAcceleration


yes the one on the front cover >>5113
and libreoffice tables because Marx used free softwareaccelerationAcceleration


We're reading Chapter 1: The Circuit of Money Capital this week.

'The Russian landowners, who as a result of the so-called emancipation of the peasants are now compelled to carry on agriculture with the help of wage-labourers instead of the forced labour of serfs, complain about two things: First, about the lack of money-capital. They say for instance that comparatively large sums must be paid to wage-labourers before the crops are sold, and just then there is a dearth of ready cash, the prime condition. Capital in the form of money must always be available, particularly for the payment of wages, before production can be carried on capitalistically. But the landowners may take hope. Everything comes to those who wait, and in due time the industrial capitalist will have at his disposal not alone his own money but also that of others.

The second complaint is more characteristic. It is to the effect that even if one has money, not enough labourers are to be had at any time. The reason is that the Russian farm-laborer, owing to the common ownership of land in the village community, has not yet been fully separated from his means of production and hence is not yet a “free wage-laborer” in the full sense of the word. But the existence of the latter on a social scale is a sine qua non for M — C, the conversion of money into commodities, to be able to represent the transformation of money-capital into productive capital.'

An example of the super woke shit you could be reading leftypol anonsaccelerationAcceleration


We will be reading Chapter 2 + 3 this week, as always if you have some familiarity with Volume I you are encouraged to join. Happy reading.accelerationAcceleration


we read slow this week and only covered through chapter 2, we will be meeting up for a discussion on chapters 3 4 and 5 in two weeks.accelerationAcceleration

File: 1615166717175.jpg (5.32 KB, 225x225, download.jpeg.jpg)


Anyone have those guide to organizing books? I think sage was on here recommending em but cant find the thread
1 post omitted. Click reply to view.


>not using the dewey decimal classification
what the fuck anon


acorn organising guide and one called no shortcuts


>acorn organizing guide
this one?


shieeet and naive me at firt thought that this thread was about searching foor books which talk about organizing (workers)


By Author if I have a lot of them, by topic if its a lot of book about a similar subject

File: 1614451969760.png (752.99 KB, 1024x768, Meme2.0.png)


There's been alot of talk lately of Metaphysics and Idealism as bad andf wrong
Contrary to Materialism and Dialectics which is the right method worldview etc
But I got the feeling alot of people use Idealism and Metaphysics interchangable without really understanding both
So I want to start a constructive discussion about these things
I'll start with a quote
The two basic (or two possible? or two historically observable?) conceptions of development (evolution) are: development as decrease and increase, as repetition, and development as a unity of opposites (the division of a unity into mutually exclusive opposites and their reciprocal relation)The two basic (or two possible? or two historically observable?) conceptions of development (evolution) are: development as decrease and increase, as repetition, and development as a unity of opposites (the division of a unity into mutually exclusive opposites and their reciprocal relation)
The metaphysical or vulgar evolutionist world outlook sees things as isolated, static and one-sided. It regards all things in the universe, their forms and their species, as eternally isolated from one another and immutable. Such change as there is can only be an increase or decrease in quantity or a change of place. Moreover, the cause of such an increase or decrease or change of place is not inside things but outside them, that is, the motive force is external. Metaphysicians hold that all the different kinds of things in the universe and all their characteristics have been the same ever since they first came into being. All subsequent changes have simply been increases or decreases in quantity. They contend that a thing can only keep on repeating itself as the same kind of thing and cannot change into anything different.
16 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Wasnt trying to be rude or anything just wanted to make a point about what vulgar evolutionism means


File: 1616314870346.png (19.83 KB, 1303x132, brave_DccP1kDuB6.png)

Are they right?


Ye. Most of dialectical materialism is about ironing out the inconsistencies of Hegel in his Philosophy of Right


File: 1616338065270.png (64.4 KB, 1345x322, brave_o5bACtZWcb.png)

What about this?


There is definitly a difference between materialism and idealism
trying to find a middle point between both doesnt work with Hegel or Marx
Lenin called this out as dumb

File: 1614106589437.jpg (183.89 KB, 800x1200, bpp.jpg)


Recommended reading from/on the Black Panther Party and Black Marxists{-Leninists}/Communists and aligned? Also anything stemming from that which was further developed as well. Don't see anything on the board related to it but really wanna dive into lefty perspective from organized Blacks in the U.S.
1 post and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Hammer & Hoe is non-panther related but I found it useful for setting up the context for the prior generation of older black southern ML in the 1920s and 30s when the CPUSA was getting started. I highly recommend it or the shorter paper which is a summary of the book. It's a little known piece of history that should be spread.

>I wasn’t prepared for characters such as Lemon Johnson, a former member of the Communist-led Share Croppers Union. In December 1986, I visited Johnson at his home in rural Montgomery County, which I described in my journal as “a tiny, run-down shack with battered wooden walls, a rusted tin roof that had begun to cave in, and a porch stocked with three rickety chairs.” … He told stories about the 1935 cotton pickers’ strike, Stalin’s pledge to send troops to Mobile to help black sharecroppers if things got out of hand, and the night a well-armed group of women set out to avenge their comrades who had been beaten or killed during the strike. When I asked Mr. Johnson how the union succeeded in winning some of their demands, without the slightest hesitation he reached into the drawer of his nightstand and pulled out a dog-eared copy of V. I. Lenin’s What Is to Be Done and a box of shotgun shells, set both firmly on the bed next to me, and said, “Right thar, theory and practice. That’s how we did it. Theory and practice.


Intercommunalism should be mandatory reading for every Marxist Leninist. it's short, simple, and enlightening.


it's by Huey P Newton btw


Not reading, but Black Red Guard on youtube is based


Based as fuck

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 / zine ]
[ 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