R: 5 / I: 0
how big is the skill gap between genre fiction and literary fiction? are there genre fiction writers who are equally as good as literary fiction authors?
how big is the skill gap between genre fiction and literary fiction? are there genre fiction writers who are equally as good as literary fiction authors?
R: 15 / I: 0
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)
-Lenin
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.
-Mao
Metaphysics and Idealism
There's been alot of talk lately of Metaphysics and Idealism as bad andf wrongContrary 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)
-Lenin
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.
-Mao
R: 42 / I: 16
Hello and welcome comrades!, this is a reading club thread, we will be reading and discussing Marxist theory books.
We've already started and completed reading and discussing The Communist Manifesto and The Principles of Communism yesterday.
Anyone can join the reading club, if you want to read and understand theory and you're serious about it then don't be afraid to join! we're still reading the basics so you don't have to be intimidated.
Our current reading list:
https://leftyread.neocities.org/
/leftytrash/ matrix community link:
https://matrix.to/#/+leftytrash:matrix.org
/read/ matrix room link:
https://matrix.to/#/#leftyread:matrix.org
Also we are closely related to the /GET/ Reading group who helped us make our own reading group:
https://www.getchan.net/GET/res/469.html
Hello and welcome comrades!, this is a reading club thread, we will be reading and discussing Marxist theory books.
We've already started and completed reading and discussing The Communist Manifesto and The Principles of Communism yesterday.
Anyone can join the reading club, if you want to read and understand theory and you're serious about it then don't be afraid to join! we're still reading the basics so you don't have to be intimidated.
Our current reading list:
https://leftyread.neocities.org/
/leftytrash/ matrix community link:
https://matrix.to/#/+leftytrash:matrix.org
/read/ matrix room link:
https://matrix.to/#/#leftyread:matrix.org
Also we are closely related to the /GET/ Reading group who helped us make our own reading group:
https://www.getchan.net/GET/res/469.html
R: 22 / I: 33
Thread for PDFs related to the 'Anti-Anglo reading group - left deviation'
Thread for PDFs related to the 'Anti-Anglo reading group - left deviation'
R: 18 / I: 0
Is any of Engels' math in Anti-Dühring wrong, or outdated (wrong to a lesser extent)? I showed my STEMlord friend some of these quotes and they didn't understand what they meant:
>It is for example a contradiction that a root of A should be a power of A, and yet A^(1/2) = square root of A.
> It is a contradiction that a negative quantity should be the square of anything, for every negative quantity multiplied by itself gives a positive square. The square root of minus one is therefore not only a contradiction, but even an absurd contradiction, a real absurdity. And yet the square root of minus one is in many cases a necessary result of correct mathematical operations. Furthermore, where would mathematics — lower or higher — be, if it were prohibited from operation with square root of minus one?
>We have already noted that one of the basic principles of higher mathematics is the contradiction that in certain circumstances straight lines and curves may be the same. It also gets up this other contradiction: that lines which intersect each other before our eyes nevertheless, only five or six centimetres from their point of intersection, can be shown to be parallel, that is, that they will never meet even if extended to infinity. And yet, working with these and with even far greater contradictions, it attains results which are not only correct but also quite unattainable for lower mathematics.
Is any of Engels' math in Anti-Dühring wrong, or outdated (wrong to a lesser extent)? I showed my STEMlord friend some of these quotes and they didn't understand what they meant:
>It is for example a contradiction that a root of A should be a power of A, and yet A^(1/2) = square root of A.
> It is a contradiction that a negative quantity should be the square of anything, for every negative quantity multiplied by itself gives a positive square. The square root of minus one is therefore not only a contradiction, but even an absurd contradiction, a real absurdity. And yet the square root of minus one is in many cases a necessary result of correct mathematical operations. Furthermore, where would mathematics — lower or higher — be, if it were prohibited from operation with square root of minus one?
>We have already noted that one of the basic principles of higher mathematics is the contradiction that in certain circumstances straight lines and curves may be the same. It also gets up this other contradiction: that lines which intersect each other before our eyes nevertheless, only five or six centimetres from their point of intersection, can be shown to be parallel, that is, that they will never meet even if extended to infinity. And yet, working with these and with even far greater contradictions, it attains results which are not only correct but also quite unattainable for lower mathematics.
R: 96 / I: 9
This thread could serve to discuss this work if anyone ever dedicates the time to read it, or we could debate the place of ecology in modern day Marxism. To provoke discussion: does nature have any value outside how it immediately serves human interests?
Rafiq/Ecology Discussion
So some of you may have read the quite popular pdf where Rafiq dunks on eco fetishism, in that thread he references a previous thread where he had spent a lot of time focusing in on eco-fetishism, however this thread has been lost from Revleft. It's available on internet archives but to preserve it I've made this in the style of the previous popular pdf. Hope you guys enjoy!This thread could serve to discuss this work if anyone ever dedicates the time to read it, or we could debate the place of ecology in modern day Marxism. To provoke discussion: does nature have any value outside how it immediately serves human interests?
R: 53 / I: 9
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the third and highest stage of communist theory, was synthesized in 1982 by the Peruvian Communist Party (known in bourgeois sources by the epithet "Sendero Luminoso"). Here is the document they published concerning this: http://library.redspark.nu/1982_-_Maoism._On_Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
Parties and organizations that uphold MLM theory in the modern day include:
>Communist Party of Ecuador – Red Sun
>Peru People’s Movement (Reorganisation Committee)
>Communist Party of Brazil (Red Faction)
>Red Faction of the Communist Party of Chile
>Maoist Organization for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Columbia
>Revolutionary Nucleus for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Mexico
>Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist
>Committee Red Flag, FRG
>Maoist Communist Party, French State
Red Flag Collective, Finland
>Committees for the Foundation of the (Maoist) Communist Party of Austria
>Tjen Folket - Communist League, Norway
>Committee to Reconstitute the Communist Party of the USA
>Communist Nucleus Nepal
Two other well-known parties are affiliated in part with MLM, although their political orientation overlaps significantly with what we'd call "Mao Zedong Thought" which is not the same thing:
>Communist Party of India (Maoist)
>Communist Party of Philippines
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism Q&A
This is not a debate thread. I encourage debate on this topic to happen in /leftypol/, as it would have anyway. This is an /edu/cational thread only.Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the third and highest stage of communist theory, was synthesized in 1982 by the Peruvian Communist Party (known in bourgeois sources by the epithet "Sendero Luminoso"). Here is the document they published concerning this: http://library.redspark.nu/1982_-_Maoism._On_Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
Parties and organizations that uphold MLM theory in the modern day include:
>Communist Party of Ecuador – Red Sun
>Peru People’s Movement (Reorganisation Committee)
>Communist Party of Brazil (Red Faction)
>Red Faction of the Communist Party of Chile
>Maoist Organization for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Columbia
>Revolutionary Nucleus for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party of Mexico
>Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist
>Committee Red Flag, FRG
>Maoist Communist Party, French State
Red Flag Collective, Finland
>Committees for the Foundation of the (Maoist) Communist Party of Austria
>Tjen Folket - Communist League, Norway
>Committee to Reconstitute the Communist Party of the USA
>Communist Nucleus Nepal
Two other well-known parties are affiliated in part with MLM, although their political orientation overlaps significantly with what we'd call "Mao Zedong Thought" which is not the same thing:
>Communist Party of India (Maoist)
>Communist Party of Philippines
R: 4 / I: 5
Black Marxists/Communists/etc
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.
R: 11 / I: 2
Reminder that this bad boy was responsible for modern international law. Say thank you.
Reminder that this bad boy was responsible for modern international law. Say thank you.
R: 47 / I: 13
What book influenced you the most?
What do you like about books?
what are you planning to read?
What are you reading now?
Saw this in /hobby/ but thought it fit more here
/lit/
What is your favorite book?What book influenced you the most?
What do you like about books?
what are you planning to read?
What are you reading now?
Saw this in /hobby/ but thought it fit more here
R: 6 / I: 2
I want to learn from zero to all the way into marx, make a reading road for me
>pic unrelated
Radicalise me from zero
I have been never exposed to philosophy out of religion, but I beated the religion with thinking,I want to learn from zero to all the way into marx, make a reading road for me
>pic unrelated
R: 3 / I: 4
Books on U.S Intelligence Agencies
Requesting books on the U.S Intelligence community, especially the CIA and NSA. I'm interested in their history, anything they've been involved with, how they work etc. From a leftist perspective would be appreciated as well. Currently reading Surveillance Valley by Yasha Levine, which is pretty good for some basic observation and history.
R: 17 / I: 2
Not explicitly leftist, just some fiction and non-fiction that isn't based in liberal worldview like picrelated.
Books for kids
Any parents here? Please recommend books for 7-14yo kids that aren't lib shit (i.e. most of the Amazon top and NYT bestsellers).Not explicitly leftist, just some fiction and non-fiction that isn't based in liberal worldview like picrelated.
R: 5 / I: 2
Does anybody have a EPUB or a pdf(although a epub is preferred) of pic related. On a Zer0books binge at the moment
Does anybody have a EPUB or a pdf(although a epub is preferred) of pic related. On a Zer0books binge at the moment
R: 28 / I: 12
>>>/leftypol/438911
>>>/leftypol/438923
>>701
/cybersoc/ critical edition
ITT we post links and pdfs to critical or constructive takes on Cockshott and cybersocialism, as well as works or authors who wrote in the fields of cybernetics, systems theory, or operational research in general.>>>/leftypol/438911
>>>/leftypol/438923
>>701
R: 48 / I: 5
There are people who spend their entire lives reading Hegel and still manage to come out empty handed.
ITT we discuss the great thinker, Karl Marx's teacher, and he on who's shadow we walk:
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
1. What are good things to read/view to get an understanding of Hegel from a philosophical neophyte?
2. What service can Hegel's philosophy provide us today?
3. What an be done to make Hegel more accessible to the masses? Why is it so unpenetrable?
There are people who spend their entire lives reading Hegel and still manage to come out empty handed.
ITT we discuss the great thinker, Karl Marx's teacher, and he on who's shadow we walk:
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
1. What are good things to read/view to get an understanding of Hegel from a philosophical neophyte?
2. What service can Hegel's philosophy provide us today?
3. What an be done to make Hegel more accessible to the masses? Why is it so unpenetrable?
R: 164 / I: 44
/edu/ checkpoint
Hello comrades. I propose a general thread in an attempt to get the /edu/ ball rolling again. Everytime you visit /edu/, post in this thread. Tell us about what you're thinking about, what you're reading, an interesting thing you have learned today, anything! Just be sure to pop in and say hi.
R: 8 / I: 0
If I write an essay, theory and shit like that where do I post it and share it? Is there even an audience for mad leftist rants?
If I write an essay, theory and shit like that where do I post it and share it? Is there even an audience for mad leftist rants?
R: 3 / I: 0
I had the displeasure of listening to the audiobook version of this shit during my commutes the last few months and I must say this is liberalism at it's purest and clearest form.
The book was designer for general audiences so it never goes in deep about what do right or wrong mean, why are things right or wrong or any other analysis about ethics themselves the essays are just a really polite "I'm right and you're wrong" which in the end made the author: Peter Singer, come out like an absolute retarded who only got into philosophy so people will have to listen to his retarded opinions.
What really offends me it's that behind all its stupidity I saw the core of liberalism, absolute ignorance on material conditions and a very strong belief that people are responsible of everything they do. There are essays where Singer struggles to understand why rich people care more about showing their social status than donating to charity and imagines this ideal world where "donating to charity will be the biggest showcase of status" without explaining how would that world come to be and why it doesn't exist already, it's just a really polite rant that rich people are not engaging in noblesse oblige. Like wise Singer; a vegan, protests the mistreatment of animals mean for meat consumption, he cites the testimonial of a farm worker who had a bad experience artificially inseminating a turkey but a no point he ever feels that a human should not work on such conditions in the first place.
After all of that I released that consoomerism is the natural conclusion of liberalism because liberal really believe that other people are not liberal because they have not consoomed the right movies or the right ted talks and that material conditions and life experiences do not matter, Singer just expects that after reading this book you will become a vegan because how right he is about everything.
I had the displeasure of listening to the audiobook version of this shit during my commutes the last few months and I must say this is liberalism at it's purest and clearest form.
The book was designer for general audiences so it never goes in deep about what do right or wrong mean, why are things right or wrong or any other analysis about ethics themselves the essays are just a really polite "I'm right and you're wrong" which in the end made the author: Peter Singer, come out like an absolute retarded who only got into philosophy so people will have to listen to his retarded opinions.
What really offends me it's that behind all its stupidity I saw the core of liberalism, absolute ignorance on material conditions and a very strong belief that people are responsible of everything they do. There are essays where Singer struggles to understand why rich people care more about showing their social status than donating to charity and imagines this ideal world where "donating to charity will be the biggest showcase of status" without explaining how would that world come to be and why it doesn't exist already, it's just a really polite rant that rich people are not engaging in noblesse oblige. Like wise Singer; a vegan, protests the mistreatment of animals mean for meat consumption, he cites the testimonial of a farm worker who had a bad experience artificially inseminating a turkey but a no point he ever feels that a human should not work on such conditions in the first place.
After all of that I released that consoomerism is the natural conclusion of liberalism because liberal really believe that other people are not liberal because they have not consoomed the right movies or the right ted talks and that material conditions and life experiences do not matter, Singer just expects that after reading this book you will become a vegan because how right he is about everything.
R: 23 / I: 3
How does this make you feel?
How does this make you feel?
R: 102 / I: 30
The book is Karl Kautsky's history of the French Revolution, originally published as Die Klassengegensätze im Zeitalter der Französischen Revolution in 1889. Coming from the "Pope of Marxism", as Kautsky was then known, this text likely had an immense influence on Lenin and other revolutionaries of his day. It was approved by Engels himself, and may have been foundational in establishing the Marxist theory of bourgeois revolution, yet it has never been translated into English. The original German is available here: https://www.marxists.org/deutsch/archiv/kautsky/1908/frev/index.html and an old French translation is available here: https://www.marxists.org/francais/kautsky/works/1889/00/antagonismes-table.htm
What makes this work especially good for us to translate is that it's relatively short - just around 60 pages in total, divided into 10 chapters. With each chapter being 5-7 pages each, it is conceivable to translate a chapter in one day's volunteer work. Comrade Akko has already translated the preface, and is working on chapter 1. That leaves 9 chapters to complete:
Preface: Complete!
Chapter 1: Second draft complete (French)
Chapter 2: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 3: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 4: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 5: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 6: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 7: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 8: Complete! (Copyrighted work, permission secured)
Chapter 9: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 10: Translator needed
If you don't speak French or German, you can still contribute! We need proofreaders for completed chapters, and historical experts to confirm / resolve contextual clues in the text.
If we are able to complete this project, it will be uploaded to marxists.org under /leftypol/'s name, and maybe win us some name recognition from the broader left in the process. We can do this!
Translators Wanted! Traducteurs recherchés! Übersetzer gesucht!
If you know French or German, please contribute a chapter to /leftypol/'s first crowdsourced translation project! This project started on >>691.The book is Karl Kautsky's history of the French Revolution, originally published as Die Klassengegensätze im Zeitalter der Französischen Revolution in 1889. Coming from the "Pope of Marxism", as Kautsky was then known, this text likely had an immense influence on Lenin and other revolutionaries of his day. It was approved by Engels himself, and may have been foundational in establishing the Marxist theory of bourgeois revolution, yet it has never been translated into English. The original German is available here: https://www.marxists.org/deutsch/archiv/kautsky/1908/frev/index.html and an old French translation is available here: https://www.marxists.org/francais/kautsky/works/1889/00/antagonismes-table.htm
What makes this work especially good for us to translate is that it's relatively short - just around 60 pages in total, divided into 10 chapters. With each chapter being 5-7 pages each, it is conceivable to translate a chapter in one day's volunteer work. Comrade Akko has already translated the preface, and is working on chapter 1. That leaves 9 chapters to complete:
Preface: Complete!
Chapter 1: Second draft complete (French)
Chapter 2: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 3: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 4: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 5: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading complete (English)
Chapter 6: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 7: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 8: Complete! (Copyrighted work, permission secured)
Chapter 9: Draft complete (French) - Proofreading in progress (English) - Proofreader needed
Chapter 10: Translator needed
If you don't speak French or German, you can still contribute! We need proofreaders for completed chapters, and historical experts to confirm / resolve contextual clues in the text.
If we are able to complete this project, it will be uploaded to marxists.org under /leftypol/'s name, and maybe win us some name recognition from the broader left in the process. We can do this!
R: 10 / I: 3
Theses On Feuerbach
About 200 words total.
In this thread, we break down what the Marx was trying to say.
Link to the text:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/index.htm
Theses On Feuerbach
About 200 words total.
In this thread, we break down what the Marx was trying to say.
Link to the text:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/index.htm
R: 1 / I: 0
Flash cards
What intervals do you use for the Leitner system? How many boxes do you have? need your advice on widening vocabulary by flash cards
R: 0 / I: 0
Picture not related, it's just a bloody box.
is war commdified ?
The explanations for the kind of post 2000 warfare are a bit rubbish in my humble opinion. I'm referring to the endless wars that have changing objectives but no real victory conditions. Has capitalism commodified war and did that change it's nature ?Picture not related, it's just a bloody box.
R: 22 / I: 21
> / t / - torrents and downloads
things to share:Movies, documentaries and mainly books.Anything related to socialism, anarchy, communism and so on.>Absolute beginner materialhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/index.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm>More Marx and Engels:https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/sw/index.htm>Leninhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/>Other Selected Marxistshttps://www.marxists.org/archive/selected-marxists.htm>Classical Works Recommended To High-Ranking Cadreshttps://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_56.htm>Many important books can be found on libgen:http://gen.lib.rus.ec/>Libcom has some good books/documents:https://libcom.org/library>Other links:https://archive.is/L8uFD>Various assortment of historical and biographical works.https://archive.org/search.php?query=uploader%3A%22kocotosi%40gmail.com%22&sort=-publicdate
R: 35 / I: 20
ok /edu/ some of you may already know what this thread is, share your downloads.things to share:Movies, documentaries and mainly books.Anything related to socialism, anarchy, communism and so on.
> / t / - torrents and downloads
Mod edit: Too many broken links, new thread here >>4881ok /edu/ some of you may already know what this thread is, share your downloads.things to share:Movies, documentaries and mainly books.Anything related to socialism, anarchy, communism and so on.
R: 2 / I: 0
Capital in the 21st century by Thomas Piketty
Is this book worthy of reading?
R: 16 / I: 0
What History YTers do you like, which ones do you hate?
There's already a thread about Lindybeige but I find him a bit of an insufferable right wing anticommunist fuck, granted there's plenty of that kind of thing in the YT historian community, but we can try to pick out the diamonds, relatively speaking. I'm kind of afraid to give my recommendations since I've just been going off Youtube recommendations so I'll let you go first.
R: 5 / I: 0
There were two major marxist parties in cataluña:
POUM, that did not align with the USSR, and claimed that the civil war and the revolution were inseparable
PSUC, that aligned with the USSR, and claimed that only after the civil war was won, and bourgeois democracy was restored, that the revolution could go on
He was very skeptical of PSUC's position, and states that the USSR would not allow the revolution to go on because they needed stable allies, and revolutions bring about many things, but not stability.
Smart people of /edu/, can you comment on this position? Maybe provide some more info on this matter? Asking because Orwell is not the most reputable of sources.
Cataluña-USSR Relations
I'm reading Orwell's Homage to Cataluña, and the explanation of the USSR influence goes like this:There were two major marxist parties in cataluña:
POUM, that did not align with the USSR, and claimed that the civil war and the revolution were inseparable
PSUC, that aligned with the USSR, and claimed that only after the civil war was won, and bourgeois democracy was restored, that the revolution could go on
He was very skeptical of PSUC's position, and states that the USSR would not allow the revolution to go on because they needed stable allies, and revolutions bring about many things, but not stability.
Smart people of /edu/, can you comment on this position? Maybe provide some more info on this matter? Asking because Orwell is not the most reputable of sources.
R: 2 / I: 0
How can we reconcile these two seemingly contradictory passages of Marx's? Are they even contradictory?
From Critique of the Gotha Program:
>Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. The phrase "proceeds of labor", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning.
From Capital Vol III:
>Secondly, after the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, but still retaining social production, the determination of value continues to prevail in the sense that the regulation of labour-time and the distribution of social labour among the various production groups, ultimately the book-keeping encompassing all this, become more essential than ever.
Similarly, does Engels contradict Marx's above passage in Capital in his letter to Karl Kautsky on the 20th of September, 1884?
>Present value is that of the production of commodities, but with the suppression of the production of commodities, value 'changes' or rather, value as such remains and merely changes its form. But in fact economic value is a category that appertains to the production of commodities, disappearing with it, just as it did not exist before it. The relation of labour to product prior to and after production of commodities no longer expresses itself in the form of value.
How can we reconcile these two seemingly contradictory passages of Marx's? Are they even contradictory?
From Critique of the Gotha Program:
>Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. The phrase "proceeds of labor", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning.
From Capital Vol III:
>Secondly, after the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, but still retaining social production, the determination of value continues to prevail in the sense that the regulation of labour-time and the distribution of social labour among the various production groups, ultimately the book-keeping encompassing all this, become more essential than ever.
Similarly, does Engels contradict Marx's above passage in Capital in his letter to Karl Kautsky on the 20th of September, 1884?
>Present value is that of the production of commodities, but with the suppression of the production of commodities, value 'changes' or rather, value as such remains and merely changes its form. But in fact economic value is a category that appertains to the production of commodities, disappearing with it, just as it did not exist before it. The relation of labour to product prior to and after production of commodities no longer expresses itself in the form of value.
R: 4 / I: 0
I'm a history major and the bourgeois dominance of the field is just as prevalent here as anywhere else.
What books on Marxist conceptions of history, historiography, etc are there that can give me the tools to critique and fight back against bourgeois historians.
I'm a history major and the bourgeois dominance of the field is just as prevalent here as anywhere else.
What books on Marxist conceptions of history, historiography, etc are there that can give me the tools to critique and fight back against bourgeois historians.
R: 14 / I: 0
https://www.health.com/condition/alcoholism/people-with-this-eye-color-may-have-a-greater-risk-of-alcoholism
People with blue eyes are more prone to alcohol addiction, which makes sense if you take into account their greater social inhibition. For many alcohol can be a way to feel free of inhibitions, so while darker eyed people may be more likely to drink to feel less depressed (if they are socially disadvantaged espec), light eyed people are more likely to drink to become more impulsive.
But ofc, blue eyes aren't making someone less impulsive. It's a Neanderthal trait, so anyone with it is more likely to have another set of Neanderthal traits, correlated with being antisocial.
blue eyes and alcoholism
https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=2571&context=etdhttps://www.health.com/condition/alcoholism/people-with-this-eye-color-may-have-a-greater-risk-of-alcoholism
People with blue eyes are more prone to alcohol addiction, which makes sense if you take into account their greater social inhibition. For many alcohol can be a way to feel free of inhibitions, so while darker eyed people may be more likely to drink to feel less depressed (if they are socially disadvantaged espec), light eyed people are more likely to drink to become more impulsive.
But ofc, blue eyes aren't making someone less impulsive. It's a Neanderthal trait, so anyone with it is more likely to have another set of Neanderthal traits, correlated with being antisocial.
R: 2 / I: 0
hopefully unrelatedd.
learning new languages - advice needed
I'm starting to learn Portuguese, because I'm tired of being an undereducated burger who relies on English news sources for interaction with the rest of the hemisphere. I would like to eventually learn Spanish and French as well. What can I do to retain the language as best I can, while expanding my knowledge as quickly as I can? Pichopefully unrelatedd.
R: 0 / I: 0
My understanding is that first large scale agriculture and with it city states are established. You get social stratification into commoners, nobility and priests. Why does this happen? Do priests and nobles start as mere bureaucrats, organizing production and distribution of food, and over the time solidify their position on top of society?
I am also not quite clear on the reasons why do these city states proceeds to enslave their neighbours. Is because work, particularly farming, sucks and nobody wants to do it, so the citizens of the city state get slaves for it, and thus the main antagonism is between free citizens and slaves? From what I remember from history, the most important class conflicts in Athens were between rising merchant class and nobility, and in Rome between nobility and plebeians.
Ancient city states were oligarchies, but when they expand and become empires, the power seems to concentrate in a hands of single ruler. Why? Also, why does the similar thing happen in feudal kingdoms? In early middle ages, nobility had substantial independence from king, yet during late middle ages came absolutism.
At the end, when Roman empire collapsed, why did the newly settled tribes establish feudal relations between nobility and peasantry, rather that slave society?
Slave society and feudalism
I need someone to give me a rundown of how does society develop from the end of tribal society up to birth of feudal one.What are the conditions that lead to creation of slave society and lead to its demise? What contradictions are at play here?My understanding is that first large scale agriculture and with it city states are established. You get social stratification into commoners, nobility and priests. Why does this happen? Do priests and nobles start as mere bureaucrats, organizing production and distribution of food, and over the time solidify their position on top of society?
I am also not quite clear on the reasons why do these city states proceeds to enslave their neighbours. Is because work, particularly farming, sucks and nobody wants to do it, so the citizens of the city state get slaves for it, and thus the main antagonism is between free citizens and slaves? From what I remember from history, the most important class conflicts in Athens were between rising merchant class and nobility, and in Rome between nobility and plebeians.
Ancient city states were oligarchies, but when they expand and become empires, the power seems to concentrate in a hands of single ruler. Why? Also, why does the similar thing happen in feudal kingdoms? In early middle ages, nobility had substantial independence from king, yet during late middle ages came absolutism.
At the end, when Roman empire collapsed, why did the newly settled tribes establish feudal relations between nobility and peasantry, rather that slave society?
R: 0 / I: 0
>Of the 170 pages long doctrine document, many experienced officers didn’t understand more than half. Officers responsible for planning EBOs in the Air Force, could not understand the definition of EBO (more precisely in Hebrew Effect-Based Campaigns) or of the definition of the word “Campaign” in the document. The terminology used was too complicated, vain, and could not be understood by the thousands of officers that needed to carry it out. . . . The new terminology and methodology was supposed to be limited to the higher levels of command, and at the level of theater command and definitely at the division level, the old terminology and methodology should have been used.
