R: 2 / I: 1 (sticky)
>>5912 /read/
>>6162 Continental Floppa
Reading Group List
A list of reading groups and their schedules that have chosen to advertise themselves here. Take a minute to check them out. If you would like to promote your reading group, feel free to leave a comment telling people where they can go.>>5912 /read/
>>6162 Continental Floppa
R: 8 / I: 1
I'm a college dropout in burgerland, and I would like to improve my understanding of math, which was my worst subject in academia. Does anyone here have any suggestions or resources for someone who only speaks English, but would still like to do better than American schooling? Assume that I stopped learning math in 6th grade, or 9th grade for geometry in particular.
I'm a college dropout in burgerland, and I would like to improve my understanding of math, which was my worst subject in academia. Does anyone here have any suggestions or resources for someone who only speaks English, but would still like to do better than American schooling? Assume that I stopped learning math in 6th grade, or 9th grade for geometry in particular.
R: 3 / I: 0
/pol/ tards of course expect they will find some juicy new proofs for le jewerinos making shit up.
Stanford:
https://news.stanford.edu/2021/09/30/stanford-scholars-expand-digital-database-historic-records-nuremberg-trial/
Complete archive:
https://poa.st/nur.tar.gz
Direct download:
http://gofile.me/6POk4/5hmHD9un5
Nurnberg trials transcripts declassified
Stanford University is marking the 75th anniversary of the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg with a significant expansion of records from the historic trial./pol/ tards of course expect they will find some juicy new proofs for le jewerinos making shit up.
Stanford:
https://news.stanford.edu/2021/09/30/stanford-scholars-expand-digital-database-historic-records-nuremberg-trial/
Complete archive:
https://poa.st/nur.tar.gz
Direct download:
http://gofile.me/6POk4/5hmHD9un5
R: 46 / I: 46
Anything related to socialism, anarchy, communism and so on.
>Absolute beginner material
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/index.htm
https://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
>Lenin
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/
>Other Selected Marxists
https://www.marxists.org/archive/selected-marxists.htm
>Classical Works Recommended To High-Ranking Cadres
https://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
/t/ - torrents and downloads
Things to share: Movies, documentaries and mainly books.Anything related to socialism, anarchy, communism and so on.
>Absolute beginner material
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/index.htm
https://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
>Lenin
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/
>Other Selected Marxists
https://www.marxists.org/archive/selected-marxists.htm
>Classical Works Recommended To High-Ranking Cadres
https://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: 18 / I: 15
"The X-Files got nothing on this shit"
This Thread is dedicated for the discussion, analysis and reveal of obscure information on the shadowy hands of capitalism and fascism - the federal agents - and their efforts as part of the porky hydra. Propaganda and conspiracies of these Alphabet agencies and their impacts today and past are to be discussed.
Information and discussion on the OSS and NSA or equivalent government agencies of other countries - such as MI6 of Britain or the Nazi Gestapo - are also encouraged to be posted. KGB and FSB can be discussed too.
Technology for spying and espionage are also welcome. NATO and US military abuses or the affairs of corporate military-industrial complexes that are covered or hushed up also apply. Whistleblowers like Assange and Snowden are permitted sources of information as well.
Please contribute to leftypedia >>3780
Debunking anti-leftist myths >>4210 including debunking of "Le Holohoax"
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/List_of_atrocities_committed_by_the_United_States
Rules: No idpol drama, no anti-communist rhetoric, no sectarianism, no soyjak spam or emotional gaslighting; Glowies Keep Out!
Major Topics:
>Anti-Communist Action:
- Operation Gladio https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
- COINTELPRO
- Radio Free Europe
- Use of Nazis for Propaganda
- Operation Dropshot & Operation Unthinkable
- Bay of Pigs Invasion
- CIA coups (Color Revolutions)
- Assassinations and Murders of Leftist Leaders
>Inhumane and humanitarian abuses:
- Guantanamo and illegal detainment camps + torture https://archive.ph/nXR6x
- MK ULTRA
- Plutonium Experiments
- Tuskegee Syphilis 'vaccinations'
- Depleted Uranium (DU), Agent Orange, Napalm and White Phosphorus in US Military use
- Macnamara's Project 100,000
>Miscellaneous
- Operation North Woods
- KKK Police and FBI informants
- Corporate and Political Support of Nazi Germany's rise
- Operation Mockingbird
- The Bohemian Grove and Bildeburg Meetings
- NGOs and funding of Color Revolutions https://leftypedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy
- Israeli attack on the USS Liberty
- Tonkin Gulf Attack
- 9/11 attacks https://leftypedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
- Flouride in water
- Shooters and Right-wing riots
- Cultural Marxism and co-opting infiltration of liberal "rights" movements
- Operation Earnest Voice
- Operation Paperclip
- Industrial Espionage
Recommended literature:
>Fraud, Famine, and Fascism: the Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard by Douglas Tottle
Argues that charges of a deliberate Soviet policy of genocide by famine directed against the Ukrainian nation in the early 1930s are based on inflated figures and fabricated evidence created by the Nazis and propagated by their US backers and ideological yes-men.
>War Is A Racket By Smedley Butler https://archive.ph/YI1pK https://archive.ph/fisL8
A speech and a 1935 pamphlet by Smedley Darlington Butler, a retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two-time Medal of Honor recipient. Based on his career military experience, Butler discusses how business interests commercially benefit, such as war profiteering from warfare. At the time of his mysterious death, Smedley D. Butler also known as "The Fighting Quaker", was the most decorated Marine in US history and had fought in nearly every major American Conflict in his lifetime.
>Confessions of an Economic Hit Man & The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins
A semi-autobiographical book detailing his efforts as an EHM in cheating money out of people.
>Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by journalist Gary Webb
The title speaks for itself; it is a collection of the Dark Alliance series of journalistic articles published by the author detailing the methods of the CIA in funneling drugs into Ghettos, prior to his shotgun-to-the-back-of-his-head suicide
>Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II by William Blum
A detailed analysis of the post WW2 imperialism of the USA and an update on the previous book The CIA - A Forgotten History (1986)
>THE GUNS OF AUGUST: Nazis, NATO and the Color Revolutions https://archive.ph/O9Lnh
Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe
>Death Over Sakhalin by Bill Purkayastha
A detailed analysis of the KA-007 flight that had been intercepted and shot down by a Soviet Su-15 fighter and the lies made up about it.
list of others https://archive.ph/8xI83
CIA / FBI / Fed / Glowie / Conspiracy
CIA / FBI / Fed / Conspiracy General"The X-Files got nothing on this shit"
This Thread is dedicated for the discussion, analysis and reveal of obscure information on the shadowy hands of capitalism and fascism - the federal agents - and their efforts as part of the porky hydra. Propaganda and conspiracies of these Alphabet agencies and their impacts today and past are to be discussed.
Information and discussion on the OSS and NSA or equivalent government agencies of other countries - such as MI6 of Britain or the Nazi Gestapo - are also encouraged to be posted. KGB and FSB can be discussed too.
Technology for spying and espionage are also welcome. NATO and US military abuses or the affairs of corporate military-industrial complexes that are covered or hushed up also apply. Whistleblowers like Assange and Snowden are permitted sources of information as well.
Please contribute to leftypedia >>3780
Debunking anti-leftist myths >>4210 including debunking of "Le Holohoax"
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency
https://leftypedia.org/wiki/List_of_atrocities_committed_by_the_United_States
Rules: No idpol drama, no anti-communist rhetoric, no sectarianism, no soyjak spam or emotional gaslighting; Glowies Keep Out!
Major Topics:
>Anti-Communist Action:
- Operation Gladio https://leftypedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
- COINTELPRO
- Radio Free Europe
- Use of Nazis for Propaganda
- Operation Dropshot & Operation Unthinkable
- Bay of Pigs Invasion
- CIA coups (Color Revolutions)
- Assassinations and Murders of Leftist Leaders
>Inhumane and humanitarian abuses:
- Guantanamo and illegal detainment camps + torture https://archive.ph/nXR6x
- MK ULTRA
- Plutonium Experiments
- Tuskegee Syphilis 'vaccinations'
- Depleted Uranium (DU), Agent Orange, Napalm and White Phosphorus in US Military use
- Macnamara's Project 100,000
>Miscellaneous
- Operation North Woods
- KKK Police and FBI informants
- Corporate and Political Support of Nazi Germany's rise
- Operation Mockingbird
- The Bohemian Grove and Bildeburg Meetings
- NGOs and funding of Color Revolutions https://leftypedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy
- Israeli attack on the USS Liberty
- Tonkin Gulf Attack
- 9/11 attacks https://leftypedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
- Flouride in water
- Shooters and Right-wing riots
- Cultural Marxism and co-opting infiltration of liberal "rights" movements
- Operation Earnest Voice
- Operation Paperclip
- Industrial Espionage
Recommended literature:
>Fraud, Famine, and Fascism: the Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard by Douglas Tottle
Argues that charges of a deliberate Soviet policy of genocide by famine directed against the Ukrainian nation in the early 1930s are based on inflated figures and fabricated evidence created by the Nazis and propagated by their US backers and ideological yes-men.
>War Is A Racket By Smedley Butler https://archive.ph/YI1pK https://archive.ph/fisL8
A speech and a 1935 pamphlet by Smedley Darlington Butler, a retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two-time Medal of Honor recipient. Based on his career military experience, Butler discusses how business interests commercially benefit, such as war profiteering from warfare. At the time of his mysterious death, Smedley D. Butler also known as "The Fighting Quaker", was the most decorated Marine in US history and had fought in nearly every major American Conflict in his lifetime.
>Confessions of an Economic Hit Man & The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins
A semi-autobiographical book detailing his efforts as an EHM in cheating money out of people.
>Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion by journalist Gary Webb
The title speaks for itself; it is a collection of the Dark Alliance series of journalistic articles published by the author detailing the methods of the CIA in funneling drugs into Ghettos, prior to his shotgun-to-the-back-of-his-head suicide
>Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II by William Blum
A detailed analysis of the post WW2 imperialism of the USA and an update on the previous book The CIA - A Forgotten History (1986)
>THE GUNS OF AUGUST: Nazis, NATO and the Color Revolutions https://archive.ph/O9Lnh
Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe
>Death Over Sakhalin by Bill Purkayastha
A detailed analysis of the KA-007 flight that had been intercepted and shot down by a Soviet Su-15 fighter and the lies made up about it.
list of others https://archive.ph/8xI83
R: 4 / I: 1
Soviet History Books from the USSR?
Hey /edu/ bros, I'd like to find out if there are any books on Soviet history from historians in the USSR that an English speaker could read? I know there's Trotsky's history of the revolution, but I'm looking for something more comprehensive, covering at least up until the Khrushchev period, if possible. I feel like when people argue about Soviet history, we always toss around names like Conquest, Applebaum, Kotkin, Getty, Tauger, and yes even the dark lord of history Grover Furr, but the only Russian historian I see often on here is Zemzov, but I only know him from graphs and citations. Would very much appreciate feedback, thanks.
R: 8 / I: 6
/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: 137 / I: 60
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: 63 / I: 16
>>>/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: 98 / I: 38
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: 30 / 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: 333 / I: 52
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: 33 / I: 8
We're running what is essentially the Marxist counterpart to The Anarchist Library, same software and all. There are a few advantages this software provides us over a traditional site like marxists.org:
>uses a database for storing data, easier to maintain over time
>texts are formatted in a simple markup language, adding new texts is incredibly easy
>site automatically generates various formats of ebooks for use on different devices or even printing
>advanced search and browsing function
and best of all, it's public, so anyone can contribute! Whether adding new translations or just fixing a typo on an already published piece, anyone can help!
The goal of the archive is to be a public place anyone can use to publish Marxist literature in a general sense, whether republished content from other sources, or new translations and original writings. We try to be non-sectarian, as our community itself is diverse. We'll let most classic works be published right away, but original pieces will require a closer look by moderation.
We've already published a few different pieces so you can see for yourself how it all works. For example this one: archive.marxists.xyz/library/friedrich-engels-principles-of-communism
We'd love to have contributions from you! We also invite the translation team at >>2085 to publish their work on our site.
That is all for now, thank you.
archive.marxists.xyz
Hello /edu/! /read/ ( >>5912 ) here to announce a new project to you. It's https://archive.marxists.xyz. It's a new public archive of Marxist texts and books, where anyone can edit and format texts.We're running what is essentially the Marxist counterpart to The Anarchist Library, same software and all. There are a few advantages this software provides us over a traditional site like marxists.org:
>uses a database for storing data, easier to maintain over time
>texts are formatted in a simple markup language, adding new texts is incredibly easy
>site automatically generates various formats of ebooks for use on different devices or even printing
>advanced search and browsing function
and best of all, it's public, so anyone can contribute! Whether adding new translations or just fixing a typo on an already published piece, anyone can help!
The goal of the archive is to be a public place anyone can use to publish Marxist literature in a general sense, whether republished content from other sources, or new translations and original writings. We try to be non-sectarian, as our community itself is diverse. We'll let most classic works be published right away, but original pieces will require a closer look by moderation.
We've already published a few different pieces so you can see for yourself how it all works. For example this one: archive.marxists.xyz/library/friedrich-engels-principles-of-communism
We'd love to have contributions from you! We also invite the translation team at >>2085 to publish their work on our site.
That is all for now, thank you.
R: 92 / I: 10
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: 127 / I: 155
Drop those PDF's or else
Drop those PDF's or else
R: 26 / 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: 35 / I: 3
Why have women always been subjugated in some way or another? What are the material roots of this sex-based social hierarchy that has permeated virtually all human societies throughout history, and what actions should we as socialists undertake to achieve equality between the sexes?
There was a brief discussion about this in the prostitution thread, but it quickly got buried between all the other conversations going on at the same time. Feel free to share your thoughts - maybe we can come to some sort of conclusion here.
From a Marxist perspective, what are the origins of Patriarchy?
(This is not an identity politics or feminism vs. anti-feminism debate thread. Please don't use it as such.)Why have women always been subjugated in some way or another? What are the material roots of this sex-based social hierarchy that has permeated virtually all human societies throughout history, and what actions should we as socialists undertake to achieve equality between the sexes?
There was a brief discussion about this in the prostitution thread, but it quickly got buried between all the other conversations going on at the same time. Feel free to share your thoughts - maybe we can come to some sort of conclusion here.
R: 16 / 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
20 interviews PDF
Please does anybody have a pdf file of 20 interviews by joshua citarella? or at least a link to one? I have tried looking for it everywhere but couldnt find it.thanx a lot
R: 12 / I: 3
Procrastination
How can I stop this? It's bad….really bad and I know should be preparing for uni, but I just keep on procrastinating. Does somebody have some ritual or set of tips that help combating it?
R: 159 / I: 28
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: 6 / I: 3
On the Socialist/People's Republic of Romania
Anyone know any good books for reading up on the history of the RSR/RPR? Pretty much every book I've been able to find have been Ceaușescu screeds written by devout anticommunists, which for the most part don't discuss the earlier history of PCR
R: 176 / I: 45
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: 62 / I: 6
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: 12 / I: 4
I am trying to understand American political economy, the history of it, how that created the present structure, and what the present class structure and relations are.
Can anyone suggest some good Marxist books that will help? Pic related.
Books to understand the American condition?
Hello /edu/.I am trying to understand American political economy, the history of it, how that created the present structure, and what the present class structure and relations are.
Can anyone suggest some good Marxist books that will help? Pic related.
R: 56 / I: 14
>What is Wydna?
Wydna is a research collective dedicated to reading history through a unique lens. Taking inspiration from Marxism and Accelerationism, Kantbot and other members of the collective dedicate themselves to uncovering the conspiracies, traditions and ideologies that circle the elites of the British and American Empires. Through their podcast, they discuss secret societies, scandals, and factions of the deep state in a fashion considered unconventional to our current interpretation of history.
>That sounds great, where can I learn more?
Their episodes are paywalled, so that's why I'm making this thread. I will be uploading some of their more noteworthy episodes on request here for those who aren't interested in paying the 5$ a month on patreon.
You can listen to their most popular episodes for free on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/45p4IYDT96zuulXl1oH5wW?si=4uuH0B85RjWbbqdEmnwQkw
And I will be filling this thread with links to episodes I consider noteworthy.
I'll start by uploading their episode on the history of political economy, which is 7 hours, so I'll be breaking the audio up into several parts. This post, OP, contains the first 3.
/wydna/ - Kantbot, Pseudodoxology, Tankerpills, and Wydna
Seems like there are a few people on leftypol interested in this subject so I thought I'd create a thread dedicated to discussing the Wydna collective and Pseudodoxology podcast>What is Wydna?
Wydna is a research collective dedicated to reading history through a unique lens. Taking inspiration from Marxism and Accelerationism, Kantbot and other members of the collective dedicate themselves to uncovering the conspiracies, traditions and ideologies that circle the elites of the British and American Empires. Through their podcast, they discuss secret societies, scandals, and factions of the deep state in a fashion considered unconventional to our current interpretation of history.
>That sounds great, where can I learn more?
Their episodes are paywalled, so that's why I'm making this thread. I will be uploading some of their more noteworthy episodes on request here for those who aren't interested in paying the 5$ a month on patreon.
You can listen to their most popular episodes for free on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/45p4IYDT96zuulXl1oH5wW?si=4uuH0B85RjWbbqdEmnwQkw
And I will be filling this thread with links to episodes I consider noteworthy.
I'll start by uploading their episode on the history of political economy, which is 7 hours, so I'll be breaking the audio up into several parts. This post, OP, contains the first 3.
R: 61 / I: 7
For context, we've been running this collective of reading groups on >>/edu/5912 for around a year now, and we're finally ready to tackle the second volume of Capital, after successfully getting through the first one earlier this year.
Currently our system is to have weekly meetings over Matrix, on Sundays at 10 PM UTC. However we are willing to change that schedule depending on the availability of any new members.
Anyways, if you are interested, join our main Matrix chats:
Matrix Community (if you still use those): https://matrix.to/#/+leftyread:matrix.org
Matrix Space: https://matrix.to/#/#leftyreadmain:matrix.org
Join the Main chat for general discussion, and the /kritik/ chat for the Capital group.
Come /read/ with us!
Capital Volume 2 /read/ing group
Hey leftypol! Would anyone be interested in joining a reading group for Capital Volume 2? Because us over at the /read/ group are gonna do that and we'd like to have it as open as possible, so we're inviting you to join.For context, we've been running this collective of reading groups on >>/edu/5912 for around a year now, and we're finally ready to tackle the second volume of Capital, after successfully getting through the first one earlier this year.
Currently our system is to have weekly meetings over Matrix, on Sundays at 10 PM UTC. However we are willing to change that schedule depending on the availability of any new members.
Anyways, if you are interested, join our main Matrix chats:
Matrix Community (if you still use those): https://matrix.to/#/+leftyread:matrix.org
Matrix Space: https://matrix.to/#/#leftyreadmain:matrix.org
Join the Main chat for general discussion, and the /kritik/ chat for the Capital group.
Come /read/ with us!
R: 11 / I: 7
Discuss History, Mythology, Archeology, Socio-Economics, Politics and Culture of Ancient China. This includes Tibet, Korea and Mongolia.
Leftypedia >>3780 requires an article on Ancient China, all that is covered is the current People's Republic
Important Topics
>Mythology and Legends and their Modern Cultural Impacts
A society that arose at the beginning of human civilization, China's culture is enormous and diverse. Legends and mythology of China such as Fa Mulan and Journey to the West are just prominent examples of legends that influenced others across the globe. Recommend and discuss literature or myths on this.
>Eastern Philosophy, Culture and Religion
The East, especially China developed several unique religions and philosophies utterly separate from the primarily Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian philosophies of Western and Central Europe as well as the Middle East. The 3 primary Chinese philosophies are Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism. Discuss the merits of these.
>Military Conflicts and Everyday Life in Ancient China
Society in China developed on its own and so it had much different ways of life. China is also known for having massive conflicts, some of the first to have millions of men fight at a time. China is known for it's generals such as author of "The Art of War"* Sun Tzu, Han Xing and CaoCao.
*https://sites.ualberta.ca/~enoch/Readings/The_Art_Of_War.pdf
>Colonial China
In the 19th Century, China, having stagnated under the Manchu or Quing invaders, lagged behind and lost the Opium Wars, being forced to open up to British, German, Russian and Japanese colonialism of such cities and territories like Beijing, Manchuria and Hong Kong.
