/edu/ - Education

>>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?

bump for relevancy :v)

>>25093
- The Very Hungry Caterpillar
- ASPCA Ultimate Cat Care Manual
- Max Stirner's Art and Religion
- Marx's stuff
- The rest of Max Stirner's stuff
- Main story in arknights
- Hegel's stuff
- Side stories in arknights
- The Very Hungry Caterpillar (again)

>>25094
What if I want to learn League of Legends lore?

>>25094
ok now could you be kind and sincere with me? where do I start, where do I go?

What're Hegels most important works according to you guys? What's the craziest interpretation you've seen of it?

>>25620
the science of logic is hegel's most concise work.
and marx clearly styles his critique of political economy on it.

Did you at least get to have sex with her? It's all temporary anyways.

>>25546
yes but not too often

humblebrag

>>25485
>>25484
Moreover, the entire premise of education (as it currently exists) is one of submission. It isn't an accidental stroke of etymology that you have to 'submit' a paper ;).
To deviate from the accepted standards is an unconscionable act, and deserves to be met only with browbeating in the eyes of the imperious arbitrators.
If you truly think critically, you'll come to the realization that much of academia is a kind of 'ritual' more than it is anything transcendentally objective; most of its presuppositions are arbitrary and cannot be honestly defended, and so they fall back upon the circularity of their own tautological self-validation, either through demanding accreditation (circular) or through deferring to likeminded communities who already predispose themselves to the starting premise that education *must* be an inherent 'good', i.e. curating their argumentative experience with the likes of reddit and bluesky and academic forums and so on (tautological). The basis of contemporary education is to work backwards from a series of starting presuppositions and deem anyone who attempts to dissent anew from this as 'stupid' or 'ignorant' or 'crazy'. So-called 'common sense' is really just a form of brutal conformism, and it is fundamentally feminine in essence–it is best encapsulated with the spirit of the phrase 'Really? I can't even…' or something akin to that. The very notion that the fundamental foundations might be a festering source is treated as an inconceivably profaned thing. I don't share the same cynicism towards the future possibility of the human condition, or the reading of its full nature, as Eugene, but he is absolutely on the mark at least with respect to the current state of affairs.

Name a single philosopher who has produced anything of world shattering, history moving value from the modern universities. There isn't one. Probably the most interesting figures currently out there are those involved in the speculative realist movement, but in the end, irrelevance is the doomed fate of those who radically innovate (i.e. 'challenge') under this system. If you want to be a philosopher, OP, you must do it for the love of an enduring truth which might one day be excavated and embraced hermeneutically, assuming anything evePost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>25486
BTW OP I have a degree in philosophy. It was a waste of time and money and most importantly sanity. All it did was further entrench my hatred for the capitalist world.
Anyone who currently thinks this shit is worthwhile, at least from a philosophical (and not, say, medical–assuming an honest doctor, of course) perspective, is as delusional and pliable to recuperation as someone like Chomsky. It's hilarious to see so many anarchists embrace university. Worshipping a microcosmic mirror of the dynamic the state already serves, thereby telling on themselves in the implicit process: "We want to abolish our lack of power, not to abolish power altogether–we'll forge it again in our image." Very similar logic to Zionism, wherein the phrase "never again" is perverted into indicating "never again TO THE LIKES OF US", rather than being a universalist renunciation of genocide.

>>25486
>>25487
I was a phil major for years and ended up dropping out and I agree 100% with what you are saying. Academia is just a recuperation factory.

>ideological brainwashing factories
reactionary rhetoric

>>25505
academia is anti-communist, sorry, the theory industry is an industry just like music and movie industries are, and its stimulated by Capital to toe the NATO line in similar ways

aristotle's "politics" is the bedrock of political science
also, plato's "republic", "statesman" and "nomoi"

Hannah Arrendt is a nazi bitch. Stay away from her.

Aristotle and Plato. Alot of what they have to say is still worth thinking about particularly Aristotle, then just progress chronologically.

Polsci is for fucking retards, do you unironically believe shit like political compasses are remotely useful?

>>25015
>normal
idealism

>>25017
Okay totally not dysfunctional and damaging to the development of a person then.

>>25018
and what determines this?

>>24969
absolutely accurate. the ussr suffered this post-stalin as well as yugoslavia post-tito

the only thing you need to know about anarchism in order to reject it is that it's a moral analysis

RIP. Millions must read miataken identity, one of the best criticisms of identity politics within the left while being committed to black, queer and female liberation.

One other thing about a robotic co-worker; it would be the bestest buddy a human worker could ever have, if it weren't programmed by disgusting assholes. Robots are cool and don't start stupid shit for drama. Amazingly, of all of the ways humans were made into robots, they didn't think to suppress the obviously disgusting backstabbing behavior of humans. Instead the machine essentialized every malicious thing humans did and insisted you were supposed to "respect" it, so that fag managers can keep stealing more stuff and hiring their buddies.

>>25384
humans are machines
They’re just not made of metal

>>25426
If humans are machines, then why are the partisans of that view so emotional and spiritually invested in making you believe humans are machines? If humans are machines, and they really are, then it would not be unusual to regard the actual conditions of those machines, without any necessary intervention of a thought leader telling them what they are "supposed" to be.

It gets more insane and maddening the more these people insist on a failed system that cannot fail, only be failed.

>>25432
>everything in nature is mechanical except humans
hello, descartes.

>>25426
>They’re just not made of metal
speak for yourself, meatbag