I've found several papers on EBO but nothing penned by Naveh (I'm attaching them). ITT we can also academically discuss military doctrines. I'm more versed in philosophy than military doctrine but I'm open to learning about campaigns or strategies.
Military Doctrine: EBO, SOD
Hello all. I just finished reading a report about the Israel/Lebanon war called "We Were Caught Unprepared" and I was interested in learning more about Effects-Based Operations and Systemic Operational Design which were used by Israel and written or spread by S. Naveh. It sounds like pomo warfare but I want to know if it's legit or not. I'm trying to find more info about it and the document mentioned here in the report:>Of the 170 pages long doctrine document, many experienced officers didn’t understand more than half. Officers responsible for planning EBOs in the Air Force, could not understand the definition of EBO (more precisely in Hebrew Effect-Based Campaigns) or of the definition of the word “Campaign” in the document. The terminology used was too complicated, vain, and could not be understood by the thousands of officers that needed to carry it out. . . . The new terminology and methodology was supposed to be limited to the higher levels of command, and at the level of theater command and definitely at the division level, the old terminology and methodology should have been used.
I've found several papers on EBO but nothing penned by Naveh (I'm attaching them). ITT we can also academically discuss military doctrines. I'm more versed in philosophy than military doctrine but I'm open to learning about campaigns or strategies.
R: 19 / I: 0
How to effortpost?
How can I learn to write pages of nearly incomprehensible bullshit about simple things that could straightforwardly expressed? I want to fit in on /leftypol/.
R: 315 / I: 47
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Anyway, if you have a look at the leftypedia site you might be able to tell that they have a much more formal and 'encyclopedic' tone than what we're planning, just like wikipedia, but the admin is going to create a separate 'category' for our new content that will be called something like 'rhetoric: topic' rather than just 'topic', this will also feature on the frontpage much like the encyclopedic content. As a tenplate, I'd like you to feast your eyes on these pages which someone on leftypedia already made (albeit only on their personal userspace for now).
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/User:Anarcho-Bolshevik/compendium
I'd like to ask if anyone can come up with a slightly more catchy name for our new section than 'rhetoric', cause that sounds a bit cumbersome to me even though I came up with it, so yeah, open to suggestions.
So, since that isn't implemented yet, I'd like you all to try familiarise yourselves with the site for now, maybe take a look at the articles that are already there and improve some of them if you feel able. Unfortunately the site currently has only edit by approval so you will have to wait for any changes you make to be approved, this is because of a persistent spambot problem and I hope that we will be able to work out something to change this to normal editing as on wikipedia and the like, please just bear with it for now.
If you have an answer to a 'common question', or you have an effortpost you'd like to archive and save, then please post it in this topic for now so that we can work on it together until we can figure out how to categorise our new section of the site.
Thanks for your attention!
EDIT: I've now got admin permissions on leftypedia, so I can create pages and approve edits directly. If you want to use the site I recommend you create a user account, which I can then approve once you make a productive edit (to distinguish from spambots), then you won't have to wait for approval anymore and can create articles yourself. Or, just ask me and I can create an article for you if you're desperate to make one as your first edit. Thanks guys, I hope we can make this project cool together!
t. Caballo
The beginnings of our new leftypol project
Hello everyone, we have received the results of our project proposal topic, and I'm delighted to announce that we are teaming up with 'leftypedia' to deliver our planned 'argument/talking point resource' idea. In case you don't know, leftypedia is the current version of the old abandoned 'marxistpedia' which was a project started by leftypol users back in the day, so I think this is sort of like a homecoming in a way.https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Anyway, if you have a look at the leftypedia site you might be able to tell that they have a much more formal and 'encyclopedic' tone than what we're planning, just like wikipedia, but the admin is going to create a separate 'category' for our new content that will be called something like 'rhetoric: topic' rather than just 'topic', this will also feature on the frontpage much like the encyclopedic content. As a tenplate, I'd like you to feast your eyes on these pages which someone on leftypedia already made (albeit only on their personal userspace for now).
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/User:Anarcho-Bolshevik/compendium
I'd like to ask if anyone can come up with a slightly more catchy name for our new section than 'rhetoric', cause that sounds a bit cumbersome to me even though I came up with it, so yeah, open to suggestions.
So, since that isn't implemented yet, I'd like you all to try familiarise yourselves with the site for now, maybe take a look at the articles that are already there and improve some of them if you feel able. Unfortunately the site currently has only edit by approval so you will have to wait for any changes you make to be approved, this is because of a persistent spambot problem and I hope that we will be able to work out something to change this to normal editing as on wikipedia and the like, please just bear with it for now.
If you have an answer to a 'common question', or you have an effortpost you'd like to archive and save, then please post it in this topic for now so that we can work on it together until we can figure out how to categorise our new section of the site.
Thanks for your attention!
EDIT: I've now got admin permissions on leftypedia, so I can create pages and approve edits directly. If you want to use the site I recommend you create a user account, which I can then approve once you make a productive edit (to distinguish from spambots), then you won't have to wait for approval anymore and can create articles yourself. Or, just ask me and I can create an article for you if you're desperate to make one as your first edit. Thanks guys, I hope we can make this project cool together!
t. Caballo
R: 4 / I: 0
Leading Light Communism general thread
The goal of LLCO is not to get rid of leadership, or simply to declare everyone a leader by fiat, but rather to make everyone capable of truly being a leader.
R: 34 / I: 3
Articles, books, infographs everythings is welcomed.
BUT MUH HOLOHOAX
Let's debunk muh holocaust revishunism with FACTS & LOGIC.Articles, books, infographs everythings is welcomed.
R: 18 / I: 7
Since /leftypol/ is downright autistic at times I decided to make a Debunk thread where anticommunist arguments are presented with their debunks by users.
Since /leftypol/ is downright autistic at times I decided to make a Debunk thread where anticommunist arguments are presented with their debunks by users.
R: 2 / I: 0
My professor gave us this math lesson on white privilege.
Do you agree with her? R: 114 / I: 21
What are you studying right now? What is your favorite field of mathematics and why?
Personally, I really like the book "Linear Algebra Done Right" by Sheldon Axler. It is on Libgen if you are interested and I attached a pdf.
/math/ general
All good communists study math.What are you studying right now? What is your favorite field of mathematics and why?
Personally, I really like the book "Linear Algebra Done Right" by Sheldon Axler. It is on Libgen if you are interested and I attached a pdf.
R: 0 / I: 0
lads, I'm looking for books in pdf or epub format on the CIA and the Mossad, specifically pic related. Drop any you have, or rec
lads, I'm looking for books in pdf or epub format on the CIA and the Mossad, specifically pic related. Drop any you have, or rec
R: 8 / I: 1
tl;dr why do orthodox Marxists believe no banknotes at all > labor vouchers > money?
pic unrelated.
why do orthodox Marxists want to eventually abolish money
and how do they plan on deprecating money itself? I know labor vouchers is usually the system that’s brought up but it doesn’t seem like Marx himself was thrilled about it, he just said it could be temporarily used in a workers’ state. I don’t understand how he planned on deprecating it afterwards. Cockshott expanded upon this by adding that they could be digital so that people wouldn’t be able to trade with them. but how does the act of trading currency inherently promote labor alienation? I understand how under private property it does, but in a collectively owned means of production I don’t see why it’s a problem, or why it’s any better than the currency system of the Soviet Union.tl;dr why do orthodox Marxists believe no banknotes at all > labor vouchers > money?
pic unrelated.
R: 18 / I: 1
Marx's "Capital" And One Free World
Has anyone read it? What do you think of its attempt at refuting marxism, its socioeconomic analysis, and Hegelian logic?
R: 4 / I: 0
Therefore I'm searching for the mao Zedong national liberation or KR politics later I would publish my book on amazon kindle.
Still, there is a reel version of my book but sadly I wont reveal it only few had the chance
National Maoism/Pol Pot thought
I've been working for a manifesto all these days I've been trying to idealize the Khmer rouge ideology which was hardly based on radical nationalism and Maoism and apparently I call my ideology national Maoism.Therefore I'm searching for the mao Zedong national liberation or KR politics later I would publish my book on amazon kindle.
Still, there is a reel version of my book but sadly I wont reveal it only few had the chance
R: 41 / I: 3
The thread is to serve as a mutual intellectual support system and meta-discussion for communist students to
· share resources for picking and learning your object of study
· discuss strategies for studies
· weekly rhythms and scheduling outside of the classroom
· organizing the student-body and/or spreading artistic agitation
· all while ultimately staying safe and completing your studies
✊🚩🏴
University communists general
This is a thread for communists who are (or are planning to) study at [b]unnamed[/b] universities the world over.The thread is to serve as a mutual intellectual support system and meta-discussion for communist students to
· share resources for picking and learning your object of study
· discuss strategies for studies
· weekly rhythms and scheduling outside of the classroom
· organizing the student-body and/or spreading artistic agitation
· all while ultimately staying safe and completing your studies
✊🚩🏴
R: 37 / I: 2
9 out of 10 leftists have never read Capital
Just gauging interest in a loosely organized Capital Reading Group. Not sure if a reading group has been done on here but we could agree to read a few chapters a week and then create a thread to discuss it or alternatively make a group signal/matrix for it. If there is no interest then please Sage or Ignore.
R: 5 / I: 0
This paper is about an education program in Indonesia and the long term effects on the job market. I'm used to studying more sociological papers, but this also includes lots of statistical analysis and words like function and regression that I don't understand.
Also, I've read this passage 10 times and don't understand it
>The production function in the formal sector exhibits constant returns to physical and human capital combined. The fact that the increase in the share of educated workers led to a movement of workers from the informal to the formal sector indicates that the elasticity of substitution between labor and land in the informal sector is smaller than the elasticity of substitution between labor and capital in the formal sector.
Can anyone help me? If I want to understand this stuff, what kind of courses should I be looking at?
How to learn economics?
I consider myself fairly intelligent when it comes to reading papers, but I'm really struggling with this one.This paper is about an education program in Indonesia and the long term effects on the job market. I'm used to studying more sociological papers, but this also includes lots of statistical analysis and words like function and regression that I don't understand.
Also, I've read this passage 10 times and don't understand it
>The production function in the formal sector exhibits constant returns to physical and human capital combined. The fact that the increase in the share of educated workers led to a movement of workers from the informal to the formal sector indicates that the elasticity of substitution between labor and land in the informal sector is smaller than the elasticity of substitution between labor and capital in the formal sector.
Can anyone help me? If I want to understand this stuff, what kind of courses should I be looking at?
R: 7 / I: 0
How should I go around teaching a kid a new language?
How should I go around teaching a kid a new language?
R: 6 / I: 0
- Paris Manuscripts
- Germany Ideology
- Civil war in France
- Feuerbach
- Gotha
- Grundrisse
- Wage labor and capital
Best editions/translations of the following Marx books?
Everyone tells me Penguin Classic's translation of all of Capital is the best around but what about the rest?- Paris Manuscripts
- Germany Ideology
- Civil war in France
- Feuerbach
- Gotha
- Grundrisse
- Wage labor and capital
R: 8 / I: 0
>The free people’s state is transformed into the free state. Grammatically speaking, a free state is one in which the state is free vis-à-vis its citizens, a state, that is, with a despotic government. All the palaver about the state ought to be dropped, especially after the Commune, which had ceased to be a state in the true sense of the term. The people’s state has been flung in our teeth ad nauseam by the anarchists, although Marx’s anti-Proudhon piece and after it the Communist Manifesto declare outright that, with the introduction of the socialist order of society, the state will dissolve of itself and disappear. Now, since the state is merely a transitional institution of which use is made in the struggle, in the revolution, to keep down one’s enemies by force, it is utter nonsense to speak of a free people’s state; so long as the proletariat still makes use of the state, it makes use of it, not for the purpose of freedom, but of keeping down its enemies and, as soon as there can be any question of freedom, the state as such ceases to exist. We would therefore suggest that Gemeinwesen ["community"] be universally substituted for state; it is a good old German word that can very well do service for the French “Commune.”
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm
What did Engels mean by this?
>pic unrelated
it's what comes up when you search for images of Engels
>The free people’s state is transformed into the free state. Grammatically speaking, a free state is one in which the state is free vis-à-vis its citizens, a state, that is, with a despotic government. All the palaver about the state ought to be dropped, especially after the Commune, which had ceased to be a state in the true sense of the term. The people’s state has been flung in our teeth ad nauseam by the anarchists, although Marx’s anti-Proudhon piece and after it the Communist Manifesto declare outright that, with the introduction of the socialist order of society, the state will dissolve of itself and disappear. Now, since the state is merely a transitional institution of which use is made in the struggle, in the revolution, to keep down one’s enemies by force, it is utter nonsense to speak of a free people’s state; so long as the proletariat still makes use of the state, it makes use of it, not for the purpose of freedom, but of keeping down its enemies and, as soon as there can be any question of freedom, the state as such ceases to exist. We would therefore suggest that Gemeinwesen ["community"] be universally substituted for state; it is a good old German word that can very well do service for the French “Commune.”
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm
What did Engels mean by this?
>pic unrelated
it's what comes up when you search for images of Engels
R: 25 / I: 2
Any good suggestions (books, videos, texts) for getting into African philosophy, culture and art?
African: culture, philosophy, art
I saw this picture (pic related) on another thread, and I am actually pretty curious about the topic.Any good suggestions (books, videos, texts) for getting into African philosophy, culture and art?
R: 12 / I: 2
We will all be reading through James Stewart's "Calculus" 4e edition.
see: http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=67AF6FA4D6DAB692F81A09B6A2EBCC7B
This is inspired by my need to review undergraduate mathematics due to work/school purposes. I'm a bit rusty and I've forgotten a ton of math.
We will start by doing problems from his algebra review pdf which is prep for the calc problems.
Calculus Review General
This is a thread to review/learn calculus.We will all be reading through James Stewart's "Calculus" 4e edition.
see: http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=67AF6FA4D6DAB692F81A09B6A2EBCC7B
This is inspired by my need to review undergraduate mathematics due to work/school purposes. I'm a bit rusty and I've forgotten a ton of math.
We will start by doing problems from his algebra review pdf which is prep for the calc problems.
R: 3 / I: 0
this chart
How accurate is it?
R: 21 / I: 4
What if I wanted to read more or less "contemporary" philosophers like Sartre, Beauvoir, Adorno, Deleuze, Zizek, Badiou, etc.. but don't have the time and, dare I say, sufficient interest to go through Kant, Plato, Aristotle, and all the other classical authors of philosophy? How much do I have to lose? I'm willing to spend a couple of months reading Plato, but I think I'm only willing to go through secondary sources for Aristotle. Same goes for the philosophers that predated the "contemporary" ones mentioned above. I'd be willing to read a history and primer on German idealism and maybe even read primary enlightenment texts if I have to.
So how much do I have to lose? People who are good at philosophy please answer.
What if I wanted to read more or less "contemporary" philosophers like Sartre, Beauvoir, Adorno, Deleuze, Zizek, Badiou, etc.. but don't have the time and, dare I say, sufficient interest to go through Kant, Plato, Aristotle, and all the other classical authors of philosophy? How much do I have to lose? I'm willing to spend a couple of months reading Plato, but I think I'm only willing to go through secondary sources for Aristotle. Same goes for the philosophers that predated the "contemporary" ones mentioned above. I'd be willing to read a history and primer on German idealism and maybe even read primary enlightenment texts if I have to.
So how much do I have to lose? People who are good at philosophy please answer.
R: 49 / I: 2
http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Essay-alt-view-TIK-presentation.pdf
I checked out his website and alsthough he does seem to be knowledgeable, he makes certain ridiculous claims that the "Vicors write history" in WW2, and the allies covered up how technologically and tactically inferior they were to the germans.
Can you help me debunk this wehraboo historian
This guy Is called nigel askey, and is apparently a legitimate historian. He published a paper debunking TIK's claim that the K/D ratio of the soviets during WW was 1/1.6, instead claiming that the soviets lost over 4 more times as many combatants as the Germansduring WW2. Here is his paper. I'm not a qualified historian and I dont have access to acrhives or time to research, so I can't debunk him.http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Essay-alt-view-TIK-presentation.pdf
I checked out his website and alsthough he does seem to be knowledgeable, he makes certain ridiculous claims that the "Vicors write history" in WW2, and the allies covered up how technologically and tactically inferior they were to the germans.
R: 15 / I: 2
Penguin Random House Parent Company buys Simon & Schuster
Penguin Random House Parent Company buys Simon & Schuster
R: 14 / I: 2
Time Travel
What can you guys tell me about "Time Travel"?
R: 33 / I: 11
Weird History Facts
Post any weird and obscure history facts that you know of
R: 17 / I: 1
Another question, should I try to get the absolute best translation and publisher or is does it not matter what edition I get as long as I freaking read something?
Going for physical books
I can't concentrate when reading on a computer screen, is it a bad idea or nah? Ideally I'm only going to buy cheap used stuff I find.Another question, should I try to get the absolute best translation and publisher or is does it not matter what edition I get as long as I freaking read something?
R: 9 / I: 3
>Let's talk about a hard truth about voting and community networks….
Community Organizing 101
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apGViv909eo>Let's talk about a hard truth about voting and community networks….
R: 5 / I: 0
Academic Bussywork
I feel like the busywork is college is draining my desire to live. How do people make it through four years of this?
R: 6 / I: 6
Infographics, Guides, etc
A thread for informative content of all types
R: 7 / I: 2
>The author voices concern that the philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels failed to incorporate women's oppression into their critiques of capitalism.
What is "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" for $300, Trebek?
>The author voices concern that the philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels failed to incorporate women's oppression into their critiques of capitalism.
What is "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" for $300, Trebek?
R: 5 / I: 0
Requesting Books on Leadership
Anyone know of good books on leadership as an academic field? Analyses of different styles and structures of leadership are welcome as well. None of that self-help, entrepreneurial, hero worship, or landfill literature BS that so often dominates pop culture. Thanks friends.
R: 5 / I: 0
Academia
What is the primary contradiction inside Academia? Is it between the Sciences and Humanities or something else?
R: 14 / I: 5
Educate me on weapons
Educate me on weapons
R: 9 / I: 0
There’s a recurring problem with modern history books (and other entertainment forms) in the Anglo sphere where they always cite Cold War era history works which in turn cite Nazi, gusanos or just made up garbage (The gulag archipelago being the biggest one).
The Soviet Archive
Where do you find a comprehensive access to the Soviet archive? I really want to do more research using primary source to debunk reactionaries and Wehraboos. But trawling through the entire thing is just so time consuming.There’s a recurring problem with modern history books (and other entertainment forms) in the Anglo sphere where they always cite Cold War era history works which in turn cite Nazi, gusanos or just made up garbage (The gulag archipelago being the biggest one).
R: 16 / I: 2
any suggestions?
pic unrelated.
The truth about Stalin
I want to learn more about the dogmatism that surrounds Stalin in socialism by looking at the actual historical evidence. I know there are books by Grover Furr that discuss this subject. but I want to additionally know what are some books with direct counter-arguments to Grover Furr's claims, and which of Grover Furr's books I should read first.any suggestions?
pic unrelated.
R: 1 / I: 0
In particular it does explicitly formulate how the tprf leads to recurring recessions (directly or indirectly).
I have an electronic copy of the pic book but haven't read it yet.
TSSI
Any enthusiasts of it on the board? I have read a good chunk of Andrew Kliman's Reclaiming Marx's Capital, but I admit that it mostly clears the deck of red herrings rather than makes an argument for a rigorous mathematical formulation of marxist economics.In particular it does explicitly formulate how the tprf leads to recurring recessions (directly or indirectly).
I have an electronic copy of the pic book but haven't read it yet.
R: 8 / I: 0
>Indirectly, however, it interests us inasmuch as we must desire as the present system of production to develop and expand as freely and as quickly as possible: because along with it will develop also those economic phenomena which are its necessary consequences, and which must destroy the whole system: misery of the great mass of the people, in consequence of overproduction. This overproduction engendering either periodical gluts and revulsions, accompanied by panic, or else a chronic stagnation of trade; division of society into a small class of large capitalist, and a large one of practically hereditary wage-slaves, proletarians, who, while their numbers increase constantly, are at the same time constantly being superseded by new labor-saving machinery; in short, society brought to a deadlock, out of which there is no escaping but by a complete remodeling of the economic structure which forms it basis.
>From this point of view, 40 years ago Marx pronounced, in principle, in favor of Free Trade as the more progressive plan, and therefore the plan which would soonest bring capitalist society to that deadlock. But if Marx declared in favor of Free Trade on that ground, is that not a reason for every supporter of the present order of society to declare against Free Trade? If Free Trade is stated to be revolutionary, must not all good citizens vote for Protection as a conservative plan?
>If a country nowadays accepts Free Trade, it will certainly not do so to please the socialists. It will do so because Free trade has become a necessity for the industrial capitalists. But if it should reject Free Trade and stick to Protection, in order to cheat the socialists out of the expected social catastrophe, that will not hurt the prospects of socialism in the least. Protection is a plan for artificially manufacturing manufacturers, and therefore also a plan for artificially manufacturing wage laborers. You cannot breed the one without breeding the other.
>The wage laborer everywhere follows in the footsteps of the manufacturer; he is like the "gloomy care" of Horace, that sits behind the rider, and that he cannot shake off wherever he go. You cannot escape fate; in other words, you cannot escape the necessary consequences of your own actions. A system of production based upon the exploitation of wage labor, in which wealth increases in proportion to the number of laborers employed and exploited, such a system is bound to increase the class of wage laborers, that is to say, the class which is fated one day to destroy the system itself. In the meantime, there is no help for it: you must go on developing the capitalist system, you must accelerate the production, accumulation, and centralization of capitalist wealth, and, along with it, the production of a revolutionary class of laborers. Whether you try the Protectionist or the Free Trade will make no difference in the end, and hardly any in the length of the respite left to you until the day when that end will come. For long before that day will protection have become an unbearable shackle to any country aspiring, with a chance of success, to hold its own in the world market.
- Engels, writing in 1888
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1888/free-trade/index.htm
The world has changed, free trade has enabled countries like China to build up its productive forces. However, the "necessary consequences" do not seem to have materialised fully. Along with free trade, we have gotten increased inter-dependence, exchange of information, global policing, surveillance, etc. How can the proletariat of one country stand up against its national bourgeoisie if there are countries willing to ignore sovereignty and help the counter-revolutionaries? These things seemed more possible when each and every person was not tracked and listened to through a cell phone or laptop.
Engels says that in Marx's time the free trade position was the revolutionary one? Does that still hold true today?
Free Trade vs. Protectionism
<The question of Free Trade or Protection moves entirely within the bounds of the present system of capitalist production, and has, therefore, no direct interest for us socialists who want to do away with that system.>Indirectly, however, it interests us inasmuch as we must desire as the present system of production to develop and expand as freely and as quickly as possible: because along with it will develop also those economic phenomena which are its necessary consequences, and which must destroy the whole system: misery of the great mass of the people, in consequence of overproduction. This overproduction engendering either periodical gluts and revulsions, accompanied by panic, or else a chronic stagnation of trade; division of society into a small class of large capitalist, and a large one of practically hereditary wage-slaves, proletarians, who, while their numbers increase constantly, are at the same time constantly being superseded by new labor-saving machinery; in short, society brought to a deadlock, out of which there is no escaping but by a complete remodeling of the economic structure which forms it basis.
>From this point of view, 40 years ago Marx pronounced, in principle, in favor of Free Trade as the more progressive plan, and therefore the plan which would soonest bring capitalist society to that deadlock. But if Marx declared in favor of Free Trade on that ground, is that not a reason for every supporter of the present order of society to declare against Free Trade? If Free Trade is stated to be revolutionary, must not all good citizens vote for Protection as a conservative plan?
>If a country nowadays accepts Free Trade, it will certainly not do so to please the socialists. It will do so because Free trade has become a necessity for the industrial capitalists. But if it should reject Free Trade and stick to Protection, in order to cheat the socialists out of the expected social catastrophe, that will not hurt the prospects of socialism in the least. Protection is a plan for artificially manufacturing manufacturers, and therefore also a plan for artificially manufacturing wage laborers. You cannot breed the one without breeding the other.
>The wage laborer everywhere follows in the footsteps of the manufacturer; he is like the "gloomy care" of Horace, that sits behind the rider, and that he cannot shake off wherever he go. You cannot escape fate; in other words, you cannot escape the necessary consequences of your own actions. A system of production based upon the exploitation of wage labor, in which wealth increases in proportion to the number of laborers employed and exploited, such a system is bound to increase the class of wage laborers, that is to say, the class which is fated one day to destroy the system itself. In the meantime, there is no help for it: you must go on developing the capitalist system, you must accelerate the production, accumulation, and centralization of capitalist wealth, and, along with it, the production of a revolutionary class of laborers. Whether you try the Protectionist or the Free Trade will make no difference in the end, and hardly any in the length of the respite left to you until the day when that end will come. For long before that day will protection have become an unbearable shackle to any country aspiring, with a chance of success, to hold its own in the world market.
- Engels, writing in 1888
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1888/free-trade/index.htm
The world has changed, free trade has enabled countries like China to build up its productive forces. However, the "necessary consequences" do not seem to have materialised fully. Along with free trade, we have gotten increased inter-dependence, exchange of information, global policing, surveillance, etc. How can the proletariat of one country stand up against its national bourgeoisie if there are countries willing to ignore sovereignty and help the counter-revolutionaries? These things seemed more possible when each and every person was not tracked and listened to through a cell phone or laptop.
Engels says that in Marx's time the free trade position was the revolutionary one? Does that still hold true today?
R: 27 / I: 6
I was sitting around watching Step back and I realized it has been a while since I have seen any of those old BBC like documentaries about historical figures.
Doesn't have to be older though. If you have any Youtube links or torrents to look up post them here. Thanks anons.
Historical Documentary General
This will be a thread for posting and sharing Documentaries about history as a whole.I was sitting around watching Step back and I realized it has been a while since I have seen any of those old BBC like documentaries about historical figures.