- Бутаков Александр Михайлович; барон Тизенгаузен Александр Евгеньевич, Опиумные войны. Обзор войн европейцев против Китая в 1840—1842, 1856—1858, 1859 и 1860 годах http://militera.lib.ru/h/butakov_tizengauz/index.html
Recommended book for basic overview - Harold M. Tanner, China: A History Volume 1 (2009)
Ancient China General
Thread for History of Ancient China up until the end of the Chinese EmpireDiscuss History, Mythology, Archeology, Socio-Economics, Politics and Culture of Ancient China. This includes Tibet, Korea and Mongolia.
Leftypedia >>3780 requires an article on Ancient China, all that is covered is the current People's Republic
Important Topics
>Mythology and Legends and their Modern Cultural Impacts
A society that arose at the beginning of human civilization, China's culture is enormous and diverse. Legends and mythology of China such as Fa Mulan and Journey to the West are just prominent examples of legends that influenced others across the globe. Recommend and discuss literature or myths on this.
>Eastern Philosophy, Culture and Religion
The East, especially China developed several unique religions and philosophies utterly separate from the primarily Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian philosophies of Western and Central Europe as well as the Middle East. The 3 primary Chinese philosophies are Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism. Discuss the merits of these.
>Military Conflicts and Everyday Life in Ancient China
Society in China developed on its own and so it had much different ways of life. China is also known for having massive conflicts, some of the first to have millions of men fight at a time. China is known for it's generals such as author of "The Art of War"* Sun Tzu, Han Xing and CaoCao.
*https://sites.ualberta.ca/~enoch/Readings/The_Art_Of_War.pdf
>Colonial China
In the 19th Century, China, having stagnated under the Manchu or Quing invaders, lagged behind and lost the Opium Wars, being forced to open up to British, German, Russian and Japanese colonialism of such cities and territories like Beijing, Manchuria and Hong Kong.
- Бутаков Александр Михайлович; барон Тизенгаузен Александр Евгеньевич, Опиумные войны. Обзор войн европейцев против Китая в 1840—1842, 1856—1858, 1859 и 1860 годах http://militera.lib.ru/h/butakov_tizengauz/index.html
Recommended book for basic overview - Harold M. Tanner, China: A History Volume 1 (2009)
R: 59 / I: 23
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: 23 / 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: 26 / I: 1
>inb4 schitzos like peterson or other rightwingers
this is /leftypol/ faggot
>inb4 Richard D. Wolff
all his lectures i have seen so far are just very basic stuff if you find some more advanced stuff post it
I want to focus this thread on philosophy, history and political economy on an academic level.
Lectures general /LG/
Post video recordings of lectures and announcements for online lectures.>inb4 schitzos like peterson or other rightwingers
this is /leftypol/ faggot
>inb4 Richard D. Wolff
all his lectures i have seen so far are just very basic stuff if you find some more advanced stuff post it
I want to focus this thread on philosophy, history and political economy on an academic level.
R: 75 / I: 42
Leftist Argument copypasta general /LACG/
Post Copy pastas, videos and books which debunk common Fascist, Liberal talking points which are repeated often.
R: 17 / I: 13
/his/ humour thread
Dark edition.
R: 5 / I: 1
This is a direct offline mirror, those two boards should work properly. To enter, open /edu/index.html or /tech/index.html.
https://anonfiles.com/f4zd85u7u9/bunkerchan-edutech-archive_zip (about 400MB)
Let me know if there are any issues.gentoo Gentoo
bunkerchan backup
I've made a backup of the bunkerchan.net /edu/ and /tech/ boards, since a couple of users mentioned that there were still some useful semi-active threads.This is a direct offline mirror, those two boards should work properly. To enter, open /edu/index.html or /tech/index.html.
https://anonfiles.com/f4zd85u7u9/bunkerchan-edutech-archive_zip (about 400MB)
Let me know if there are any issues.
R: 9 / 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: 10 / I: 6
To unite various Indian topics that cropped up: Post historical and modern geopolitical discussion, memes, photos and pdfs on the topic. Keep it civil and no bad faith dogma, spam or bait, keep that to /siberia/
Contribute to Leftypedia: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/India >>3780 thread
Articles on Britain, Pakistan and more needed.
Important Topics
>Pre-Colonial Indian History
Indian history that isn't just British colonialism. Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs warring over each other sounds way more exciting but you rarely hear anything about the era and the place. Recommend any books to easily get into the settings of the culture(s).
>Colonial India
History of British colonialism and it's exploitation and impact on the country(s). British humanitarian crimes such as the Black Hole of Calcutta are welcome to be posted.
>Modern India
Modern political, social and economic issues of India ranging from international conflict to internal turmoil. Environmental issues also welcome.
An Indian Dentist that does political writing on the state of the country and has soviet sympathies: http://bill-purkayastha.blogspot.com/
>Socialism in India
Leftist movements and areas of India and it's efforts to bring about socialism in the country and the 90s privatization and neo-liberalist arrival.
- A book from 1985 about the Indian Big Bourgeoisie: https://archive.org/details/IndianBigBourgeoisie/page/n5/mode/2up
- Kerala: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_in_Kerala
- Indian Maoist party links: https://bannedthought.net/India/CPI-Maoist-Docs/index.htm
https://foreignlanguages.press/colorful-classics/historic-eight-documents-charu-mazumdar/
https://foreignlanguages.press/colorful-classics/maoists-in-india-writings-interviews-azad/
https://www.redspark.nu/en/
MLM thread >>310
History and Socialism of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, Nepal
Thread on the Indian Peninsula and Surrounding Areas Closely Tied to the CountryTo unite various Indian topics that cropped up: Post historical and modern geopolitical discussion, memes, photos and pdfs on the topic. Keep it civil and no bad faith dogma, spam or bait, keep that to /siberia/
Contribute to Leftypedia: https://leftypedia.org/wiki/India >>3780 thread
Articles on Britain, Pakistan and more needed.
Important Topics
>Pre-Colonial Indian History
Indian history that isn't just British colonialism. Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs warring over each other sounds way more exciting but you rarely hear anything about the era and the place. Recommend any books to easily get into the settings of the culture(s).
>Colonial India
History of British colonialism and it's exploitation and impact on the country(s). British humanitarian crimes such as the Black Hole of Calcutta are welcome to be posted.
>Modern India
Modern political, social and economic issues of India ranging from international conflict to internal turmoil. Environmental issues also welcome.
An Indian Dentist that does political writing on the state of the country and has soviet sympathies: http://bill-purkayastha.blogspot.com/
>Socialism in India
Leftist movements and areas of India and it's efforts to bring about socialism in the country and the 90s privatization and neo-liberalist arrival.
- A book from 1985 about the Indian Big Bourgeoisie: https://archive.org/details/IndianBigBourgeoisie/page/n5/mode/2up
- Kerala: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_in_Kerala
- Indian Maoist party links: https://bannedthought.net/India/CPI-Maoist-Docs/index.htm
https://foreignlanguages.press/colorful-classics/historic-eight-documents-charu-mazumdar/
https://foreignlanguages.press/colorful-classics/maoists-in-india-writings-interviews-azad/
https://www.redspark.nu/en/
MLM thread >>310
R: 359 / I: 83
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: 244 / I: 55
/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: 33 / I: 15
>What is /read/?
</read/ is a collective of marxist reading groups, hailing from /edu/ and /GET/. We are split into various different reading groups, each with different interests, goals and schedules.
We're making a new thread to let everyone know that /read/ is still very much alive. In fact, we're inviting everyone to join in for our new batch of readings! Our groups are done with previous readings, so this is the perfect time for new members to join up!
As of today, May 30th 2021, the /sniff/ group is done reading volume 1 of Capital. We have a new batch of readings planned (more on that in the post below), and all are invited to join. Meanwhile, the /tilmeeth/ group is gearing up to read Capital, so if anyone missed out on the first round, this is your chance.
As always, our website, containing our library and reading lists is: https://leftyread.neocities.org
And our Matrix Community, where all discussion happens, can be found at: https://matrix.to/#/+leftyread:matrix.org
Old thread: >>3624
Come /read/ with us!read_a_fucking_book Read a Fucking Book
/read/ 2.0
Hello and welcome comrades! This is the new /read/ thread.>What is /read/?
</read/ is a collective of marxist reading groups, hailing from /edu/ and /GET/. We are split into various different reading groups, each with different interests, goals and schedules.
We're making a new thread to let everyone know that /read/ is still very much alive. In fact, we're inviting everyone to join in for our new batch of readings! Our groups are done with previous readings, so this is the perfect time for new members to join up!
As of today, May 30th 2021, the /sniff/ group is done reading volume 1 of Capital. We have a new batch of readings planned (more on that in the post below), and all are invited to join. Meanwhile, the /tilmeeth/ group is gearing up to read Capital, so if anyone missed out on the first round, this is your chance.
As always, our website, containing our library and reading lists is: https://leftyread.neocities.org
And our Matrix Community, where all discussion happens, can be found at: https://matrix.to/#/+leftyread:matrix.org
Old thread: >>3624
Come /read/ with us!
R: 138 / I: 15
>Leader of the KPD in Germany
>Get over 10% of the vote in 1928 (4th place)
>1930
>Get 13% (3rd place) but Hitler just came out of no where and got 18% (2nd place)
>It's obvious that Hitler is going to keep growing in power
>Hitler brags in speeches that he'll suppress every other party in the Reichstag once he wins
>He even wrote a book where he talks about bolshevism being the blood enemy of fascism
>Be Ernst Thälmann: massively popular, growing at a similar rate to Hitler, but don't know what to do
>Consult pre-1935 Comintern, guidelines only retards would follow (even Stalin admitted this later)
>"Whatever you do, don't make a coalition with the Social Democrats!" says Comintern
>Social Democrats are the only party bigger than the Nazis
>They are interested in forming a coalition with the KPD to beat Hitler
>"Nah, that sounds like social fascism to me"
>Thälmann decides to attack SD rather than Hitler
>To most of the public, it looks like the left is fighting itself and they turn to Hitler.
>1932
>Hitler is by far the largest party in Germany with 37% of the vote
>The KPD grew, but only by a point
>Hitler is just months away from the Chancellery
>If the left can form a coalition, a literal right-wing monarchist will choose them over Hitler
>"Let's not let some Nazi trees overshadow the SD forest"
>Doesn't form a government because he believes he can still win
>1933
>Hitler is appointed Chancellor
>Ernst Thälmann rallies his party with a speech
>"Hitler first, then our turn!"
>Is arrested two months after Hitler's election
>Sent to the Buchenwald concentration camp along with most of his party and supporters
>Some of his comrades flee to the Soviet Union only to die in the Great Purge a few years later
>Ernst Thälmann is executed on Hitler's orders in 1944 after 11 years in solitary confinement
How could this guy have the largest Communist party in Europe at the time and then squander it like that? He didn't even have to work with the Social Democrats after winning. Hitler banned everyone else that he promised to work with and killed anyone else that disagreed in the Night of the Long Knives. Was Ernst Thälmann actually retarded?
Was Ernst Thälmann a retard?
>Be Ernst Thälmann in the late 20s>Leader of the KPD in Germany
>Get over 10% of the vote in 1928 (4th place)
>1930
>Get 13% (3rd place) but Hitler just came out of no where and got 18% (2nd place)
>It's obvious that Hitler is going to keep growing in power
>Hitler brags in speeches that he'll suppress every other party in the Reichstag once he wins
>He even wrote a book where he talks about bolshevism being the blood enemy of fascism
>Be Ernst Thälmann: massively popular, growing at a similar rate to Hitler, but don't know what to do
>Consult pre-1935 Comintern, guidelines only retards would follow (even Stalin admitted this later)
>"Whatever you do, don't make a coalition with the Social Democrats!" says Comintern
>Social Democrats are the only party bigger than the Nazis
>They are interested in forming a coalition with the KPD to beat Hitler
>"Nah, that sounds like social fascism to me"
>Thälmann decides to attack SD rather than Hitler
>To most of the public, it looks like the left is fighting itself and they turn to Hitler.
>1932
>Hitler is by far the largest party in Germany with 37% of the vote
>The KPD grew, but only by a point
>Hitler is just months away from the Chancellery
>If the left can form a coalition, a literal right-wing monarchist will choose them over Hitler
>"Let's not let some Nazi trees overshadow the SD forest"
>Doesn't form a government because he believes he can still win
>1933
>Hitler is appointed Chancellor
>Ernst Thälmann rallies his party with a speech
>"Hitler first, then our turn!"
>Is arrested two months after Hitler's election
>Sent to the Buchenwald concentration camp along with most of his party and supporters
>Some of his comrades flee to the Soviet Union only to die in the Great Purge a few years later
>Ernst Thälmann is executed on Hitler's orders in 1944 after 11 years in solitary confinement
How could this guy have the largest Communist party in Europe at the time and then squander it like that? He didn't even have to work with the Social Democrats after winning. Hitler banned everyone else that he promised to work with and killed anyone else that disagreed in the Night of the Long Knives. Was Ernst Thälmann actually retarded?
R: 6 / I: 3
Learning Philosophy
Give me a guide to learning philosophy, starting with the Greeks all up to our current era. Preferably, I would stick with the most prominent thinkers of their epoch. You guys probably have an infographic for that, right?
R: 57 / I: 30
Learning philosophy
Is there a website where I can learn philosophy? A website that leads your through and explains to you all larger categories and questions in philosophy? I know there is plato.stanford.edu, but it's an encyclopedia and doesn't lead you through the topics in a didactic manner. I didn't want to learn philosophy by reading a bunch of books, because I have several dozens of books I'm already intending to read.
R: 8 / I: 1
On Technodefeatism
https://tanketterambles.wordpress.com/2021/09/29/on-technodefeatism/
>I’ve noticed in the past few years that there’s a trend among both libertarian socialist types and even supposed ‘anarchists’ which I’ve come to call “technodefeatism”. Broadly, the tenants of technodefeatism are as follows 1. Revolution is not coming, 2. Technological advances in fields like automation will soon bring about a post-scarcity society 3. Therefore, our goal should be to make things livable until that post-scarcity society comes about through things like environmental protection and social welfare. Technodefeatism is a cancerous trend that must be catalogued and extirpated as it tempts discouraged activists away from revolutionary activity and towards lethargy. I’ll attempt here to outline the tendency and give some thoughts on how best to combat it.
>This pessimism on its own is familiar to most people on the left. It’s what’s known as ‘doomerism’; a sort of intense, all-encompassing pessimism regarding the future. Technodefeatism goes further than mere doomerism, though, because it purports to offer a solution. This solution is to do… nothing! That’s the beauty of technodefeatism: it doesn’t require any major change from the status quo. It doesn’t ask anything of us; it doesn’t require us to risk anything. It presents itself as an inevitability; as a ‘safe bet’ (as opposed to the very unsafe bet of armed struggle).
>This confidence comes from its adherence to a principle which is, at its core, liberal in origin. Namely, that capitalism spurs innovation which leads us inexorably towards greater progress. The main focus of technodefeatism is automation and robotics technology, although AI plays a role in some technodefeatist thinking. The idea is that as capitalist society moves towards greater and greater automation, the need for wage labor will slowly dissolve given the availability of cheaper robotic labor. Because nobody needs to work anymore, and because capitalists no longer need to extract surplus value from humans to profit, we will be able to live in a world of consumption without (human) labor. Sometimes this is even put in Marxist terms, that the rate of profit will fall to near-zero given advances in automation technology. Subsequently, the thinking goes, capitalism will ‘wither away’ as it no longer fits this new automated mode of production.
>Given that we’re on track for a post-scarcity utopia in the minds of technodefeatists, what ought we to do now? Invariably, they concede that environmental degradation is a big concern and could put a damper on their dreams of indefinite progress. For this reason, they will support legislation (yes, though the bourgeois state) to create environmental safeguards and limit the harm of capitalism as best they can before the new mode of production is upon us. In keeping with this ‘minimizing harm’ mentality, they usually advocate for things like universal healthcare and welfare expansion. To make things easier until the new age dawns, you understand.
>Reader, you have probably already noticed that this is a very familiar set of political goals. This is straight out of the social liberal playbook. Welfare expansion, environmental protections, and investment into private-sector technological research? You’d struggle to find a disagreement between a technodefeatist and a typical liberal. The difference lies solely in the framing of the issue. Whereas the core of liberal reformism is patrician noblesse oblige, the core of technodefeatism is a desperation to escape their soul-crushing pessimism. A technodefeatist would likely say “yes I would support a revolution if it happened, but it never will”. A liberal of course would oppose revolution on principle.
>Here we can finally see the true nature and purpose of technodefeatism: to draw disillusioned and pessimistic leftists towards serving liberal ends without requiring them to fundamentally change their worldview. The technodefeatist doesn’t have to renounce Marx, or renounce revolution. They don’t have to denounce their anarchism or hatred of capitalism. All they have to do is accept a couple of premises that bourgeois propaganda already primes us to accept.
>The technodefeatist is a travesty of a revolutionary. They profess their Marxist ideals while making the case–using the vocabulary of a revolutionary–for campaigning on behalf of bourgeois politicians to pass reforms that they know are doomed to fail.
>As we’ve seen, technodefeatism stems from ‘doomerism’, that crushing pessimism felt by many a leftist. In order to combat technodefeatism, then, it stands to reason that we ought to focus on morale and revolutionary optimism. There are many ways to do this, of course, and perhaps I’ll go into them in further detail later. Just by way of example I’ll say that publicizing actions and talking openly about real wins that we’ve made (however small they might seem) do wonders to combat this pessimism. It’s harder to sit in a corner and sulk when comrades in your community are out fighting the good fight.
>Another way to combat technodefeatism is by questioning its assumptions, in particular the assumption that automation under capitalism will lead to a better society (let alone a post-scarcity one). The capitalist class, for all its moral failings, is not stupid. They will seek to maintain their wealth, power and influence no matter the cost. The utopia of technodefeatist imaginations may not be as idyllic as they make it out to be. In particular, the most vulnerable part of their analysis is the idea that capitalism could ever ‘wither away’ due to advancements in production. This tenant is just sort of taken for granted by technodefeatists; they imagine a smooth transition from the hellish world we have now into the post-scarcity utopia. This is more unrealistic than any prospect of revolution. Automation will increase the contradictions capitalism as it develops further, and there is no reason to think that this will be a painless process. Nor is there reason to think that automation will necessarily develop into a post-scarcity society rather than one of intensified exploitation and widespread misery. Undermining the supposed inevitability of the technodefeatist argument should be a key focus.
>Technodefeatism is a rising trend in the left. It threatens to turn disillusioned activists into the willing servants of the status quo while making them think they’re furthering the cause of the working class. We must consciously combat this trend; we ignore it at our own peril.
ITT: Good Posts which are too lengthy to be used as greentext
Not quite short enough to be reused easily, and not quite long enough to be a novel. Any overly-long greentext can go here too, I guess.On Technodefeatism
https://tanketterambles.wordpress.com/2021/09/29/on-technodefeatism/
>I’ve noticed in the past few years that there’s a trend among both libertarian socialist types and even supposed ‘anarchists’ which I’ve come to call “technodefeatism”. Broadly, the tenants of technodefeatism are as follows 1. Revolution is not coming, 2. Technological advances in fields like automation will soon bring about a post-scarcity society 3. Therefore, our goal should be to make things livable until that post-scarcity society comes about through things like environmental protection and social welfare. Technodefeatism is a cancerous trend that must be catalogued and extirpated as it tempts discouraged activists away from revolutionary activity and towards lethargy. I’ll attempt here to outline the tendency and give some thoughts on how best to combat it.
>This pessimism on its own is familiar to most people on the left. It’s what’s known as ‘doomerism’; a sort of intense, all-encompassing pessimism regarding the future. Technodefeatism goes further than mere doomerism, though, because it purports to offer a solution. This solution is to do… nothing! That’s the beauty of technodefeatism: it doesn’t require any major change from the status quo. It doesn’t ask anything of us; it doesn’t require us to risk anything. It presents itself as an inevitability; as a ‘safe bet’ (as opposed to the very unsafe bet of armed struggle).
>This confidence comes from its adherence to a principle which is, at its core, liberal in origin. Namely, that capitalism spurs innovation which leads us inexorably towards greater progress. The main focus of technodefeatism is automation and robotics technology, although AI plays a role in some technodefeatist thinking. The idea is that as capitalist society moves towards greater and greater automation, the need for wage labor will slowly dissolve given the availability of cheaper robotic labor. Because nobody needs to work anymore, and because capitalists no longer need to extract surplus value from humans to profit, we will be able to live in a world of consumption without (human) labor. Sometimes this is even put in Marxist terms, that the rate of profit will fall to near-zero given advances in automation technology. Subsequently, the thinking goes, capitalism will ‘wither away’ as it no longer fits this new automated mode of production.
>Given that we’re on track for a post-scarcity utopia in the minds of technodefeatists, what ought we to do now? Invariably, they concede that environmental degradation is a big concern and could put a damper on their dreams of indefinite progress. For this reason, they will support legislation (yes, though the bourgeois state) to create environmental safeguards and limit the harm of capitalism as best they can before the new mode of production is upon us. In keeping with this ‘minimizing harm’ mentality, they usually advocate for things like universal healthcare and welfare expansion. To make things easier until the new age dawns, you understand.
>Reader, you have probably already noticed that this is a very familiar set of political goals. This is straight out of the social liberal playbook. Welfare expansion, environmental protections, and investment into private-sector technological research? You’d struggle to find a disagreement between a technodefeatist and a typical liberal. The difference lies solely in the framing of the issue. Whereas the core of liberal reformism is patrician noblesse oblige, the core of technodefeatism is a desperation to escape their soul-crushing pessimism. A technodefeatist would likely say “yes I would support a revolution if it happened, but it never will”. A liberal of course would oppose revolution on principle.
>Here we can finally see the true nature and purpose of technodefeatism: to draw disillusioned and pessimistic leftists towards serving liberal ends without requiring them to fundamentally change their worldview. The technodefeatist doesn’t have to renounce Marx, or renounce revolution. They don’t have to denounce their anarchism or hatred of capitalism. All they have to do is accept a couple of premises that bourgeois propaganda already primes us to accept.
>The technodefeatist is a travesty of a revolutionary. They profess their Marxist ideals while making the case–using the vocabulary of a revolutionary–for campaigning on behalf of bourgeois politicians to pass reforms that they know are doomed to fail.
>As we’ve seen, technodefeatism stems from ‘doomerism’, that crushing pessimism felt by many a leftist. In order to combat technodefeatism, then, it stands to reason that we ought to focus on morale and revolutionary optimism. There are many ways to do this, of course, and perhaps I’ll go into them in further detail later. Just by way of example I’ll say that publicizing actions and talking openly about real wins that we’ve made (however small they might seem) do wonders to combat this pessimism. It’s harder to sit in a corner and sulk when comrades in your community are out fighting the good fight.
>Another way to combat technodefeatism is by questioning its assumptions, in particular the assumption that automation under capitalism will lead to a better society (let alone a post-scarcity one). The capitalist class, for all its moral failings, is not stupid. They will seek to maintain their wealth, power and influence no matter the cost. The utopia of technodefeatist imaginations may not be as idyllic as they make it out to be. In particular, the most vulnerable part of their analysis is the idea that capitalism could ever ‘wither away’ due to advancements in production. This tenant is just sort of taken for granted by technodefeatists; they imagine a smooth transition from the hellish world we have now into the post-scarcity utopia. This is more unrealistic than any prospect of revolution. Automation will increase the contradictions capitalism as it develops further, and there is no reason to think that this will be a painless process. Nor is there reason to think that automation will necessarily develop into a post-scarcity society rather than one of intensified exploitation and widespread misery. Undermining the supposed inevitability of the technodefeatist argument should be a key focus.
>Technodefeatism is a rising trend in the left. It threatens to turn disillusioned activists into the willing servants of the status quo while making them think they’re furthering the cause of the working class. We must consciously combat this trend; we ignore it at our own peril.
R: 59 / I: 14
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: 12 / I: 1
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: 12 / I: 0
Asshole! • Arschloch!
I won and you lost, haha! / I got this and you don’t, haha! • Ätsch!
Owee! • Aua!
Stand up! / Wake up! • Aufstehen!
Tidy up! • Aufräumen!
Open the door/window/whatever! • Aufmachen!
Close the door/window/whatever! • Zumachen!
Encore! • Zugabe! (shouted ZU-GA-BE to keep in synch with the others shouting it)
Colloquial greeting that sounds like a question. • Na?
Don’t act cocky like that! • Nanana! It basically only exists in spoken form. Some writing attempts use spaces, but that’s like writing Zu ga be.
I’m rating this game/movie/situation/whatever two stars out of five. ★★☆☆☆ • Naja. It’s also a filler word similar to “well“.
Boaster! • Angeber!
Give it! • Gib! (order addressing a single person)
Sit down! • Hinsetzen!
Desirable. • Wünschenswert. (basically “wish-worthy”)
Remarkable! • Bemerkenswert! Bemerken means both “to notice” and “to remark”.
“Good morning”, but saving time by cutting out “good”. • Morgen! (also means tomorrow)
Northern German greeting used early and mid-day • Moin!
Southern German greeting • Servus!
💩Shit! • Scheiße!
What one says when “shit” would be a bit too strong for the situation. • Mist! (literally “manure”)
Breakfast! • Frühstück! (literally “early-piece”)
Bitch. • Miststück. (literally “manure-piece”)
Please. / Here you are. *puts food on table* / You’re welcome. • Bitte.
Thanks. • Danke. Many English words have the letter th where their German brothers have d.
My decision and final word on this issue! • Basta! (from Spanish)
Fraud! • Betrug!
Move! • Bewegung! (literally “movement”)
Hurry! • Beeilung!
Stay! • Bleib! (order addressing a single person)
Uncultured philistine! • Banause! (from Greek «βάναυσος»)
Fatcat! • Bonze! (from Japanese 「bonsō」, “monk”; European usage started with complaints about clerical fatcats)
Whoa! • Boah! This sound shift to b is pretty common when going from English to German.
Great performance! • Bravo! (from Italian)
Golly! • Donnerwetter! (literally “thunder-weather”)
Chaaaarge! • Attackeeee! (Of course in formal writing it does not look liiiike thiiiis.)
Fooled! • Ausgetrickst!
That is ruled out. • Ausgeschlossen. (basically “out-locked”)
Permitted as an exception. • Ausnahmsweise. „Ausnahme“ means “exception”. „Xweise“ basically means “way of X”.
Turn off whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Ausmachen!
Turn on whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Anmachen!
Whatever. • Egal.
Finally! • Endlich!
What one calls a shorter person one wants to bully. • Gartenzwerg! (literally “garden gnome”)
What one calls a weird huge person with bad posture who shuffles around. • Lulatsch!
Guilty! • Schuldig!
Sorry! • Entschuldigung! (Shortening of this sentence to just the last word: “I’m asking many times for de-guilt-ification!”)
What one says when feeling only like ¾ of what would merit a full “sorry”. • Tschuldigung!
What one says when sorry for being unable to provide a service. • Bedaure.
Macabre. • Makaber. It’s from «macabre» by the French who got that probably from the Arabic «maqābir», “graves”.
Just a sec! • Sekunde!
Just a minute! • Minute!
“Good day”, but again saving time by cutting out “good”. • Tag!
Lunch! • Mittagessen! (literally “midday-food”)
Depending on region and trade, this utterance can mean “enjoy your lunch break” or “hello” or “enjoy taking a shit”. • Mahlzeit! (literally “meal”)
Fascinating. • Faszinierend. English words with a soft c often have a German brother with z in its place.
I don’t mind if you do that. • Meinetwegen. (literally “on my behalf”)
What one says to remind a cocky kid that its height does not surpass that of three cheeses. • Dreikäsehoch! Note the shift from ch to k.
Brat! • Rotzlöffel! (literally “snot-spoon”) Yes, a short vocab list like this definitely needs to have more than one insult aimed at children.
Seriously? • Ernsthaft?
Gotcha! • Erwischt!
❌False! • Falsch!
Finished. • Fertig.
Attach whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Dranmachen!
Detach whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Abmachen!
Request denied. • Abgelehnt.
Request granted. • Genehmigt.
Okey-dokey! • Gebongt!
Loafer! • Faulpelz! (literally “lazy-pelt”)
Fire! • Feuer!
Cunt! • Fotze! Once upon a time, this anatomical reference meant “mouth” in the Southern parts of Germany.
How fucking two-faced! • Hinterfotzig! Basically “behind-the-back-cunty” to most German ears. Southerners are less offended.
Brash! • Frech!
Exactly! • Genau!
Ingenious! • Genial!
What one says to somebody sneezing. • Gesundheit! (literally “health”)
Grisly! • Grauenhaft!
Ugly! • Hässlich!
What one says when undecided between “grisly” and “ugly”. • Grässlich! It sounds like the baby of „grauenhaft” and „hässlich”.
Coward! • Feigling! In English, the adjective “cowardly” countains the noun here; in German, the noun here contains the adjective: „feige”.
Weakling! • Weichei! (literally “soft-egg”)
Leave! • Geh! (order addressing a single person)
Great and/or horny! • Geil!
Congrats! • Glückwunsch!
Fatso! • Fettwanst! „Wanst“ already means “fat belly”, so this is basically “fat fat belly”.
The opposite of “Fatso!” • Hungerhaken! (literally “hunger-hook”)
Stop doing that! • Aufhören! The word „hören“ means to hear and you can hear better when you stop doing anything.
Look! • Guck! (order addressing a single person)
Ha! That’s what you’d like to think! (addressing a single person) • Denkste!
Now ya see. (addressing a single person) • Siehste.
See ya. • Wiedersehen. (literally “again see”)
The equivalent of “see ya” for telephone conversation. • Wiederhören. (literally “again hear”)
👍Good. • Gut.
What one calls a person who performs actions signaling moral superiority without bringing much or any positive change. • Gutmensch! (literally “good-human”)
Huh? • Hä?
What? • Was?
That! • Das! It rhymes with the corresponding question. There are a few more such pairs in this set.
Hello. • Hallo.
Upsy daisy! • Hoppla!
Stop! • Halt!
Outstanding. • Hervorragend.
What one says to announce a mindstate between “oops” and “eek”. • Huch‽ (tends to be less self-critical than “oops” & less shocked than “eek”)
Hooray! • Hurra!
Whore! • Hure!
Son of a whore! • Hurensohn!
What one says to the kind of person who can’t remember the translation of this. • Idiot!
What one says when „Idiot“ is a bit too harsh. • Esel! (literally “donkey”)
Interesting! • Interessant!
When? • Wann?
Then. • Dann.
Eww! • Igitt!
Disgusting! • Widerlich!
Yes. • Ja. In the middle of a sentence „ja“ means something like “very” or “surprisingly”.
No. • Nein.
Yes and no. • Jein.
That’s bullshit and you can kiss my ass. • Jaja… (Not to be confused with: 1. „Ja, ja!“ – “Yes, indeed!” 2. „Ja, ja.“ – “Yes, I know that.”)
Now! • Jetzt!
Who? • Wer?
Where? • Wo?
Here!/There! • Da!
Right here! • Hier!
Over there! • Dort!
Enemy of the working class! • Klassenfeind!
Wait. • Warte. (order addressing a single person)
Come! • Komm! (order addressing a single person)
Shoo! (telling toddlers or animals to get out of the way) • Kusch!
Why? • Warum? We also got another word for “why”, „wieso“, and there’s also our OTHER other word for “why”, „weshalb“.
250 GERMAN ONE-WORD SENTENCES
Attention! • Achtung!Asshole! • Arschloch!
I won and you lost, haha! / I got this and you don’t, haha! • Ätsch!
Owee! • Aua!
Stand up! / Wake up! • Aufstehen!
Tidy up! • Aufräumen!
Open the door/window/whatever! • Aufmachen!
Close the door/window/whatever! • Zumachen!
Encore! • Zugabe! (shouted ZU-GA-BE to keep in synch with the others shouting it)
Colloquial greeting that sounds like a question. • Na?
Don’t act cocky like that! • Nanana! It basically only exists in spoken form. Some writing attempts use spaces, but that’s like writing Zu ga be.
I’m rating this game/movie/situation/whatever two stars out of five. ★★☆☆☆ • Naja. It’s also a filler word similar to “well“.
Boaster! • Angeber!
Give it! • Gib! (order addressing a single person)
Sit down! • Hinsetzen!
Desirable. • Wünschenswert. (basically “wish-worthy”)
Remarkable! • Bemerkenswert! Bemerken means both “to notice” and “to remark”.
“Good morning”, but saving time by cutting out “good”. • Morgen! (also means tomorrow)
Northern German greeting used early and mid-day • Moin!
Southern German greeting • Servus!
💩Shit! • Scheiße!
What one says when “shit” would be a bit too strong for the situation. • Mist! (literally “manure”)
Breakfast! • Frühstück! (literally “early-piece”)
Bitch. • Miststück. (literally “manure-piece”)
Please. / Here you are. *puts food on table* / You’re welcome. • Bitte.
Thanks. • Danke. Many English words have the letter th where their German brothers have d.
My decision and final word on this issue! • Basta! (from Spanish)
Fraud! • Betrug!
Move! • Bewegung! (literally “movement”)
Hurry! • Beeilung!
Stay! • Bleib! (order addressing a single person)
Uncultured philistine! • Banause! (from Greek «βάναυσος»)
Fatcat! • Bonze! (from Japanese 「bonsō」, “monk”; European usage started with complaints about clerical fatcats)
Whoa! • Boah! This sound shift to b is pretty common when going from English to German.
Great performance! • Bravo! (from Italian)
Golly! • Donnerwetter! (literally “thunder-weather”)
Chaaaarge! • Attackeeee! (Of course in formal writing it does not look liiiike thiiiis.)
Fooled! • Ausgetrickst!
That is ruled out. • Ausgeschlossen. (basically “out-locked”)
Permitted as an exception. • Ausnahmsweise. „Ausnahme“ means “exception”. „Xweise“ basically means “way of X”.
Turn off whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Ausmachen!
Turn on whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Anmachen!
Whatever. • Egal.
Finally! • Endlich!
What one calls a shorter person one wants to bully. • Gartenzwerg! (literally “garden gnome”)
What one calls a weird huge person with bad posture who shuffles around. • Lulatsch!
Guilty! • Schuldig!
Sorry! • Entschuldigung! (Shortening of this sentence to just the last word: “I’m asking many times for de-guilt-ification!”)
What one says when feeling only like ¾ of what would merit a full “sorry”. • Tschuldigung!
What one says when sorry for being unable to provide a service. • Bedaure.
Macabre. • Makaber. It’s from «macabre» by the French who got that probably from the Arabic «maqābir», “graves”.
Just a sec! • Sekunde!
Just a minute! • Minute!
“Good day”, but again saving time by cutting out “good”. • Tag!
Lunch! • Mittagessen! (literally “midday-food”)
Depending on region and trade, this utterance can mean “enjoy your lunch break” or “hello” or “enjoy taking a shit”. • Mahlzeit! (literally “meal”)
Fascinating. • Faszinierend. English words with a soft c often have a German brother with z in its place.
I don’t mind if you do that. • Meinetwegen. (literally “on my behalf”)
What one says to remind a cocky kid that its height does not surpass that of three cheeses. • Dreikäsehoch! Note the shift from ch to k.
Brat! • Rotzlöffel! (literally “snot-spoon”) Yes, a short vocab list like this definitely needs to have more than one insult aimed at children.
Seriously? • Ernsthaft?
Gotcha! • Erwischt!
❌False! • Falsch!
Finished. • Fertig.
Attach whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Dranmachen!
Detach whatever thing(s) depending on context! • Abmachen!
Request denied. • Abgelehnt.
Request granted. • Genehmigt.
Okey-dokey! • Gebongt!
Loafer! • Faulpelz! (literally “lazy-pelt”)
Fire! • Feuer!
Cunt! • Fotze! Once upon a time, this anatomical reference meant “mouth” in the Southern parts of Germany.
How fucking two-faced! • Hinterfotzig! Basically “behind-the-back-cunty” to most German ears. Southerners are less offended.
Brash! • Frech!
Exactly! • Genau!
Ingenious! • Genial!
What one says to somebody sneezing. • Gesundheit! (literally “health”)
Grisly! • Grauenhaft!
Ugly! • Hässlich!
What one says when undecided between “grisly” and “ugly”. • Grässlich! It sounds like the baby of „grauenhaft” and „hässlich”.
Coward! • Feigling! In English, the adjective “cowardly” countains the noun here; in German, the noun here contains the adjective: „feige”.
Weakling! • Weichei! (literally “soft-egg”)
Leave! • Geh! (order addressing a single person)
Great and/or horny! • Geil!
Congrats! • Glückwunsch!
Fatso! • Fettwanst! „Wanst“ already means “fat belly”, so this is basically “fat fat belly”.
The opposite of “Fatso!” • Hungerhaken! (literally “hunger-hook”)
Stop doing that! • Aufhören! The word „hören“ means to hear and you can hear better when you stop doing anything.
Look! • Guck! (order addressing a single person)
Ha! That’s what you’d like to think! (addressing a single person) • Denkste!
Now ya see. (addressing a single person) • Siehste.
See ya. • Wiedersehen. (literally “again see”)
The equivalent of “see ya” for telephone conversation. • Wiederhören. (literally “again hear”)
👍Good. • Gut.
What one calls a person who performs actions signaling moral superiority without bringing much or any positive change. • Gutmensch! (literally “good-human”)
Huh? • Hä?
What? • Was?
That! • Das! It rhymes with the corresponding question. There are a few more such pairs in this set.
Hello. • Hallo.
Upsy daisy! • Hoppla!
Stop! • Halt!
Outstanding. • Hervorragend.
What one says to announce a mindstate between “oops” and “eek”. • Huch‽ (tends to be less self-critical than “oops” & less shocked than “eek”)
Hooray! • Hurra!
Whore! • Hure!
Son of a whore! • Hurensohn!
What one says to the kind of person who can’t remember the translation of this. • Idiot!
What one says when „Idiot“ is a bit too harsh. • Esel! (literally “donkey”)
Interesting! • Interessant!
When? • Wann?
Then. • Dann.
Eww! • Igitt!
Disgusting! • Widerlich!
Yes. • Ja. In the middle of a sentence „ja“ means something like “very” or “surprisingly”.
No. • Nein.
Yes and no. • Jein.
That’s bullshit and you can kiss my ass. • Jaja… (Not to be confused with: 1. „Ja, ja!“ – “Yes, indeed!” 2. „Ja, ja.“ – “Yes, I know that.”)
Now! • Jetzt!
Who? • Wer?
Where? • Wo?
Here!/There! • Da!
Right here! • Hier!
Over there! • Dort!
Enemy of the working class! • Klassenfeind!
Wait. • Warte. (order addressing a single person)
Come! • Komm! (order addressing a single person)
Shoo! (telling toddlers or animals to get out of the way) • Kusch!
Why? • Warum? We also got another word for “why”, „wieso“, and there’s also our OTHER other word for “why”, „weshalb“.
R: 9 / I: 3
Resources
https://www.sciencemadness.org/ The go-to site for amateur chemists
Wiki: http://www.sciencemadness.org/smwiki/index.php/Main_Page
Forums, require email registration: https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/
Archive.org has plenty of old chemistry textbooks. The most useful ones for me are those meant to teach youngsters from the early 1900's.
YouTube
NurdRage, the OG channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/NurdRage
NileRed, the internet's premier piss chemist: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheRedNile
NileBlue, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1D3yD4wlPMico0dss264XA
Explosions&Fire, energetic materials: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVovvq34gd0ps5cVYNZrc7A
Extractions&Ire, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvFApMFo_AafXbHRyEJefjA
Cody'sLab, chemistry and physics: https://www.youtube.com/user/theCodyReeder
ChemistNATE, educational: https://www.youtube.com/user/chemistNATE
/chem/ - Chemistry
Let's have a thread about chemistry. I can't be the only amateur chemist on here. To please the mods, everything in here is purely academic. Check local laws before you embark on your projects. And before you do anything, make sure you have appropriate safety equipment. Think about the worst thing that could happen to your reaction, because chances are it will. Don't be stupid.Resources
https://www.sciencemadness.org/ The go-to site for amateur chemists
Wiki: http://www.sciencemadness.org/smwiki/index.php/Main_Page
Forums, require email registration: https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/
Archive.org has plenty of old chemistry textbooks. The most useful ones for me are those meant to teach youngsters from the early 1900's.
YouTube
NurdRage, the OG channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/NurdRage
NileRed, the internet's premier piss chemist: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheRedNile
NileBlue, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1D3yD4wlPMico0dss264XA
Explosions&Fire, energetic materials: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVovvq34gd0ps5cVYNZrc7A
Extractions&Ire, secondary channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvFApMFo_AafXbHRyEJefjA
Cody'sLab, chemistry and physics: https://www.youtube.com/user/theCodyReeder
ChemistNATE, educational: https://www.youtube.com/user/chemistNATE
R: 80 / I: 80
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: 13 / 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: 50 / I: 69
The revolution of 1905 came as a surprise to everyone, although Russia had been going to it for a long time. For example, the American historian Richard Pipes considers it a prologue to the student unrest of 1899. The Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Izvolsky believed that the tsarist regime began to collapse even under Alexander III, and the publicist Mark Vishnyak counted the end of the autocracy from the mid-1870s, when Alexander II stopped the Great Reforms and decided to" freeze " the country. Russia and the ruling dynasty could only be saved from revolution by the introduction of a constitutional monarchy. But the last Romanovs, in an effort to preserve the unshakable autocratic foundations of their power, eventually lost everything and led the country to the catastrophe of 1917.