Doesn't have to be older though. If you have any Youtube links or torrents to look up post them here. Thanks anons.
R: 9 / I: 0
This article claims that Marx's "Poverty of Philosophy" is just a slanderous book that has nothing to do with Proudhon's real theories.
Marx doesn't properly quote Proudhon or openly strawmans him. His claims about Proudhon being bad economist in the begining of the book sound laughable since Proudhon was respected economist in his time.
>Comparing Marx’s “reply” to what Proudhon actually wrote, it is hard to take the former seriously. Once the various distortions and inventions are corrected, little remains. Proudhon was right to suggest Marx’s work was “a tissue of crudities, slanders, falsifications, and plagiarism.” (Correspondance [Paris: Lacroix, 1875] II: 267-8) Worse, Marx himself twenty years later embraces in Capital most of the positions he attacks Proudhon for holding in 1847.
>The dishonesty of The Poverty of Philosophy has distorted our view of Proudhon’s ideas and the time is long overdue for a revaluation of Proudhon and his contributions to anarchism and the wider socialist movement. This does not mean that Marx does not, occasionally, presents a valid point – most obviously, Proudhon’s opposition to strikes was wrong as subsequent anarchists recognised – it is just that these are frustratingly few in the midst of so much distortion. So, yes, Proudhon’s mutualism – a form of market socialism based on worker-run co-operatives – does need to be critiqued but Marx’s book is simply not that work.
are there any counter arguments to this?
Is "The Poverty of Philosophy" full of slander ahd lies?
https://anarchism.pageabode.com/anarcho/review-poverty-philosophy-karl-marxThis article claims that Marx's "Poverty of Philosophy" is just a slanderous book that has nothing to do with Proudhon's real theories.
Marx doesn't properly quote Proudhon or openly strawmans him. His claims about Proudhon being bad economist in the begining of the book sound laughable since Proudhon was respected economist in his time.
>Comparing Marx’s “reply” to what Proudhon actually wrote, it is hard to take the former seriously. Once the various distortions and inventions are corrected, little remains. Proudhon was right to suggest Marx’s work was “a tissue of crudities, slanders, falsifications, and plagiarism.” (Correspondance [Paris: Lacroix, 1875] II: 267-8) Worse, Marx himself twenty years later embraces in Capital most of the positions he attacks Proudhon for holding in 1847.
>The dishonesty of The Poverty of Philosophy has distorted our view of Proudhon’s ideas and the time is long overdue for a revaluation of Proudhon and his contributions to anarchism and the wider socialist movement. This does not mean that Marx does not, occasionally, presents a valid point – most obviously, Proudhon’s opposition to strikes was wrong as subsequent anarchists recognised – it is just that these are frustratingly few in the midst of so much distortion. So, yes, Proudhon’s mutualism – a form of market socialism based on worker-run co-operatives – does need to be critiqued but Marx’s book is simply not that work.
are there any counter arguments to this?
R: 0 / I: 0
Is it fine to read translations of Adorno? What are the best ones? I've heard his works are difficult to translate correctly.
Is it fine to read translations of Adorno? What are the best ones? I've heard his works are difficult to translate correctly.
R: 4 / I: 1
>ideally fairly short (not a book)
>classic text or unsung new author
>something awesome.
this is along term project I am starting with the New Multitude magazine and we already have one translation completed (Blood and Earth (1958) by Bamaw Tin Aung) and are looking for more.
any suggestions?
Translation Project
I need suggestions of things to translate into English.>ideally fairly short (not a book)
>classic text or unsung new author
>something awesome.
this is along term project I am starting with the New Multitude magazine and we already have one translation completed (Blood and Earth (1958) by Bamaw Tin Aung) and are looking for more.
any suggestions?
R: 60 / I: 9
If so, how do you work with your curricula to insert your chosen beliefs?
And what is the most based methodology and pedagogy?
>t. Primary School, Y 4-5, we play "Red Leader" which is basically capture the flag but with special rules, and I put up lots of posters about "working together" and "team work".
Pedagogy and /leftypol/
Are there any teachers here?If so, how do you work with your curricula to insert your chosen beliefs?
And what is the most based methodology and pedagogy?
>t. Primary School, Y 4-5, we play "Red Leader" which is basically capture the flag but with special rules, and I put up lots of posters about "working together" and "team work".
R: 56 / I: 3
Would it be apt to refer to this as libertarian Marxism?
Libertarian marxist?
I'm not sure sure where I sit on the left exactly because i am very sympathetic to alot of ansyn and mutualist anarchist models and also strongly center my belifes around the labor theory of value but I don't belive in the dissolution of the state but instead the state only existing as a democratic and transparent beuracratic entity that can mediate between potential disputes between communes and plan for projects that would involve multiple communes coperationWould it be apt to refer to this as libertarian Marxism?
R: 6 / I: 9
Obviously "Just join local X to get experience", but just doing prior reading.
MLs, Anarkiddies, Syndies, etc. All sources and styles welcome.
Just trying to build a little portfolio to read and share.
Organising Resources
/edu/ what are some resources that you've used or know of to help newbies learn to organise?Obviously "Just join local X to get experience", but just doing prior reading.
MLs, Anarkiddies, Syndies, etc. All sources and styles welcome.
Just trying to build a little portfolio to read and share.
R: 6 / I: 0
>Whilst it forces on more and more of the transformation of the vast means of production, already socialized, into State property, it shows itself the way to accomplishing this revolution. The proletariat seizes political power and turns the means of production into State property.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/04/nationalisation-land.htm
>The nationalisation of land will work a complete change in the relations between labour and capital, and finally, do away with the capitalist form of production, whether industrial or rural. Then class distinctions and privileges will disappear together with the economical basis upon which they rest. To live on other people's labour will become a thing of the past. There will be no longer any government or state power, distinct from society itself! Agriculture, mining, manufacture, in one word, all branches of production, will gradually be organised in the most adequate manner. National centralisation of the means of production will become the national basis of a society composed of associations of free and equal producers, carrying on the social business on a common and rational plan. Such is the humanitarian goal to which the great economic movement of the 19th century is tending.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
>If man, by dint of his knowledge and inventive genius, has subdued the forces of nature, the latter avenge themselves upon him by subjecting him, in so far as he employs them, to a veritable despotism independent of all social organisation. Wanting to abolish authority in large-scale industry is tantamount to wanting to abolish industry itself, to destroy the power loom in order to return to the spinning wheel.
Let us take another example — the railway. Here too the co-operation of an infinite number of individuals is absolutely necessary, and this co-operation must be practised during precisely fixed hours so that no accidents may happen. Here, too, the first condition of the job is a dominant will that settles all subordinate questions, whether this will is represented by a single delegate or a committee charged with the execution of the resolutions of the majority of persona interested. In either case there is a very pronounced authority. Moreover, what would happen to the first train dispatched if the authority of the railway employees over the Hon. passengers were abolished?
But the necessity of authority, and of imperious authority at that, will nowhere be found more evident than on board a ship on the high seas. There, in time of danger, the lives of all depend on the instantaneous and absolute obedience of all to the will of one.
When I submitted arguments like these to the most rabid anti-authoritarians, the only answer they were able to give me was the following: Yes, that's true, but there it is not the case of authority which we confer on our delegates, but of a commission entrusted! These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.
We have thus seen that, on the one hand, a certain authority, no matter how delegated, and, on the other hand, a certain subordination, are things which, independently of all social organisation, are imposed upon us together with the material conditions under which we produce and make products circulate.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm
>But no more than local and provincial self-government is in contradiction to political, national centralisation, is it necessarily bound up with that narrow-minded cantonal or communal self-seeking which strikes us as so repulsive in Switzerland, and which all the South German federal republicans wanted to make the rule in Germany in 1849. – Note by Engels to the 1885 edition.]
Evidence against:
>With all the great towns organized into Communes after the model of Paris, no government could repress the movement by the surprise of sudden reaction. Even by this preparatory step the time of incubation, the guarantee of the movement, came. All France [would be] organized into self-working and self-governing Communes, the standing army replaced by the popular militias, the army of State parasites removed, the clerical hierarchy displaced by the schoolmaster, the State judge transformed into Communal organs, the suffrage for the national representation not a matter of sleight of hand for an all-powerful government but the deliberate expression of organized Communes, the State functions reduced to a few functions for general national purposes.
Such is the Commune – the political form of the social emancipation, of the liberation of labour from the usurpations (slaveholding) of the monopolists of the means of labour, created by the labourers themselves or forming the gift of nature. As the State machinery and parliamentarism are not the real life of the ruling classes, but only the organized general organs of their dominion, the political guarantees and forms and expressions of the old order of things, so the Commune is not the social movement of the working class and therefore of a general regeneration of mankind, but the organized means of action. The Commune does not [do] away with the class struggles, through which the working classes strive to [read for] the abolition of all classes and, therefore, of all classes [class rule] (because it does not represent a peculiar interest, it represents the liberation of “labour,” that is the fundamental and natural condition of individual and social life which only by usurpation, fraud, and artificial contrivances can be shifted from the few upon the many), but it affords the rational medium in which that class struggle can run through its different phases in the most rational and humane way. It could start violent reactions and as violent revolutions. It begins the emancipation of labour – its great goal – by doing away with the unproductive and mischievous work of the State parasites, by cutting away the springs which sacrifice an immense portion of the national produce to the feeding of the State monster on the one side, by doing, on the other, the real work of administration, local and national, for working men’s wages. It begins therefore with an immense saving, with economical reform as well as political transformation.
The Communal organization once firmly established on a national scale, the catastrophes it might still have to undergo, would be sporadic slaveholders’ insurrections, which, while for a moment interrupting the work of peaceful progress, would only accelerate the movement, by putting the sword into the hands of the Social Revolution.
Source unknown
Did Marx support a strongly centralized state or no?
I am open to non-marxist points of view. Evidence for:>Whilst it forces on more and more of the transformation of the vast means of production, already socialized, into State property, it shows itself the way to accomplishing this revolution. The proletariat seizes political power and turns the means of production into State property.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/04/nationalisation-land.htm
>The nationalisation of land will work a complete change in the relations between labour and capital, and finally, do away with the capitalist form of production, whether industrial or rural. Then class distinctions and privileges will disappear together with the economical basis upon which they rest. To live on other people's labour will become a thing of the past. There will be no longer any government or state power, distinct from society itself! Agriculture, mining, manufacture, in one word, all branches of production, will gradually be organised in the most adequate manner. National centralisation of the means of production will become the national basis of a society composed of associations of free and equal producers, carrying on the social business on a common and rational plan. Such is the humanitarian goal to which the great economic movement of the 19th century is tending.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
>If man, by dint of his knowledge and inventive genius, has subdued the forces of nature, the latter avenge themselves upon him by subjecting him, in so far as he employs them, to a veritable despotism independent of all social organisation. Wanting to abolish authority in large-scale industry is tantamount to wanting to abolish industry itself, to destroy the power loom in order to return to the spinning wheel.
Let us take another example — the railway. Here too the co-operation of an infinite number of individuals is absolutely necessary, and this co-operation must be practised during precisely fixed hours so that no accidents may happen. Here, too, the first condition of the job is a dominant will that settles all subordinate questions, whether this will is represented by a single delegate or a committee charged with the execution of the resolutions of the majority of persona interested. In either case there is a very pronounced authority. Moreover, what would happen to the first train dispatched if the authority of the railway employees over the Hon. passengers were abolished?
But the necessity of authority, and of imperious authority at that, will nowhere be found more evident than on board a ship on the high seas. There, in time of danger, the lives of all depend on the instantaneous and absolute obedience of all to the will of one.
When I submitted arguments like these to the most rabid anti-authoritarians, the only answer they were able to give me was the following: Yes, that's true, but there it is not the case of authority which we confer on our delegates, but of a commission entrusted! These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.
We have thus seen that, on the one hand, a certain authority, no matter how delegated, and, on the other hand, a certain subordination, are things which, independently of all social organisation, are imposed upon us together with the material conditions under which we produce and make products circulate.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm
>But no more than local and provincial self-government is in contradiction to political, national centralisation, is it necessarily bound up with that narrow-minded cantonal or communal self-seeking which strikes us as so repulsive in Switzerland, and which all the South German federal republicans wanted to make the rule in Germany in 1849. – Note by Engels to the 1885 edition.]
Evidence against:
>With all the great towns organized into Communes after the model of Paris, no government could repress the movement by the surprise of sudden reaction. Even by this preparatory step the time of incubation, the guarantee of the movement, came. All France [would be] organized into self-working and self-governing Communes, the standing army replaced by the popular militias, the army of State parasites removed, the clerical hierarchy displaced by the schoolmaster, the State judge transformed into Communal organs, the suffrage for the national representation not a matter of sleight of hand for an all-powerful government but the deliberate expression of organized Communes, the State functions reduced to a few functions for general national purposes.
Such is the Commune – the political form of the social emancipation, of the liberation of labour from the usurpations (slaveholding) of the monopolists of the means of labour, created by the labourers themselves or forming the gift of nature. As the State machinery and parliamentarism are not the real life of the ruling classes, but only the organized general organs of their dominion, the political guarantees and forms and expressions of the old order of things, so the Commune is not the social movement of the working class and therefore of a general regeneration of mankind, but the organized means of action. The Commune does not [do] away with the class struggles, through which the working classes strive to [read for] the abolition of all classes and, therefore, of all classes [class rule] (because it does not represent a peculiar interest, it represents the liberation of “labour,” that is the fundamental and natural condition of individual and social life which only by usurpation, fraud, and artificial contrivances can be shifted from the few upon the many), but it affords the rational medium in which that class struggle can run through its different phases in the most rational and humane way. It could start violent reactions and as violent revolutions. It begins the emancipation of labour – its great goal – by doing away with the unproductive and mischievous work of the State parasites, by cutting away the springs which sacrifice an immense portion of the national produce to the feeding of the State monster on the one side, by doing, on the other, the real work of administration, local and national, for working men’s wages. It begins therefore with an immense saving, with economical reform as well as political transformation.
The Communal organization once firmly established on a national scale, the catastrophes it might still have to undergo, would be sporadic slaveholders’ insurrections, which, while for a moment interrupting the work of peaceful progress, would only accelerate the movement, by putting the sword into the hands of the Social Revolution.
Source unknown
R: 44 / I: 15
drop links, pdfs, images
if it's larger than 20k lmk and i'll think about it
i'll also do belarusian if needed
will translate any russian text under 20k words
it should take me a couple of days max to do so.drop links, pdfs, images
if it's larger than 20k lmk and i'll think about it
i'll also do belarusian if needed
R: 22 / I: 1
Why is the Proletariat the revolutionary class?
I haven't read much but I'm confused as to why Marx and others conceived of the proletariat as the class that would overthrow capitalism. If we look at history through a materialist lense it seems to me that it's only been a third propertied class overthrows the current system of production, not the people without property. For example, it wasn't slaves that overthrew slavery, it was landlords. It wasn't serfs that overthrew feudalism, it was the bourgeoisie. Every revolution calling itself socialist that actually took state power was led by petit-bourgeois intellectuals like Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, Mao, and Fidel Castro and manned mostly not by workers, but by peasants in a semi-colonial semi-feudal relationship to the means of production. Most proletarian movements in advanced capitalist societies have been reformist and class collaborationist. How, after all of this evidence, can we say that the proletariat is the revolutionary class? How can you say the workers have nothing to lose but their chains when they need capitalism to keep going so they can have running water, electricity, and the spectacle to keep them comfortable?
R: 3 / I: 0
Books/Sources on America's Coal Wars?
I'm a history major in Burgerstan, I'm hoping to really focus in on labor history and eventually get some kind of law degree so I can help Unions or work for OSHA or some shit. I thought it might be a good idea to start reading up on one of the more violent episodes of American Capitalism. Can anybody recommend some good accounts or Historians that cover the Coalfield Wars?
R: 2 / I: 0
Isn't this a false dichotomy, though? Different institutions have different strengths and weaknesses. Non-centralized institutions are necessary to deal with major collective action problems, like for instance climate change, but can come with a small number of failure points. One could imagine a world where SOEs produce public goods and homogenous commodities at scale, while smaller cooperatives form to produce more differentiated or experimental products.
I suppose a difficulty this introduces is that unlike everyone both owning and working for the state, or everyone both owning and working for their cooperative, this produces a seeming worker-owner split, with everyone owning the state but only some working for it. But there might presumably be a way to fix this with the way the state funds new cooperatives and collects back surplus from successful ones, which would seem to be necessary to avoid independent capital accumulation in an economy of just cooperatives anyway; and there may be aspects of the labor/ownership split that are physically inevitable per Critique of the Gotha Program (it cannot ever be the case that the only people who benefit from labor are the laborers, etc.)
Probably people have already done the math on this, or shown ways you could do it or why you couldn't, but I'm an ignoramus, so I'm posting this here.
socialism and institutional pluralism
It seems like most socialists are either Marxists who support comprehensive state planning, or anarchists who support either cooperative firms or informal local economies.Isn't this a false dichotomy, though? Different institutions have different strengths and weaknesses. Non-centralized institutions are necessary to deal with major collective action problems, like for instance climate change, but can come with a small number of failure points. One could imagine a world where SOEs produce public goods and homogenous commodities at scale, while smaller cooperatives form to produce more differentiated or experimental products.
I suppose a difficulty this introduces is that unlike everyone both owning and working for the state, or everyone both owning and working for their cooperative, this produces a seeming worker-owner split, with everyone owning the state but only some working for it. But there might presumably be a way to fix this with the way the state funds new cooperatives and collects back surplus from successful ones, which would seem to be necessary to avoid independent capital accumulation in an economy of just cooperatives anyway; and there may be aspects of the labor/ownership split that are physically inevitable per Critique of the Gotha Program (it cannot ever be the case that the only people who benefit from labor are the laborers, etc.)
Probably people have already done the math on this, or shown ways you could do it or why you couldn't, but I'm an ignoramus, so I'm posting this here.
R: 2 / I: 0
I've heard the May '68 failure characterized as being due to a conflict between the PCF and the students themselves. I haven't finished reading PDF related (below) but so far it seems to support this, being from the perspective of the students and, as you would expect, laying the blame on the PCF as well as heaping them with epithets (comparing them to liberals, for example). So my questions here are:
<1. Is this book known to anyone? If not, does it look like a decent primary source from the students' point of view?
<2. Does anyone have anything more sympathetic to the PCF that could balance it out? Or even something more neutral to both sides?
Thx anons
I've heard the May '68 failure characterized as being due to a conflict between the PCF and the students themselves. I haven't finished reading PDF related (below) but so far it seems to support this, being from the perspective of the students and, as you would expect, laying the blame on the PCF as well as heaping them with epithets (comparing them to liberals, for example). So my questions here are:
<1. Is this book known to anyone? If not, does it look like a decent primary source from the students' point of view?
<2. Does anyone have anything more sympathetic to the PCF that could balance it out? Or even something more neutral to both sides?
Thx anons
R: 24 / I: 23
Essay writing / academic skills
Hey /e/Im a brainlet prole that recently got a scholarships to university, and Im wondering if there are any resources that you could recommend to improve general academic skills with an emphasis on essay writing. I've done a general scan for books and courses on libgen and TPB. But I wanted to get some advise with a left perspective. When I say brainlet I mean dyslexic and when I say prole I mean any unskilled job I can land (bar work, kitchen work, construction, etc.) My degree is in healthcare and administration.
R: 46 / I: 10
I've had arguments in the past with people who claim that modern science doesn't prove materialism or that materialism cannot explain things like the origin of the universe or quantum mechanics. Well, where do I begin with this? Is materialism the truth? The most basic part of marxist philosophy is the assertion that matter is objectively real, right? How do I prove this then? Maybe one of you STEMlords around here can help me out with this. Any resources on this is appreciated.
The scientific value of materialism
Hello comrades. I have doubts about materialism since the philosophical part of Marxism isn't my strength, but I want to be able to understand it better since materialism is the foundation of marxist theory and the communist movement.I've had arguments in the past with people who claim that modern science doesn't prove materialism or that materialism cannot explain things like the origin of the universe or quantum mechanics. Well, where do I begin with this? Is materialism the truth? The most basic part of marxist philosophy is the assertion that matter is objectively real, right? How do I prove this then? Maybe one of you STEMlords around here can help me out with this. Any resources on this is appreciated.
R: 23 / I: 2
How do we know myths, stories, magic, etc. are not real? Assuming what we know scientifically is true, how does this negate myth, legend, etc? Why are dinosaurs not simultaneously animals and also monsters when they fit what we would have called monsters? Why are overriding social systems not tantamount to a spirit or God when they control our actions and shape our life histories even if they don't act consciously? Are they not what we'd call an egregor, i.e., a presence brought into existence by the actions and beliefs of a large number of people? Is our Sun not a God when it is responsible for all life on Earth? Is the biosphere not some sort of Earth spirit when it encompasses all living things yet influences each individually and can be destroyed through harming the Natural (non-human) World. Are spirits not the electrical currents moving through your brain? Do we not tell history as a story?
In the beginning there was nothing but the One, then the One expanded into the Everything, as the Everything continued to expand soon the beating hearts of the Everything, the Stars began to form from the energy of the Beginning, the stars coalesced into huge interstellar communities, galaxies; in the nuclear core of the stars more building elements were created, and from the stars came the planets; in the deep seas of one planet around one star life formed out of the energy of the planet's iron core, over the course of billions of years life arose in complexity in a way matching the Everything until finally from Life emerged the Someone, a complex arrangement of the Everything capable of consciously perceiving itself.
Why isn't our understanding of the Universe, even being scientifically true, a myth? Myths were once truths, after all.
Is it possible that magic and myth are true?
Inspired by my reading of the book, Ishmael, by Daniel QuinnHow do we know myths, stories, magic, etc. are not real? Assuming what we know scientifically is true, how does this negate myth, legend, etc? Why are dinosaurs not simultaneously animals and also monsters when they fit what we would have called monsters? Why are overriding social systems not tantamount to a spirit or God when they control our actions and shape our life histories even if they don't act consciously? Are they not what we'd call an egregor, i.e., a presence brought into existence by the actions and beliefs of a large number of people? Is our Sun not a God when it is responsible for all life on Earth? Is the biosphere not some sort of Earth spirit when it encompasses all living things yet influences each individually and can be destroyed through harming the Natural (non-human) World. Are spirits not the electrical currents moving through your brain? Do we not tell history as a story?
In the beginning there was nothing but the One, then the One expanded into the Everything, as the Everything continued to expand soon the beating hearts of the Everything, the Stars began to form from the energy of the Beginning, the stars coalesced into huge interstellar communities, galaxies; in the nuclear core of the stars more building elements were created, and from the stars came the planets; in the deep seas of one planet around one star life formed out of the energy of the planet's iron core, over the course of billions of years life arose in complexity in a way matching the Everything until finally from Life emerged the Someone, a complex arrangement of the Everything capable of consciously perceiving itself.
Why isn't our understanding of the Universe, even being scientifically true, a myth? Myths were once truths, after all.
R: 32 / I: 8
This piece is well written like most of Trotsky's work, but his argument is full of non-sequitors and general misreadings of Marx and Engels. I want to make this thread to do some comparing and contrasting between four texts in particular, but we can bring in other lit if people want. Those four texts are…
Anti-Duhring by Engels:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/index.htm
The ABC of Materialst Dialectics:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/12/abc.htm
Dialectical and Historical Materialism:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm
On Contradiction by Mao Zedong:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_17.htm
The first thing I want to note is in paragraph 12 of the general introduction to Anti-Duhring:
>To the metaphysician, things and their mental reflexes, ideas, are isolated, are to be considered one after the other and apart from each other, are objects of investigation fixed, rigid, given once for all. He thinks in absolutely irreconcilable antitheses. "His communication is 'yea, yea; nay, nay'; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." [Matthew 5:37. — Ed.] For him a thing either exists or does not exist; a thing cannot at the same time be itself and something else. Positive and negative absolutely exclude one another, cause and effect stand in a rigid antithesis one to the other.
Now, on first read this might appear to be a denunciation of Aristotelian non-contradiction, but I am pretty sure it isn't. It isn't a mere assertion of temporarily either because he specifically says "at the same time". I'm pretty sure what he means here is that a thing can be both itself in terms of it's internal relations, and something else in terms of it's external relations. This is supported by the context of this quote, in which Engels is talking about the metaphysical or even naturalistic approach of examining systems in isolation and not in their particular contexts.
Thoughts?
Scientific Socialism and Dialectics
Alright so I've had a few interactions with people on /leftypol/ who seem to think that Dialectics means rejecting the Aristotelian law of non-contradiction. As far as I can tell this has no real basis in the work of Marx or Engels and is a good to not be taken seriously by anyone who understands logic or philosophy or mathematics. I was really confused about where this came from for a while. I have read Mao's "On Contradiction" many times and I suppose that text could be read that way, but I don't think that is what Mao meant by contradiction or "the unity of opposites". Last night though I read Leon Trotsky's "The ABC of Materialist Dialectics" and I think I've found my answer. In it, Trotsky straight up makes a case for why A=/=A, and does make a somewhat compelling argument until you examine it critically.This piece is well written like most of Trotsky's work, but his argument is full of non-sequitors and general misreadings of Marx and Engels. I want to make this thread to do some comparing and contrasting between four texts in particular, but we can bring in other lit if people want. Those four texts are…
Anti-Duhring by Engels:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/index.htm
The ABC of Materialst Dialectics:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1939/12/abc.htm
Dialectical and Historical Materialism:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm
On Contradiction by Mao Zedong:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_17.htm
The first thing I want to note is in paragraph 12 of the general introduction to Anti-Duhring:
>To the metaphysician, things and their mental reflexes, ideas, are isolated, are to be considered one after the other and apart from each other, are objects of investigation fixed, rigid, given once for all. He thinks in absolutely irreconcilable antitheses. "His communication is 'yea, yea; nay, nay'; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." [Matthew 5:37. — Ed.] For him a thing either exists or does not exist; a thing cannot at the same time be itself and something else. Positive and negative absolutely exclude one another, cause and effect stand in a rigid antithesis one to the other.