Interactive map of the 1905 revolution
https://libcom.org/history/interactive-map-1905-revolution
Revolution 1905-1907(1917) and Civil War
It was a dress rehearsal, without which the final victory of the proletariat in October 1917 would have been impossible. (Lenin)The revolution of 1905 came as a surprise to everyone, although Russia had been going to it for a long time. For example, the American historian Richard Pipes considers it a prologue to the student unrest of 1899. The Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Izvolsky believed that the tsarist regime began to collapse even under Alexander III, and the publicist Mark Vishnyak counted the end of the autocracy from the mid-1870s, when Alexander II stopped the Great Reforms and decided to" freeze " the country. Russia and the ruling dynasty could only be saved from revolution by the introduction of a constitutional monarchy. But the last Romanovs, in an effort to preserve the unshakable autocratic foundations of their power, eventually lost everything and led the country to the catastrophe of 1917.
Interactive map of the 1905 revolution
https://libcom.org/history/interactive-map-1905-revolution
R: 114 / 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: 107 / I: 17
Trotsky alleges that during the 20s there was a bonapartist coup where the reactionary forces of the soviet bureaucracy gained control of the political organs of the USSR. He identifies Stalin as the protagonist of this movement. Trotsky says the subsequent shift in foreign policy, (The USSR/third international adopting a defensive, class collaborationist line) is evidence of this degeneration.
But what is the Stalinist response to this reasoning? Do Stalinists argue that bureaucratic Bonapartism is impossible? Or do they think believe that it didn't occur until later? It's an interesting situation, because obviously *something* happened over the decades which diminished the proletarian authenticity of soviet politics. Do Stalinists have some alternative material explanation for what exactly occurred?
Anyway, first time coming to /leftypol/ in a few years, I hope you all have been well.
Bureaucratization, Bonapartism, and Degenerated workers states
I don't understand the Stalinist response to Trotskyist thought.Trotsky alleges that during the 20s there was a bonapartist coup where the reactionary forces of the soviet bureaucracy gained control of the political organs of the USSR. He identifies Stalin as the protagonist of this movement. Trotsky says the subsequent shift in foreign policy, (The USSR/third international adopting a defensive, class collaborationist line) is evidence of this degeneration.
But what is the Stalinist response to this reasoning? Do Stalinists argue that bureaucratic Bonapartism is impossible? Or do they think believe that it didn't occur until later? It's an interesting situation, because obviously *something* happened over the decades which diminished the proletarian authenticity of soviet politics. Do Stalinists have some alternative material explanation for what exactly occurred?
Anyway, first time coming to /leftypol/ in a few years, I hope you all have been well.
R: 0 / I: 0
i was wondering if anyone knows any good books/files regarding socialist music or the connection between socialism and music theory (or socialist realism and music). this is mostly due to the fact that most pre-contemporary music (not including folk) was very bourgeois in nature, and most books seem to focus on such composers/theory.
the books i'm looking for include; the theory behind Soviet composers like Shostakovich and Khachaturyan; as well as the influence which socialism may've had on a composer's style (ie. Bartók's repulsion towards «upper-class music» which he viewed as tainted, choosing to focus on villagers and peasants for influence).
music theory and socialism
i wasn't sure to put this in /edu/ or /music/, so if this is in the wrong place, mods please move it therei was wondering if anyone knows any good books/files regarding socialist music or the connection between socialism and music theory (or socialist realism and music). this is mostly due to the fact that most pre-contemporary music (not including folk) was very bourgeois in nature, and most books seem to focus on such composers/theory.
the books i'm looking for include; the theory behind Soviet composers like Shostakovich and Khachaturyan; as well as the influence which socialism may've had on a composer's style (ie. Bartók's repulsion towards «upper-class music» which he viewed as tainted, choosing to focus on villagers and peasants for influence).
R: 13 / I: 26
cool uniforms
ITT post ur favourite historical uniforms
R: 22 / I: 8
Especially in The Mirror of Production his criticisms are from the prespective of some one knowledgeable of Marx.
Now that the dust has settled was he right nearly about everything?
I mean look at China
Baudrillard critique of Marxism
Baudrillard is one of the few who was able to critique Marxism from a resonable and not cucked perspective.Especially in The Mirror of Production his criticisms are from the prespective of some one knowledgeable of Marx.
Now that the dust has settled was he right nearly about everything?
I mean look at China
R: 14 / I: 3
https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/wilweg03.htm
It's an interesting historical document, and I also believe there might be things we can learn from it, because the Nazis were trying to figure out Marxists' strengths and weaknesses at the time with the goal of winning over workers and recruiting ex-Marxists into their ranks. So it's like an enemy document about how they would target us in the battle of rhetoric and public attention. There are some things in the essay that I think are worth pondering.
The article begins by mentioning that the Nazis had gone as far as they could winning over members of the "'middle class' reactionary front" and that they risked wearing them out in terms of attendance at public rallies and so on, and the party wanted to expand beyond their middle class / petit-bourgeoisie base and recruit workers, which posed many challenges.
>Those citizens whom we could interest in our world view through marches and mass meetings, the sensible members of the middle class, have been reached. The “middle class” reactionary front has been ground down — despite their election “victory” of 6 November. Nationalist circles are the ones that increasingly visited our mass meetings, that saw our marches with growing enthusiasm, and remain today about 95% of the attendees at our meetings, although they have long since been won over to National Socialism.
Next, Oerter claims the party had won over a "large number of former Marxists" and that the Social Democrats in particular "are fighting desperately for their survival … Still, Marxist propaganda, and especially its press, regularly succeeds in leading people who have seen the light back into error, and bringing them back under the control of Marxist party leaders."
The Nazis viewed Marxism as founded in and nurtured within liberalism, which afforded it some protection, while also challenging liberalism with the strength of being a younger movement challenging an older movement.
>Liberalism was not able to resist Marxism. The liberal parties and ideologies could only fight defensively against a worldview with greater strength and clarity of purpose. Even the Marxist worker who long doubted and sought for something better eventually had to conclude that Marxism is the only worldview that can bring a new and better society and economic order. Who can hold it against him that he rejected the forces that denied him equality and a share in the results of his labor? The German worker absorbed Marxism in his parents’ home, and was surrounded by people who thought the same in the workplace. In what remained of his sound understanding, he knew that there was a flaw somewhere in the worldview. He realized that there was a catch somewhere to the lovely teachings of “expropriating the expropriators,” of “the equality of everyone with a human face,” of “international brotherhood,” of “international solidarity,” but he did not know where, and there was no one to show him the contradictions, the weak points, in the thinking of Karl Marx and his followers.
Then the essay goes into the usual stuff about how Marxism and socialists are everything to blame for what's wrong with Germany, but admits that trying to fight it requires some understanding of it. Also, they felt that attacking Marxist leaders (Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc.) wasn't so successful, because while that might cause a Marxist's conviction to rattle a bit, it didn't really change a Marxist worldview.
Therefore, the Nazis aimed to present Marxist aims as utopian (sounds familiar?), erroneous, and "lead in the wrong direction." They also wanted to train their members to be able to speak and debate, and they were having trouble "holding their own against opponents," and Nazi Party functionaries were not preparing their members for the task very well because they treated them "as if they were a bit stupid." A general lack of knowledge about Marxism was a problem for these counter-propagandists who "are like army officers who have good soldiers, but do not know how strong the enemy is or where he is located."
Plus, they were thinking about optics, and were concerned with how they dressed for public meetings, and trying to find the right balance between being too sloppy and too elegant:
>It is nonsense to think that a popular style of speaking (which often turns out to be vulgar) is enough to win sympathy for the speaker in a meeting of workers. The opposite! The Marxist worker can tell what is genuine and what is artificial. When he sees that a speaker has taken on a “popular” style of speaking, or that he wears a shirt without a collar, or rolled up sleeves or other things like that, he becomes reserved and critical. Obviously a workers’ meeting is not a university auditorium. The speech must be simple and clear. But coarse language and shabby clothing generally harm the overall impression, just as do an elevated, lecturing style and elegant dress. There is too much of this going on, in part due to a lack of through training that is replaced by outward appearances.
So, they seemed to believe (if I'm reading this right) that one of their problems is that they were *too* focused on optics, trying to present an appearance over substance and feels over reals. So they were dressing down *too* much, which came across as fake, or they wanted to appear respectable, so they overdressed. "Unnecessary exaggeration is also harmful," Oerter writes. Hyperbole, in other words, and prematurely declaring victory. Oerter mentions a Nazi speaker making an exaggerated prediction of Nazi Party electoral success in the Nov. 6, 1932 elections, when the Nazi Party actually lost seats, which they felt was damaging to their reputation.
Another problem involved speakers misleading people about the subjects of public talks, and mixing up discussions about worldviews with discussions about current events. A Nazi speaker would hold an event titled "Marxism or German workers" and then discuss stuff in the news, which didn't failed to win anyone over to Nazism. That reminds me of some of our dear friends from 4chan who have a confused worldview and prefer to mostly talk about random bullshit in the news. The Nazis also liked to send out "former Marxists" give speeches, and Oerter describes states that Marxists know "that Soviet Russia is not a land of milk and honey," but just repeating that over and over again doesn't really matter to believing Marxists – we've heard it all before. It doesn't really shake the worldview to learn that the USSR is not a utopia.
>[The wavering Marxist] did not come to listen to a former Marxist speaker to hear these things again. He wants to hear something different. He wants to know why this former Marxist left the red flag and now fights for the swastika. He is a seeker. He has lost faith in Marx and his doctrines. His world is threatening to collapse, and he wants a new and better worldview. The former Marxist who found a new worldview in National Socialism should help his former party members to make a final break with Marxism. He should make it easier to for them to become National Socialists. The Marxist worker wants to hear why the speaker today opposes which he once honestly fought for, perhaps for more than a generation. He wants to know why the speaker chose National Socialism, and how it is superior to Marxist thinking.
>… [wavering Marxists] want a plausible justification and good reasons for doing what they instinctively feel. For decades the materialist worldview was pumped into them. They learned to evaluate everything from a materialistic and rational perspective. As convinced Marxists, they were ruled by cold, clear reason, not by feelings. Mind and stomach, not heart and soul, were the driving forces behind events. In their heart and soul, many of these former Marxist workers are already National Socialists; only their materialism keeps them from breaking with the false gods of the past.
So, what can we learn from all this? How do we use these observations to strengthen on our own movement and improve where we might be lacking? How can we resist far-right techniques in the future when they reorganize themselves? Please add observations of your own. Here's what I think:
(1) Media is really important. The Nazis really didn't like the socialist press and saw this as one of our major strengths. Naturally, one of the first things they did when taking power was to smash our printing presses. Today, there are new forms of media and I think we should avail ourselves to it as much as possible.
(2) Nazi speakers liked to blab about current events but were weak in terms of ideology / worldview. This is no surprise, but I think it's evident in a lot of right-wing media today. See: Tim Pool. One of the most effective reactionary speakers in North America in recent years in terms of worldview has been Jordan Peterson, but he floundered in a highly public debate with Slavoj Zizek and has had health problems.
(3) To be able to win people over to a Marxist worldview requires a solid understanding of Marx and Engels. Therefore: read.
(4) Don't get caught up on defending leaders so much or dead historical figures. I think the Chinese formulation of "70% correct, 30% incorrect" is useful here. Right wingers attacking Marxist leaders and historical figures is what they really shouldn't be doing.
(5) Don't stress optics too much but don't discount it. I think this Nazi essayist was basically correct that you shouldn't look sloppy but you shouldn't overdress. The Nazis saw problems with their own members both dressing down too much and appearing too professorial.
(6) The Nazis saw themselves in a "battle for the soul." Feels over reals. It's an irrational worldview. But they recognized that many Marxists had doubts in their convictions, would waver, and the Nazis were right there waiting to provide a plausibly-enough-sounding justification for weak Marxists to break with the ideology for their own.
By the way, I think Xi Jinping recognizes a similar vulnerability and believes in the importance of stressing a strong belief in socialism, which smacks to some Marxists as a kind of subjectivist idealism, but is he wrong about that? He said: "Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Soviet Communist Party collapse? An important reason was that their ideals and convictions wavered … In the end nobody was a real man, nobody came out to resist … Facts have repeatedly proved that the most dangerous moment is when one wavers or begins to show doubt in one's ideals and convictions." One article on this states that Xi's sense of mission marks a difference between him and his predecessors, whom Zhao Ziyang (a former general secretary) described as "lacking ideals, lacking historical responsibility, and lacking vision."
Nazis' 1932 Anti-Marxist Propaganda Guide
I've been digging through a Nazi propaganda archive hosted by Calvin University, a Christian university in Michigan, and came across a 1932 essay from Nazi propagandist Fritz Oerter titled "Our Speakers in the Anti-Marxist Battle," published in their agitprop journal "Our Will and Way."https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/wilweg03.htm
It's an interesting historical document, and I also believe there might be things we can learn from it, because the Nazis were trying to figure out Marxists' strengths and weaknesses at the time with the goal of winning over workers and recruiting ex-Marxists into their ranks. So it's like an enemy document about how they would target us in the battle of rhetoric and public attention. There are some things in the essay that I think are worth pondering.
The article begins by mentioning that the Nazis had gone as far as they could winning over members of the "'middle class' reactionary front" and that they risked wearing them out in terms of attendance at public rallies and so on, and the party wanted to expand beyond their middle class / petit-bourgeoisie base and recruit workers, which posed many challenges.
>Those citizens whom we could interest in our world view through marches and mass meetings, the sensible members of the middle class, have been reached. The “middle class” reactionary front has been ground down — despite their election “victory” of 6 November. Nationalist circles are the ones that increasingly visited our mass meetings, that saw our marches with growing enthusiasm, and remain today about 95% of the attendees at our meetings, although they have long since been won over to National Socialism.
Next, Oerter claims the party had won over a "large number of former Marxists" and that the Social Democrats in particular "are fighting desperately for their survival … Still, Marxist propaganda, and especially its press, regularly succeeds in leading people who have seen the light back into error, and bringing them back under the control of Marxist party leaders."
The Nazis viewed Marxism as founded in and nurtured within liberalism, which afforded it some protection, while also challenging liberalism with the strength of being a younger movement challenging an older movement.
>Liberalism was not able to resist Marxism. The liberal parties and ideologies could only fight defensively against a worldview with greater strength and clarity of purpose. Even the Marxist worker who long doubted and sought for something better eventually had to conclude that Marxism is the only worldview that can bring a new and better society and economic order. Who can hold it against him that he rejected the forces that denied him equality and a share in the results of his labor? The German worker absorbed Marxism in his parents’ home, and was surrounded by people who thought the same in the workplace. In what remained of his sound understanding, he knew that there was a flaw somewhere in the worldview. He realized that there was a catch somewhere to the lovely teachings of “expropriating the expropriators,” of “the equality of everyone with a human face,” of “international brotherhood,” of “international solidarity,” but he did not know where, and there was no one to show him the contradictions, the weak points, in the thinking of Karl Marx and his followers.
Then the essay goes into the usual stuff about how Marxism and socialists are everything to blame for what's wrong with Germany, but admits that trying to fight it requires some understanding of it. Also, they felt that attacking Marxist leaders (Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc.) wasn't so successful, because while that might cause a Marxist's conviction to rattle a bit, it didn't really change a Marxist worldview.
Therefore, the Nazis aimed to present Marxist aims as utopian (sounds familiar?), erroneous, and "lead in the wrong direction." They also wanted to train their members to be able to speak and debate, and they were having trouble "holding their own against opponents," and Nazi Party functionaries were not preparing their members for the task very well because they treated them "as if they were a bit stupid." A general lack of knowledge about Marxism was a problem for these counter-propagandists who "are like army officers who have good soldiers, but do not know how strong the enemy is or where he is located."
Plus, they were thinking about optics, and were concerned with how they dressed for public meetings, and trying to find the right balance between being too sloppy and too elegant:
>It is nonsense to think that a popular style of speaking (which often turns out to be vulgar) is enough to win sympathy for the speaker in a meeting of workers. The opposite! The Marxist worker can tell what is genuine and what is artificial. When he sees that a speaker has taken on a “popular” style of speaking, or that he wears a shirt without a collar, or rolled up sleeves or other things like that, he becomes reserved and critical. Obviously a workers’ meeting is not a university auditorium. The speech must be simple and clear. But coarse language and shabby clothing generally harm the overall impression, just as do an elevated, lecturing style and elegant dress. There is too much of this going on, in part due to a lack of through training that is replaced by outward appearances.
So, they seemed to believe (if I'm reading this right) that one of their problems is that they were *too* focused on optics, trying to present an appearance over substance and feels over reals. So they were dressing down *too* much, which came across as fake, or they wanted to appear respectable, so they overdressed. "Unnecessary exaggeration is also harmful," Oerter writes. Hyperbole, in other words, and prematurely declaring victory. Oerter mentions a Nazi speaker making an exaggerated prediction of Nazi Party electoral success in the Nov. 6, 1932 elections, when the Nazi Party actually lost seats, which they felt was damaging to their reputation.
Another problem involved speakers misleading people about the subjects of public talks, and mixing up discussions about worldviews with discussions about current events. A Nazi speaker would hold an event titled "Marxism or German workers" and then discuss stuff in the news, which didn't failed to win anyone over to Nazism. That reminds me of some of our dear friends from 4chan who have a confused worldview and prefer to mostly talk about random bullshit in the news. The Nazis also liked to send out "former Marxists" give speeches, and Oerter describes states that Marxists know "that Soviet Russia is not a land of milk and honey," but just repeating that over and over again doesn't really matter to believing Marxists – we've heard it all before. It doesn't really shake the worldview to learn that the USSR is not a utopia.
>[The wavering Marxist] did not come to listen to a former Marxist speaker to hear these things again. He wants to hear something different. He wants to know why this former Marxist left the red flag and now fights for the swastika. He is a seeker. He has lost faith in Marx and his doctrines. His world is threatening to collapse, and he wants a new and better worldview. The former Marxist who found a new worldview in National Socialism should help his former party members to make a final break with Marxism. He should make it easier to for them to become National Socialists. The Marxist worker wants to hear why the speaker today opposes which he once honestly fought for, perhaps for more than a generation. He wants to know why the speaker chose National Socialism, and how it is superior to Marxist thinking.
>… [wavering Marxists] want a plausible justification and good reasons for doing what they instinctively feel. For decades the materialist worldview was pumped into them. They learned to evaluate everything from a materialistic and rational perspective. As convinced Marxists, they were ruled by cold, clear reason, not by feelings. Mind and stomach, not heart and soul, were the driving forces behind events. In their heart and soul, many of these former Marxist workers are already National Socialists; only their materialism keeps them from breaking with the false gods of the past.
So, what can we learn from all this? How do we use these observations to strengthen on our own movement and improve where we might be lacking? How can we resist far-right techniques in the future when they reorganize themselves? Please add observations of your own. Here's what I think:
(1) Media is really important. The Nazis really didn't like the socialist press and saw this as one of our major strengths. Naturally, one of the first things they did when taking power was to smash our printing presses. Today, there are new forms of media and I think we should avail ourselves to it as much as possible.
(2) Nazi speakers liked to blab about current events but were weak in terms of ideology / worldview. This is no surprise, but I think it's evident in a lot of right-wing media today. See: Tim Pool. One of the most effective reactionary speakers in North America in recent years in terms of worldview has been Jordan Peterson, but he floundered in a highly public debate with Slavoj Zizek and has had health problems.
(3) To be able to win people over to a Marxist worldview requires a solid understanding of Marx and Engels. Therefore: read.
(4) Don't get caught up on defending leaders so much or dead historical figures. I think the Chinese formulation of "70% correct, 30% incorrect" is useful here. Right wingers attacking Marxist leaders and historical figures is what they really shouldn't be doing.
(5) Don't stress optics too much but don't discount it. I think this Nazi essayist was basically correct that you shouldn't look sloppy but you shouldn't overdress. The Nazis saw problems with their own members both dressing down too much and appearing too professorial.
(6) The Nazis saw themselves in a "battle for the soul." Feels over reals. It's an irrational worldview. But they recognized that many Marxists had doubts in their convictions, would waver, and the Nazis were right there waiting to provide a plausibly-enough-sounding justification for weak Marxists to break with the ideology for their own.
By the way, I think Xi Jinping recognizes a similar vulnerability and believes in the importance of stressing a strong belief in socialism, which smacks to some Marxists as a kind of subjectivist idealism, but is he wrong about that? He said: "Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Soviet Communist Party collapse? An important reason was that their ideals and convictions wavered … In the end nobody was a real man, nobody came out to resist … Facts have repeatedly proved that the most dangerous moment is when one wavers or begins to show doubt in one's ideals and convictions." One article on this states that Xi's sense of mission marks a difference between him and his predecessors, whom Zhao Ziyang (a former general secretary) described as "lacking ideals, lacking historical responsibility, and lacking vision."
R: 3 / I: 0
Wouldn't it be better for the survival of the species if they just died after they couldn't have kids anymore? Evolutionarily they have no purpose right?
Is it just so they can help to raise offspring? But elderly animals continue to consume resources that could go towards young, so isn't it still a net loss overall?
Weird question
Hello, I was petting my dog earlier today, he's pretty old, and it got me wondering - why, evolutionarily speaking, do animals or organisms in general (including humans) keep on living after they are no longer able to reproduce due to age?Wouldn't it be better for the survival of the species if they just died after they couldn't have kids anymore? Evolutionarily they have no purpose right?
Is it just so they can help to raise offspring? But elderly animals continue to consume resources that could go towards young, so isn't it still a net loss overall?
R: 2 / I: 0
What did Marx say about George Washington?
What about Lutheranism?
What about primitive communism?
Everyone from Oxford to Britannica has their own reference works on Marx's own ideas, but which one is the most responsive and comprehensive for actual Marxists to use? Is Hal Draper usable as an encyclopedia? If not, then who?
I want to understand his practical takes as well as his abstract ideas. Book worship is surely an evil to be avoided, but total ignorance of the man's own perspectives is one I hold far worse.
Best Reference Work on Marx?
What did Marx think about democratic Athens?What did Marx say about George Washington?
What about Lutheranism?
What about primitive communism?
Everyone from Oxford to Britannica has their own reference works on Marx's own ideas, but which one is the most responsive and comprehensive for actual Marxists to use? Is Hal Draper usable as an encyclopedia? If not, then who?
I want to understand his practical takes as well as his abstract ideas. Book worship is surely an evil to be avoided, but total ignorance of the man's own perspectives is one I hold far worse.
R: 5 / I: 5
I thought leftypol could use a general /lit/ thread, maybe mainly to discuss fiction and poetry and everything in between since theory and philosophy is widely discussed in many other threads. And I guess aspiring writers could also ask for feedback and advice in this thread.
I would like to start off by asking for some recommendations of leftypol approved Latin American authors and works. Stuff I've already read and enjoyed include: Cien años de soledad, Crónica de una muerte anunciada, Pedro Páramo, El llano en llamas and Cuentos de amor de locura y de muerte.
Maybe /hobby/ would be more fit for a thread like this, but /edu/ could do with some more activity, I reckon.
I thought leftypol could use a general /lit/ thread, maybe mainly to discuss fiction and poetry and everything in between since theory and philosophy is widely discussed in many other threads. And I guess aspiring writers could also ask for feedback and advice in this thread.
I would like to start off by asking for some recommendations of leftypol approved Latin American authors and works. Stuff I've already read and enjoyed include: Cien años de soledad, Crónica de una muerte anunciada, Pedro Páramo, El llano en llamas and Cuentos de amor de locura y de muerte.
Maybe /hobby/ would be more fit for a thread like this, but /edu/ could do with some more activity, I reckon.
R: 4 / I: 0
I remember seeing a book about atheism and german idealism; or idealism in general but I can't seem to find it.
Either way let's just talk about atheism in general.
Books on non anglo atheism
Any one has any reads on atheism that are not just "I hecking love science" like the new atheism movement was?I remember seeing a book about atheism and german idealism; or idealism in general but I can't seem to find it.
Either way let's just talk about atheism in general.
R: 20 / I: 4
Our schedule has recently changed. We now discuss on Sundays.
UTC (UTC +0) 19:00 (5pm) Universal time
EDT (UTC -4) 15:00 (3pm) Eastern US (daylight savings time)
CEST (UTC +2) 21:00 (7pm) Central Europe (summer time)
The next session will be Sunday 27th June, covering essay 1:
Theory, Theoretical Practice and Theoretical Formation: Ideology and Ideological Struggle
Althusser on Philosophy, Science, Marxism
This is part of the reading series we're doing in the Continental Floppa reading group formerly the anti-Anglo reading group. The plan is to read 1 chapter per week (breaking up chapter 3 into the 3 lectures). This is a selection of lectures and essays by Louis Althusser on the topics of philosophy relative to science and politics. This thread is for discussion and to invite people to the reading group, which can be found here https://matrix.to/#/!mjlMGagFTDhvgxMWhY:matrix.org/Our schedule has recently changed. We now discuss on Sundays.
UTC (UTC +0) 19:00 (5pm) Universal time
EDT (UTC -4) 15:00 (3pm) Eastern US (daylight savings time)
CEST (UTC +2) 21:00 (7pm) Central Europe (summer time)
The next session will be Sunday 27th June, covering essay 1:
Theory, Theoretical Practice and Theoretical Formation: Ideology and Ideological Struggle
R: 3 / I: 3
Someone explain to me what color in "color charges" actually fucking means because the definitions for it are confusing as fuck all hell
Someone explain to me what color in "color charges" actually fucking means because the definitions for it are confusing as fuck all hell
R: 5 / I: 0
Please let me know if you want to see such a room in the future so that if enough people are interested the room can be created.
Proposal for /sci/ room
Hello comrades, i'm here to propose the creation of a new matrix room (called /sci/) for the general discussion of science, topics included are mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology and their branches and related fields.Please let me know if you want to see such a room in the future so that if enough people are interested the room can be created.
R: 163 / I: 30
lysenko & agriculture
i'm curious to learn about him, how catastrophic was he for soviet agriculture or was he actually not all that bad? i'd appreciate some reading material about this matter too thanks
R: 53 / I: 17
Weird History Facts
Post any weird and obscure history facts that you know of
R: 140 / I: 38
http://proriv.ru/articles.shtml/fedotov?doc_repres-9
I'll do excerpts from this.
<Yakir first started to doubt Soviet politics in the villages in 1932, and became close to Tukhachevsky due to that. In 1934, Tukhachevsky told him of his connections to Trotsky and germans. Trotsky put on Tukhachevsky the task of finding anti-soviet elements in the military and organize them.
<Under that Trotsky's directive Yakir, for example, saw that Letichevskiy fortified region be sabotaged, namely: through zinovyivite engineers they stalled equipment shipments, built bunkers so low and wrong that they couldn't shoot at the enemy, and such.
<why Letichev? Because polish-german armies would be using Novograd-Volynsk corridor for movement, because there's rivers and forests everywhere else, because less trains will be in Rovno-Lvov region, because it's the most risky direction. Lvov leads to Proskurov, and Proskurov to Letichev.
<Shepetovskiy airfield was built wrongly with sabotage in mind, too small and inconvenient, making speedy aircraft launches impossible
<Yakir was talking about how Kork did a replacement of officer corps of Moscow proletarian division, putting 120 of young officers he trained in charge of it with the aim of having an entire division on hands during the coup.
Tukhachevsky himself:
<in 1928, he was relieved from his command of Red Army and put in charge of L. military district (Letichev?) . He didn't like that! So, he started trying to make contacts with people who didn't like the direction Red Army was taking. In 1928-29, he was researching Red Army's prospects, and based on that wrote a letter to higher ups where he tried to prove that USSR needed 50k tanks and 40k planes (in 1930s, lol). He was criticized heavily for that note, so he used the momentum of it to come in contact with Yenukidze, which told him that even if rightists are defeated, they are not done and are merely in the underground, so Tukhachevsky should instead of trying to find anti-Soviet cadres in officer corps try and organize them instead. Also, that Yenukidze is connected to rightists' commanding center, and he will be giving him orders from the center.
<After a Caucasus vacation, Tukhachevsky was sent onto a joint wargames with germans. He travelled there with Romm, whom Trotsky used to start a contact with Tukhachevksy. Romm relied that Trotsky activised his work both abroad, against Comintern, and inside USSR, where trotskyist cadres are being organized. Politically, Trotsky's ideas about rural USSR were especially close to those of rightists. Trotsky was asking Tukhachevsky to collect trotskyist cadres inside the army. By the way, according to Romm, Trotsky was hopeful that Hitler will come to power, and that he will support Trotsky in the struggle against the Soviets.
Trotsky was hoping for nazis seizing power in Germany, huh?
<About sabotage, regarding artillery. In 1934 Efimov was tasked (by Tukhachevsky) with this sabotage, in particular - taking in not all required parts from the industry for shooting of the artillery, accepting goods which have confusing blueprints (no literas and such), and also to send to germans data about our stockpiles of goods. In winter 1935-36, also to prepare explosions on the artillery stockpiles. In 1936 Turovsky reported that plans for Letichevsky fortified region were transmitted to the polish intelligence services, Alafuzo reported that he gave germans and poles data on aircraft and mechanized divisions and anti-air defences in B. and K. military districts (Belarus/Brest and Kovel?)
<in 1936, after researching german and polish possible plans during the wargames in April in 1936 against B and K military districts, and also after receiving a directive from german HQ through Rundstedt for preparation of the loss on ukrainian direction, Tukhachevsky discussed those things with Yakir and Uborevich. It was decided to keep the previous plan: Belorussian front's advance into Poland, not supplied properly due to sabotage, will be a decisive loss and will be met with germans attacking through East Prussia onto Grodno or through Slonim onto Minsk.
<Ukrainian front in the first place or after germans' attack in the north will most likely meet defeat at the hands of superior german-polish forces. According to this, Uborevich was tasked to formulate such operational plans for Belorussian front so that it will cause railroads to be overcrowded, rear to be overstrained, and troops grouped in such a way as to cause all the weak spots of the current plan to be even more weak. Yakir was tasked with them same through Sablin, in addition to organizing a surrender of Letichevskiy fortified district.
<Particular sabotages included: no food for horses, declining additional shipments of food under the pretense that they already have all the food horses require; sending fuel for tanks and aviation where it's not required; weak work on the telecommunications, with the aim of making radio connections more frequent, thus exposing radio stations to germans; weak work with the organization of logistics and roads; repair stations placed in such a way as to maximize repair times; bad organization of aircraft and airfields, so they will take more time to get where they are needed
<Primakov in 1933-1934 told Tukhachevsky that he was organizing a terrorist attack on Voroshilov in Ukraine. In 1935, he was organizing a terrorist cell aimed at party members, first and foremost Voroshilov.
<center tasked Alafuzo with sabotaging the speed of organization of Red Army's rifle divisions, Red Army required 200 rifle divisions, and they made it painful for the Red Army by claiming that there were troubles with material supplies, buildings, etc. Also, they struck at HQ's reserves of artillery and tanks, by claiming resources from those reserves for existing divisions, but HQ didn't have tanks which could be moved readily (so more tanks on paper, but no tanks in reality). Artillery-wise, their cronies were in charge of fire safety of artillery stockpiles, and they were accepting bad fire safety, because practice has showed that those stockpiles are exploding rather readily due to frequent fires. They also sabotaged the mechanization of those stockpiles. Also, research and development of remote fuses was slowed, as well as industry mobilization.
Uborevich:
<since the end 1933, Yakir and Tukhachevsky became close with him with the aim of opposing centralization of the Red Army under Voroshilov, against Voroshilov. In he beginning of 1934 he was still not understanding what's happening, so he was against Tukhachevsky's saboteur plan to organize brigades instead of rifle divisions in Red Army. In 1935, Tukhachevsky explained to him everything, how the Red Army will lose in a war against Germany, Poland and Japan, and troubles inside USSR. He told Uborevich that he is the head of an organization, and that he has connections to rightists and trotskyists.
<In more practical terms, Uborevich ordered to construct artillery stockpiles on the front as easy targets for the enemy bombers. Same with gas stations, same with airfields and repair stations. Also, sabotage against fortified regions, one of such plans saw to leaving only 50% of machinegunners operational on the first day of war.
There's plenty more to it. Like, trotskyists wanting to prove to germans that they are trustworthy and are powerful in USSR, with trotskyists supplying germans with info and offering them Ukraine if germans help Trotsky to win the war. It proves pretty conclusively that a) Tukhachevsky was a traitor working with every enemy of the USSR b) that Trotsky was a cunt allying with fascists against USSR. It's fucking hilarious when their defenders try to shift the blame onto Stalin, and having no second thoughts whatsoever when seeing how western propaganda and fascists agreeing with them.
Tukhachevsky's Trial
http://istmat.info/files/uploads/59108/rgaspi_17.171.392_process_tuhachevskogo.pdfhttp://proriv.ru/articles.shtml/fedotov?doc_repres-9
I'll do excerpts from this.
<Yakir first started to doubt Soviet politics in the villages in 1932, and became close to Tukhachevsky due to that. In 1934, Tukhachevsky told him of his connections to Trotsky and germans. Trotsky put on Tukhachevsky the task of finding anti-soviet elements in the military and organize them.
<Under that Trotsky's directive Yakir, for example, saw that Letichevskiy fortified region be sabotaged, namely: through zinovyivite engineers they stalled equipment shipments, built bunkers so low and wrong that they couldn't shoot at the enemy, and such.
<why Letichev? Because polish-german armies would be using Novograd-Volynsk corridor for movement, because there's rivers and forests everywhere else, because less trains will be in Rovno-Lvov region, because it's the most risky direction. Lvov leads to Proskurov, and Proskurov to Letichev.
<Shepetovskiy airfield was built wrongly with sabotage in mind, too small and inconvenient, making speedy aircraft launches impossible
<Yakir was talking about how Kork did a replacement of officer corps of Moscow proletarian division, putting 120 of young officers he trained in charge of it with the aim of having an entire division on hands during the coup.
Tukhachevsky himself:
<in 1928, he was relieved from his command of Red Army and put in charge of L. military district (Letichev?) . He didn't like that! So, he started trying to make contacts with people who didn't like the direction Red Army was taking. In 1928-29, he was researching Red Army's prospects, and based on that wrote a letter to higher ups where he tried to prove that USSR needed 50k tanks and 40k planes (in 1930s, lol). He was criticized heavily for that note, so he used the momentum of it to come in contact with Yenukidze, which told him that even if rightists are defeated, they are not done and are merely in the underground, so Tukhachevsky should instead of trying to find anti-Soviet cadres in officer corps try and organize them instead. Also, that Yenukidze is connected to rightists' commanding center, and he will be giving him orders from the center.
<After a Caucasus vacation, Tukhachevsky was sent onto a joint wargames with germans. He travelled there with Romm, whom Trotsky used to start a contact with Tukhachevksy. Romm relied that Trotsky activised his work both abroad, against Comintern, and inside USSR, where trotskyist cadres are being organized. Politically, Trotsky's ideas about rural USSR were especially close to those of rightists. Trotsky was asking Tukhachevsky to collect trotskyist cadres inside the army. By the way, according to Romm, Trotsky was hopeful that Hitler will come to power, and that he will support Trotsky in the struggle against the Soviets.
Trotsky was hoping for nazis seizing power in Germany, huh?
<About sabotage, regarding artillery. In 1934 Efimov was tasked (by Tukhachevsky) with this sabotage, in particular - taking in not all required parts from the industry for shooting of the artillery, accepting goods which have confusing blueprints (no literas and such), and also to send to germans data about our stockpiles of goods. In winter 1935-36, also to prepare explosions on the artillery stockpiles. In 1936 Turovsky reported that plans for Letichevsky fortified region were transmitted to the polish intelligence services, Alafuzo reported that he gave germans and poles data on aircraft and mechanized divisions and anti-air defences in B. and K. military districts (Belarus/Brest and Kovel?)
<in 1936, after researching german and polish possible plans during the wargames in April in 1936 against B and K military districts, and also after receiving a directive from german HQ through Rundstedt for preparation of the loss on ukrainian direction, Tukhachevsky discussed those things with Yakir and Uborevich. It was decided to keep the previous plan: Belorussian front's advance into Poland, not supplied properly due to sabotage, will be a decisive loss and will be met with germans attacking through East Prussia onto Grodno or through Slonim onto Minsk.
<Ukrainian front in the first place or after germans' attack in the north will most likely meet defeat at the hands of superior german-polish forces. According to this, Uborevich was tasked to formulate such operational plans for Belorussian front so that it will cause railroads to be overcrowded, rear to be overstrained, and troops grouped in such a way as to cause all the weak spots of the current plan to be even more weak. Yakir was tasked with them same through Sablin, in addition to organizing a surrender of Letichevskiy fortified district.
<Particular sabotages included: no food for horses, declining additional shipments of food under the pretense that they already have all the food horses require; sending fuel for tanks and aviation where it's not required; weak work on the telecommunications, with the aim of making radio connections more frequent, thus exposing radio stations to germans; weak work with the organization of logistics and roads; repair stations placed in such a way as to maximize repair times; bad organization of aircraft and airfields, so they will take more time to get where they are needed
<Primakov in 1933-1934 told Tukhachevsky that he was organizing a terrorist attack on Voroshilov in Ukraine. In 1935, he was organizing a terrorist cell aimed at party members, first and foremost Voroshilov.
<center tasked Alafuzo with sabotaging the speed of organization of Red Army's rifle divisions, Red Army required 200 rifle divisions, and they made it painful for the Red Army by claiming that there were troubles with material supplies, buildings, etc. Also, they struck at HQ's reserves of artillery and tanks, by claiming resources from those reserves for existing divisions, but HQ didn't have tanks which could be moved readily (so more tanks on paper, but no tanks in reality). Artillery-wise, their cronies were in charge of fire safety of artillery stockpiles, and they were accepting bad fire safety, because practice has showed that those stockpiles are exploding rather readily due to frequent fires. They also sabotaged the mechanization of those stockpiles. Also, research and development of remote fuses was slowed, as well as industry mobilization.
Uborevich:
<since the end 1933, Yakir and Tukhachevsky became close with him with the aim of opposing centralization of the Red Army under Voroshilov, against Voroshilov. In he beginning of 1934 he was still not understanding what's happening, so he was against Tukhachevsky's saboteur plan to organize brigades instead of rifle divisions in Red Army. In 1935, Tukhachevsky explained to him everything, how the Red Army will lose in a war against Germany, Poland and Japan, and troubles inside USSR. He told Uborevich that he is the head of an organization, and that he has connections to rightists and trotskyists.
<In more practical terms, Uborevich ordered to construct artillery stockpiles on the front as easy targets for the enemy bombers. Same with gas stations, same with airfields and repair stations. Also, sabotage against fortified regions, one of such plans saw to leaving only 50% of machinegunners operational on the first day of war.
There's plenty more to it. Like, trotskyists wanting to prove to germans that they are trustworthy and are powerful in USSR, with trotskyists supplying germans with info and offering them Ukraine if germans help Trotsky to win the war. It proves pretty conclusively that a) Tukhachevsky was a traitor working with every enemy of the USSR b) that Trotsky was a cunt allying with fascists against USSR. It's fucking hilarious when their defenders try to shift the blame onto Stalin, and having no second thoughts whatsoever when seeing how western propaganda and fascists agreeing with them.
R: 5 / I: 3
I'm trying to get into statistics, because I've been reading studies and statistics for a while and the abuse of them to reach certain politically motivated conclusions made me cautious. I just read about the Simpson's Paradox for example. Can you recommend me any literature to learn statistics and to also be aware of common fallacies?
I'm trying to get into statistics, because I've been reading studies and statistics for a while and the abuse of them to reach certain politically motivated conclusions made me cautious. I just read about the Simpson's Paradox for example. Can you recommend me any literature to learn statistics and to also be aware of common fallacies?
R: 35 / I: 4
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: 12 / 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: 7 / 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: 20 / I: 1
Period management before cheap paper
How did women do it back then?
R: 12 / I: 3
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: 25 / I: 7
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: 10 / 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: 7 / I: 1
The teacher is great and even though he doesn't understand the first thing about marxism he's a very scientific dude constantly referring his marxist colleges who tried hard, he gets the materialist thinker part at least.
You can watch the course there, it's fascinating really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNnIGh9g6fA&list=PL848F2368C90DDC3D&index=1
Human Behavioral Biology and explains the basic premise
So I got drawn in this Stanford course, a lecture without homework, a conferrable thing. But it made me thing about a lot of stuff.The teacher is great and even though he doesn't understand the first thing about marxism he's a very scientific dude constantly referring his marxist colleges who tried hard, he gets the materialist thinker part at least.