Now, on first read this might appear to be a denunciation of Aristotelian non-contradiction, but I am pretty sure it isn't. It isn't a mere assertion of temporarily either because he specifically says "at the same time". I'm pretty sure what he means here is that a thing can be both itself in terms of it's internal relations, and something else in terms of it's external relations. This is supported by the context of this quote, in which Engels is talking about the metaphysical or even naturalistic approach of examining systems in isolation and not in their particular contexts.
Thoughts?
R: 60 / I: 16
Universities and Education
I saw this thread on leftypol and thought it would be very suited here. Did you guys go to university or any other forms of higher education? Why or why not? Did it help you achieve what you want to achieve? Would you go back in time and choose a different path?
R: 1 / I: 0
1. what features did the ML revisionism of Khrushchev and his USSR followers entail that broke with this
2. which policies differentiated Dengist revisionism from the USSR revisionism, enough for them to not be able to get along by Brezhnev-Deng times?
3. Does Bukharin'ism' play any particular role in how these right-wing deviations differed?
Distinguishing features between real ML and ML right-deviationism(^2)?
If ML anti-revisionism came to encompass a defense of orthodox Marxism, Bolshevism/Leninism and Stalinism, then:1. what features did the ML revisionism of Khrushchev and his USSR followers entail that broke with this
2. which policies differentiated Dengist revisionism from the USSR revisionism, enough for them to not be able to get along by Brezhnev-Deng times?
3. Does Bukharin'ism' play any particular role in how these right-wing deviations differed?
R: 8 / I: 1
A huge part of this is of course cybersocialism so I'd like to use this thread to discuss ideas relating to that too. If you are new to this, Cockshott's Towards A New Socialism is a must. If you want to bring round your soccdem friends, recommend People's Republic of Walmart as a taste.
Cybersocialism and Marx & Lenin in the 21st Century
This thread is to discuss how we plan to adapt, and build upon current Marxist thought into the century. We must cut ties with larp of the 20th century, we need no more trot parties or consumer ideologies. This is about Marxism as a science.A huge part of this is of course cybersocialism so I'd like to use this thread to discuss ideas relating to that too. If you are new to this, Cockshott's Towards A New Socialism is a must. If you want to bring round your soccdem friends, recommend People's Republic of Walmart as a taste.
R: 9 / I: 1
Any historical books similar to this?
Any historical books similar to this?
R: 3 / I: 0
Anyone have any recommended books on the Russian Civil War? Preferably from a military focus and perspective from the Soviet side.
Anyone have any recommended books on the Russian Civil War? Preferably from a military focus and perspective from the Soviet side.
R: 7 / I: 0
Explain what Marx meant by "abstract labour". Me too unga bunga to understand.
Explain what Marx meant by "abstract labour". Me too unga bunga to understand.
R: 2 / I: 0
The Agricultural Revolution vs the Urban Revolution vs Industrial Revolution
Explain, in your opinion, from a Marxist standpoint, which held the more important change to humanity's social organization, technology, and relationship to Nature; was it the Agricultural Revolution with the start of animal husbandry, settlements, and war? Was it the Urban Revolution with the start of social classes, states, philosophical inquiry, and writing? Or was it the Industrial Revolution with the start of modern warfare, modern agricultural, globalization, modern science, and the population boom?
R: 5 / I: 0
I'm interested in non-marxist historiography. Where should I start?
I'm interested in non-marxist historiography. Where should I start?
R: 6 / I: 2
Theodor Adorno
Frankfurt School Thread.
R: 16 / I: 9
/chart/
I made these charts recently, if you have any ideas of new charts or charts of your own drop them here.
R: 7 / I: 2
Do you use reading charts?
Do you decide based on Recommendations?
Aside from the obvious Leftist ones, which are the good and which are the bad Publishers?
How to decide what to read?
What is your process?Do you use reading charts?
Do you decide based on Recommendations?
Aside from the obvious Leftist ones, which are the good and which are the bad Publishers?
R: 4 / I: 0
The third (last) edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia was translated into English for a western publisher almost concurrently with the Russian encyclopedia's publication. Given its obvious significance, it's surprising that not a single volume has circulated online like many other books.
The Great Soviet Encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Soviet_EncyclopediaThe third (last) edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia was translated into English for a western publisher almost concurrently with the Russian encyclopedia's publication. Given its obvious significance, it's surprising that not a single volume has circulated online like many other books.
R: 157 / I: 41
I just found this photograph btw. Samurai didn't look nearly as impressive as I thought they would, and that hairdo is "objectively ugly."
There were a lot of peasant revolutions/movements that tried to go against the samurai but they all ultimately failed so no one except historians talk about them. Unfortunately too, the people who study Japanese history appear to be mostly weebs who romanticize the samurai so much that you never get to hear about the peasents' movements.
Samurai thread
Was the Meiji restoration and "restoring power to the emperor" a good or bad thing in 18th century Japan for the peasants? It marked the upper class revolution that caused the samurai feudal system to transition into a capitalist system. (Which ultimately turned into a racist imperialist empire that tried to invade and oppress all of its neighbors in Asia in a sort of fascist system, and as Japan lost the war the people starved and suffered greatly.)I just found this photograph btw. Samurai didn't look nearly as impressive as I thought they would, and that hairdo is "objectively ugly."
There were a lot of peasant revolutions/movements that tried to go against the samurai but they all ultimately failed so no one except historians talk about them. Unfortunately too, the people who study Japanese history appear to be mostly weebs who romanticize the samurai so much that you never get to hear about the peasents' movements.
R: 44 / I: 9
Is there any Marxist historians you recommend?
>inb4 Grover Furr
Is there any Marxist historians you recommend?
>inb4 Grover Furr
R: 7 / I: 0
What are your opinions on this book? I'll keep mine to myself for now, I'm genuinely curious to see how it is viewed in leftist circles.
What are your opinions on this book? I'll keep mine to myself for now, I'm genuinely curious to see how it is viewed in leftist circles.
R: 4 / I: 4
recommend me books of underground socialist/anarchist movements, files and biographies of people who were involved.
recommend me books of underground socialist/anarchist movements, files and biographies of people who were involved.
R: 6 / I: 1
You can recommended book of history of africa ? in pdf format of course
Pls… in spanish much better
Pls need help
Please guyYou can recommended book of history of africa ? in pdf format of course
Pls… in spanish much better
R: 18 / I: 1
I have limited time and two options:
>stuyding esotericism,magick,mystic treatises and meditation techniques,the vedas,medieval books etc
OR
>cosmology,neurology,biology,history of life on earth,maths,etc
Which should I devote my time to?
studying mysticism/esotericism vs studying cosmology,physics and maths
I'm a celibate man(thus have high brain power)and i want to find the ultimate truth to life.I have limited time and two options:
>stuyding esotericism,magick,mystic treatises and meditation techniques,the vedas,medieval books etc
OR
>cosmology,neurology,biology,history of life on earth,maths,etc
Which should I devote my time to?
R: 14 / I: 1
What is morality to you?
Do you think at the end of your life you will be judged by a god for your actions?
What is morality to you?
Do you think at the end of your life you will be judged by a god for your actions?
R: 5 / I: 0
history of the world
What does /roulette/ think of the markovian view of marxist/althusserian historical materialism presented by the immortal scientist in his review of althusser's philosopher of the encounter, as well as in his book "how the world works".
R: 32 / I: 3
Do you prefer physical or digital books /edu/?
Do you prefer physical or digital books /edu/?
R: 5 / I: 0
Ethiopian elephants
Did the ancient/medieval Ethiopians domesticate the African elephant? In many historical records, the Abyssinians/Aksumites are mentioned to use elephants for military purposes, but were these African elephants or Asian elephants? In modern-day Ethiopia, or in fact anywhere for that matter, there is no sign of domestication of the African elephant. However, African elephants have been extensively used in ancient times for military purposes, for example by the Carthaginians.
R: 9 / I: 0
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xgqkyw/copper-destroys-viruses-and-bacteria-why-isnt-it-everywhere
>Today, we have insight into why a person handling copper day in and day out would have protection from a bacterial threat: Copper is antimicrobial. It kills bacteria and viruses, sometimes within minutes. In the 19th century, exposure to copper would have been an early version of constantly sanitizing one's hands.
>A study from 2015 found that a different coronavirus, human coronavirus 229E, which causes respiratory tract infections, could still infect a human lung cell after five days of being on materials like teflon, ceramic, glass, silicone rubber, and stainless steel. But on copper alloys, the coronavirus was “rapidly inactivated.”
>So given how well it could work, for hospital infections and for health more generally, why isn’t copper everywhere? Why isn’t every door knob, every subway rail, every ICU room, made of copper? Why can we easily buy stainless steel water bottles, but not copper? Where are the copper iPhone cases?
>There might also be a perception that copper is too expensive, Schmidt said, despite the fact that the numbers indicate it would ultimately save money. One of Keevil and Schmidt's studies from 2015 did the math: The cost of treating an HAI ranges from $28,400 to $33,800 per patient. Installing copper on 10 percent of surfaces cost $52,000 and prevented 14 infections over the course of the 338-day study. If you take the lower end of the HAI treatment cost ($28,400), then those 14 prevented infections saved a total of $397,600, or $1,176 a day.
So while the material and reason to use copper for most things are there. The kind of short-term market logic that makes it impossible to do anything about climate change also prevents this move from being made.
Reforms possible post-capitalist society
This thread is for large-scale improvements or even small tweaks in society that are impossible to implement under capitalism. Inspiration for this thread came after reading thishttps://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xgqkyw/copper-destroys-viruses-and-bacteria-why-isnt-it-everywhere
>Today, we have insight into why a person handling copper day in and day out would have protection from a bacterial threat: Copper is antimicrobial. It kills bacteria and viruses, sometimes within minutes. In the 19th century, exposure to copper would have been an early version of constantly sanitizing one's hands.
>A study from 2015 found that a different coronavirus, human coronavirus 229E, which causes respiratory tract infections, could still infect a human lung cell after five days of being on materials like teflon, ceramic, glass, silicone rubber, and stainless steel. But on copper alloys, the coronavirus was “rapidly inactivated.”
>So given how well it could work, for hospital infections and for health more generally, why isn’t copper everywhere? Why isn’t every door knob, every subway rail, every ICU room, made of copper? Why can we easily buy stainless steel water bottles, but not copper? Where are the copper iPhone cases?
>There might also be a perception that copper is too expensive, Schmidt said, despite the fact that the numbers indicate it would ultimately save money. One of Keevil and Schmidt's studies from 2015 did the math: The cost of treating an HAI ranges from $28,400 to $33,800 per patient. Installing copper on 10 percent of surfaces cost $52,000 and prevented 14 infections over the course of the 338-day study. If you take the lower end of the HAI treatment cost ($28,400), then those 14 prevented infections saved a total of $397,600, or $1,176 a day.
So while the material and reason to use copper for most things are there. The kind of short-term market logic that makes it impossible to do anything about climate change also prevents this move from being made.
R: 9 / I: 4
any good books on the medieval period?
yes i have already read the peseant war in germany, no i did not understood what the fuck it was saying
any good books on the medieval period?
yes i have already read the peseant war in germany, no i did not understood what the fuck it was saying
R: 1 / I: 0
https://youtu.be/wnqS7G3LmMo?t=1619
timestamp is 27 minutes if the link doesn't work(skipping a lot of introduction).
I like the presenters maxim of
>geography determines social development and social development determines what geography means
Of course i'd replace 'geography' with 'material conditions' but that's a small nitpick in an otherwise great presentation. The other nitpick is the absence of the idea of a mode of production.
We all know how inefficient capitalism is at its uses of the geography/resources it potentially has at its disposal. The profit motive holds back the total use of geography that would be a huge boon on the level of the guns and boat revolution in the 1400s
Historical Development
A thread for sharing and discussing information related to the historical development of humanity. Here's my opening contributionhttps://youtu.be/wnqS7G3LmMo?t=1619
timestamp is 27 minutes if the link doesn't work(skipping a lot of introduction).
I like the presenters maxim of
>geography determines social development and social development determines what geography means
Of course i'd replace 'geography' with 'material conditions' but that's a small nitpick in an otherwise great presentation. The other nitpick is the absence of the idea of a mode of production.
We all know how inefficient capitalism is at its uses of the geography/resources it potentially has at its disposal. The profit motive holds back the total use of geography that would be a huge boon on the level of the guns and boat revolution in the 1400s
R: 10 / I: 2
date: 9-4kya
blue = european
orange = levant MENA
green = iran MENA
9kya, levants colonize europe and mix with european foragers. The mixing ultimately ends up being on somewhat even terms.
5kya, a mixed race group (half euro half iran) colonizes europe very hard, killing off both euro/levant males and essentially raping their women. These "aryans" introduce the indoeuropean languages into europe.
Every european today has these three ancestries in their genome. Some europeans, like italians and greeks, are more Middle Eastern than European.
The average Brit is 60% european, 40% MENA (30% levant and 10% iran)
In addition, Finns and Russians have about 10% Asian ancestry from Uralics.
date: 9-4kya
blue = european
orange = levant MENA
green = iran MENA
9kya, levants colonize europe and mix with european foragers. The mixing ultimately ends up being on somewhat even terms.
5kya, a mixed race group (half euro half iran) colonizes europe very hard, killing off both euro/levant males and essentially raping their women. These "aryans" introduce the indoeuropean languages into europe.
Every european today has these three ancestries in their genome. Some europeans, like italians and greeks, are more Middle Eastern than European.
The average Brit is 60% european, 40% MENA (30% levant and 10% iran)
In addition, Finns and Russians have about 10% Asian ancestry from Uralics.
R: 3 / I: 2
Aesthetics
Hume established criteria for good taste. However, criteria for good taste says nothing about criteria for good art. So what then is the criteria for good art, the seeming elephant in the room left unaddressed in the realm of aesthetics? How can you call something good art if you cannot even define what is good art?
R: 2 / I: 2
Can someone get me this? I'm getting copyright blocked and cant find it anywhere.
Bellu, E. "The Dialectical Significance of Chemistry in the Works of Fr. Engels." Revue roumaine des sciences sociales: serie de philosophie et logique 17 (1973): 163-169.
Bellu, E. The Dialectical Significance of Chemistry in the Work of Friedrich Engels. Romanian Journal of Social Sciences Philosophy and Logic Series, Volume 17, 1973, 163-169.
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000494736
Can someone get me this? I'm getting copyright blocked and cant find it anywhere.
Bellu, E. "The Dialectical Significance of Chemistry in the Works of Fr. Engels." Revue roumaine des sciences sociales: serie de philosophie et logique 17 (1973): 163-169.
Bellu, E. The Dialectical Significance of Chemistry in the Work of Friedrich Engels. Romanian Journal of Social Sciences Philosophy and Logic Series, Volume 17, 1973, 163-169.
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000494736
R: 4 / I: 1
Why are Lesbians, Transbians, Trans*, and Bisexuals so much more radical overall than gay men? What's the issue?
I see so many LBTQ+ people in socialist groups like FRSO or anarchist collectives but my fellow gays would rather hole up in bars or form Stonewall caucuses to support homophobic democrats.
Any Gayfags here? Why are Gays so liberal compared to LBTQ+?
It seems like the Democrats have done a great job of pinkwashing their party, the amount of Gays I see worshipping any Dem candidate–including Biden, who supported both DADT and DOMA, is entirely annoying.Why are Lesbians, Transbians, Trans*, and Bisexuals so much more radical overall than gay men? What's the issue?
I see so many LBTQ+ people in socialist groups like FRSO or anarchist collectives but my fellow gays would rather hole up in bars or form Stonewall caucuses to support homophobic democrats.
R: 0 / I: 0
Mafarka the Futurist
I'm looking for Marinetti's Mafarka the Futurist novel but I cannot find it anywhere. I've searched libgen and archive (dot) org but I didn't find an English translation. Can anyone post a copy or at least a link to it?
R: 26 / I: 3
Tolstoy wrote that Nietzsche wrote nothing insightful, that had he been alive earlier no one would have paid attention to his writings, that he and his prominence is a sign of intellectual decay. Trotsky wrote that the reason why Nietzsche's followers can be so radically different from each other is because they take what they want from Nietzsche and ignore whatever else is inconvenient for them. When someone points out the terrible things Nietzsche wrote, the response is either a) you're misinterpreting him! or b) his personal views are not reflective of his philosophy! or even c) you can't critique the genius of Nietzsche because he has rejected reason!
Does this strike anyone else as eerily similar to Jordan Peterson and his rabid followers?
What's the deal with Nietzsche and his rabid followers?
Is he like an old Jordan Peterson? A Rorschach test that says "water is wet"?Tolstoy wrote that Nietzsche wrote nothing insightful, that had he been alive earlier no one would have paid attention to his writings, that he and his prominence is a sign of intellectual decay. Trotsky wrote that the reason why Nietzsche's followers can be so radically different from each other is because they take what they want from Nietzsche and ignore whatever else is inconvenient for them. When someone points out the terrible things Nietzsche wrote, the response is either a) you're misinterpreting him! or b) his personal views are not reflective of his philosophy! or even c) you can't critique the genius of Nietzsche because he has rejected reason!
Does this strike anyone else as eerily similar to Jordan Peterson and his rabid followers?
R: 28 / I: 6
Me: Native English speaker, very good at math, okay at similar sciences, and computer science, can help with music regarding drums/guitar/songwriting etc.
I'm particularly interested in learning Chinese (Mandarin), I've just started learning some basics, if anyone has any advice or resources for learning that would be great.
Knowledge/Skill Exchange
Here we post our fields of expertise, in hopes to share the knowledge with our fellow comrades. Ask any questions to comrades in this thread regarding their skills, and post your own. Maybe we can create a chat eventually to teach things at a more in depth level.Me: Native English speaker, very good at math, okay at similar sciences, and computer science, can help with music regarding drums/guitar/songwriting etc.
I'm particularly interested in learning Chinese (Mandarin), I've just started learning some basics, if anyone has any advice or resources for learning that would be great.
R: 131 / I: 94
Audio thread
Post audio sources R: 8 / I: 1
Do y'all have any good resources or books for someone looking to restart their education from basics? Assume that I don't know anything aside from basic literacy and numbers. Maybe not even that.
General Education for Brainlets
A lifetime of undiagnosed learning disorders, educational neglect and unproductive escapism has reduced my grey matter into a vestigial organ. I essentially missed out on the entirety of highschool but was able to work with what I had and managed to get a GED plus a tiny smattering of community college. But I started to hit the brainlet wall again and I realized how spotty and full of holes my whole foundation is. I was too ashamed at the time to ask for help and I no longer have access to professional educators so I might as well ask an anonymous imageboard.Do y'all have any good resources or books for someone looking to restart their education from basics? Assume that I don't know anything aside from basic literacy and numbers. Maybe not even that.
R: 4 / I: 0
>Read capital and complimentary theory.
>No! Really, READ capital and complimentary theory.
>No, not like that!
>Ok basically read this quote down below by fucking Karl Marx.
>And at least read the text on point 1 down below.
>Why?
> To understand why your current party isn't even being shut down or disturbed by the Porky Police.
>You are in your current state, totally harmless.
>Let's not keep it that way.
"It is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be. Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner." - Karl Marx
1:
https://www.krisis.org/1999/manifesto-against-labour/
2:
https://libcom.org/files/Moishe%20Postone%20-%20Time,%20Labor,%20and%20Social%20Domination.pdf
Feel free to read these pages before going for the full dive in this one:
3-18,24-32,39-41,49,58,72-83,123-125,144-158,179-180,193-204,211-217,263-265,277-279,358-368,373-378,389-390,394-399
(btw yes I know this file is hosted on libcom but who gives a shit)
3:https://rtheory.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/disassembling-capital-n-pepperell.pdf
Feel free to read these pages before going for the full dive in this one:: 3-18,41-42,85-86,99-101,156-157-176-181,189,248-254,257-263,266-268
Bonus:
Idk translate this shit if u give a fuck or read Bork, I've not read it I just stumbled across it, It's written as a masters in intellectual history so it might suck… But more theory is almost always good, otherwise we'll never get out of this shit.
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/53697/1/gupea_2077_53697_1.pdf
Also: Rest of the thread is now dedicated to talking about the literature as well as recommending other stuff which is actually good and not full of quasi-religious essentialism et.c
How to get woke cheat sheet
/Leftypol/ didn't bite, let's see if /edu/ acctually might read something.>Read capital and complimentary theory.
>No! Really, READ capital and complimentary theory.
>No, not like that!
>Ok basically read this quote down below by fucking Karl Marx.
>And at least read the text on point 1 down below.
>Why?
> To understand why your current party isn't even being shut down or disturbed by the Porky Police.
>You are in your current state, totally harmless.
>Let's not keep it that way.
"It is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be. Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner." - Karl Marx
1:
https://www.krisis.org/1999/manifesto-against-labour/
2:
https://libcom.org/files/Moishe%20Postone%20-%20Time,%20Labor,%20and%20Social%20Domination.pdf
Feel free to read these pages before going for the full dive in this one:
3-18,24-32,39-41,49,58,72-83,123-125,144-158,179-180,193-204,211-217,263-265,277-279,358-368,373-378,389-390,394-399
(btw yes I know this file is hosted on libcom but who gives a shit)
3:https://rtheory.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/disassembling-capital-n-pepperell.pdf
Feel free to read these pages before going for the full dive in this one:: 3-18,41-42,85-86,99-101,156-157-176-181,189,248-254,257-263,266-268
Bonus:
Idk translate this shit if u give a fuck or read Bork, I've not read it I just stumbled across it, It's written as a masters in intellectual history so it might suck… But more theory is almost always good, otherwise we'll never get out of this shit.
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/53697/1/gupea_2077_53697_1.pdf
Also: Rest of the thread is now dedicated to talking about the literature as well as recommending other stuff which is actually good and not full of quasi-religious essentialism et.c
R: 4 / I: 2
Spanish Civil War
Thread for discussing the spanish civil war. I start the thread with a short paper on Soviet Union's involvement 1936-1939.
R: 4 / I: 0
NEP and collectivisation period
Does anyone have some good things to read about the NEP period and the collectivisation period and the transition between the two? R: 12 / I: 4
everything feels outdated what the fuck do I read to understand neoliberalism and all this shit, what can you even do at this point?
everything feels outdated what the fuck do I read to understand neoliberalism and all this shit, what can you even do at this point?
R: 28 / I: 0
Stalin as center,
Bordiga as left –
but then where the fuck would people like Lenin, Trotsky, Mao and Cockshott fit in to this? Lenin had a big shift in positions (before vs after the revolution), Trotsky was clearly very similar to Lenin in positions after, but he often gets called "left" by Stalinists. Mao clearly was more sympathetic to Stalin than either Trotsky or post-Stalin right-wing revisionists, yet he is occasionally slandered as "ultra-left" (which is ridiculous), and then Cockshott went through "ML" (centrist, I suppose) parties, get kicked out for "ultra-leftism" and subsequently writes his seminal work TANS, including a critique of the scrapping of soviet cybernetics in the USSR, bourgeois elements of democratic centralism, and proposes to move towards communism immediately via the DotP through the revolutionary utilization of cybernetics instead of any market mechanisms (market mechanisms seemingly being supported by both right-wing and centrist Communists).
To me, intuitively, it sounds like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao, in hindsight, had more in common than they were willing to admit (all "centrists", but how would one divide them into center-left-, center and center-right?), while Cockshott clearly drifted left (toward Bordiga).
I may be missing something, That's why I want to open it up for collective discussion with you all here on /edu/.
What DEFINES left-wing, centrist and right-wing Communism?
I hear Deng and Bukharin be described as right-wing,Stalin as center,
Bordiga as left –
but then where the fuck would people like Lenin, Trotsky, Mao and Cockshott fit in to this? Lenin had a big shift in positions (before vs after the revolution), Trotsky was clearly very similar to Lenin in positions after, but he often gets called "left" by Stalinists. Mao clearly was more sympathetic to Stalin than either Trotsky or post-Stalin right-wing revisionists, yet he is occasionally slandered as "ultra-left" (which is ridiculous), and then Cockshott went through "ML" (centrist, I suppose) parties, get kicked out for "ultra-leftism" and subsequently writes his seminal work TANS, including a critique of the scrapping of soviet cybernetics in the USSR, bourgeois elements of democratic centralism, and proposes to move towards communism immediately via the DotP through the revolutionary utilization of cybernetics instead of any market mechanisms (market mechanisms seemingly being supported by both right-wing and centrist Communists).
To me, intuitively, it sounds like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao, in hindsight, had more in common than they were willing to admit (all "centrists", but how would one divide them into center-left-, center and center-right?), while Cockshott clearly drifted left (toward Bordiga).
I may be missing something, That's why I want to open it up for collective discussion with you all here on /edu/.
R: 1 / I: 0
Furthermore what makes me believe this more, is that sometimes scientific discoveries can have multiple interpretations. Quantum mechanics has like 4,and all of them are valid logically. Which one you chose depends more on your preference then anything. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have scientist debating the exact same theory. You may say one is more clean or beautiful or intuitive, but previous scientific discoveries did not care about that. Some weren't symmetrical as people wanted or intuitive, some were. So it's just speculation.
Where this bothers me though is simulations. Assume we model a person inside a computer by describing every particle in him through code. Would he "think"? Obviously I expect him to behave a certain way like a human do, but so would a simulated model of a tree, even if it wasn't really a tree. It does not mean the simulated person thinks. He just fools us, but has no understanding of the world himself.
What even gets me more confused is the fact that thoughts, as in consciousness and direct experience play a role in our behaviour. We all know the famous experiment of brain activity appearing milliseconds before a person is conscious of moving his finger, but this wasn't the only thing found. Consciousness can also cancel that movement as it desires. actually in practice the complexity, free will or how you want to call what makes humans unique is a reason why it is impossible with current understanding to predict human behaviour. Game theory only works if you assume people as psychopaths and shallow husk only interested in playing the game the game theorist made up. This makes the idea of unconscious mathematical digital human being the same as a regular human bit wonky, yet because I can't point to from where consciousness emerges, my position is wonky too.
Amy thoughts?
Does math describe the world or is math the world?