You can watch the course there, it's fascinating really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNnIGh9g6fA&list=PL848F2368C90DDC3D&index=1
R: 10 / I: 2
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: 30 / 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: 18 / I: 4
physics books
im interested in learning about physics and i am absolutely new to the subject, and if anyone could recommend any books related to physics that would be great! thank you:)
R: 19 / 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: 262 / I: 50
How do we refute the right-wing claim that leftists seek to "abolish" the family and romance?
This seems to be the biggest hurdle I've come across when talking to working-class conservatives. Many of them seem fairly sympathetic to the idea of socialism in an economic sense, i.e. they like the idea of workers' self-management, central planning, free healthcare, housing for all, a "government of action", etc. Yet they refuse to fall behind socialism because they believe that 1. communists want to abolish marriage, 2. communists want to abolish the nuclear family as an institution, 3. communists want to take children away and put them all in communes where they have no clue who their bio parents are, 4. communists support abortion (this is THE biggest issue for a lot of right-wingers, even trumping economics), and 5. communists want to see non-attachment relationships and polyamory (especially queer relationships) be the norm to replace marriage and family.
How do we counter this? I've thought about bringing up the fact that socialist countries that exist today are quite conservative when it comes to issues of marriage and family but I can't give any details to show how.
How do we refute the right-wing claim that leftists seek to "abolish" the family and romance?
This seems to be the biggest hurdle I've come across when talking to working-class conservatives. Many of them seem fairly sympathetic to the idea of socialism in an economic sense, i.e. they like the idea of workers' self-management, central planning, free healthcare, housing for all, a "government of action", etc. Yet they refuse to fall behind socialism because they believe that 1. communists want to abolish marriage, 2. communists want to abolish the nuclear family as an institution, 3. communists want to take children away and put them all in communes where they have no clue who their bio parents are, 4. communists support abortion (this is THE biggest issue for a lot of right-wingers, even trumping economics), and 5. communists want to see non-attachment relationships and polyamory (especially queer relationships) be the norm to replace marriage and family.
How do we counter this? I've thought about bringing up the fact that socialist countries that exist today are quite conservative when it comes to issues of marriage and family but I can't give any details to show how.
R: 15 / I: 1
What the fuck with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
>The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.
Am I missing something?
The paradox of intolerance is fucking retarded concept and popper could've figured this out if he just exercised the almonds.
Here's the real deal. There is no "intolerance of intolerence" or other stupid word games, there is only intolerance to injustices. This is a re-branded "muh authoritarianism" bullshit. Either there is justice or you implement it by force. Otherwise you're letting injustice exist.
Every time I hear Popper's name, it's always in some ultra-lib cunty context. How is this pseud taken seriously?
What the fuck with this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
>The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.
Am I missing something?
The paradox of intolerance is fucking retarded concept and popper could've figured this out if he just exercised the almonds.
Here's the real deal. There is no "intolerance of intolerence" or other stupid word games, there is only intolerance to injustices. This is a re-branded "muh authoritarianism" bullshit. Either there is justice or you implement it by force. Otherwise you're letting injustice exist.
Every time I hear Popper's name, it's always in some ultra-lib cunty context. How is this pseud taken seriously?
R: 0 / I: 0
Does anyone have a ProQuest account? I need this full article which effectively refutes an anti-communist snitch memoir written during the McCarthyism era by an ex-communist rat.
Basically, the author of this piece (it's her senior thesis, I believe) argues that the rat lied several times in her autobiography concerning her motives for joining and then ditching and snitching on the CPUSA. It's a very good smackdown so naturally I would like to read the full thing.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/8850071a29d27e97e6b480971ad41e26/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Does anyone have a ProQuest account? I need this full article which effectively refutes an anti-communist snitch memoir written during the McCarthyism era by an ex-communist rat.
Basically, the author of this piece (it's her senior thesis, I believe) argues that the rat lied several times in her autobiography concerning her motives for joining and then ditching and snitching on the CPUSA. It's a very good smackdown so naturally I would like to read the full thing.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/8850071a29d27e97e6b480971ad41e26/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
R: 6 / I: 0
I am looking for recommendations for podcasts on history and or agroecology.
But also this can be a thread about anything educational that you really enjoy
Podcasts
Hey all.I am looking for recommendations for podcasts on history and or agroecology.
But also this can be a thread about anything educational that you really enjoy
R: 0 / I: 0
books on the American War in Afghanistan
looking for some leftist (or at least lefty friendly) books on the history of the Afghanistan war. I often find that a lot of these types of leftist history books demand a working knowledge of the topic, which I only barely have.
R: 8 / I: 2
I am starting a Tiddlywiki and plan on doing the zettelkasten method. The way I understand it, I just take notes and link them to each other with tags or something? Seems straightforward yet quite useful.egoism Egoism
Personal Knowledge Management
What does /edu/ do for knowledge management? Does it work? How important is it? Experiences?I am starting a Tiddlywiki and plan on doing the zettelkasten method. The way I understand it, I just take notes and link them to each other with tags or something? Seems straightforward yet quite useful.
R: 3 / I: 1
https://learnsocialism.dropmark.com/554165/25389829
this site good for leftist newbies who want to learn about socialism.
This pdf explains Socialism for dummies. I found it to be very informative.
https://learnsocialism.dropmark.com/554165/25389829
this site good for leftist newbies who want to learn about socialism.
This pdf explains Socialism for dummies. I found it to be very informative.
R: 9 / I: 2
The german political economist and translator of the Wealth of Nations Peter Thal writes in this regard
>Smith’s work lives on in the proletarian political economics; yes only here his true scientific elements have found a lasting monument
I am currently looking for an equivalent to David Harvey's Companion to Marx's Capital which helped me a lot to better understand Marx howsoever it's important to read Harvey critically
tl;dr: ITT we share secondary literature with regard to Adam Smith and his magnum opus the Wealth of Nations.
in german or english
The Wealth of Nations
I am going to tackle An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith to advance my understanding of the classical tradition of political economy of which marxist political economy is an extension.The german political economist and translator of the Wealth of Nations Peter Thal writes in this regard
>Smith’s work lives on in the proletarian political economics; yes only here his true scientific elements have found a lasting monument
I am currently looking for an equivalent to David Harvey's Companion to Marx's Capital which helped me a lot to better understand Marx howsoever it's important to read Harvey critically
tl;dr: ITT we share secondary literature with regard to Adam Smith and his magnum opus the Wealth of Nations.
in german or english
R: 6 / I: 1
I am also searching for technical books which explains in detail how the planning process operates in modern China and how this process relate to the economy and private markets in general.
These books can be pro or anti Soviet style planning, although I'd obviously prefer some books which are advocating for such economic models.
Books about the way in which centrally planned economy such as the USSR worked
Does anyone have some books which explains the way in which the Soviet economy worked? I am looking specifically at how prices and quantities of goods were adjusted to correspond the demands and needs of the people. Although 1929-1953 is nice, I am more interested in the post-Stalin era of 1961-1985. You can also post how plans worked for other countries such as East Germany, Poland, Yugoslavia, etc.I am also searching for technical books which explains in detail how the planning process operates in modern China and how this process relate to the economy and private markets in general.
These books can be pro or anti Soviet style planning, although I'd obviously prefer some books which are advocating for such economic models.
R: 1 / I: 0
Cambodian Killing Fields
Did the Cambodian Genocide happen? Is picrel true or full of shit? If it happened, was it justified? Was Chomsky right to deny it at the time? Will this OP reach 200 chars? So many questions, so few answers.
R: 25 / I: 16
Leftist Military books
Post Military, Insurgency, General warfare and Military history and Insurgency history books and miscellaneous guides, preferably in pdf format, ZIP Files or torrents of these would also be apricated
R: 10 / I: 1
Why everytime i search for something I always have to to through pile of positivist brainlets?
I want a library full of Materialist Analysis of history. Why i cannot find out history of the Mongol Empire and Lamaism without reading through some micky mouse shit about
>lmao they chinks they think like dat
>lmao das tradition mane
>lmao religion says x therfore y happen
why there is no fucking historian who explain the material basis of these thoughts of tradition in the first place? No wonder people are geographically and historically illiterate
Marxist History / Historiography
Where is it possible to find modern and materialist history of things?Why everytime i search for something I always have to to through pile of positivist brainlets?
I want a library full of Materialist Analysis of history. Why i cannot find out history of the Mongol Empire and Lamaism without reading through some micky mouse shit about
>lmao they chinks they think like dat
>lmao das tradition mane
>lmao religion says x therfore y happen
why there is no fucking historian who explain the material basis of these thoughts of tradition in the first place? No wonder people are geographically and historically illiterate
R: 9 / I: 2
Can attention spans be repaired? I regret ever being introduced to Twitter or Facebook or any of that. I feel like I can't work without looking something up a few minutes later, and then becoming distracted for an hour. I don't wanna completely abandon those social media sites, memes and cat pics are butter for my real life social relationships. Any tips?
Can attention spans be repaired? I regret ever being introduced to Twitter or Facebook or any of that. I feel like I can't work without looking something up a few minutes later, and then becoming distracted for an hour. I don't wanna completely abandon those social media sites, memes and cat pics are butter for my real life social relationships. Any tips?
R: 5 / I: 1
I've skimmed through some introductory materials of his writings and they catch my curiosity yet I am too brainlet to actually read them. What exactly is schizoanalysis and how does capitalism relate to schizophrenia?
Deleuze
Give me the TL;DR on him.I've skimmed through some introductory materials of his writings and they catch my curiosity yet I am too brainlet to actually read them. What exactly is schizoanalysis and how does capitalism relate to schizophrenia?
R: 10 / I: 4
Please note I am not a libertarian, I am relativley new to Marxism and given what I know as far as I can tell other than the world regressing into barbarism the ECP seems to be the only thing posing a true existential threat to socialism.
Debunk of the ECP?
Hey friends, I am looking for some good PDFs, videos and takes from you on why the economic calculation problem is incorrect and not a damning critique of socialism.Please note I am not a libertarian, I am relativley new to Marxism and given what I know as far as I can tell other than the world regressing into barbarism the ECP seems to be the only thing posing a true existential threat to socialism.
R: 33 / I: 8
The site is filled up with amazing PDF's that I really want to read, but because I've spent most of my life coasting on general knowledge and cramming, I have no study habits to speak of. I really want to be able to write theory, but to do so I'm going to need a lot more books under my belt.
Additionally I spent a lot of my life playing lots and lots of video games and browsing lots of social media so as a result my attention span is completely fucked. I want to get back to the attention span I had when I was a kid. When I felt like I could stop playing video games whenever I wanted when I felt like reading books were just ss interesting as everything else i wanted to do.
Largely kicked my addiction to video games but I've just supplanted it with social media. The problem seems to be that I need to use my computer and my phone but the distraction and seduction of fast food media is often too great.
Largely kicked my addiction to video games but I've just supplanted it with social media. The problem seems to be that I need to use my computer and my phone but the distraction and seduction of fast food media is often too great.
This thread is for:
-it's about how to build study habits.
-how to effectively organize your time
-Posting your progress and gaining back their attention span.
-how your brain learns and how to maximise that
I'm hoping you can drop PDF's and advice and a thread so that we can all benefit from that. because I think we'd all agree that we could all with being a bit more well read.ak-47 AK-47
Study Habits and digital hygiene
Hey, I've seen this thread before a bunch of times, but upon searching it in the catalog I couldn't find anything.The site is filled up with amazing PDF's that I really want to read, but because I've spent most of my life coasting on general knowledge and cramming, I have no study habits to speak of. I really want to be able to write theory, but to do so I'm going to need a lot more books under my belt.
Additionally I spent a lot of my life playing lots and lots of video games and browsing lots of social media so as a result my attention span is completely fucked. I want to get back to the attention span I had when I was a kid. When I felt like I could stop playing video games whenever I wanted when I felt like reading books were just ss interesting as everything else i wanted to do.
Largely kicked my addiction to video games but I've just supplanted it with social media. The problem seems to be that I need to use my computer and my phone but the distraction and seduction of fast food media is often too great.
Largely kicked my addiction to video games but I've just supplanted it with social media. The problem seems to be that I need to use my computer and my phone but the distraction and seduction of fast food media is often too great.
This thread is for:
-it's about how to build study habits.
-how to effectively organize your time
-Posting your progress and gaining back their attention span.
-how your brain learns and how to maximise that
I'm hoping you can drop PDF's and advice and a thread so that we can all benefit from that. because I think we'd all agree that we could all with being a bit more well read.
R: 1 / I: 1 lenin_cap Lenin Cap
Soviet Central Asia
Anyone have any good texts on the development/history/culture of the Central Asian republics of the USSR? Seems like a fairly overlooked area compared to the European and Caucasian republics.
R: 12 / I: 14
Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit
Presented by Todd McGowan
What follows are some very accessible lectures that will walk you through The Phenomenology. It's a great place to start, not only with Hegel, but even philosophy generally. Don't be scared off if you're a layman. Included along with the lectures are a handy glossary of terms and McGowan's own summary. Everything you need to climb the mountain to Absolute Knowing.
Sorry if the recordings are wonky and i had to cut some of these in half due to file limits
Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit
Presented by Todd McGowan
What follows are some very accessible lectures that will walk you through The Phenomenology. It's a great place to start, not only with Hegel, but even philosophy generally. Don't be scared off if you're a layman. Included along with the lectures are a handy glossary of terms and McGowan's own summary. Everything you need to climb the mountain to Absolute Knowing.
Sorry if the recordings are wonky and i had to cut some of these in half due to file limits
R: 3 / I: 0
I'm tired of people overstating Hegel's influence in Marx's theories and then fucking recommending secondary books because they "make Marx understandable by getting rid of all the Hegel stuff". You REALLY do not need to know Hegel to understand 99% of the stuff Marx wrote.
I'm tired of people overstating Hegel's influence in Marx's theories and then fucking recommending secondary books because they "make Marx understandable by getting rid of all the Hegel stuff". You REALLY do not need to know Hegel to understand 99% of the stuff Marx wrote.
R: 6 / I: 3
Does he have a good grasp on dialectics or his rambling lead to Nick Land tier shit?
Bataille
is he a schizo? Are his theories specifically general economy compatible with marxism in some form or are at least of some interest?Does he have a good grasp on dialectics or his rambling lead to Nick Land tier shit?
R: 29 / I: 2
Post anything engineering related: questions, educational material, documentaries, Machines(old and new), your own projects and anything else you find interesting.
/eng/ineering general
A thread for the finest STEM has to offer. I'm sure there are lots of us here. In the end it is the engineers who end up ruling most socialist states somehow.Post anything engineering related: questions, educational material, documentaries, Machines(old and new), your own projects and anything else you find interesting.
R: 20 / I: 8
Books about pornography in modern society
Can you recommend me some books that exposes the pornography addiction in modern society? I want a book that explains this phenomena by a marxist perspective, without any conservative "but tha westarn moral is dyingg!!11".
R: 4 / I: 1
>Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out stimuli with psychosis. However, Peterson and his co-researchers - lead author and psychology lecturer Shelley Carson of Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences and Harvard PhD candidate Daniel Higgins - hypothesized that it might also contribute to original thinking, especially when combined with high IQ. They administered tests of latent inhibition to Harvard undergraduates. Those classified as eminent creative achievers - participants under age 21 who reported unusually high scores in a single area of creative achievement - were seven times more likely to have low latent inhibition scores.
>The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive when combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the capacity to think about many things at once - but negative otherwise. Peterson states: "If you are open to new information, new ideas, you better be able to intelligently and carefully edit and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only two or three are likely to be good. You have to be able to discriminate or you'll get swamped."
<being a skitzo is good
<t peaterson
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031001061055.htm
Biological Basis For Creativity Linked To Mental Illness
>"This means that creative individuals remain in contact with the extra information constantly streaming in from the environment," says co-author and U of T psychology professor Jordan Peterson. "The normal person classifies an object, and then forgets about it, even though that object is much more complex and interesting than he or she thinks. The creative person, by contrast, is always open to new possibilities.">Previously, scientists have associated failure to screen out stimuli with psychosis. However, Peterson and his co-researchers - lead author and psychology lecturer Shelley Carson of Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences and Harvard PhD candidate Daniel Higgins - hypothesized that it might also contribute to original thinking, especially when combined with high IQ. They administered tests of latent inhibition to Harvard undergraduates. Those classified as eminent creative achievers - participants under age 21 who reported unusually high scores in a single area of creative achievement - were seven times more likely to have low latent inhibition scores.
>The authors hypothesize that latent inhibition may be positive when combined with high intelligence and good working memory - the capacity to think about many things at once - but negative otherwise. Peterson states: "If you are open to new information, new ideas, you better be able to intelligently and carefully edit and choose. If you have 50 ideas, only two or three are likely to be good. You have to be able to discriminate or you'll get swamped."
<being a skitzo is good
<t peaterson
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031001061055.htm
R: 16 / I: 1 tankie Tankie
What is "revisionism" and why is it bad?
Some people on the left (mostly Maoists and Hoxhaists) talk about "revisionism" a lot. They say the current government of the PRC is revisionist. They say the government of the USSR after Stalin's death was revisionist. But what actually is revisionism? Like, how was Khruschev's USSR materially different from Stalin's, and why should I care? Is revisionism just "anything I don't like" on steroids?
R: 1 / I: 1 tankie Tankie
Inca Empire
What is the correct socialist analysis of the Inca Empire? Was it really a proto-socialist society, as some people claim? Or was it just Andean feudalism?
R: 5 / I: 1
Soviet Diet
any other resources on Nutrition/Diet in the USSR to deboonk the Commie Starves meme apart from that one CIA Report? we could really use a more thorough list of sources on it. R: 3 / I: 0
I want to create a sync channel for educational purpose with different playlist rotations so we can have people getting educated on leftist thought.
This thread I want to construct the best videos on educating people into the basics of socialism. So the basics of the means of production, the basics of property, and etc. I want it simple, easy to understand and yet thorough enough to explain to someone brand new to socialist thought where if they watch this playlist of videos. They can get a handle of what are the core principles of socialism. I also want to make sure these videos are strictly socialist. No social democratic bullshit please.
Please post your suggestions in the thread and I'll check the videos and we work on getting a nice clean playlist of videos. We can discuss videos if I feel it doesn't quite fit what we should build for this thread.
Please don't bring up communism, anarchism, and etc. This is all about the basics of socialism and getting people beyond social democrat thought.
Reason why I want to do this:
People aren't reading theory and books nowadays. It's a harsh reality and it's hard to make people pick up a book and read it. We leftists need to have a fucking reality check on this. We always want to force people to read theory so much and yet when we watch our opponents in other ideology. They are able to explain their theories and bullshit within a few videos and they get their followers locked in. We need to stop making excuses, gatekeeping and general bullshitting. We can do this. I also understand that we are also under attack via social media companies. There is a way to upload video files and such into playlists on cytube. I just haven't done it in a while but I'll be looking into that as well so we can make our own content without being tied to hosting on youtube and etc.
My first suggestion is this video. I like how it focuses on the main points of what socialism is. It touches briefly on the other flavors of socialist but doesn't go too fair into them but the best part is I like how it makes the statement at the end of the video that calling a political system socialism is just inaccurate because socialism is used to define an economic system.
Let me know if you like this idea and this video, and please contribute.socialism Socialism
Educational Leftist Cytube Channel
Hello all.I want to create a sync channel for educational purpose with different playlist rotations so we can have people getting educated on leftist thought.
This thread I want to construct the best videos on educating people into the basics of socialism. So the basics of the means of production, the basics of property, and etc. I want it simple, easy to understand and yet thorough enough to explain to someone brand new to socialist thought where if they watch this playlist of videos. They can get a handle of what are the core principles of socialism. I also want to make sure these videos are strictly socialist. No social democratic bullshit please.
Please post your suggestions in the thread and I'll check the videos and we work on getting a nice clean playlist of videos. We can discuss videos if I feel it doesn't quite fit what we should build for this thread.
Please don't bring up communism, anarchism, and etc. This is all about the basics of socialism and getting people beyond social democrat thought.
Reason why I want to do this:
People aren't reading theory and books nowadays. It's a harsh reality and it's hard to make people pick up a book and read it. We leftists need to have a fucking reality check on this. We always want to force people to read theory so much and yet when we watch our opponents in other ideology. They are able to explain their theories and bullshit within a few videos and they get their followers locked in. We need to stop making excuses, gatekeeping and general bullshitting. We can do this. I also understand that we are also under attack via social media companies. There is a way to upload video files and such into playlists on cytube. I just haven't done it in a while but I'll be looking into that as well so we can make our own content without being tied to hosting on youtube and etc.
My first suggestion is this video. I like how it focuses on the main points of what socialism is. It touches briefly on the other flavors of socialist but doesn't go too fair into them but the best part is I like how it makes the statement at the end of the video that calling a political system socialism is just inaccurate because socialism is used to define an economic system.