This question has been puzzling me lately. In my view because the most "raw" understanding we have of the world is our experience, which isn't mathematical (color, feelings, etc) which means that the world cannot be purely mathematical. I think then what we have is a "materialistic" world which can be described as mathematics. The maths isn't what is really happening, but it helps us in manipulation. Kind of like moving an desktop icon to the bin on your screen is just a metaphor for execution of code inside the computer. It would be a mistake to assume how the computer really works is icons on some screen, even if it helps us in manipulation.Furthermore what makes me believe this more, is that sometimes scientific discoveries can have multiple interpretations. Quantum mechanics has like 4,and all of them are valid logically. Which one you chose depends more on your preference then anything. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have scientist debating the exact same theory. You may say one is more clean or beautiful or intuitive, but previous scientific discoveries did not care about that. Some weren't symmetrical as people wanted or intuitive, some were. So it's just speculation.
Where this bothers me though is simulations. Assume we model a person inside a computer by describing every particle in him through code. Would he "think"? Obviously I expect him to behave a certain way like a human do, but so would a simulated model of a tree, even if it wasn't really a tree. It does not mean the simulated person thinks. He just fools us, but has no understanding of the world himself.
What even gets me more confused is the fact that thoughts, as in consciousness and direct experience play a role in our behaviour. We all know the famous experiment of brain activity appearing milliseconds before a person is conscious of moving his finger, but this wasn't the only thing found. Consciousness can also cancel that movement as it desires. actually in practice the complexity, free will or how you want to call what makes humans unique is a reason why it is impossible with current understanding to predict human behaviour. Game theory only works if you assume people as psychopaths and shallow husk only interested in playing the game the game theorist made up. This makes the idea of unconscious mathematical digital human being the same as a regular human bit wonky, yet because I can't point to from where consciousness emerges, my position is wonky too.
Amy thoughts?
R: 73 / I: 7
How do dialectics explain evolution?
How do dialectics explain evolution?
R: 1 / I: 0
What are the prerequisites for understanding this book ?
Is college alegbra enough?
R: 20 / I: 18
- Does anyone here studies Graphic Design or something Art-related?
- Which principles or rules should I follow when making these contents?
- Can you provide some links with examples of leftist media and design?, I'm aware of some artistic currents and their names (Like Soviet Constructivism), but I would like to know <how> to "use" them
Basic Graphic Design ?
I want to start making infographics for my college to use them as a way to spread Marxism and leftist theory- Does anyone here studies Graphic Design or something Art-related?
- Which principles or rules should I follow when making these contents?
- Can you provide some links with examples of leftist media and design?, I'm aware of some artistic currents and their names (Like Soviet Constructivism), but I would like to know <how> to "use" them
R: 4 / I: 0
Liberal Arts Major Contrition Thread
The regret and remorse lasts a lifetime. Graduated during last recession, no steady work for over a decade. I am the stereotype be they rightoid or STEMlord points to. It is correct, it is valid. Only debt remains. Do not sin like I have sinned. Only death will cleanse me of suffering. Just use the library. Only STEM will bring us a socialist future.
R: 76 / I: 10
>“We really went through all possible pathways that could produce phosphine on a rocky planet,” Dr. Petkowski said.
>“If this is not life, then our understanding of rocky planets is severely lacking.”
http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/phosphine-atmosphere-venus-08847.html
Ayy Lmao
>They found that phosphine on Venus is a minor gas, existing at a concentration of about 20 out of every billion molecules in the atmosphere.>“We really went through all possible pathways that could produce phosphine on a rocky planet,” Dr. Petkowski said.
>“If this is not life, then our understanding of rocky planets is severely lacking.”
http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/phosphine-atmosphere-venus-08847.html
R: 27 / I: 0
Reading
How do you read? I am sick of looking at my laptop to read these huge pdfs, there must be a better way that doesn't burn my retinas and destroy my posture! E-readers? Libraries? Just buying every book that you wish to read? Please share your ideas, also reading based pics.
R: 14 / I: 0
Please waste no time on Hegel!
https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2020/04/28/please-waste-no-time-on-hegel/
R: 7 / I: 1
So I think It may be useful to clear things out by making a little general so it can be properly defined and pointed out.
I will start by laying some popular questions about it:
-What is Fascism? (or who best defined it)
-What is function of Fascism?
-Is Trump fascist? (if not, why and where he stands instead)
-What (if it exist) is Post-modern Fascism (/leftypol/s sugarboy Prolekult talked about it)
-Are there Fascist still around/what would take them for to rise up again?
-Does QAnon have any Fascist pararels?
-Some post-1945 historical examples of Fascism.
-Economics of Fascism.
-Flavours of Fascism (based on different material conditions, nations etc.).
-Fascist relations to Imperialism, can Fascist country be Imperialist?
Definition of Fascism
There is a lot of confusion on what fascism is and what it means.So I think It may be useful to clear things out by making a little general so it can be properly defined and pointed out.
I will start by laying some popular questions about it:
-What is Fascism? (or who best defined it)
-What is function of Fascism?
-Is Trump fascist? (if not, why and where he stands instead)
-What (if it exist) is Post-modern Fascism (/leftypol/s sugarboy Prolekult talked about it)
-Are there Fascist still around/what would take them for to rise up again?
-Does QAnon have any Fascist pararels?
-Some post-1945 historical examples of Fascism.
-Economics of Fascism.
-Flavours of Fascism (based on different material conditions, nations etc.).
-Fascist relations to Imperialism, can Fascist country be Imperialist?
R: 0 / I: 0
Hi /edu/, I'm looking a list of famines and droughts in Russia before 1917 with death estimates but after an hour of searching on the Googles I've found nothing. I'm also having trouble finding a list of population size numbers for the 19th century. Could somebody please point me in the right direction, or otherwise explain why this information is so hard to find (am I just a brainlet)? I'd prefer a source that is as apolitical/free from ideology as possible.
Hi /edu/, I'm looking a list of famines and droughts in Russia before 1917 with death estimates but after an hour of searching on the Googles I've found nothing. I'm also having trouble finding a list of population size numbers for the 19th century. Could somebody please point me in the right direction, or otherwise explain why this information is so hard to find (am I just a brainlet)? I'd prefer a source that is as apolitical/free from ideology as possible.
R: 18 / I: 6
/lit/
What is your favorite book?What book influenced you the most?What do you like about books?what are you planning to read?What are you reading now?/Lit/ thread because i did not see one in the catalog
R: 10 / I: 3
They have books by Zizek, David Harvey, classics from marx, lenin, trotsky, etc.
Take a look if you want to satisfy your commodity fetish in the form of paperbacks.
Verso Books 40% off
I wanted to let everyone know that Verso Books is having a sale were everything is 40% off.They have books by Zizek, David Harvey, classics from marx, lenin, trotsky, etc.
Take a look if you want to satisfy your commodity fetish in the form of paperbacks.
R: 3 / I: 2
Do you guys have a reading list on Ai and consciousness or AI and ethics? I really want to research this subject but I don't know where to start. I welcome any recommendation.
Do you guys have a reading list on Ai and consciousness or AI and ethics? I really want to research this subject but I don't know where to start. I welcome any recommendation.
R: 10 / I: 1
>At one time I formed a juvenile collection of Oriental pottery and objets d’art, announcing myself as a devout Mohammedan and assuming the pseudonym of “Abdul Alhazred” – which you will recognise as the author of that mythical Necronomicon which I drag into various of my tales […]. (letter to Edwin Baird, February 3, 1924)
>The absurdity of the myth I was called upon to accept and the sombre greyness of the whole faith compared with the Eastern magnificence of Mahometanism, made me de-finitely agnostic […].10
You can read more here:
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272537419_The_Darker_Islam_within_the_American_Gothic_Sufi_Motifs_in_the_Stories_of_HP_Lovecraft
the dark islam within lovecraftian horror.
His works contain explicit references to ancient islamic texts, some say cosmic horror is a pessimistic inversion of sufist cosmology. Some of his stories, like the nameless city, is a direct reference to a story contained within the quran. Here are some direct quotes:>At one time I formed a juvenile collection of Oriental pottery and objets d’art, announcing myself as a devout Mohammedan and assuming the pseudonym of “Abdul Alhazred” – which you will recognise as the author of that mythical Necronomicon which I drag into various of my tales […]. (letter to Edwin Baird, February 3, 1924)
>The absurdity of the myth I was called upon to accept and the sombre greyness of the whole faith compared with the Eastern magnificence of Mahometanism, made me de-finitely agnostic […].10
You can read more here:
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272537419_The_Darker_Islam_within_the_American_Gothic_Sufi_Motifs_in_the_Stories_of_HP_Lovecraft
R: 9 / I: 2
ITT: Post and speculate about alternate history.
/ahg/ Alternate History General
The Paris Commune successfully establishes socialism in France. What now?ITT: Post and speculate about alternate history.
R: 30 / I: 3
>>2866
Human beings have an innate need to have control over their lives, and also to feel as if the people around them facilitate the sense of control. As an anarchist, I believe that, for example, workplaces ought to be owned and run democratically by their workers, because this kind of economic arrangement, called workers self-management, meets the human needs of the workers for autonomy. It seems very unusual to suggest that meeting the innate human need for autonomy is somehow contrary to human nature when we have reason to believe that people having autonomy is associated with positive psychological outcomes. Being trained for compliance not only undermines people's autonomy but also reduces their creative and intellectual faculties. Another study found that the use of controlling teaching methods makes children more prone to helpless behavior, and this interferes with their performance. We can look further at her hierarchy affects people by considering the impact of competition on human relationships. Hierarchical systems, by their very nature, create centers of power. These centers of power may or may not be treated as scarce resources that people have to compete with each other to obtain. Indeed, capitalist societies valorize the notion that individuals ought to compete with each other for the acquisition of wealth and resources. Alfie Kohn writes,
>In the workplace, one tries to remain at friendly terms with one's colleagues, but there is guardedness, a part of the self held in reserve. Even when no rivalry exists at the moment, one never knows whom one will have to compete against next week.
Edward Deci contrasts autonomous motivation and controlled motivation as follows,
>Autonomous motivation really means to do something with a full sense of willingness, volition, endorsement of the activity. It's having a sense of "this is what I want to be doing now. This is what I choose to be doing now". The experience that goes along with what we call controlled motivation is that I'm feeling pressured and intense about it. "Those forces are operating on me and making me do this", for instance.
One study looked at the relationship between autonomous motivation, controlled motivation and the outcome of interpersonal therapy for recurrent depression. It found that,
>In the entire sample, both the therapeutic alliance and the autonomous motivation predicted higher probability of achieving remission; however, the relation differed for those with highly recurrent depression compared to those with less recurrent depression. For those with highly recurrent depression, the therapeutic alliance predicted remission whereas autonomous motivation had no effect on remission. For those with less recurrent depression, both autonomous motivation and the therapeutic alliance predicted better achieving remission. Controlled motivation emerged as a significant negative predictor of remission across both groups.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/014466509X479186
Autonomous motivation is also a predictor of something called flow. Flow describes a state in which a person becomes fully immersed and focused on an activity. They are completely engaged, they have a full and thorough appreciation for what they're doing, and this brings them intense feelings of enjoyment. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a Hungarian psychologist, identified a number of characteristics of flow states, which includes but is not limited to,
<Complete concentration on the task
<Clarity of goals and reward in mind and immediate feedback
<Transformation of time (speeding up/slowing down of time)
<The experience is intrinsically rewarding, has an end itself
<Effortlessness and ease
<There is a balance between challenge and skills
<Actions and awareness are merged, losing self-conscious rumination
<There is a feeling of control over the task
A study looking at flow in the context of higher education found that,
>Psychology students who were autonomously motivated experienced more flow than those that exhibited controlled motivation.
http://www.psychology.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/117/Zara.Vorwerk.pdf
Giving people autonomy meets the essential needs of humans, and this need satisfaction enhances people's capacity to fully engage themselves with what's going on and promotes mastery of activities. Conversely, when people are deprived of their autonomy, when we go through the experience of feeling like, as Edward Dici says, "forces are operating on me and making us behave in a certain way", our needs are unsatisfied, and that diminishes our capacity to engage with what's going on. For examples of this, we can look at how rewards, a simple example of imposing controlled motivation on people, "do this and you'll get that" affect us. Rewards are widely used and one of the most commonly accepted means by which authority figures exercise control over people. We have reason to believe that dangling goodies in front of people in order to behave in a certain way is inherently destructive to human nature. Rewards increase the likelihood that we will do something, but they changed the way we do it. Alfie Kohn writes,
>They offer one particular reason for doing it, sometimes displacing other possible motivations. And they change the attitude we take toward the activity.
When people are rewarded for doing something, they continue doing it for as long as the reward persists, but when the rewards run out, they lose their interest in it. For example, in 1972, a systematic review of the research looking at token economies, which dispensed rewards for acting in a certain way, found that there are numerous reports of token programs showing behavior change only while contingent token reinforcement is being delivered. Generally, removal of token reinforcement results in decrements in desirable responses, and a return to baseline or near baseline levels of performance. In other words, when the goodies stop, people lose interest.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1901/jaba.1972.5-343
A study looking at children's interests, in particular games when rewards were involved, found that when the reward started, the kids promptly gravitated to the games that led to a payoff. When the rewards disappeared their interest in those games dropped significantly, to the point that many were now less interested in them than were children who had never been rewarded in the first place. A review of 28 programs encouraging people to wear seat belts found that reward-based programs, which gave people prizes or cash for wearing seatbelts, were the least effective over the long haul, whereas programs without rewards were actually more effective, which was, contrary to the predictions of the authors. Rewards tend to produce temporary compliance, not behavior change that lasts beyond the reward. When in a situation where someone is saying "do this and you'll get that", our minds tend to assume that the reward is the only reason for doing the activity, hence why we lose interest as soon as the goodies stop. When we are in these conditions, we also tend to feel as if our behavior is being controlled by external forces, by getting us to think this way, rewards actively undermine our intrinsic interest in the activity at hand and our autonomous motivation. If n activity is creative, stimulating, and interesting, this will be undermined when rewards are introduced.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232491498_Overjustification_in_a_token_economy
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022437587900594
>>2866
Human beings have an innate need to have control over their lives, and also to feel as if the people around them facilitate the sense of control. As an anarchist, I believe that, for example, workplaces ought to be owned and run democratically by their workers, because this kind of economic arrangement, called workers self-management, meets the human needs of the workers for autonomy. It seems very unusual to suggest that meeting the innate human need for autonomy is somehow contrary to human nature when we have reason to believe that people having autonomy is associated with positive psychological outcomes. Being trained for compliance not only undermines people's autonomy but also reduces their creative and intellectual faculties. Another study found that the use of controlling teaching methods makes children more prone to helpless behavior, and this interferes with their performance. We can look further at her hierarchy affects people by considering the impact of competition on human relationships. Hierarchical systems, by their very nature, create centers of power. These centers of power may or may not be treated as scarce resources that people have to compete with each other to obtain. Indeed, capitalist societies valorize the notion that individuals ought to compete with each other for the acquisition of wealth and resources. Alfie Kohn writes,
>In the workplace, one tries to remain at friendly terms with one's colleagues, but there is guardedness, a part of the self held in reserve. Even when no rivalry exists at the moment, one never knows whom one will have to compete against next week.
Edward Deci contrasts autonomous motivation and controlled motivation as follows,
>Autonomous motivation really means to do something with a full sense of willingness, volition, endorsement of the activity. It's having a sense of "this is what I want to be doing now. This is what I choose to be doing now". The experience that goes along with what we call controlled motivation is that I'm feeling pressured and intense about it. "Those forces are operating on me and making me do this", for instance.
One study looked at the relationship between autonomous motivation, controlled motivation and the outcome of interpersonal therapy for recurrent depression. It found that,
>In the entire sample, both the therapeutic alliance and the autonomous motivation predicted higher probability of achieving remission; however, the relation differed for those with highly recurrent depression compared to those with less recurrent depression. For those with highly recurrent depression, the therapeutic alliance predicted remission whereas autonomous motivation had no effect on remission. For those with less recurrent depression, both autonomous motivation and the therapeutic alliance predicted better achieving remission. Controlled motivation emerged as a significant negative predictor of remission across both groups.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/014466509X479186
Autonomous motivation is also a predictor of something called flow. Flow describes a state in which a person becomes fully immersed and focused on an activity. They are completely engaged, they have a full and thorough appreciation for what they're doing, and this brings them intense feelings of enjoyment. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a Hungarian psychologist, identified a number of characteristics of flow states, which includes but is not limited to,
<Complete concentration on the task
<Clarity of goals and reward in mind and immediate feedback
<Transformation of time (speeding up/slowing down of time)
<The experience is intrinsically rewarding, has an end itself
<Effortlessness and ease
<There is a balance between challenge and skills
<Actions and awareness are merged, losing self-conscious rumination
<There is a feeling of control over the task
A study looking at flow in the context of higher education found that,
>Psychology students who were autonomously motivated experienced more flow than those that exhibited controlled motivation.
http://www.psychology.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/117/Zara.Vorwerk.pdf
Giving people autonomy meets the essential needs of humans, and this need satisfaction enhances people's capacity to fully engage themselves with what's going on and promotes mastery of activities. Conversely, when people are deprived of their autonomy, when we go through the experience of feeling like, as Edward Dici says, "forces are operating on me and making us behave in a certain way", our needs are unsatisfied, and that diminishes our capacity to engage with what's going on. For examples of this, we can look at how rewards, a simple example of imposing controlled motivation on people, "do this and you'll get that" affect us. Rewards are widely used and one of the most commonly accepted means by which authority figures exercise control over people. We have reason to believe that dangling goodies in front of people in order to behave in a certain way is inherently destructive to human nature. Rewards increase the likelihood that we will do something, but they changed the way we do it. Alfie Kohn writes,
>They offer one particular reason for doing it, sometimes displacing other possible motivations. And they change the attitude we take toward the activity.
When people are rewarded for doing something, they continue doing it for as long as the reward persists, but when the rewards run out, they lose their interest in it. For example, in 1972, a systematic review of the research looking at token economies, which dispensed rewards for acting in a certain way, found that there are numerous reports of token programs showing behavior change only while contingent token reinforcement is being delivered. Generally, removal of token reinforcement results in decrements in desirable responses, and a return to baseline or near baseline levels of performance. In other words, when the goodies stop, people lose interest.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1901/jaba.1972.5-343
A study looking at children's interests, in particular games when rewards were involved, found that when the reward started, the kids promptly gravitated to the games that led to a payoff. When the rewards disappeared their interest in those games dropped significantly, to the point that many were now less interested in them than were children who had never been rewarded in the first place. A review of 28 programs encouraging people to wear seat belts found that reward-based programs, which gave people prizes or cash for wearing seatbelts, were the least effective over the long haul, whereas programs without rewards were actually more effective, which was, contrary to the predictions of the authors. Rewards tend to produce temporary compliance, not behavior change that lasts beyond the reward. When in a situation where someone is saying "do this and you'll get that", our minds tend to assume that the reward is the only reason for doing the activity, hence why we lose interest as soon as the goodies stop. When we are in these conditions, we also tend to feel as if our behavior is being controlled by external forces, by getting us to think this way, rewards actively undermine our intrinsic interest in the activity at hand and our autonomous motivation. If n activity is creative, stimulating, and interesting, this will be undermined when rewards are introduced.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232491498_Overjustification_in_a_token_economy
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022437587900594
R: 14 / I: 0
is this true?
but even if it's not, is this something that's possible? how do you develop the hermeneutics to read this fast?
R: 19 / I: 0
I am looking to improve my writing ability to a level where It would be easy for me to write papers for academic journals, and conferences.
If you have any recommendations, please do post them.
How to improve English writing?
I am an ESLer. How do I improve my English writing? My grammar, and punctuation is terrible. My writing vocabulary is terrible as well. Sometimes when I write, I take a long time because the right word or phrase is not on my mind. I have a large passive vocabulary, but I don't know how to use it, and turn it into active vocabulary.I am looking to improve my writing ability to a level where It would be easy for me to write papers for academic journals, and conferences.
If you have any recommendations, please do post them.
R: 6 / I: 1
Would anime today be better if Americans rightfully executed the Emperor for his war crimes after the second world war instead of blaming it all on Hideki Tojo?
Would anime today be better if Americans rightfully executed the Emperor for his war crimes after the second world war instead of blaming it all on Hideki Tojo?
R: 8 / I: 0
I've been reading a lot about classical economics, or classically-trained economists (mostly cause I live in a small town and my local library only has capital and i feel im not ready yet for that). How much classical or "mainstream" economics should I read before getting into marx and marxist theory proper?
I should mention Im only doing this in the first place cause I'm a literal brainlet when it comes to economics so I'm trying to learn basic economic concepts in order to build on later with the marxism.
Also when it comes to philosophy, should it go plato-→aristotle-→hegel–→marx? Or should I add a few more or maybe skip some? pic unrelated
I've been reading a lot about classical economics, or classically-trained economists (mostly cause I live in a small town and my local library only has capital and i feel im not ready yet for that). How much classical or "mainstream" economics should I read before getting into marx and marxist theory proper?
I should mention Im only doing this in the first place cause I'm a literal brainlet when it comes to economics so I'm trying to learn basic economic concepts in order to build on later with the marxism.
Also when it comes to philosophy, should it go plato-→aristotle-→hegel–→marx? Or should I add a few more or maybe skip some? pic unrelated
R: 9 / I: 1
Gulag Archipelago
According to Gulag Archipelago, torture, rape, and killing of peasants and political dissidents was common practice in soviet gulags. Was this really the case?
R: 7 / I: 2
I keep seeing a lot of conflicting opinions on this but I'm too much of a brainlet to find a satisfying answer.
What is IQ really?
Is IQ even real? Can it reliably measure someone's "intelligence"? What even is intelligence, and is it really primarily genetic? Is IQ really tied to race?I keep seeing a lot of conflicting opinions on this but I'm too much of a brainlet to find a satisfying answer.
R: 3 / I: 0
Where do they differ and which of them is, in your mind, more accurate?
I have unfortunately not the time to read "Die Akkumulation des Kapitals." or "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism" as I have to do a lot of reading for uni at the time and my tbr list is already way too long.
It´s a topic I'm really interested in and I would appreciate it if you could help me out here.
Maybe you know a shorter, more accessible introductional book on imperialism.
Theories of Imperialism
I don't know much about Imperialism. Can someone summarise the key differences between the Luxemburgian theory of Imperialism and the ML theory of Imperialism?Where do they differ and which of them is, in your mind, more accurate?
I have unfortunately not the time to read "Die Akkumulation des Kapitals." or "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism" as I have to do a lot of reading for uni at the time and my tbr list is already way too long.
It´s a topic I'm really interested in and I would appreciate it if you could help me out here.
Maybe you know a shorter, more accessible introductional book on imperialism.
R: 11 / I: 1
Welcome to /LA/ comrades. In this thread we will work together more or less in line with the MIT OCW Linear Algebra syllabus.
The OCW page can be found here: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-06-linear-algebra-spring-2010/index.htm
On the OCW page you can find the calendar, recommended readings, lectures, and problem sets and exams. The lectures are done by Gilbert Strang who also wrote the recommended textbook. I think he is a very good instructor and I believe you should certainly give his lectures a watch if you are interested in learning more.
The Calendar is divided into 40 sessions which correspond to 40 assigned readings and lectures. There are 10 problem sets and 4 exams with all the solutions online. This thread will serve as a place to discuss lectures, readings, and, probably most usefully, ask other anons for help on problem sets or exams.
Linear Algebra General /LA/
-Linear Algebra General-Welcome to /LA/ comrades. In this thread we will work together more or less in line with the MIT OCW Linear Algebra syllabus.
The OCW page can be found here: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-06-linear-algebra-spring-2010/index.htm
On the OCW page you can find the calendar, recommended readings, lectures, and problem sets and exams. The lectures are done by Gilbert Strang who also wrote the recommended textbook. I think he is a very good instructor and I believe you should certainly give his lectures a watch if you are interested in learning more.
The Calendar is divided into 40 sessions which correspond to 40 assigned readings and lectures. There are 10 problem sets and 4 exams with all the solutions online. This thread will serve as a place to discuss lectures, readings, and, probably most usefully, ask other anons for help on problem sets or exams.
R: 5 / I: 4
I'm looking for book recommendations on Operaismo, Operation Gladio and the Marshall Plan. If anyone has suggestions, then it would be much appreciated.
I'm looking for book recommendations on Operaismo, Operation Gladio and the Marshall Plan. If anyone has suggestions, then it would be much appreciated.
R: 32 / I: 37
Drop those PDF's or else
Drop those PDF's or else
R: 9 / I: 2
Educate me on things like cryptocurrency, inflation, pumps, different economic sectors like tech…
Investing
Since /crisis/ general isn't helpful at all and 4/biz/ is shill central.Educate me on things like cryptocurrency, inflation, pumps, different economic sectors like tech…
R: 5 / I: 0
Are microeconomics and macroeconomics bullshit?
I'm not sure if I am being too contrarian, but I think that maybe economics was split into micro and macro as an effort to destroy the LToV. Seeing that Microeconomics was built upon the assumption of the bourgeois economist Alfred Marshall and his conception of marginal utility, I hold a lot of skepticism. Pair that with Keynes- a student of Marshal- who later built the conception that the economy's malaise was due problems with aggregate demand via Mashall's axioms that supply and demand determine value, then I feel loss. I basically believe these divisions are arbitrary, yet I'm not sure how far I can go against the grain. Are there books from the perspective of a classical economist or Marxist who deals with this topic. I was inspired a lot by Cockshott in this regard.
R: 3 / I: 0
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKVcO3co5aCBnDt7k5eU8msX4DhTNUila
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8B2364D7C0D31D63
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTMFx0t8kDzc72vtNWeTP05x6WYiDgEx7
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmcdciEwRcMZr0t2Hqnp0LnG1NZxZNHLZ
Econ Thread
Can we get an economic general started? I'll do the bare minimum and post series of lectures on YouTube.https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKVcO3co5aCBnDt7k5eU8msX4DhTNUila
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8B2364D7C0D31D63
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTMFx0t8kDzc72vtNWeTP05x6WYiDgEx7
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmcdciEwRcMZr0t2Hqnp0LnG1NZxZNHLZ
R: 9 / I: 0
"Development needs or human agriculture has gone to evil"
This is a post which I've found in redchinacn.org, which in turn was copied from Utopia internet forum. I think it's quite educational, so posting the machine translation of it here
R: 23 / I: 1
https://brill.com/view/title/22024
Excuse the academic pricing; I assume Haymarket Books are going to publish a paperback edition later this year if not into the next.