Let me know if you like this idea and this video, and please contribute.
R: 4 / I: 3
The two I know of rn is 'The Making of the British Working Class' by E.P. Thompson and 'Conditions of the Working Class in England' by Engels.
I've been told they are classic accounts but they unfortunately only cover the very early period of British capitalism and working class history.
If anyone has any good books and resources that cover past the period these two cover (so anything covering the 1830s and beyond, please post them here.snibeti_snab Snibeti Snab
British Working Class/Labour (not the party) History
Does anyone have any recommendations for books or resources for studying the history and conditions of the English (or British, in the current sense) working class?The two I know of rn is 'The Making of the British Working Class' by E.P. Thompson and 'Conditions of the Working Class in England' by Engels.
I've been told they are classic accounts but they unfortunately only cover the very early period of British capitalism and working class history.
If anyone has any good books and resources that cover past the period these two cover (so anything covering the 1830s and beyond, please post them here.
R: 30 / I: 2
Why do some say postmodernism is incompatible with marxism?
I've finally read the big ones (Deleuze, Guattari, Baudrilland, Foucault, Derrida) and I'm just not seeing it. The only argument I usually see when they bother explaining why is that these authors """reject""" class struggle.
R: 3 / I: 0
Where do most communists stand on the being vs becoming vs nothingness metaphysical debate? This debate is as old as philosophy itself; does a left wing mindset require you to take a particular stance, or is it irrelevant?
Where do most communists stand on the being vs becoming vs nothingness metaphysical debate? This debate is as old as philosophy itself; does a left wing mindset require you to take a particular stance, or is it irrelevant?
R: 1 / I: 0
OH NO NO NO
So is the universe flat or is it curved? I haven't had the change to read the whole paper, yet, but, from what I understand from the paper and what the lovely people at PBS explained to me is, apparently physicists at Cornell University observed a cluster galaxies under extreme gravitation forces causing gravitational lensing. Now this is nothing spectacular as far as what observation about the universe has lead us to, but, what is interesting is that when the amplitude of light passing over these distortions in gravity are examined more closely, apparently, they fall way out of line with currently, standard, models involving the geometry of the universe which uses triangulation of areas in the Microwave Background Image and Early Super Nova in the Early universe to summize that the universe is flat. This totally flies in the face of our current understanding of the universe and could have damning implications for modern Cosmology; The universe wont expand for ever? What is driving expansion then? Our models for Dark Energy break down. I am literally freaking the fuck out over this right now. HELP ME EDU!
R: 13 / I: 1
See some people find it helpful to improve their understanding of a topic by explaining it to someone else. If you are one of these people please feel free to try and explain what it is you are working on and I will try my best to grasp what you are saying though active listening.Win win
Duck Pedagogy
Hello edu, I am a curious yet ADD retard that finds it difficult to grasp anything through reading and I offer you my services;See some people find it helpful to improve their understanding of a topic by explaining it to someone else. If you are one of these people please feel free to try and explain what it is you are working on and I will try my best to grasp what you are saying though active listening.Win win
R: 3 / I: 0
So I know what capital is but what gives capital it’s characteristics? And if capitalism is capital reproducing itself in ever expanding processes, then what is it? Does this mean that capital only producing commodities which is what the end product of capital is? No this can’t be because that would be engaging in commodity fetishism. If generalized commodity production is then a phenomena of capitalism then in appearance capitalism looks like a world of exchange values and use values in which is the limits of bourgeois economy because on the surface commodities seem to rule life. But if commodities are nothing but a phenomena and nothing but something taking place in the surface then what is actually capital doing?
If the subjective essence of capital is labor then the product or the commodity appears as the central issue and generalized commodity production the fundamental issue of capitalism. But what then is the objective essence of capital and capitalism?
Capital could only be capitalism if it reproduces itself and so the true essence of capitalism is a social relation. And even more fundamental is the conditions for such a social relation to exist. Predicate to the existence of capital is the deprivation of the means of production from the immediate producer whether that be the land, tools, machinery etc. but that’s not the only deprivation, capital itself must be deprived of labor itself: people. And so the fundamental conflict appears to be dead labor vs living labor and those two being deprived of the other. Capital (dead labor) is useless without the labor process (living labor) but in order for capital to be capital it must continue to keep itself separate from living labor and living labor separate from it, with commodity production being the mediator between the two. And so the true essence of capitalism is capital reproducing a social relation continuously in increasing size. So if capitalism’s objective is to reproduce this social relation why do so many people take commodity production as the true essence of capitalism. Or “changing hands” into that of the state? If the point of communism is to abolish this relation of production to a production in common then it follows that capital will seize to exist in contradiction between dead and living labor. We have seen historically that it doesn’t matter which hands capital is put in, it still exists as capital and reproduces capital relations, so what is it with the misunderstanding of the nature of capitalism and it’s social relations and taking commodity production as the fundamental problem and nothing but a mediator that exists in the surface?
So I know what capital is but what gives capital it’s characteristics? And if capitalism is capital reproducing itself in ever expanding processes, then what is it? Does this mean that capital only producing commodities which is what the end product of capital is? No this can’t be because that would be engaging in commodity fetishism. If generalized commodity production is then a phenomena of capitalism then in appearance capitalism looks like a world of exchange values and use values in which is the limits of bourgeois economy because on the surface commodities seem to rule life. But if commodities are nothing but a phenomena and nothing but something taking place in the surface then what is actually capital doing?
If the subjective essence of capital is labor then the product or the commodity appears as the central issue and generalized commodity production the fundamental issue of capitalism. But what then is the objective essence of capital and capitalism?
Capital could only be capitalism if it reproduces itself and so the true essence of capitalism is a social relation. And even more fundamental is the conditions for such a social relation to exist. Predicate to the existence of capital is the deprivation of the means of production from the immediate producer whether that be the land, tools, machinery etc. but that’s not the only deprivation, capital itself must be deprived of labor itself: people. And so the fundamental conflict appears to be dead labor vs living labor and those two being deprived of the other. Capital (dead labor) is useless without the labor process (living labor) but in order for capital to be capital it must continue to keep itself separate from living labor and living labor separate from it, with commodity production being the mediator between the two. And so the true essence of capitalism is capital reproducing a social relation continuously in increasing size. So if capitalism’s objective is to reproduce this social relation why do so many people take commodity production as the true essence of capitalism. Or “changing hands” into that of the state? If the point of communism is to abolish this relation of production to a production in common then it follows that capital will seize to exist in contradiction between dead and living labor. We have seen historically that it doesn’t matter which hands capital is put in, it still exists as capital and reproduces capital relations, so what is it with the misunderstanding of the nature of capitalism and it’s social relations and taking commodity production as the fundamental problem and nothing but a mediator that exists in the surface?
R: 6 / I: 0
I am so hyper panicked with the idea that there are so many books to read just about leftism and history and with so many perspectives
It overstimulates me and I get stunlocked
What is your procedure and methods to reading in a uniformed structure?
Hoarding Books & Not reading
How do you decide what to read?I am so hyper panicked with the idea that there are so many books to read just about leftism and history and with so many perspectives
It overstimulates me and I get stunlocked
What is your procedure and methods to reading in a uniformed structure?
R: 12 / I: 1
Roman Empire
Is there a book I can read on the economy of the Roman Empire and the social classes of the time? Anything that goes into deep analysis or extensive stuff.
R: 15 / I: 3
All that's well and good, but these (nonetheless relevant) geopolitical considerations made me wonder how to study historical and current AES countries' political economies, their evolution, and how they stack up to, for example, western social democracies such as the Nordic countries in their heyday. Again, usually I'd be foaming at the mouth too seeing a comparison of Scandinavia with the late USSR, but from a purely economic standpoint it'd be nice to clear up some of the confusion.
This becomes especially interesting, once again, when bringing up modern-day China. Is it socialist? Is it just social democracy at the barrel of a gun? I feel like it's difficult nowadays to get a purely economic view of that question without involving, again, the matter of nigh obligation to critically support China due to their geopolitical position. Let's change that and drop some PDFs.
Indulging Economism
The other day in the China thread, I read an argument about supporting China over Vietnam despite the latter's arguably more "socialist" economy. The reason for support of China over Vietnam would be the fact that the former is most poised in breaking with the established American world order, while the latter is more inclined to appease American interests due to strained relations with the PRC.All that's well and good, but these (nonetheless relevant) geopolitical considerations made me wonder how to study historical and current AES countries' political economies, their evolution, and how they stack up to, for example, western social democracies such as the Nordic countries in their heyday. Again, usually I'd be foaming at the mouth too seeing a comparison of Scandinavia with the late USSR, but from a purely economic standpoint it'd be nice to clear up some of the confusion.
This becomes especially interesting, once again, when bringing up modern-day China. Is it socialist? Is it just social democracy at the barrel of a gun? I feel like it's difficult nowadays to get a purely economic view of that question without involving, again, the matter of nigh obligation to critically support China due to their geopolitical position. Let's change that and drop some PDFs.
R: 1 / I: 0
anyone here ever read gentile ? whats his writings like, is there any merit to what he has to say as well as any relevant criticism of capitalism or socialist movements ?
anyone here ever read gentile ? whats his writings like, is there any merit to what he has to say as well as any relevant criticism of capitalism or socialist movements ?
R: 6 / I: 3
An in-depth understanding of these modes of production is, however, essential for reasonable historical materialist analysis.
Post videos, books, articles and so on for education on this topic.
precapitalist modes of production general /pcmop/
Most Marxists, for obvious reasons, are primarily concerned with the analysis of the capitalist mode of production, this causes many marxists (including myself) to have a poor or just a very basic understanding of pre-capitalist modes of production.An in-depth understanding of these modes of production is, however, essential for reasonable historical materialist analysis.
Post videos, books, articles and so on for education on this topic.
R: 4 / I: 0
Science & Society
I'm looking for editions of this journal (current, past). I've checked libgen, sci-hub, MAM, and IRC to no avail. I'm looking for the current edition in particular (https://www.scienceandsociety.com/current.pdf) but anything helps, really.
R: 4 / I: 0
This shouldn't be only about surplus value but about whatever seems to fullfill the premise of being an unsupported claim in Marx's works. Communists like Althusser insist that there are remnants of Hegelian Idealism in Marx that make some of his claims unscientific. Is there truth to that too?
>posting in /edu/ since I hope to get some good answers in this thread
Unfounded Axioms in Marxism
So, what I hear from from liberals, reactonaries but also some communists, is that a lot of Marx's concepts and categories are not empirically proven and just based on prior assumptions Marx makes(ie Dialectics) or based on his own morality. One of these categories disputed by liberal "intellectuals" is surplus value or profit in their view. They argue, that it only exists as an entity if you accept Marx's epistemology. Is it true?This shouldn't be only about surplus value but about whatever seems to fullfill the premise of being an unsupported claim in Marx's works. Communists like Althusser insist that there are remnants of Hegelian Idealism in Marx that make some of his claims unscientific. Is there truth to that too?
>posting in /edu/ since I hope to get some good answers in this thread
R: 6 / I: 6
Any posadist literature in english? I wanna see if there is any method to his madness or is it just shizo rambling.christian_communism Christian Communism
/posadism/
/posadism/ generalAny posadist literature in english? I wanna see if there is any method to his madness or is it just shizo rambling.
R: 6 / I: 1
Private property
I want to talk about private property, it’s original inspiration to according to modern private property, and it’s development as private property in bourgeois society.
R: 6 / I: 0
Should I read theory in english or my native language? Until now I've only read in german but I never debate or discuss in german so I don't know which is better. Also, which language do you read theory?
Should I read theory in english or my native language? Until now I've only read in german but I never debate or discuss in german so I don't know which is better. Also, which language do you read theory?
R: 1 / I: 0
American WWII training videos are so cool. I don't know what else I should add here. I'm going to post a couple on various topics. Some might be more useful than others.
American WWII training videos are so cool. I don't know what else I should add here. I'm going to post a couple on various topics. Some might be more useful than others.
R: 26 / I: 8
I just accepted a job as a history teacher in china. i dont have a teachers cert and im a little overwhelmed because i want to teach history better than i was taught it.
does anyone have any pdfs/epubs on historiography, philosophy of history and or textbooks on teaching history? i will be teaching to American, New Jersey standards.ak-47 AK-47
I just accepted a job as a history teacher in china. i dont have a teachers cert and im a little overwhelmed because i want to teach history better than i was taught it.
does anyone have any pdfs/epubs on historiography, philosophy of history and or textbooks on teaching history? i will be teaching to American, New Jersey standards.
R: 2 / I: 1
Ive heard studies say that it doesn't affect the ability to recall the information highlighted, but could it be good for if you want to skim through the important points of the previous pages you've already read/highlighted before you continue on?
Is highlighting books good or a waste of time?
Title says it all mostlyIve heard studies say that it doesn't affect the ability to recall the information highlighted, but could it be good for if you want to skim through the important points of the previous pages you've already read/highlighted before you continue on?
R: 53 / I: 8
As for myself. I used to be a hardcore skeptic. I used to laugh at my Chinese friends telling me about Chi power and herbal medicine and whatnot. I remember my brother was interested in Chi-Qong and I brushed it off as at best a primitive understanding of understood biological processes. I had my first experience with Salvia Divinorum and immediately it was like my skepticism and my attachment to crude understandings of accepted science was blown out the window. I remember at the time I first encountered it, my inclination was to try and get some people smarter and more knowledgeable in physics and quantum physics than myself to try and encounter these kind of experiences and see what there interpretation would be. I've had many more experiences off and on various psychedelics since than, Marijauna, Mescaline, and LSD since than, and frankly, in the right state I feel like even completely sober, I could induce altered perceptions in myself and in others, but I feel like certain people who are attached to their learned perspective of reality are internally/sub-consciously afraid of ever opening themselves up to alternate perspectives. I am very hesitant to get myself involved with other people who are into this kind of stuff, because I feel like many of them, especially religious types, are victims of superstitious beliefs and understandings of these experiences and phenomenon. Yogis have talked about the high-probability of falling into superstition when encountering the spiritual unknown. It's really not hard to believe when we consider the history of accepted science. People not to long ago believed that flies spontaneously spawned from rotten food. A fault explanation of a phenomenon, does not negate the underlying phenomenon described.
There used to be in The West a high interest in spiritual science in the late 1800s early 1900s(Edgar Cayce, Dione Fortune, etc.) but all of that got kind of pushed to the periphery but still existed with some prominence with The US and Soviet remote viewing programs and suchlike. I think there should still be interest in this area of research and especially with people without such a narrow view as The US MIC. Also with people willing to objectively analyze such phenomenon, neither superstitious cooks nor "rational skeptics" who want to dismiss everything outright because of their own personal hang-ups with their own personal experiences with organized religion.
As for myself. I feel like I've experience enough and know enough where I could demonstrate the reality of "psychic phenomenon" on command in a controlled environment to prove it exists. Of course, even if I could prove it exists, it doesn't prove a soul or God, or whatever belief system one would want to extrapolate from it. But personally, I've seen enough to believe that the realm of accepted science can't explain the mechanisms of human life and our interaction with our environment.
So this thread is for the premise of investigating "spiritual" and "psychic" phenomenon in an empirical and scientific manner and accepting the possibility that there might be something there beyond "magic tricks," Charlatanism, and wishful thinking.
Scientific Spirituality
We have some threads on religion and what not, but I think we should have one taking "spirituality" as a developing science. I feel "spiritual science" isn't "anti-materialist" in the same way that quantum physics is not anti-classical physics. I'm also not saying to woo woo quantum physics into some kind of justification of spirituality. All of these things may be true and seemingly separate because of our lack of knowledge between the connections of these various phenomenon at different levels.As for myself. I used to be a hardcore skeptic. I used to laugh at my Chinese friends telling me about Chi power and herbal medicine and whatnot. I remember my brother was interested in Chi-Qong and I brushed it off as at best a primitive understanding of understood biological processes. I had my first experience with Salvia Divinorum and immediately it was like my skepticism and my attachment to crude understandings of accepted science was blown out the window. I remember at the time I first encountered it, my inclination was to try and get some people smarter and more knowledgeable in physics and quantum physics than myself to try and encounter these kind of experiences and see what there interpretation would be. I've had many more experiences off and on various psychedelics since than, Marijauna, Mescaline, and LSD since than, and frankly, in the right state I feel like even completely sober, I could induce altered perceptions in myself and in others, but I feel like certain people who are attached to their learned perspective of reality are internally/sub-consciously afraid of ever opening themselves up to alternate perspectives. I am very hesitant to get myself involved with other people who are into this kind of stuff, because I feel like many of them, especially religious types, are victims of superstitious beliefs and understandings of these experiences and phenomenon. Yogis have talked about the high-probability of falling into superstition when encountering the spiritual unknown. It's really not hard to believe when we consider the history of accepted science. People not to long ago believed that flies spontaneously spawned from rotten food. A fault explanation of a phenomenon, does not negate the underlying phenomenon described.
There used to be in The West a high interest in spiritual science in the late 1800s early 1900s(Edgar Cayce, Dione Fortune, etc.) but all of that got kind of pushed to the periphery but still existed with some prominence with The US and Soviet remote viewing programs and suchlike. I think there should still be interest in this area of research and especially with people without such a narrow view as The US MIC. Also with people willing to objectively analyze such phenomenon, neither superstitious cooks nor "rational skeptics" who want to dismiss everything outright because of their own personal hang-ups with their own personal experiences with organized religion.
As for myself. I feel like I've experience enough and know enough where I could demonstrate the reality of "psychic phenomenon" on command in a controlled environment to prove it exists. Of course, even if I could prove it exists, it doesn't prove a soul or God, or whatever belief system one would want to extrapolate from it. But personally, I've seen enough to believe that the realm of accepted science can't explain the mechanisms of human life and our interaction with our environment.
So this thread is for the premise of investigating "spiritual" and "psychic" phenomenon in an empirical and scientific manner and accepting the possibility that there might be something there beyond "magic tricks," Charlatanism, and wishful thinking.
R: 22 / I: 6
Montefiore
An anti-communist friend recommended me these. Has anyone here read them? Are they at all accurate?
R: 0 / I: 0
I need it to debunk reactionnaries shitting on China daily and claiming the B&R is unsustainable.
Belt and Road Initiative
Does anybody have some book that study the Belt and Road Initiative from a Marxist-Leninist (not MLM) perspective? Preferably from the Chinese perspective.I need it to debunk reactionnaries shitting on China daily and claiming the B&R is unsustainable.
R: 13 / I: 9
Books about other communist revolutions and state establishments are also welcome.
I want to know everything that happened before and after those events occurred
I want to know how the conditions and reasons for revolution happened in the first place
I want to know what happened during the civil wars
I want to know what happened after they won or lost
I want to know what were the mistakes they made
Don't care how many books to get a full understanding but as long as they're credible and good it's fine by me. I prefer PDFs.
Revolution and State
What are the best books on Russian, Chinese and the failed German Revolution and East Germany.Books about other communist revolutions and state establishments are also welcome.
I want to know everything that happened before and after those events occurred
I want to know how the conditions and reasons for revolution happened in the first place
I want to know what happened during the civil wars
I want to know what happened after they won or lost
I want to know what were the mistakes they made
Don't care how many books to get a full understanding but as long as they're credible and good it's fine by me. I prefer PDFs.
R: 13 / I: 0
I'm not sure if anyone is interested, but I've created a playlist of all of jacque Fresco's classic lectures from tapes 1-20. The audio is a little hard to hear, so you may have to wear headphones or earphones, but the audio is relatively fine.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiADn3rLZsazUnhTlBCgiD9MaxPCANwD-anarchism Anarchism
I'm not sure if anyone is interested, but I've created a playlist of all of jacque Fresco's classic lectures from tapes 1-20. The audio is a little hard to hear, so you may have to wear headphones or earphones, but the audio is relatively fine.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiADn3rLZsazUnhTlBCgiD9MaxPCANwD-
R: 2 / I: 0
Chinese dialectics
Dialectical thinking is not only a western concept. There is a native Chinese tradition of dialectics within Taoism, that while similar to has some interesting differences when compared to western dialectics. Is this something worth exploring? It was very influential to Mao's thinking. Not to sound to much like a libtard but it seems exploring non western philosophy might be an interesting way to gain insights that might be otherwise ignored.
R: 4 / I: 0
Lenin apparently wasn't a fan; from "The Other Lenin" by Alexander Maysuryan:
> ["Demons" is] Evidently reactionary filth, like Krestovsky's "Flock of Panurge", I have absolutely no desire to waste time on it. I have no need for such literature; what could it possibly give me? […] I have no free time for this garbage."