Amadeo Bordiga
They're actually publishing a collection of his writings in English:https://brill.com/view/title/22024
Excuse the academic pricing; I assume Haymarket Books are going to publish a paperback edition later this year if not into the next.
R: 354 / I: 80
what do the german anons here think of the german democratic republic ?
what do the german anons here think of the german democratic republic ?
R: 0 / I: 0
>unironically citing Cauchy
cringe
>unironically citing Cauchy
cringe
R: 6 / I: 0
EG above
Cool and interesting formulas/equations
I want to get good at using math for things and practical issues but I'm kind of a brainlet. If you guys could post math formulas and equations for things, what they mean and how I can use them I'd greatly appreciate it.EG above
R: 24 / I: 5
Discuss.
Germany's former eastern territories
Why do so many people have a boner for Germany's old eastern borders? Look at any alt-hist featuring the nation and they still own Pomerania, Silesia, Prussia (East/West) etc. Is it because of aesthetics and looking nice, does /pol/ have anything to do with it, or is it something different?Discuss.
R: 9 / I: 13
Socialist Grenada
Does anyone here knows any book or more information, about the socialist revolution, that happened in the Caribbean island of Grenada. And also, what are your thoughts on Maurice Bishop R: 16 / I: 1
If I were to pay my wagecucks the full amount, or give them control over my company instead of paying them a pittance, I won't be able to stay competitive and maximize profits.
In capitalist philosophy on the other hand, exploitation requires the use of force. A worker is not forced to work for me for example, they are 100% free to go find a different job or start their own company. I just wanna know your point of view, and why you think you are entitled to your surplus labor.
Capitalist here
By marxist standards, I do not provide labor, I own capital. From what I understand, the commie concept of wage labor is "exploitation" in the sense that we take the surplus value you produce. Since this board allows non-leftists to ask questions, mine is, why do you think you have the right to the full product/end result of your labor and not just a small compensation?If I were to pay my wagecucks the full amount, or give them control over my company instead of paying them a pittance, I won't be able to stay competitive and maximize profits.
In capitalist philosophy on the other hand, exploitation requires the use of force. A worker is not forced to work for me for example, they are 100% free to go find a different job or start their own company. I just wanna know your point of view, and why you think you are entitled to your surplus labor.
R: 13 / I: 9
/his/ humour thread
Dark edition.
R: 31 / I: 2
Is this man the only good youtube historian?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBUGQkpk3RE
Is this man the only good youtube historian?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBUGQkpk3RE
R: 2 / I: 0
Historical Determinism
Why some marxist use historical determinism as a pejorative and how can someone be marxist and reject determinism?
R: 20 / I: 1
Help with Marxian philosophical reading list
I've been doing a bit of reading on the economic aspects of Marxism, however it occurred to me that I don't know where to start with the more philosophical aspects. I've seen people post Stalin's, "Dialectical and Historical Materialism" and I've occasionally been recommended some works by Bukharin, however I really don't know what order would be best to understand concepts such as dialectical materialism or the base and superstructure or ideology, and so on. Could one of you anons help me figure out how exactly I should educate myself on such topics?
R: 75 / I: 10
Which of these books do you recommend?
And which should I skip?
R: 29 / I: 6
On the other hand the rate of profit is falling (empirically proven in [3]), which makes the contradictions accelerate: median living conditions become increasingly unbearable, inequality between the working population and the elite skyrockets, etc. (coronavirus and climate change are just accelerating even further the process). The question is not if, but when, will capitalism collapse. Two options at that point: regression, the elite fights back and wins (fascism, neo-feudalism, apocalyptic-tier world wars, pick your poison) or progression, the working class fights back and wins (socialism, which means the long term construction of post-scarcity society i.e. communism).
[1]: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6qp8x28p
[2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/463608a
>Quantitative historical analysis reveals that complex human societies are affected by recurrent — and predictable — waves of political instability (P. Turchin and S. A. Nefedov Secular Cycles Princeton Univ. Press; 2009). In the United States, we have stagnating or declining real wages, a growing gap between rich and poor, overproduction of young graduates with advanced degrees, and exploding public debt. These seemingly disparate social indicators are actually related to each other dynamically. They all experienced turning points during the 1970s. Historically, such developments have served as leading indicators of looming political instability
>Very long 'secular cycles' interact with shorter-term processes. In the United States, 50-year instability spikes occurred around 1870, 1920 and 1970, so another could be due around 2020. We are also entering a dip in the so-called Kondratiev wave, which traces 40-60-year economic-growth cycles. This could mean that future recessions will be severe. In addition, the next decade will see a rapid growth in the number of people in their twenties, like the youth bulge that accompanied the turbulence of the 1960s and 1970s. All these cycles look set to peak in the years around 2020.
[3]: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/55894/1/MPRA_paper_55894.pdf
>The downward trend of the rate of profit, its empirical confirmation, highlights the historically limited nature of capitalist production. If the rate of profit marks the vitality of the system, the logical conclusion is that it approaches further to an endpoint.
The question is when
The late 2010's and early 2020's upheavals were predicted 10 years ago by a relatively simple model that accounts for elite infighting, income inequality, number of 18-29 y.o. people, etc. The same analysis was retroactively applied to many civil wars and revolutions throughout history and the results were pretty consistent: wars, revolutions and upheavals follow pretty deterministic patterns. The thing that's impossible to predict, is the trigger, the casus belli. In-depth paper in [1], 2020 prediction in [2].On the other hand the rate of profit is falling (empirically proven in [3]), which makes the contradictions accelerate: median living conditions become increasingly unbearable, inequality between the working population and the elite skyrockets, etc. (coronavirus and climate change are just accelerating even further the process). The question is not if, but when, will capitalism collapse. Two options at that point: regression, the elite fights back and wins (fascism, neo-feudalism, apocalyptic-tier world wars, pick your poison) or progression, the working class fights back and wins (socialism, which means the long term construction of post-scarcity society i.e. communism).
[1]: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6qp8x28p
[2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/463608a
>Quantitative historical analysis reveals that complex human societies are affected by recurrent — and predictable — waves of political instability (P. Turchin and S. A. Nefedov Secular Cycles Princeton Univ. Press; 2009). In the United States, we have stagnating or declining real wages, a growing gap between rich and poor, overproduction of young graduates with advanced degrees, and exploding public debt. These seemingly disparate social indicators are actually related to each other dynamically. They all experienced turning points during the 1970s. Historically, such developments have served as leading indicators of looming political instability
>Very long 'secular cycles' interact with shorter-term processes. In the United States, 50-year instability spikes occurred around 1870, 1920 and 1970, so another could be due around 2020. We are also entering a dip in the so-called Kondratiev wave, which traces 40-60-year economic-growth cycles. This could mean that future recessions will be severe. In addition, the next decade will see a rapid growth in the number of people in their twenties, like the youth bulge that accompanied the turbulence of the 1960s and 1970s. All these cycles look set to peak in the years around 2020.
[3]: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/55894/1/MPRA_paper_55894.pdf
>The downward trend of the rate of profit, its empirical confirmation, highlights the historically limited nature of capitalist production. If the rate of profit marks the vitality of the system, the logical conclusion is that it approaches further to an endpoint.
R: 4 / I: 0
Adorno
Were his works a coping mechanism because dialectics failed? R: 1 / I: 0
[b]COSTA RICA[/b]
[b]PANAMA[/b]
[b]HONDURAS[/b]
[b]EL SALVADOR[/b]
Frankly I wanted more info and knowladge about these part of the world.
BOOKS, THEORY, VIDEOS, DOCUMENTALS ABOUT CENTRAL AMERICA
[b]NICARAGUA[/b][b]COSTA RICA[/b]
[b]PANAMA[/b]
[b]HONDURAS[/b]
[b]EL SALVADOR[/b]
Frankly I wanted more info and knowladge about these part of the world.
R: 28 / I: 3
Is math invented or discovered?
Is mathematics invented, discovered or both?
R: 4 / I: 0
is there a literary historian that gives a structuralist reason as to why the Soviet Union fell without blaming "revisionism" or "totalitarianism"?
is there a literary historian that gives a structuralist reason as to why the Soviet Union fell without blaming "revisionism" or "totalitarianism"?
R: 31 / I: 2
why do leftists generally dislike Althusser?
why do leftists generally dislike Althusser?
R: 3 / I: 0
>If then, speaking broadly, and embracing somewhat longer periods, all descriptions of commodities sell at their respective values, it is nonsense to suppose that profit, not in individual cases, but that the constant and usual profits of different trades spring from surcharging the prices of commodities, or selling them at a price over and above their value. The absurdity of this notion becomes evident if it is generalized. What a man would constantly win as a seller he would as constantly lose as a purchaser. It would not do to say that there are men who are buyers without being sellers, or consumers without being producers. What these people pay to the producers, they must first get from them for nothing. If a man first takes your money and afterwards returns that money in buying your commodities, you will never enrich yourselves by selling your commodities too dear to that same man. This sort of transaction might diminish a loss, but would never help in realizing a profit.
Marx's argument against a fallacy rampant in the present day seems like it would be incredibly useful to learn, I cannot for the life of me parse what he is talking about. Thus, instead of ignoring this aside I come to /edu/'s help in making sense of it. To break it down:
<What a man would constantly win as a seller he would as constantly lose as a purchaser.
If every transaction in capitalism can be understood abstractly as buyers and sellers entering a marketplace - representing supply and demand by changes in stalls, shoppers, and salesmen, for instance - then each transaction with an arbitrary percentage of profit x applied would even out. This is what I assumed this sentence to mean at first. But even if this were the case, could each successive capitalist in the line from raw material to finished product not add a surplus onto the successively increasing true value of the increasingly complex commodity? Marx might say that the competition between capitalists (ignoring supply and demand, which self-cancel) would force this arbitrary "profit" to increasingly diminish to almost nothing if it were to ever exist at all, and force them to reduce the labor cost of their commodidies by increasing their productive forces. But I don't see a point where this bastardization of Marxist theory would reach a contradiction, resolving itself into the correct understanding. Where is the error here? Either way, it turns out the rest of the paragraph seems to have nothing to do with any of this.
<It would not do to say that there are men who are buyers without being sellers, or consumers without being producers.
It feels like it ought to be phrased the other way around - sellers without being buyers - when talking about a business making profit during sales, which must of course buy raw materials, land, and the MoP from another source. But I ignored this as a stylistic deviation, until the next sentence:
<What these people pay to the producers, they must first get from them for nothing.
"These people"? Who? The capitalists? The sellers of labor power? Who are the producers? Why is there a dual-transaction taking place here?
<If a man first takes your money and afterwards returns that money in buying your commodities, you will never enrich yourselves by selling your commodities too dear to that same man. This sort of transaction might diminish a loss, but would never help in realizing a profit.
This is the point where the absolute abstraction loses me entirely. Is the man "taking my money" another capitalist, who makes a profit off of me in selling me raw materials but loses his profit as he buys from me? Would this really even out, if you were to take it to its logical conclusion mathematically?
It seems this cursory, metaphorical refutation is much harder for me to grasp than a refutation in the form of a full analytical explanation of how the system actually works, which makes up the rest of the text. If someone could put it to me in plain terms I would greatly appreciate it, and I would hope other anons could use it to teach others as well.
Marx on "Arbitrary Profit"
In Section VI of Wages Price and Profit, Marx explains that prices approximate the true value of a commodity, but only over time as supply and demand average out. Having established this, he goes on to argue against the fallacy that profit is obtained by selling commodities above their value:>If then, speaking broadly, and embracing somewhat longer periods, all descriptions of commodities sell at their respective values, it is nonsense to suppose that profit, not in individual cases, but that the constant and usual profits of different trades spring from surcharging the prices of commodities, or selling them at a price over and above their value. The absurdity of this notion becomes evident if it is generalized. What a man would constantly win as a seller he would as constantly lose as a purchaser. It would not do to say that there are men who are buyers without being sellers, or consumers without being producers. What these people pay to the producers, they must first get from them for nothing. If a man first takes your money and afterwards returns that money in buying your commodities, you will never enrich yourselves by selling your commodities too dear to that same man. This sort of transaction might diminish a loss, but would never help in realizing a profit.
Marx's argument against a fallacy rampant in the present day seems like it would be incredibly useful to learn, I cannot for the life of me parse what he is talking about. Thus, instead of ignoring this aside I come to /edu/'s help in making sense of it. To break it down:
<What a man would constantly win as a seller he would as constantly lose as a purchaser.
If every transaction in capitalism can be understood abstractly as buyers and sellers entering a marketplace - representing supply and demand by changes in stalls, shoppers, and salesmen, for instance - then each transaction with an arbitrary percentage of profit x applied would even out. This is what I assumed this sentence to mean at first. But even if this were the case, could each successive capitalist in the line from raw material to finished product not add a surplus onto the successively increasing true value of the increasingly complex commodity? Marx might say that the competition between capitalists (ignoring supply and demand, which self-cancel) would force this arbitrary "profit" to increasingly diminish to almost nothing if it were to ever exist at all, and force them to reduce the labor cost of their commodidies by increasing their productive forces. But I don't see a point where this bastardization of Marxist theory would reach a contradiction, resolving itself into the correct understanding. Where is the error here? Either way, it turns out the rest of the paragraph seems to have nothing to do with any of this.
<It would not do to say that there are men who are buyers without being sellers, or consumers without being producers.
It feels like it ought to be phrased the other way around - sellers without being buyers - when talking about a business making profit during sales, which must of course buy raw materials, land, and the MoP from another source. But I ignored this as a stylistic deviation, until the next sentence:
<What these people pay to the producers, they must first get from them for nothing.
"These people"? Who? The capitalists? The sellers of labor power? Who are the producers? Why is there a dual-transaction taking place here?
<If a man first takes your money and afterwards returns that money in buying your commodities, you will never enrich yourselves by selling your commodities too dear to that same man. This sort of transaction might diminish a loss, but would never help in realizing a profit.
This is the point where the absolute abstraction loses me entirely. Is the man "taking my money" another capitalist, who makes a profit off of me in selling me raw materials but loses his profit as he buys from me? Would this really even out, if you were to take it to its logical conclusion mathematically?
It seems this cursory, metaphorical refutation is much harder for me to grasp than a refutation in the form of a full analytical explanation of how the system actually works, which makes up the rest of the text. If someone could put it to me in plain terms I would greatly appreciate it, and I would hope other anons could use it to teach others as well.
R: 6 / I: 0
I'm noticing this really is a recurring theme with Lenin, but I'll leave this for another thread…
>and theorized by Vladimir Lenin in his treatise on Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. [b]According to Lenin, companies in the developed world exploit workers in the developing world where wages are much lower. The increased profits enable these companies to pay higher wages to their employees "at home" (that is, in the developed world), thus creating a working class satisfied with their standard of living and not inclined to proletarian revolution. It is a form of exporting poverty, creating an "exclave" of lower social class. Lenin contended that imperialism had prevented increasing class polarization in the developed world and argued that a workers' revolution could only begin in one of the developing countries, such as Imperial Russia.[/b]
By contrast, the definition within revolutionary syndicalism is that trade union bureaucracy, 'yellow unions', or social democratic unions were labelled 'labor aristocracy', (the IWW for example instead being a revolutionary industrial union, created within the orthodox Marxist theories of De Leonism).
The Leninist root of Third Worldism (Maoism)
>Those workers (proletarians) in the developed countries who benefit from the superprofits extracted from the impoverished workers of developing countries form an "aristocracy of labor". The phrase was popularized by Karl Kautsky in 1901I'm noticing this really is a recurring theme with Lenin, but I'll leave this for another thread…
>and theorized by Vladimir Lenin in his treatise on Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. [b]According to Lenin, companies in the developed world exploit workers in the developing world where wages are much lower. The increased profits enable these companies to pay higher wages to their employees "at home" (that is, in the developed world), thus creating a working class satisfied with their standard of living and not inclined to proletarian revolution. It is a form of exporting poverty, creating an "exclave" of lower social class. Lenin contended that imperialism had prevented increasing class polarization in the developed world and argued that a workers' revolution could only begin in one of the developing countries, such as Imperial Russia.[/b]
By contrast, the definition within revolutionary syndicalism is that trade union bureaucracy, 'yellow unions', or social democratic unions were labelled 'labor aristocracy', (the IWW for example instead being a revolutionary industrial union, created within the orthodox Marxist theories of De Leonism).
R: 4 / I: 2
Things I'm looking for:
1) Rapidly catching up on my own knowledge of the period. I know a bit, but US history I'm weaker on than in most subjects despite being a burgerlander myself.
2) "Antiracist" teaching resources that don't suck. I'm in a metropolitan area in the northeast so the hold of radlib thinking over the profession is quite strong; but this seems more of an opportunity to me than a problem in this case because there's a lot of overlap in themes (settler colonialism, exploitation in slavery, the construction of race, skepticism towards "patriotic" narratives, &c.) and that gives latitude to introduce things related to that even when it doesn't slot in easily to the official curriculum. Books are good, but non-book resources are better, since I love books but most high schoolers don't.
3) From those who teach HS or lower, anything more generally that they'd recommend re: navigating the profession etc (although maybe that's something that deserves a separate thread)
early burger history
I'm teaching US History I to high schoolers next year; if I can pill the more curious students (in a non-obnoxious way), that's obviously ideal.Things I'm looking for:
1) Rapidly catching up on my own knowledge of the period. I know a bit, but US history I'm weaker on than in most subjects despite being a burgerlander myself.
2) "Antiracist" teaching resources that don't suck. I'm in a metropolitan area in the northeast so the hold of radlib thinking over the profession is quite strong; but this seems more of an opportunity to me than a problem in this case because there's a lot of overlap in themes (settler colonialism, exploitation in slavery, the construction of race, skepticism towards "patriotic" narratives, &c.) and that gives latitude to introduce things related to that even when it doesn't slot in easily to the official curriculum. Books are good, but non-book resources are better, since I love books but most high schoolers don't.
3) From those who teach HS or lower, anything more generally that they'd recommend re: navigating the profession etc (although maybe that's something that deserves a separate thread)
R: 6 / I: 3
"Oh, twenty years after a GOOD WAR, get out and take a look at the Soviet Union - composed of lets say thirty or forty republics."
On January 1, 1937 as part of the so-called USSR there were only 11 republics, implying that that USSR has planned to annex at least 20 European states during WW2. Communist propaganda also portrayed total war as something "good".
After the war the propaganda has drastically changed, now claiming that USSR is the "Bastion of Peace" (СССР оплот МИРА). But there is a catch, since in Russian language both "peace" and "world" have the same word "mir" (МИР). So when a Russian says "we need mir", he can mean botch "we need peace" and "we need the whole world".
Lets Study Cinema History
Quote from the Soviet film "The Great Citizen" (1937):"Oh, twenty years after a GOOD WAR, get out and take a look at the Soviet Union - composed of lets say thirty or forty republics."
On January 1, 1937 as part of the so-called USSR there were only 11 republics, implying that that USSR has planned to annex at least 20 European states during WW2. Communist propaganda also portrayed total war as something "good".
After the war the propaganda has drastically changed, now claiming that USSR is the "Bastion of Peace" (СССР оплот МИРА). But there is a catch, since in Russian language both "peace" and "world" have the same word "mir" (МИР). So when a Russian says "we need mir", he can mean botch "we need peace" and "we need the whole world".
R: 31 / I: 5
I don't like reading
I'm a highschool drop out who never had the tension span to read anything more than 200 pages, why should I now read some 700 pages of confusing dialectics? isn't it enough to read some wikipedia articles or something? aren't there any movies that explain all the theory?
R: 165 / I: 37
let's play a game
someone draws a historic event in paint and other people try to guess what event that person drew
let's play a game
someone draws a historic event in paint and other people try to guess what event that person drew
R: 5 / I: 1
So now I really started to want to really understand math and learn more concepts that I didn't learn because I never really liked it very much but now I am more interested in it. What are some resources or basic principles that I can use to understand math better?
So now I really started to want to really understand math and learn more concepts that I didn't learn because I never really liked it very much but now I am more interested in it. What are some resources or basic principles that I can use to understand math better?
R: 3 / I: 1
Any good documentaries for oogling at the wealth amassed by America's industrialists?
Any good documentaries for oogling at the wealth amassed by America's industrialists?
R: 12 / I: 2
What is postmodernism?
explain in simple terms pls
R: 5 / I: 1
I've been working on formatting Black Bolshevik into EPUB and webpages to make it more accessible, as it's a very long book. At the moment chapters 1-3 are finished. Please contribute if you have the time.
https://github.com/scaredporky/scaredporkylib
I've been working on formatting Black Bolshevik into EPUB and webpages to make it more accessible, as it's a very long book. At the moment chapters 1-3 are finished. Please contribute if you have the time.
https://github.com/scaredporky/scaredporkylib
R: 13 / I: 0
I don't want to leave the house, do any work or anything at all. I would rather lay in bed all day and do heroin. In a socialist society, what happens when I simply refuse to work at all? Do I get housed and fed, or do I starve?
I don't want to leave the house, do any work or anything at all. I would rather lay in bed all day and do heroin. In a socialist society, what happens when I simply refuse to work at all? Do I get housed and fed, or do I starve?
R: 9 / I: 0
Cuba and Venezuela before the revolution.
What do people exactly mean when they claim Cuba and Venezuela were richer before their socialist governments? was it close to an oligarchy?
R: 12 / I: 0
What makes someone a nazbol or "reactionary leftist"?
What makes someone a nazbol or "reactionary leftist"?
R: 2 / I: 0
And I remember seeing here and there in all manner of different threads stuff like Soviet nuclear icebreakers and massive scaled naval hovercraft.
So I figure weird and supercool Soviet vehicles like those would be a great topic for an /edu/ thread,
as well as any normal Soviet vehicles of course because they're cool too.
https://youtu.be/f6R-h06IsJw
Obscure Soviet Vehicles (and Regular Ones too, why not)
Just saw this video on the Soviet Antarctic ice cruisers called Kharkovchanka, and thought it was pretty good.And I remember seeing here and there in all manner of different threads stuff like Soviet nuclear icebreakers and massive scaled naval hovercraft.
So I figure weird and supercool Soviet vehicles like those would be a great topic for an /edu/ thread,
as well as any normal Soviet vehicles of course because they're cool too.
https://youtu.be/f6R-h06IsJw
R: 15 / I: 6
Cuckoldry
Does anyone have a PDF of Charles Fourier's "The Hierarchies of Cuckoldry and Bankruptcy"?
R: 24 / I: 6
Post history, share sources, let's make a list!
List of successful socialist countries
You've heard this argument time and time again that there has never been a successful socialist country, so I thought it would be nice to have a thread talking about successful socialist countries.Post history, share sources, let's make a list!
R: 40 / I: 4
What makes us special? What makes us different? What makes our lives meaningful? Are we even special? Are we even different? Are we meant to be in an unending war for dominance of nature that inevitably ends in our mutual destruction? Are we meant to become stewards of the Earth, the next stage in energy usage for Life, living in harmony with the Earth as its first sentient aspect? Why were there no others, why only us? In 500 million years of animal life, why only Man? Can more come after us, if we go extinct? Is our purpose merely to choose for ourselves why we exist? Are we free, or are we slaves? Why do we individually seem so limited, and yet together humanity seems to be without limits?
What is the dialectical explanation for Man? His consciousness? His relationship to Nature? His drive to spirituality? Is it a misunderstanding on Man's part? Does Man not see that those aspects he has are those he shares with Nature? Gained from Nature? Marx wrote that many species engage in labor; yet seemingly only man labors first in his mind, then with his body. Why are We in this regard?
Our notions of honor, of courage, of willpower, of morality; only we created cultures. And yet, other species experience these emotions from which such ideas rose. Other species experience love. They feel fear. They summon bravery to conquer that fear.
The materialist relation between Man and Nature, between Man and Himself; why is Man, why are We?
These questions, they haunt me frequently, I wish to understand, to Nature we seemingly stand above as gods, and yet we are of Nature, not apart from it; and to us aspects of Nature, like our Sun, like our Universe; they seem yet greater than we could ever hope to be. Help me to understand.
Why humans?
What makes us so special? What makes us different? Humans are primates, when I look at other people I see, in every sense of the word, an ape. We are animals,we look like animals, we smell like animals. Thinking of what we really are makes my head spin.What makes us special? What makes us different? What makes our lives meaningful? Are we even special? Are we even different? Are we meant to be in an unending war for dominance of nature that inevitably ends in our mutual destruction? Are we meant to become stewards of the Earth, the next stage in energy usage for Life, living in harmony with the Earth as its first sentient aspect? Why were there no others, why only us? In 500 million years of animal life, why only Man? Can more come after us, if we go extinct? Is our purpose merely to choose for ourselves why we exist? Are we free, or are we slaves? Why do we individually seem so limited, and yet together humanity seems to be without limits?
What is the dialectical explanation for Man? His consciousness? His relationship to Nature? His drive to spirituality? Is it a misunderstanding on Man's part? Does Man not see that those aspects he has are those he shares with Nature? Gained from Nature? Marx wrote that many species engage in labor; yet seemingly only man labors first in his mind, then with his body. Why are We in this regard?
Our notions of honor, of courage, of willpower, of morality; only we created cultures. And yet, other species experience these emotions from which such ideas rose. Other species experience love. They feel fear. They summon bravery to conquer that fear.
The materialist relation between Man and Nature, between Man and Himself; why is Man, why are We?
These questions, they haunt me frequently, I wish to understand, to Nature we seemingly stand above as gods, and yet we are of Nature, not apart from it; and to us aspects of Nature, like our Sun, like our Universe; they seem yet greater than we could ever hope to be. Help me to understand.
R: 55 / I: 9
Which works should I read to understand dialectical (Hegelian, materialist) thinking and in what order?
Learning dialectical thinking
I'm trying to learn and understand dialectics, but I think getting some direction for this would be helpful.Which works should I read to understand dialectical (Hegelian, materialist) thinking and in what order?
R: 8 / I: 0
So are there some works/philosophers that would be benefitial to read for Marxist from other branches of world philosophy like Chinese, Indian, African etc.?
Non-western philosophy and Marxism
We all know that Marxists philosophy has roots in the classic European works of Hegel, Greeks etc..So are there some works/philosophers that would be benefitial to read for Marxist from other branches of world philosophy like Chinese, Indian, African etc.?
R: 12 / I: 1
We should make a general history guide for an overview on leftists history movements/people/thinkers that type of thing
There's a lot to cover so we should just stick with what would make the best overview
We should make a general history guide for an overview on leftists history movements/people/thinkers that type of thing
There's a lot to cover so we should just stick with what would make the best overview
R: 2 / I: 1
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
define needs. is it the bare minimum to survive?
R: 4 / I: 1
but they were hyping up its discovery then, when it was still a whole world away from the production process.
From what I understand, silicon was much this way at first as well; groundbreaking discovery but a long time before they could figure out mass-production and implementation.
Now it seems at last the stuff is ready to be mass-produced and the actual production line is ramping up, and consumer products with marginal amounts of the stuff are already available.
So this thread will be for general discussion about what graphene is capable of and its implementations,
as well as for advancements in the production process and availability of graphene.
Some articles:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/what-is-graphene/
http://news.mit.edu/2018/manufacturing-graphene-rolls-ultrathin-membranes-0418
https://phys.org/news/2020-07-solar-cells-graphene-armor.html
https://www.zmescience.com/science/graphene-clothes-thermal-regulation-18062020/
https://newatlas.com/bicycles/graphenlube-graphene-bicycle-lubricant/
https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/technology/2019/graphene-2d-materials
It's coming.
Graphene General
I guess lots of people are somewhat skeptical it'll be anything, since a bunch of media outlets hyped it up a decade ago and nothing came of it,but they were hyping up its discovery then, when it was still a whole world away from the production process.
From what I understand, silicon was much this way at first as well; groundbreaking discovery but a long time before they could figure out mass-production and implementation.
Now it seems at last the stuff is ready to be mass-produced and the actual production line is ramping up, and consumer products with marginal amounts of the stuff are already available.
So this thread will be for general discussion about what graphene is capable of and its implementations,
as well as for advancements in the production process and availability of graphene.
Some articles:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/what-is-graphene/
http://news.mit.edu/2018/manufacturing-graphene-rolls-ultrathin-membranes-0418
https://phys.org/news/2020-07-solar-cells-graphene-armor.html
https://www.zmescience.com/science/graphene-clothes-thermal-regulation-18062020/
https://newatlas.com/bicycles/graphenlube-graphene-bicycle-lubricant/
https://www.knowablemagazine.org/article/technology/2019/graphene-2d-materials
It's coming.
R: 1 / I: 0
For those unfamillar: CLS was a Marxist/structuralist anthropologist and ethnologist
Claude Levi-Strauss
Where does one go after reading Tristes Tropiques? I have heard The Savage Mind is the way to go, but the English translation is supposed to be erroneousFor those unfamillar: CLS was a Marxist/structuralist anthropologist and ethnologist
R: 3 / I: 0
I am constantly feeling sleepy. I cant say wheter this is normal or not. Like, I dont know in which moment it becomes pathological.
I rather dont have serious issues if any at all when talking. I rarely go into internal monologues but when I do explain something I dont have significant problems. Thinking seems to work well in theory but I am somewhat unsecure wheter I dont think too slow too. In my life I rather had at least average intellectual abilities but when I deal with abstracts it doesnt work too well.
Whenever I do read something, no matter wheter it is philosophical, political or fictional work, I am getting tired very quickly which makes productive reading very hard for me. The fact that focusing and remembering stuff also seems to be generally hard for me doesnt help.
I can recall various things when I try but still its quite hard to go on with the reading for prolonged time. I can also comperhend the material quite well if I really slooowly study it, but it seems like I am getting way to slow than I should go with it. Whenever I try to read regularly I fail. I also have impression that reading on the pc is easier for me than reading real books, although when I read the digital books I get distracted easier.
I really think that I could read something with the interest if I wouldnt feel so fuuucking tired all the time, I dont do anything interesting anyway and I like theory.
I also lack motivation, but I think that I could overcome this if not the tiredness (Or perhaps I somewhat rationalize my lack of motivation with the tiredness problem).
So basically Id have few questions for you guys:
Did or do you have simillar situation to me? What could cause it? Is there any way to get rid of it or to cope with it?
If you read regularly, how long did it take you to get used to it? Did you have problems with focus and memory and did they have gone after some time? How did you managed to form a habit of reading in the first place?
Perhaps something more will come out later or Ill recall something more on that problem of mine.
I am constantly feeling sleepy. I cant say wheter this is normal or not. Like, I dont know in which moment it becomes pathological.
I rather dont have serious issues if any at all when talking. I rarely go into internal monologues but when I do explain something I dont have significant problems. Thinking seems to work well in theory but I am somewhat unsecure wheter I dont think too slow too. In my life I rather had at least average intellectual abilities but when I deal with abstracts it doesnt work too well.
Whenever I do read something, no matter wheter it is philosophical, political or fictional work, I am getting tired very quickly which makes productive reading very hard for me. The fact that focusing and remembering stuff also seems to be generally hard for me doesnt help.
I can recall various things when I try but still its quite hard to go on with the reading for prolonged time. I can also comperhend the material quite well if I really slooowly study it, but it seems like I am getting way to slow than I should go with it. Whenever I try to read regularly I fail. I also have impression that reading on the pc is easier for me than reading real books, although when I read the digital books I get distracted easier.
I really think that I could read something with the interest if I wouldnt feel so fuuucking tired all the time, I dont do anything interesting anyway and I like theory.
I also lack motivation, but I think that I could overcome this if not the tiredness (Or perhaps I somewhat rationalize my lack of motivation with the tiredness problem).
So basically Id have few questions for you guys:
Did or do you have simillar situation to me? What could cause it? Is there any way to get rid of it or to cope with it?
If you read regularly, how long did it take you to get used to it? Did you have problems with focus and memory and did they have gone after some time? How did you managed to form a habit of reading in the first place?
Perhaps something more will come out later or Ill recall something more on that problem of mine.
R: 13 / I: 8
Et tu, brute?
Et tu, brute?
R: 9 / I: 2
I'm having a very difficult time reading even Marx's "easier" works. I find the language he uses is far too dense and it seems to fly right over my head. Is there anything I can do to fix this? Am I just retarded?
I'm having a very difficult time reading even Marx's "easier" works. I find the language he uses is far too dense and it seems to fly right over my head. Is there anything I can do to fix this? Am I just retarded?
R: 2 / I: 0
https://maozhuyigongchandang.wordpress.com/2020/04/23/%E5%85%9A%E5%91%98%E6%9C%88%E6%8A%A5-party-members-monthly-13/
>Soon after the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao’s policies of improving sanitation and medical access led to a population boom that was previously inconceivable due to wars, famine and disease. Some people were worried that such a large population would be difficult for China to handle, in response to them, Chairman Mao declared:
>> “It is a very good thing that China has a big population. Even if China’s population multiplies many times, she is fully capable of finding a solution; the solution is production. Of all things in the world, people are the most precious. Under the leadership of the Communist Party, as long as there are people, every kind of miracle can be performed. We believe that revolution can change everything and that before long there will arise a new China with a big population and a great wealth of products, where life will be abundant and culture will flourish.”
>Mao taught us that China’s expanding population was a good thing, and that population control was a tool used by imperialist powers to weaken the rising states. Subsequently, import of contraceptives was banned, birth control was increasingly condemned. A few years into this campaign, China saw a large hike in population growth, in 1955, some areas briefly re-allowed birth control, but fortunately this was curbed by the Great Leap Forward, in 1958. According to the secretary of Communist Youth League Hu Yaobang:
>> “A larger population means greater manpower, the force of 600 million liberated people is tens of thousands of times stronger than a nuclear explosion. Such a force is capable of creating wonders which our enemies cannot even imagine. Facts since the Great Leap Forwards movement have sufficiently proved this point.”
Thoughts?
Does quantity truly have a quality all of it's own?
https://maozhuyigongchandang.wordpress.com/2020/04/23/%E5%85%9A%E5%91%98%E6%9C%88%E6%8A%A5-party-members-monthly-13/
>Soon after the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao’s policies of improving sanitation and medical access led to a population boom that was previously inconceivable due to wars, famine and disease. Some people were worried that such a large population would be difficult for China to handle, in response to them, Chairman Mao declared:
>> “It is a very good thing that China has a big population. Even if China’s population multiplies many times, she is fully capable of finding a solution; the solution is production. Of all things in the world, people are the most precious. Under the leadership of the Communist Party, as long as there are people, every kind of miracle can be performed. We believe that revolution can change everything and that before long there will arise a new China with a big population and a great wealth of products, where life will be abundant and culture will flourish.”
>Mao taught us that China’s expanding population was a good thing, and that population control was a tool used by imperialist powers to weaken the rising states. Subsequently, import of contraceptives was banned, birth control was increasingly condemned. A few years into this campaign, China saw a large hike in population growth, in 1955, some areas briefly re-allowed birth control, but fortunately this was curbed by the Great Leap Forward, in 1958. According to the secretary of Communist Youth League Hu Yaobang:
>> “A larger population means greater manpower, the force of 600 million liberated people is tens of thousands of times stronger than a nuclear explosion. Such a force is capable of creating wonders which our enemies cannot even imagine. Facts since the Great Leap Forwards movement have sufficiently proved this point.”
Thoughts?
Does quantity truly have a quality all of it's own?
R: 26 / I: 4
What the hell is a dialectic?
Can you nerds explain it using simple language?
R: 2 / I: 0
Long story short, because of coronachan, they did AP exams online, problem is that they had every person in the world take them at the same time, including international students who had to take them very early in the morning like 2 AM.
What should be done about this? Collegeboard also seems to have monopolized education because of the fact that every university and college requires people to take the SAT which collegeboard owns
My idea would be for the government to not recognize it as a nonprofit anymore by taxing the shit out of them.
If they end up raising the prices of their tests, it would prove our point that they are a greedy company in disguise, or its gonna force them to just plain admit that they are a company, and that they will cut back on test costs to gain their nonprofit status back.
Either way fuck this greedy company, Collegeboard is one of the higher powers that is fucking up the American education system
Corrupt Company masking as a "nonprofit"
Any one else seen of the scandel that collegeboard has gotten itself into?Long story short, because of coronachan, they did AP exams online, problem is that they had every person in the world take them at the same time, including international students who had to take them very early in the morning like 2 AM.
What should be done about this? Collegeboard also seems to have monopolized education because of the fact that every university and college requires people to take the SAT which collegeboard owns
My idea would be for the government to not recognize it as a nonprofit anymore by taxing the shit out of them.
If they end up raising the prices of their tests, it would prove our point that they are a greedy company in disguise, or its gonna force them to just plain admit that they are a company, and that they will cut back on test costs to gain their nonprofit status back.
Either way fuck this greedy company, Collegeboard is one of the higher powers that is fucking up the American education system
R: 13 / I: 3
And yeah, psychology general now that we are in it.
Ψ-Psychology General
Anybody know some good textbooks on modern psychology, any field goes, although social psychology would be the most important one.And yeah, psychology general now that we are in it.
R: 36 / I: 3
Thoughts on this pic.
Not so much on race but why did those countries get so far ahead from other countries? what were the material conditions that made Europe the breeding ground for innovation?
R: 0 / I: 0
When I (or Riley for that matter) try to think of why political Catholicism in Italy would turn against the system, I think of things like "well the state built its power by crowding against the church, which in turn believed it was going to get wiped out by a cabal of freemasons" but that's obviously true of Spain as well, which IIRC actually built up even more bad blood with land reform and so on. And if I think of why they'd be dependent in Spain it's things like "well big landowners used the church to control peasants," and it's not clear why that wouldn't be true in Italy as well - in fact Riley emphasses how in each case local notables organized each initially, but then they became independent in Italy by the 1890s and never really in Spain.
Maybe it's just something like "Italy had higher literacy rates and it's that much easier to self-organize?" But of course it's not like illiterate peasants never get mobilized by the left either.
italian vs spanish political catholicism
I'm reading Dylan Riley's [Civic Foundations of Fascism](https://b-ok.cc/book/5440703/4e76ad) and liking it quite a bit, but one thing that comes out pretty clearly is that while political Catholicism in Italy before and shortly after WWI had an independent and relatively "leftist" streak - lots of independent workers organizations and so on, probably most people reading this are familiar with the PSI/PPI alliance that might have been able to weather through the fascist threat if they could agree over some smaller stuff - Spanish political Catholicism was much more uniformly reactionary and under the direction of local landowners. And this happens despite obvious similarities between the countries - semiperipheral position in world-economy, historical catholicism obviously, very old "republican" associational traditions in the big cities, a liberal political system organized around clientelism and smoke-filled rooms.When I (or Riley for that matter) try to think of why political Catholicism in Italy would turn against the system, I think of things like "well the state built its power by crowding against the church, which in turn believed it was going to get wiped out by a cabal of freemasons" but that's obviously true of Spain as well, which IIRC actually built up even more bad blood with land reform and so on. And if I think of why they'd be dependent in Spain it's things like "well big landowners used the church to control peasants," and it's not clear why that wouldn't be true in Italy as well - in fact Riley emphasses how in each case local notables organized each initially, but then they became independent in Italy by the 1890s and never really in Spain.
Maybe it's just something like "Italy had higher literacy rates and it's that much easier to self-organize?" But of course it's not like illiterate peasants never get mobilized by the left either.
R: 16 / I: 2
They wanted to follow the Soviet model, but due to some ComInform (ex Comintern) tensions, Stalin excluded them and after 1948 they strated to look for their own path in building socialism and they came up with self-management - the workers voted in the managers, voted on employing new people, what the created value will be used on etc.
However, they never really found a good way to trade goods between companies so they re-implemented the market where goods between companies and between companies and consumers were traded.
They also had strong relationship with various 2nd and 3rd world countries and helped them out a lot (they worked on importan construction projects in Iraq, Syria, Egypt etc. etc.), and many foreign students came to study in Yugoslavia (people from Congo, Sudan, Algeria, Iraq etc. etc.)
In the 70s they borrowed money from the World bank which fucked them at the end of the 70s and start of the 80s (debt crisis) which gave rise to ugly nationalism which eventually destroyed the country and re-introduced a wild capitalism.
Yugoslavia and post Yugoslav states Q&A
Yugoslavia was the only "eastern bloc" country that was almost entirely liberated by the domestic communsit led anti-fascist coalition.They wanted to follow the Soviet model, but due to some ComInform (ex Comintern) tensions, Stalin excluded them and after 1948 they strated to look for their own path in building socialism and they came up with self-management - the workers voted in the managers, voted on employing new people, what the created value will be used on etc.
However, they never really found a good way to trade goods between companies so they re-implemented the market where goods between companies and between companies and consumers were traded.
They also had strong relationship with various 2nd and 3rd world countries and helped them out a lot (they worked on importan construction projects in Iraq, Syria, Egypt etc. etc.), and many foreign students came to study in Yugoslavia (people from Congo, Sudan, Algeria, Iraq etc. etc.)
In the 70s they borrowed money from the World bank which fucked them at the end of the 70s and start of the 80s (debt crisis) which gave rise to ugly nationalism which eventually destroyed the country and re-introduced a wild capitalism.
R: 0 / I: 0
Anybody know some good readings on the idea that we cannot change ideas without changing their material origins
Anybody know some good readings on the idea that we cannot change ideas without changing their material origins
R: 2 / I: 0
What can I learn fron Grundrisse that I can't learn from Capital?
What can I learn fron Grundrisse that I can't learn from Capital?
R: 2 / I: 0
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B48PXBn7S_-MMVlaZjlrOEdKWFk
There is notably some very recent documents from as late as last year, including the theoretical work of Kim Jong Un.
Everything (I have seen) in here is in English.
(If you are (rightly) wary of Google here, know that you can view and download these files through a Tor browser.)
Anyone got anything else DPRK-related they don't see here that they'd like to archive?
English DPRK Lit. Archive
Here's a google drive I found full of documents, biographies, reports, counterprop and theory for Juche, Songon and just about everything else DPRK:https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B48PXBn7S_-MMVlaZjlrOEdKWFk
There is notably some very recent documents from as late as last year, including the theoretical work of Kim Jong Un.
Everything (I have seen) in here is in English.
(If you are (rightly) wary of Google here, know that you can view and download these files through a Tor browser.)
Anyone got anything else DPRK-related they don't see here that they'd like to archive?
R: 0 / I: 0
/space/
The history of space travel. I want all material, factoids, trivia, books on space. From Sputnik to the recent Crew Dragon and further beyond
R: 1 / I: 0
Sun Yat-sen
Can someone redpill me about this dude?
R: 2 / I: 1
Alright.
-because money is represetative of value, it allows people to hoard value.
Yes.
>As the production of commodities further develops, every producer of commodities is compelled to make sure of the nexus rerum or the social pledge. [41] His wants are constantly making themselves felt, and necessitate the continual purchase of other people’s commodities, while the production and sale of his own goods require time, and depend upon circumstances. In order then to be able to buy without selling, he must have sold previously without buying. This operation, conducted on a general scale, appears to imply a contradiction. But the precious metals at the sources of their production are directly exchanged for other commodities. And here we have sales (by the owners of commodities) without purchases (by the owners of gold or silver).
What?
If selling is the trade of use-value with exchange-value represented by money, then to say that selling something to a miner isn't selling is wouldn't either mean that
A)mining doesn't generate value, even though it's human labour
B)precious metals don't have value, which in turn doesn't add up to either option A nor with out precious metals became money-commodity to begin with?
P.s.: Im reading a Portuguese copy, so some terms might be incorrect to the English version
Marx didn't think mining was labour?
-value is generated by labourAlright.
-because money is represetative of value, it allows people to hoard value.
Yes.
>As the production of commodities further develops, every producer of commodities is compelled to make sure of the nexus rerum or the social pledge. [41] His wants are constantly making themselves felt, and necessitate the continual purchase of other people’s commodities, while the production and sale of his own goods require time, and depend upon circumstances. In order then to be able to buy without selling, he must have sold previously without buying. This operation, conducted on a general scale, appears to imply a contradiction. But the precious metals at the sources of their production are directly exchanged for other commodities. And here we have sales (by the owners of commodities) without purchases (by the owners of gold or silver).
What?
If selling is the trade of use-value with exchange-value represented by money, then to say that selling something to a miner isn't selling is wouldn't either mean that
A)mining doesn't generate value, even though it's human labour
B)precious metals don't have value, which in turn doesn't add up to either option A nor with out precious metals became money-commodity to begin with?
P.s.: Im reading a Portuguese copy, so some terms might be incorrect to the English version
R: 9 / I: 3
https://youtu.be/TPrnSACiTJ4?list=PLjEaoINr3zgEq0u2MzVgAaHEBt--xLB6U
Feel free to post others or talk about modeling in general.
3D modeling
Anyone want to journey with me into 3D modeling? I was going to follow along with a blender youtube tutorial, and see where that leaves me at the end of it. Blender is free!https://youtu.be/TPrnSACiTJ4?list=PLjEaoINr3zgEq0u2MzVgAaHEBt--xLB6U
Feel free to post others or talk about modeling in general.
R: 3 / I: 1
Does anybody have the pdf of Israel, A Beachhead in the Middle East: From European Colony to US Power Projection Platform by Stephen Gowans?
Does anybody have the pdf of Israel, A Beachhead in the Middle East: From European Colony to US Power Projection Platform by Stephen Gowans?
R: 2 / I: 1
What are some similar writers to Kaczynski, Ellul and Zerzan?
What are some similar writers to Kaczynski, Ellul and Zerzan?
R: 3 / I: 1
Can anyone explain to me what Georges Sorel was about? I don't have means to get any of his books in where I live and I don't have much information about him other than Wikipedia.
Can anyone explain to me what Georges Sorel was about? I don't have means to get any of his books in where I live and I don't have much information about him other than Wikipedia.
R: 0 / I: 0
Any good books on the events of May '68? Hopefully from a modern day perspective. Documentaries are also welcomed.
I was looking into The Imaginary Revolution: Parisian Students and Workers in 1968 by Michael Seidman, but couldn't find any pdfs, so if you have one that you could share that'd be great.
Any good books on the events of May '68? Hopefully from a modern day perspective. Documentaries are also welcomed.
I was looking into The Imaginary Revolution: Parisian Students and Workers in 1968 by Michael Seidman, but couldn't find any pdfs, so if you have one that you could share that'd be great.
R: 1 / I: 0
Assuming Marx's LTRPF is true, in a moment in which low profitability gives birth to crisis can't the government (acting in an MMT framework) simply act to employ the unemployed with good wages thereby raising in this way demand for consumer goods and then the rate of profit via price increases? Or is there something am i missing?
MMt,Rate of Profit and Marxist economics
Hello anons, as you could guess from the title of the thread my question is:Assuming Marx's LTRPF is true, in a moment in which low profitability gives birth to crisis can't the government (acting in an MMT framework) simply act to employ the unemployed with good wages thereby raising in this way demand for consumer goods and then the rate of profit via price increases? Or is there something am i missing?
R: 1 / I: 0
I know asking this is futile due to how comprehensive it is, but what are some good philosophy books to get a well rounded education on Philosophy? It could be anywhere from college introduction textbooks to actual works.
inb4 start with the greeks!
I know asking this is futile due to how comprehensive it is, but what are some good philosophy books to get a well rounded education on Philosophy? It could be anywhere from college introduction textbooks to actual works.
inb4 start with the greeks!
R: 3 / I: 0
Does anyone have documents showing any historical inaccuracies or other inaccuracies in "Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat."
Does anyone have documents showing any historical inaccuracies or other inaccuracies in "Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat."
R: 7 / I: 1
this is bunkerchan
anybody knows how people build a bunker
can you make a diy bunker by yourself
this is bunkerchan
anybody knows how people build a bunker
can you make a diy bunker by yourself
R: 3 / I: 3
Now to focus on thentopic, humans throught hidtory tend to personify diseases. One of the best examples woth the related pictures are from the bubonic plague. Where medieval artists would cope with the death by creating personfications of the plague. This is what intrests me is why do we cope with the death by making into a person? I would like to hear from some of you on this, for its an interesting subject.
The personification of deadly diseases and the Human coping mechanism for death
To bring up my back ground before getting into the topic at hand. I am a historian and have been interested in seeing how we humans throughout history cope with deadly diseases. As we have seen in recent times of deadly diseases, such as the "spanish" flu, ebloa, sars, etc.Now to focus on thentopic, humans throught hidtory tend to personify diseases. One of the best examples woth the related pictures are from the bubonic plague. Where medieval artists would cope with the death by creating personfications of the plague. This is what intrests me is why do we cope with the death by making into a person? I would like to hear from some of you on this, for its an interesting subject.
R: 3 / I: 0
Can someone give me a break down of the decolonization. What is it, how it is a class, and how it functions.
I'm not interested in the efficacy of it, so this isn't a political question.
What rationalizations are there for it, i.e. why is it important to the left.
The whole world was colonized and I think there is still a deep material historical legacy to it. So I'm trying to better understand what it is in the modern sense.
Can someone give me a break down of the decolonization. What is it, how it is a class, and how it functions.
I'm not interested in the efficacy of it, so this isn't a political question.
What rationalizations are there for it, i.e. why is it important to the left.
The whole world was colonized and I think there is still a deep material historical legacy to it. So I'm trying to better understand what it is in the modern sense.
R: 51 / I: 8
I'll start: I'm shocked that Karl Kautsky's history of the French Revolution (Die Klassengegensätze von 1789) has never been translated into English. Lenin, Trotsky, and other Bolshevik theorists all had an extensive knowledge of the French Revolution, and Kautsky, the "Pope of Marxism" would presumably have had an immense influence. This work was approved by Engels himself, and may have been foundational in establishing the Marxist theory of bourgeois revolution, yet it has never been translated into English.
Untranslated Works
Post works which you think should be translated into English here.I'll start: I'm shocked that Karl Kautsky's history of the French Revolution (Die Klassengegensätze von 1789) has never been translated into English. Lenin, Trotsky, and other Bolshevik theorists all had an extensive knowledge of the French Revolution, and Kautsky, the "Pope of Marxism" would presumably have had an immense influence. This work was approved by Engels himself, and may have been foundational in establishing the Marxist theory of bourgeois revolution, yet it has never been translated into English.
R: 11 / I: 0
I recently finished reading Capital Volumes 1 and 2 for the first time (took me around 3 weeks) and I feel like I only got around 50-70% of it, is this normal?
I recently finished reading Capital Volumes 1 and 2 for the first time (took me around 3 weeks) and I feel like I only got around 50-70% of it, is this normal?
R: 6 / I: 0
United India
Do you consider a united India to be possible? If not, why so?
R: 5 / I: 2
In today’s antideconstructionist turn, there are, however, many attempts to return to a realist ontology, with all the usual caveats (it’s not really a return, because it’s a new ontology of radical contingency, etc.). Perhaps the main precursor of this return to ontology is Louis Althusser’s “aleatoric materialism.” In his two great manuscripts published posthumously, Initiation à la philosophie pour les non-philosophes (1976) and Être marxiste en philosophie (1978), Althusser (among other things) outlines a specific theory of philosophy which overlaps neither with his early “theoreticist” concept of philosophy as “theory of theoretical practice” nor with his later notion of philosophy as “class struggle in theory”; while closer to the second notion, it serves as a kind of mediator between the two. Althusser’s starting point is the omnipresence of ideology, of ideological abstractions which always structure our approach to everyday life and reality; this ideology has two levels, the “spontaneous” everyday texture of implicit meanings, and the organized religion or mythology which initiated a systematic system of these meanings. Then, in ancient Greece, something new and unexpected happened: the rise of science in the guise of mathematics. Mathematics deals with pure, abstract numbers deprived of all mythic reference, it is a game of axioms and rule in which no cosmic meaning resonates, there are no sacred, lucky or damned numbers. Precisely as such, mathematics is subversive; it threatens the universe of cosmic meaning, its homogeneity and stability.
The true break happens here, not between mythic ideology and philosophy but between the mythical universe and science—and the function of philosophy is precisely to contain this break. Formally, philosophy also breaks with the mythical universe and obeys the rules of science (rational argumentation, thinking in abstract conceptual terms, etc.), but its function is to reinscribe scientific procedure into the religious universe of cosmic meaning. To put it in mock-Hegelian terms: if science is a negation of religion, philosophy is a negation of negation, i.e., it endeavors to reassert religious meaning within the space (and with the means) of rational argumentation:
>All of Plato—the theory of ideas, the opposition of knowledge and opinion, and so on—is based on the break that the first science represents. In a sense, this is because all of Plato is an attempt to control and in a way to “sublate” this break, in a profoundly inventive but also profoundly reactive dialectic. Philosophy, in its idealist Platonist matrix, is thus a reactive invention: the displacement of (the ideological functions of) religion onto the plane of pure (abstract) rationality. It draws from these sciences its “form, the abstraction of its categories, and the demonstrativeness of its reasoning,” as a pure reasoning directly carried out on “abstract” objects, but its function is an ideological one, a mandate and a service delegated, explicitly or otherwise, by the dominant class.
Here is the link with Althusser’s second definition of philosophy as class struggle in theory: this pressure to contain the scientific threat, to reassert the all-encompassing religious world-view, is not grounded in some kind of disembodied tendency toward meaningful totalization of our experience, but is pressure exerted as part of the class struggle in order to guarantee the hegemony of the ruling-class ideology. All great philosophers after Plato repeat this gesture of containment, from Descartes (who limits the domain of science to the material world) and Kant (who limits the domain of science to the phenomenal world in order to open up the space for religion and ethics) to today’s neo-Kantian theorists of communication who exempt communication from scientific rationality. Against this predominant idealist form of philosophy (Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Hegel), Althusser asserts the subterranean tradition of materialist counterphilosophy, from the early Greek materialists and Epicureans (who assert the material world of contingent encounters) through Spinoza and even Heidegger. Is not one of the great episodes in this struggle Cantor’s profoundly materialist reconceptualization of the infinite? His basic premise is the multiplicity of infinities which cannot be totalized into an all-encompassing One. Cantor’s great materialist breakthrough concerns the status of infinite numbers (and it is precisely because this breakthrough was materialist that it caused so many psychological traumas to Cantor, a devout Catholic): prior to Cantor, the Infinite was linked to the One, the conceptual form of God in religion and metaphysics, while with Cantor, the Infinite enters the domain of the Multiple—it implies the actual existence of infinite multiplicities, as well as the infinite number of different infinities.
But is Platonism really a reaction to the subversive abstraction of mathematical science? Is it not also (or mainly) a reaction to other tendencies like sophist philosophy or pre-Platonic materialism? Moreover, did the ideological recuperation of mathematics not begin prior to Plato, with the Pythagoreans who imbued numbers with cosmic meaning? It is worth mentioning here the continuing dialogue between Alain Badiou and Barbara Cassin, which is best characterized as the new version of the ancient dialogue between Plato and the sophists: the Platonist Badiou against Cassin’s insistence on the irreducibility of the sophists’ rupture. From the strict Hegelian standpoint, Cassin is right to insist, against Badiou, on the irreducible character of the sophist’s position: the self-referential play of the symbolic process has no external support which would allow us to draw a line, within the language games, between truth and falsity. Sophists are the irreducible “vanishing mediators” between mythos and logos, between the traditional mythical universe and philosophical rationality, and, as such, a permanent threat to philosophy. Why? They broke the mythical unity of words and things, playfully asserting the gap that separates words from things; and philosophy proper can be understood only as a reaction to the sophists, as an attempt to close the gap opened up by the sophists, to provide a foundation of truth for words, to return to mythos in the new conditions of rationality. This is where one should locate Plato: he first tried to provide this foundation by his teaching on Ideas, and when, in Parmenides, he was forced to admit the fragility of this foundation, he engaged in a long struggle to reassert a clear line of separation between sophistry and truth. (The opposition between the sophists and Plato is also echoed in the opposition between democracy and corporate organic order: sophists are clearly democratic, teaching the art of seducing and convincing the crowd; while Plato outlines a hierarchical, corporate order in which every individual is in his/her proper place, allowing for no position of singular universality.)
Capitalism and Modern Science
What is philosophy today? The predominant answer of contemporary scientists is: its time is over. Even the most basic philosophical problems are increasingly becoming scientific ones: the ultimate ontological questions concerning reality (Does our universe have a limit in space and time? Is it caught in determinism, or is there a place for genuine contingency in it?) are today questions addressed by quantum cosmology; the ultimate anthropological questions (Are we free, i.e., do we have free will? etc.) are addressed by evolutionary brain science; even theology is allotted its place within brain science (which aims at translating spiritual and mystical experiences into neuronal processes). At most, what remains of philosophy are epistemological reflections on the process of scientific discoveries.In today’s antideconstructionist turn, there are, however, many attempts to return to a realist ontology, with all the usual caveats (it’s not really a return, because it’s a new ontology of radical contingency, etc.). Perhaps the main precursor of this return to ontology is Louis Althusser’s “aleatoric materialism.” In his two great manuscripts published posthumously, Initiation à la philosophie pour les non-philosophes (1976) and Être marxiste en philosophie (1978), Althusser (among other things) outlines a specific theory of philosophy which overlaps neither with his early “theoreticist” concept of philosophy as “theory of theoretical practice” nor with his later notion of philosophy as “class struggle in theory”; while closer to the second notion, it serves as a kind of mediator between the two. Althusser’s starting point is the omnipresence of ideology, of ideological abstractions which always structure our approach to everyday life and reality; this ideology has two levels, the “spontaneous” everyday texture of implicit meanings, and the organized religion or mythology which initiated a systematic system of these meanings. Then, in ancient Greece, something new and unexpected happened: the rise of science in the guise of mathematics. Mathematics deals with pure, abstract numbers deprived of all mythic reference, it is a game of axioms and rule in which no cosmic meaning resonates, there are no sacred, lucky or damned numbers. Precisely as such, mathematics is subversive; it threatens the universe of cosmic meaning, its homogeneity and stability.
The true break happens here, not between mythic ideology and philosophy but between the mythical universe and science—and the function of philosophy is precisely to contain this break. Formally, philosophy also breaks with the mythical universe and obeys the rules of science (rational argumentation, thinking in abstract conceptual terms, etc.), but its function is to reinscribe scientific procedure into the religious universe of cosmic meaning. To put it in mock-Hegelian terms: if science is a negation of religion, philosophy is a negation of negation, i.e., it endeavors to reassert religious meaning within the space (and with the means) of rational argumentation:
>All of Plato—the theory of ideas, the opposition of knowledge and opinion, and so on—is based on the break that the first science represents. In a sense, this is because all of Plato is an attempt to control and in a way to “sublate” this break, in a profoundly inventive but also profoundly reactive dialectic. Philosophy, in its idealist Platonist matrix, is thus a reactive invention: the displacement of (the ideological functions of) religion onto the plane of pure (abstract) rationality. It draws from these sciences its “form, the abstraction of its categories, and the demonstrativeness of its reasoning,” as a pure reasoning directly carried out on “abstract” objects, but its function is an ideological one, a mandate and a service delegated, explicitly or otherwise, by the dominant class.
Here is the link with Althusser’s second definition of philosophy as class struggle in theory: this pressure to contain the scientific threat, to reassert the all-encompassing religious world-view, is not grounded in some kind of disembodied tendency toward meaningful totalization of our experience, but is pressure exerted as part of the class struggle in order to guarantee the hegemony of the ruling-class ideology. All great philosophers after Plato repeat this gesture of containment, from Descartes (who limits the domain of science to the material world) and Kant (who limits the domain of science to the phenomenal world in order to open up the space for religion and ethics) to today’s neo-Kantian theorists of communication who exempt communication from scientific rationality. Against this predominant idealist form of philosophy (Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Hegel), Althusser asserts the subterranean tradition of materialist counterphilosophy, from the early Greek materialists and Epicureans (who assert the material world of contingent encounters) through Spinoza and even Heidegger. Is not one of the great episodes in this struggle Cantor’s profoundly materialist reconceptualization of the infinite? His basic premise is the multiplicity of infinities which cannot be totalized into an all-encompassing One. Cantor’s great materialist breakthrough concerns the status of infinite numbers (and it is precisely because this breakthrough was materialist that it caused so many psychological traumas to Cantor, a devout Catholic): prior to Cantor, the Infinite was linked to the One, the conceptual form of God in religion and metaphysics, while with Cantor, the Infinite enters the domain of the Multiple—it implies the actual existence of infinite multiplicities, as well as the infinite number of different infinities.
But is Platonism really a reaction to the subversive abstraction of mathematical science? Is it not also (or mainly) a reaction to other tendencies like sophist philosophy or pre-Platonic materialism? Moreover, did the ideological recuperation of mathematics not begin prior to Plato, with the Pythagoreans who imbued numbers with cosmic meaning? It is worth mentioning here the continuing dialogue between Alain Badiou and Barbara Cassin, which is best characterized as the new version of the ancient dialogue between Plato and the sophists: the Platonist Badiou against Cassin’s insistence on the irreducibility of the sophists’ rupture. From the strict Hegelian standpoint, Cassin is right to insist, against Badiou, on the irreducible character of the sophist’s position: the self-referential play of the symbolic process has no external support which would allow us to draw a line, within the language games, between truth and falsity. Sophists are the irreducible “vanishing mediators” between mythos and logos, between the traditional mythical universe and philosophical rationality, and, as such, a permanent threat to philosophy. Why? They broke the mythical unity of words and things, playfully asserting the gap that separates words from things; and philosophy proper can be understood only as a reaction to the sophists, as an attempt to close the gap opened up by the sophists, to provide a foundation of truth for words, to return to mythos in the new conditions of rationality. This is where one should locate Plato: he first tried to provide this foundation by his teaching on Ideas, and when, in Parmenides, he was forced to admit the fragility of this foundation, he engaged in a long struggle to reassert a clear line of separation between sophistry and truth. (The opposition between the sophists and Plato is also echoed in the opposition between democracy and corporate organic order: sophists are clearly democratic, teaching the art of seducing and convincing the crowd; while Plato outlines a hierarchical, corporate order in which every individual is in his/her proper place, allowing for no position of singular universality.)
R: 5 / I: 2
As a brit, I believe it's necessary to educate myself on the history of the previously vast British empire to understand how the modern Britan evolved from that.
If anyone has any good resources on this, especially the Empire's exploits in India, Africa, China and Ireland, please leave them below.
Bonus points if they are Marxist works.
The British Empire
Britbong here,As a brit, I believe it's necessary to educate myself on the history of the previously vast British empire to understand how the modern Britan evolved from that.
If anyone has any good resources on this, especially the Empire's exploits in India, Africa, China and Ireland, please leave them below.
Bonus points if they are Marxist works.
R: 4 / I: 0
Anyone have a PDF of Charles Fourier's "The Hierarchies of Cuckoldry and Bankruptcy"? I need it because reasons.
Anyone have a PDF of Charles Fourier's "The Hierarchies of Cuckoldry and Bankruptcy"? I need it because reasons.
R: 2 / I: 0
My problem focuses on history and humanities, but I guess it could apply to other subjects. How do you guys "use" sources? How should leftists approach primary and secondary sources when studying or debating? How should we approach anticommunist ones? How do you make sure sources are correct? For example: Say you have 2 books on the Russian revolution, the first one is more left wing and the second is more anticommunist. How do you prove who's right and wrong? What do you do if the two books contradict each other? Sorry if that's too many questions, but I have a lot of doubts when it comes to learning from books and using them for debates.
My problem focuses on history and humanities, but I guess it could apply to other subjects. How do you guys "use" sources? How should leftists approach primary and secondary sources when studying or debating? How should we approach anticommunist ones? How do you make sure sources are correct? For example: Say you have 2 books on the Russian revolution, the first one is more left wing and the second is more anticommunist. How do you prove who's right and wrong? What do you do if the two books contradict each other? Sorry if that's too many questions, but I have a lot of doubts when it comes to learning from books and using them for debates.
R: 21 / I: 6
Western Marxism
What are some essential western Marxist works? Which work(s) would you classify as your favourite(s) R: 0 / I: 0
So I wanted to post it somewhere, and I decided to post it here first, I think that there are some people here that would be interested in this.
The YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqhLH_SLh3apNZjSruEXZMg
The dictionary
https://wirdeins.twanksta.org/
A site with good resources
https://bila.twanksta.org/
Prussian Language
So I wrote a pdf, on the reconstructed language of old Prussian. This language is actually going through a revival, from what I could gather. Since last year I found a YouTube channel where a family from Lithuania speak this language in a daily basis, and even their daughters speak it. So I got the dictionary of the language, read some posts on their facebook page, and listened to their speech. This pdf is mostly an overview of the language, I am not a linguistic or anything like that, I am just a random guy who likes languages.So I wanted to post it somewhere, and I decided to post it here first, I think that there are some people here that would be interested in this.
The YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqhLH_SLh3apNZjSruEXZMg
The dictionary
https://wirdeins.twanksta.org/
A site with good resources
https://bila.twanksta.org/
R: 10 / I: 2
Does someone have to be skilled/proficient in a subject in order for their teachings to be taken seriously? Can you be mediocre, or even bad at something, but great at teaching it? Should you listen to someone of a low skill level in that subject?
Does this answer vary among subject matters? Like do you have to be a good artist to be able to teach art? Do you have to be proficient in writing to be able to teach that?
This is a continuation of the drawing thread I derailed on /hobby/: >>>/hobby/8436
Does someone have to be skilled/proficient in a subject in order for their teachings to be taken seriously? Can you be mediocre, or even bad at something, but great at teaching it? Should you listen to someone of a low skill level in that subject?
Does this answer vary among subject matters? Like do you have to be a good artist to be able to teach art? Do you have to be proficient in writing to be able to teach that?
This is a continuation of the drawing thread I derailed on /hobby/: >>>/hobby/8436
R: 2 / I: 0
>On the eve of February 19 1946, much wider layers of the Naval personnel had joined in this revolt. The union jacks on most of the ships of the Royal Indian Navy in the Bombay harbour were torn down and the rebel sailors hoisted red flags along with the flags of the political parties that were involved in the struggle for independence.
Within 48 hours the British imperialists were faced with the largest revolt ever of their Naval units. The message of this rebellion started to spread by word of mouth and then over the radio (the radio station had been taken over by the rebels) to military garrisons and barracks across India. Some of the leaders of the sailors broadcast the message of the uprising and revolutionary songs and poetry were also broadcast round the clock. The revolt spread to 74 ships, 20 fleets and 22 units of the Navy along the coast. It involved Bombay, Calcutta, Karachi, Madras, Cochin and Vishapatam. On February 20 only 10 ships and 2 naval stations were not in complete revolt.
>One of the effects of this uprising was that the British Prime Minister Clement Atlee was forced to announce that the British would leave India before June 1948.
https://www.marxist.com/1946-rebellion-indian-navy150903.htm
The Indian Navy Strike 1946
I was reading a book by Laal Khan on the history of proletarian and communist struggle in pre-Partition India and I was baffled at the fact that I had no idea about this event. This has to be the greatest rebellion/revolution in India before Partition.>On the eve of February 19 1946, much wider layers of the Naval personnel had joined in this revolt. The union jacks on most of the ships of the Royal Indian Navy in the Bombay harbour were torn down and the rebel sailors hoisted red flags along with the flags of the political parties that were involved in the struggle for independence.
Within 48 hours the British imperialists were faced with the largest revolt ever of their Naval units. The message of this rebellion started to spread by word of mouth and then over the radio (the radio station had been taken over by the rebels) to military garrisons and barracks across India. Some of the leaders of the sailors broadcast the message of the uprising and revolutionary songs and poetry were also broadcast round the clock. The revolt spread to 74 ships, 20 fleets and 22 units of the Navy along the coast. It involved Bombay, Calcutta, Karachi, Madras, Cochin and Vishapatam. On February 20 only 10 ships and 2 naval stations were not in complete revolt.
>One of the effects of this uprising was that the British Prime Minister Clement Atlee was forced to announce that the British would leave India before June 1948.
https://www.marxist.com/1946-rebellion-indian-navy150903.htm
R: 12 / I: 26
cool uniforms
ITT post ur favourite historical uniforms R: 0 / I: 0
are there any archives?
Cosmopolitan mongrel deleted his blog
https://cosmopolitanmongrel.home.blog/2020/02/12/boomer-individualism-and-the-californian-ideology/are there any archives?
R: 19 / I: 1
Period management before cheap paper
How did women do it back then?
R: 38 / I: 12
Notes
How do you take your notes? Do you take notes? Use this thread to discuss methods, tips, and anything else related to how you take notes.
R: 4 / I: 1
What do I need to /edu/cate myself on if I want to spot sloppy research? Like, what is a controlled study, when is the correlation significant enough to be taken seriously, things like that.
What do I need to /edu/cate myself on if I want to spot sloppy research? Like, what is a controlled study, when is the correlation significant enough to be taken seriously, things like that.
R: 0 / I: 0
The rivalry between pro-MB Qatar, Turkey and the Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and UAE. How long has this rivalry been brewing. Now days Qatar is presented as a terror financing bogeyman in Pro-Saudi media. They blame it for financing almost every terrorist group from Al-Qaeda to ISIS to Hezbollah. And even blame it for funding local opposition in the states that boycotted it: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Bahrain. Explain this rivalry to me. And how is it affecting the region. And what truth does the boycott allegations have?
https://youtu.be/qqETCuff4lw
https://youtu.be/vJyrbw7dvR4
Reasons of the boycott by AlArabiya: https://youtu.be/8Nj4TgxoBto
UAE-funded news on Qatar and the MB: https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/editorial/the-west-must-wake-up-to-the-muslim-brotherhood-s-malevolence-1.977207
Also refute this: https://youtu.be/lxp-HDSARXs
pic unrelated
Islamic terrorism and the Geopolitics of WANA
International Islamic Terrorism and it's effects in the WANA region. Tell me about it. What are some good books on them and their ideology.The rivalry between pro-MB Qatar, Turkey and the Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and UAE. How long has this rivalry been brewing. Now days Qatar is presented as a terror financing bogeyman in Pro-Saudi media. They blame it for financing almost every terrorist group from Al-Qaeda to ISIS to Hezbollah. And even blame it for funding local opposition in the states that boycotted it: Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Bahrain. Explain this rivalry to me. And how is it affecting the region. And what truth does the boycott allegations have?
https://youtu.be/qqETCuff4lw
https://youtu.be/vJyrbw7dvR4
Reasons of the boycott by AlArabiya: https://youtu.be/8Nj4TgxoBto
UAE-funded news on Qatar and the MB: https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/editorial/the-west-must-wake-up-to-the-muslim-brotherhood-s-malevolence-1.977207
Also refute this: https://youtu.be/lxp-HDSARXs
pic unrelated
R: 2 / I: 0
It is important that communists have good charisma when canvassing and interacting with others.
Social Skills, Charisma, etc.
Posts docs n shit about improving social skills and charismaIt is important that communists have good charisma when canvassing and interacting with others.
R: 3 / I: 0
/tech/ history
It seems to me that in the software world people like to rediscover things that were already known by LISP programmers in the 70s. I don't want to fall into this trap, so please post historical documents/lectures/etc. about technology!
R: 3 / I: 1
Hi comrades,
Now I am procrastinating. It's seems that procrastination is an increasingly psicological problem in our society, specially young people.
I personally had procrastinated too much in my life agravated by my OCD (obsession with that activity), Generalized Ansxiety Disorder (that increases my anxiety to do the hard thing) and partial insomnia (so, I procrastinate to very late, that harms my sleep). I achieved, with +10 ten times more of time of the average, write my final work for University. Now I think I will not be able to write a couple of "easy" articles to a institution interested in me, pointing to me as garbage.
Did the same when I was in the Communist Party Youngs and must read a lot of directives, to read and take notes of political, history and philsophy books, etc.
Did you procrastinate /edu/? If you did and now not, how the heck you broke this vicious circle of improductiviy?
Hi comrades,
Now I am procrastinating. It's seems that procrastination is an increasingly psicological problem in our society, specially young people.
I personally had procrastinated too much in my life agravated by my OCD (obsession with that activity), Generalized Ansxiety Disorder (that increases my anxiety to do the hard thing) and partial insomnia (so, I procrastinate to very late, that harms my sleep). I achieved, with +10 ten times more of time of the average, write my final work for University. Now I think I will not be able to write a couple of "easy" articles to a institution interested in me, pointing to me as garbage.
Did the same when I was in the Communist Party Youngs and must read a lot of directives, to read and take notes of political, history and philsophy books, etc.
Did you procrastinate /edu/? If you did and now not, how the heck you broke this vicious circle of improductiviy?
R: 16 / I: 2
Is this a good book? Especially for a beginner?
Is this a good book? Especially for a beginner?
R: 9 / I: 5
Post people from history who missed the mark.
Post people from history who missed the mark.
R: 7 / I: 0
A language, its rules and words should be determined by the collective people who use it and not by academic institutions and scholars
FUCK OXFORD DICTIONARY, FUCK RAE AND FUCK GRAMMAR NAZIS
ignore the semi-cringy comic btw it was the best pic I could find as OP
Descriptive Linguistics
>In the study of language, description or descriptive linguistics is the work of objectively analyzing and describing how language is actually used (or how it was used in the past) by a speech community.A language, its rules and words should be determined by the collective people who use it and not by academic institutions and scholars
FUCK OXFORD DICTIONARY, FUCK RAE AND FUCK GRAMMAR NAZIS
ignore the semi-cringy comic btw it was the best pic I could find as OP
R: 2 / I: 0
Pic related: Carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenyl hydrazone (CCCP)
Biochemistry
Anybody else here interested in biochemistry?Pic related: Carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenyl hydrazone (CCCP)
R: 7 / I: 0
The Incan Empire
Were they Socialist?
R: 0 / I: 0
The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation by Jacques Rancière.
Required reading for /edu/
If you don't know what to read, if you don't know where to start, if you think you are a brainlet: read this book.The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation by Jacques Rancière.
R: 2 / I: 0
Has there ever before been such a clear succinct demand for to each according to their needs of a universal human property?
Literary and oral history
>we demand free toilet paper now because we have anusesHas there ever before been such a clear succinct demand for to each according to their needs of a universal human property?
R: 5 / I: 3
Also, post anything you want relating to Pandemics, its effects on shaping human history etc etc.
/Pandemic/ history
What Pandemic is Corona similar to? I can't think of any off the bat. I think Corona being high spread, but less lethal kinda makes it kinda unique.Also, post anything you want relating to Pandemics, its effects on shaping human history etc etc.
R: 12 / I: 9
KPAM Thread
What are your thoughts on the Korean People’s Association in Manchuria, an anarchist zone in Manchuria
R: 7 / I: 0
Can anyone tell me how belgium managed to get the congo.
How did britain and France even allowed this to happen?
Can anyone tell me how belgium managed to get the congo.
How did britain and France even allowed this to happen?
R: 5 / I: 2
>watch history video about russian civil war
>goes out of its way to equate bolshevik and white side
>whites killed jews and raped and pillaged peasant villages
>but remember the reds were bad too!
https://youtu.be/F1xioXWb8CY?t=1144
>watch history video about russian civil war
>goes out of its way to equate bolshevik and white side
>whites killed jews and raped and pillaged peasant villages
>but remember the reds were bad too!
https://youtu.be/F1xioXWb8CY?t=1144
R: 8 / I: 2
Let's not forget the mutinies during WW1, the slaughter of African conscripts after WW2, declaring communism illegal after getting a generally elected communist government in the 1936 election, having the most useless resistance in Europe despite even countries like the Czechs killing Heydrich and the Yugoslavian and Russian Partisans while also having the highest number of collaborators of any occupied country, manufacturing 60% of all German armaments during WW2, purposefully destroying all of Syria's infrastructure before they left in the 1970s, selling weapons to Portugal so they could kill leftist rebels in their colonies despite NATO placing a ban on sales to Portugal etc.
French """"history""""
It's that time of the month again, time to laugh at France for everytime they fuck up and for being reactionary cunts who either fuck up Europe's largest social revolution or being the biggest Nazi ass-kissers.Let's not forget the mutinies during WW1, the slaughter of African conscripts after WW2, declaring communism illegal after getting a generally elected communist government in the 1936 election, having the most useless resistance in Europe despite even countries like the Czechs killing Heydrich and the Yugoslavian and Russian Partisans while also having the highest number of collaborators of any occupied country, manufacturing 60% of all German armaments during WW2, purposefully destroying all of Syria's infrastructure before they left in the 1970s, selling weapons to Portugal so they could kill leftist rebels in their colonies despite NATO placing a ban on sales to Portugal etc.
R: 1 / I: 0
Zapatista
General on the Zapatista. How were they back then? How are they now?
R: 0 / I: 0
>The Bronze Age Collapse - Before the Storm - Extra History - #1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMBM1qazAXE
>The Bronze Age Collapse - The Wheel and the Rod - Extra History - #2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-8uv4D7cOE
>The Bronze Age Collapse - Fire and Sword - Extra History - #3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HaqpSPVhW8
>The Bronze Age Collapse - Systems Collapse - Extra History - #4
AU 0:26 / 10:17 The Bronze Age Collapse - Systems Collapse - Extra History
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkMP328eU5Q>The Bronze Age Collapse - Before the Storm - Extra History - #1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMBM1qazAXE
>The Bronze Age Collapse - The Wheel and the Rod - Extra History - #2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-8uv4D7cOE
>The Bronze Age Collapse - Fire and Sword - Extra History - #3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HaqpSPVhW8
>The Bronze Age Collapse - Systems Collapse - Extra History - #4