Demons isn't the only book he doesn't like:
>I am familiar with the content of both these pungent works, and that is more than enough for me. I just about began reading the "Brothers Karamazov" and then dropped it: the scenes in the monastery made me sick."
However, Stalin apparently enjoyed Dostoevsky greatly. He had a heavily annotated copy of "The Brothers Karamasov" and at least once referred to Dostoevsky as a "great philosopher." Quote:
> [Dostoevsky is] a great writer and a great reactionary. We don't publish him because he is a bad influence on the youth. But he is a great author.international_brigade International Brigade
Thoughts on Dostoevsky?
Writer worth reading or reactionary garbage?Lenin apparently wasn't a fan; from "The Other Lenin" by Alexander Maysuryan:
> ["Demons" is] Evidently reactionary filth, like Krestovsky's "Flock of Panurge", I have absolutely no desire to waste time on it. I have no need for such literature; what could it possibly give me? […] I have no free time for this garbage."
Demons isn't the only book he doesn't like:
>I am familiar with the content of both these pungent works, and that is more than enough for me. I just about began reading the "Brothers Karamazov" and then dropped it: the scenes in the monastery made me sick."
However, Stalin apparently enjoyed Dostoevsky greatly. He had a heavily annotated copy of "The Brothers Karamasov" and at least once referred to Dostoevsky as a "great philosopher." Quote:
> [Dostoevsky is] a great writer and a great reactionary. We don't publish him because he is a bad influence on the youth. But he is a great author.
R: 23 / I: 4
War
Can anyone recommend me literature on strategies in war? From an officers perspective. Preferably something broad. I don‘t have any knowledge on the subject matter so something that is introductory material would be great as well, but it doesn‘t have to be.
R: 0 / I: 0
>muh fire
>muh artemis
>muh bow/harp
>muh death/play
>muh wisdom in ordinary things
>But he had himself withdrawn into the temple of Artemis in order to play knucklebones with the children; here, the Ephesians stood around him, and he said to them: “What are you gaping at, you scoundrels? Or is it not better to do this than to work with you on behalf of the πόλις (city)?”
>muh fire
>muh artemis
>muh bow/harp
>muh death/play
>muh wisdom in ordinary things
>But he had himself withdrawn into the temple of Artemis in order to play knucklebones with the children; here, the Ephesians stood around him, and he said to them: “What are you gaping at, you scoundrels? Or is it not better to do this than to work with you on behalf of the πόλις (city)?”
R: 9 / I: 2 anarcho-communism Anarcho-Communism
Positive books on Pol Pot and Khmer Rouge.
Most of the books I see about Pol Pot, Khmer Rouge and Kamdoji from those years portray these things as badly as possible, and compare Pol Pot himself to a mini Hitler, or worse. I would like to know if there is a book that justifies Pol Pot and speaks positively about him and the Khmer Rouge. Thank you in advance!
R: 5 / I: 0
You people lied to me, I read Deleuze and the guy was a fucking materialist.
You people lied to me, I read Deleuze and the guy was a fucking materialist.
R: 7 / I: 0
Where does Marx depart? Marx takes the materialist analysis of the political economists, their categories and terms, and constructs from these building blocks an immanent critique of capitalist production. Capital isn't liberal because Marx takes the materialist analysis seriously, he criticizes without reservation the most basic elements of exchange and the religious affectation of participants in the exchange with its elements (read Marx on commodity fetishism). We can't seriously call Capital, which is the most thorough rupture with political economy ever written, an economics textbook.
>Check reply for more, you know who you are
What is Capital?
Why isn't communism the same as liberalism? Why didn't Marx become a liberal while writing Capital? Before the critical turn of the enlightenment the purpose of most philosophy was grant intellectual legitimacy to dogmas, or pre-existing state of affairs or beliefs that are taken for granted. Classical political economists and those that came before them (Hobbes, the Physiocrats, others) were similarly uncritical; the categories of political economy were explained, but not criticized. Vulgar economists (most economists today) don't even bother with attempting to understand the categories or the social relations they're made up of, and spend their time building models of different elements of capitalist production for the purpose of making it more efficient. It's no coincidence that "economize" means "to make more efficient", that is the sole aim of vulgar economics.Where does Marx depart? Marx takes the materialist analysis of the political economists, their categories and terms, and constructs from these building blocks an immanent critique of capitalist production. Capital isn't liberal because Marx takes the materialist analysis seriously, he criticizes without reservation the most basic elements of exchange and the religious affectation of participants in the exchange with its elements (read Marx on commodity fetishism). We can't seriously call Capital, which is the most thorough rupture with political economy ever written, an economics textbook.
>Check reply for more, you know who you are
R: 6 / I: 1
"EXPLAIN JUSTICE TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN JUSTICE TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOu!"
- Plato, "Republic", 375 BC
"EXPLAIN JUSTICE TO ME OR I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU! DON'T DUMB IT DOWN INTO SOME VAGUE SHIT! EXPLAIN JUSTICE TO ME RIGHT NOW OR I'LL LITERALLY FUCKING KILL YOu!"
- Plato, "Republic", 375 BC
R: 3 / I: 1
What are your thoughts on that?anarcho-nihilism Anarcho-Nihilism
Max Stirner
Hey Comrades! The ideas of Max Stirner (lived at the time of Marx) somehow appeal to me. As I understood he basically says that morality and religious and social norms are void (called them "spooks"). By freeing oneself of these concepts, one can follow one's own will. By cooperation and mutual interest one can then happily coexist and live with other individuals.What are your thoughts on that?
R: 4 / I: 2
I'm looking for books on Middle Eastern politics and history. Give me some recommendations. Also, has anyone read this? Is it any good?
I'm looking for books on Middle Eastern politics and history. Give me some recommendations. Also, has anyone read this? Is it any good?
R: 6 / I: 0
Philosophy of Data
Is there such a thing yet? Philosophy about data itself, datamining, neural networks, massive surveillance, etc.
R: 14 / I: 2
Some leftypol regulars and I have had the idea to host a language-learning group for us all to learn together.
The language we are all interested in is Spanish, and we'll be using the Micheal Thomas course (>>1033) to learn it.
Here is the plan:
We each listen to one CD of Micheal Thomas every week.
Then on every Friday we discuss what we learned and practice it by trying to make new sentences with what we've learned as best we can.
Then, after we have completed the 'Foundations' part of said course we all switch to speaking Spanish only to keep practising what we've learned and to practice fluency.
This will all start this coming week.
These will be hosted on Element, if you want to join use this link:
https://matrix.to/#/!uDgkvHYaUmWfGUtETA:matrix.org?via=matrix.orgsendero_luminoso Sendero Luminoso
/leftyespañol/
Hola /edu/!Some leftypol regulars and I have had the idea to host a language-learning group for us all to learn together.
The language we are all interested in is Spanish, and we'll be using the Micheal Thomas course (>>1033) to learn it.
Here is the plan:
We each listen to one CD of Micheal Thomas every week.
Then on every Friday we discuss what we learned and practice it by trying to make new sentences with what we've learned as best we can.
Then, after we have completed the 'Foundations' part of said course we all switch to speaking Spanish only to keep practising what we've learned and to practice fluency.
This will all start this coming week.
These will be hosted on Element, if you want to join use this link:
https://matrix.to/#/!uDgkvHYaUmWfGUtETA:matrix.org?via=matrix.org
R: 4 / I: 5
Native American Research Thread
I thought that it might me interesting to have a research thread on Native Americans (meaning all of the American continent). I've become very interested in the subject after reading about their culture and way of life, which was much more complex than colonizers initially believed. I'll embed a video which talks about various things about pre columbian civilizations, like how the populations may have been as high as 100 million before disease wiped out many (disease likely went a head of europeans too, so what settlers saw was basically post apocalyptic). Also, what we're now finding out about how humans initially arrived is very interesting too as there were likely some migrations by boat through the pacific by Pacific Islanders, who were incredible at navigation.
R: 27 / I: 6
The goal for Marx understand the social economic relations of his time to understand why they existed in the first place and understand what bourgeois economists failed to understand in trying to create systems and economic categories to explain what they failed to get to the heart of. So the object was the liberation of the particular which would follow by liberating the social whole. The freer the individual the freer the social whole. This meant the liberation of not just the worker but also the liberation of the capitalist from their subservience to capital, which society itself created the conditions for and has created the conditions for the liberation of itself from it.
Marxist Humanism
Is Marxist Humanism the most correct interpretation of what Marx was getting at philosophically on the objective of communism? Marx only ever truly critiqued political economy and never focused on creating a new society and spoke of its political and economic structure because that was what utopian socialists and vulgar economists engaged in.The goal for Marx understand the social economic relations of his time to understand why they existed in the first place and understand what bourgeois economists failed to understand in trying to create systems and economic categories to explain what they failed to get to the heart of. So the object was the liberation of the particular which would follow by liberating the social whole. The freer the individual the freer the social whole. This meant the liberation of not just the worker but also the liberation of the capitalist from their subservience to capital, which society itself created the conditions for and has created the conditions for the liberation of itself from it.
R: 10 / I: 0
Ideology and the real
I thinking i'm making the mistake of mixing postmodern thinkers and marxism without a good philosophical base. Zizek’s conception of ideology is based Lacan’s idea of the “real”, a primordial element that can not be discovered through any scientific analysis. The Orthodox marxist conception of the ideology is in relation to material reality of class relations. Ideology is what leads to “false consciousness”. Im I grasping it wrong? If Zizek doesn’t believe in the existence of an objective reality , Can he really be a marxists? Also wtf is the "lack in the symbolic Other". Can somebody help clarify?
R: 8 / I: 2
What's a good book on one of the most epic moment in the history of communism: the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution?
What's a good book on one of the most epic moment in the history of communism: the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution?
R: 0 / I: 0
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1914/jewsrace/ch06.htm
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1914/jewsrace/ch07.htm
These two chapters from Karl Kautsky's "Are the Jews a Race?" trace the long journey of the Jewish people from their homeland in Palestine to the European diaspora, at which point they lacked a territory/administration of their own. Kautsky explains how Jews were integrated into the feudal economy in certain roles, primarily those suited to cities and outside of artisanal production (which was regulated by guilds). These roles happened to be non-productive roles of mediation, like trade, financial roles, and intellectual roles. There were exceptions and variations across Europe, but due to religious pressures, social norms, and rules, they were largely prevented from assimilation. The economic role of the Jews was reified by the racialists as innate aspects, and this forms the basis for anti-semitism. Therefore, through a materialist analysis, which discovers that social groups are determined by material circumstances and not innate qualities, it becomes plain that anti-semitism is opposed to materialism.
Please share your thoughts on alternative explanations for anti-semitism, especially in its modern form. At this point, Jewish people are assimilated into production at a high degree, to the point where the average person cannot distinguish them as a group. Could it just be a feudal remnant? There needs to be a new theory to explain phenomenon of anti-semitism under present conditions.
Materialist Analysis of Anti-Semitism
I became interested in understanding the phenomenon of anti-semitism from a materialist perspective, this discussion will proceed from Karl Kautsky's perspective of its origin, laid out in "Are the Jews a Race?".>https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1914/jewsrace/ch06.htm
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1914/jewsrace/ch07.htm
These two chapters from Karl Kautsky's "Are the Jews a Race?" trace the long journey of the Jewish people from their homeland in Palestine to the European diaspora, at which point they lacked a territory/administration of their own. Kautsky explains how Jews were integrated into the feudal economy in certain roles, primarily those suited to cities and outside of artisanal production (which was regulated by guilds). These roles happened to be non-productive roles of mediation, like trade, financial roles, and intellectual roles. There were exceptions and variations across Europe, but due to religious pressures, social norms, and rules, they were largely prevented from assimilation. The economic role of the Jews was reified by the racialists as innate aspects, and this forms the basis for anti-semitism. Therefore, through a materialist analysis, which discovers that social groups are determined by material circumstances and not innate qualities, it becomes plain that anti-semitism is opposed to materialism.
Please share your thoughts on alternative explanations for anti-semitism, especially in its modern form. At this point, Jewish people are assimilated into production at a high degree, to the point where the average person cannot distinguish them as a group. Could it just be a feudal remnant? There needs to be a new theory to explain phenomenon of anti-semitism under present conditions.
R: 8 / I: 0
I want to get into easter/soviet marxism
What authors should I read?
Why is eastern marxism so obscure for us?
What are some ideas developed by eastern marxist thinkers I should know of?
I want to get into easter/soviet marxism
What authors should I read?
Why is eastern marxism so obscure for us?
What are some ideas developed by eastern marxist thinkers I should know of?
R: 12 / I: 0
His writing style is pretty simple and I don't think he says anything absurdly stupid.
I've tried reading Forget Foucault but it's inaccessible even by Baudrillard standards.
Can someone give me a quick rundown? And what's your opinion on him? Is it true that he basically became a neoliberal at the end of his life?
Why Foucault is so criticized?
I'm a 100% Debordian doomerism cuck and the only thing i've read from Foucault is Discipline and Punish which I didn't even finish. I don't understand why he gets so much shit from everyone.His writing style is pretty simple and I don't think he says anything absurdly stupid.
I've tried reading Forget Foucault but it's inaccessible even by Baudrillard standards.
Can someone give me a quick rundown? And what's your opinion on him? Is it true that he basically became a neoliberal at the end of his life?
R: 11 / I: 16
Discuss the Juche idea, it's merits, similarities and distinctions from Marxism Leninism, post pdfs, videos, documentaries, and other educational material for coming to a proper understanding of the Juche idea and it's implications. I'll start off the thread with what is often described as the authoritative text for laying out the philosophical and socio-historical principles of the Juche idea, "On The Juche Idea" by Kim Jong Il.
https://korea-dpr.com/lib/Kim%20Jong%20Il%20-%204/ON%20THE%20JUCHE%20IDEA.pdf
Leftypol Thread for the Study of the Juche Idea
"The Juche idea is a man-centered world outlook. It is a revolutionary, scientific, and political theory that accurately illumines the way for realizing the independence of the masses." - Kim Jong IlDiscuss the Juche idea, it's merits, similarities and distinctions from Marxism Leninism, post pdfs, videos, documentaries, and other educational material for coming to a proper understanding of the Juche idea and it's implications. I'll start off the thread with what is often described as the authoritative text for laying out the philosophical and socio-historical principles of the Juche idea, "On The Juche Idea" by Kim Jong Il.
https://korea-dpr.com/lib/Kim%20Jong%20Il%20-%204/ON%20THE%20JUCHE%20IDEA.pdf
R: 20 / I: 6
Why were the polish officers killed? What was the motive for the massacre? Were they preparing a revolt?
Are the documents fake? Whose investigations are trustworthy?
Discuss
KATYN
Who did it? Soviets? Nazis?Why were the polish officers killed? What was the motive for the massacre? Were they preparing a revolt?
Are the documents fake? Whose investigations are trustworthy?
Discuss
R: 3 / I: 0 brocialism Brocialism
Need some help
Hey guys I know this might seem a bit annoying but has anyone here read Rudolph Rummel's work or Benjamin Valentino? Their death rates are so astronomically high and if someone already knows the fault with their methodology I don't wanna slog through their nonsense.
R: 3 / I: 0
I have a few text suggestions but i'd like to reach concensus if not do a poll on what to read.
Also, let this be a general PDF repo for non-leftist anarchist thought.anarcho-nihilism Anarcho-Nihilism
AnNil Reading Group.
Hi. Is there anyone interested in doing an Anarcho-Nihilist reading group? The purpose would be to help get a better understanding of the individualist/nihilist/'post-left' currents in anarchy.I have a few text suggestions but i'd like to reach concensus if not do a poll on what to read.
Also, let this be a general PDF repo for non-leftist anarchist thought.
R: 2 / I: 0
Vulgarization has always been a concern of science, because sharing the knowledge is an important part of the process, and many advances are made from people who just happen to have some relevant knowledge to a problem in their own field, or who need a problem fixed and hear of a new thing that might be applicable to their case. Nobody can build upon a knowledge he does not know yet.
But it was sadly limited by the need for the expert to use intermediaries, such as "science journalists", to reach a wide audience, with all the misconceptions someone not educated on the subject can bring, and the high cost for the enthusiast who'd like to know more of a subject, but can't really justify going to a specialist conference far away where he won't understand half of it just cause a subject sound interesting.
Youtube has allowed some of these more pedagogic experts to do focused vulgarization on important piece of their fields, with often surprising quality given the lack of financial means.
So here I will share my favorites ones, and ask you to share if you know of any good ones yourself, because sadly, all the ones I know of are in my own language.
First, Homo Fabulus, a biologist.
I recommend taking a look at his serie on morality, and it's potential biological origin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jkIONNqBcg&list=PL8mPrvnM78yJ78OqgF4xtvJyOvJTeWjiz&index=1
(note: it's in french, but for that one there are english subtitles available)
Then, in rapid succession, cause they're in french only:
Mr Phi for philosophy : https://www.youtube.com/c/MonsieurPhi/videos
Science Etonnante, some preference on physics but will talk about all groundbreaking research regardless of field : https://www.youtube.com/c/ScienceEtonnante/videos
DirtyBiology, more biology: https://www.youtube.com/c/dirtybiology/videos
Fouloscopie, social psychology : https://www.youtube.com/c/Fouloscopie/videos
Horizon Gull, more social psychology, with special interest in cognitive bias and opinions : https://www.youtube.com/c/horizongull/videos
Sur le Champ, history and military tactics : https://www.youtube.com/c/Surlechamp/videos
Le vortex, generalist science/entertainment : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZxLew-WXWm5dhRZBgEFl-Q/videos
Linguisticae, language : https://www.youtube.com/c/Linguisticae/videos
No idea why youtube never recommended me some english ones, but I hope they also exist and some comrades have recommendations.
Youtube scientific vulgarisation
One of the recent trend in youtube video productions, and one of my favorite and best thing to come of this media imo, has been the birth of various field experts that start doing the work of actually explaining to the enthusiast various knowledge relevant to their skills, an act know as "vulgarization".Vulgarization has always been a concern of science, because sharing the knowledge is an important part of the process, and many advances are made from people who just happen to have some relevant knowledge to a problem in their own field, or who need a problem fixed and hear of a new thing that might be applicable to their case. Nobody can build upon a knowledge he does not know yet.
But it was sadly limited by the need for the expert to use intermediaries, such as "science journalists", to reach a wide audience, with all the misconceptions someone not educated on the subject can bring, and the high cost for the enthusiast who'd like to know more of a subject, but can't really justify going to a specialist conference far away where he won't understand half of it just cause a subject sound interesting.
Youtube has allowed some of these more pedagogic experts to do focused vulgarization on important piece of their fields, with often surprising quality given the lack of financial means.
So here I will share my favorites ones, and ask you to share if you know of any good ones yourself, because sadly, all the ones I know of are in my own language.
First, Homo Fabulus, a biologist.
I recommend taking a look at his serie on morality, and it's potential biological origin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jkIONNqBcg&list=PL8mPrvnM78yJ78OqgF4xtvJyOvJTeWjiz&index=1
(note: it's in french, but for that one there are english subtitles available)
Then, in rapid succession, cause they're in french only:
Mr Phi for philosophy : https://www.youtube.com/c/MonsieurPhi/videos
Science Etonnante, some preference on physics but will talk about all groundbreaking research regardless of field : https://www.youtube.com/c/ScienceEtonnante/videos
DirtyBiology, more biology: https://www.youtube.com/c/dirtybiology/videos
Fouloscopie, social psychology : https://www.youtube.com/c/Fouloscopie/videos
Horizon Gull, more social psychology, with special interest in cognitive bias and opinions : https://www.youtube.com/c/horizongull/videos
Sur le Champ, history and military tactics : https://www.youtube.com/c/Surlechamp/videos
Le vortex, generalist science/entertainment : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZxLew-WXWm5dhRZBgEFl-Q/videos
Linguisticae, language : https://www.youtube.com/c/Linguisticae/videos
No idea why youtube never recommended me some english ones, but I hope they also exist and some comrades have recommendations.
R: 15 / I: 5
What's a good introduction to philosophy from a marxist perspective?
What's a good introduction to philosophy from a marxist perspective?
R: 14 / I: 3
>Be once in a millennia genius
>Writes big book detailing and explaining all his ideas and findings
>Explains something via a concept that he hasn't laid out yet and without which nobody can fully understand the explanation
>"Oh, don't worry anon! This concept I use here will be explained in chapter 7 of Volume 3 of this work"
>Goes on eating drinking and smoking like a pig
>Dies before he even finishes Vol 2
>Leaves Engels to guesstimate and extrapolate what he meant
Thanks, Karl, not like we needed all the knowledge we can get to fight the most powerful oppressive force in human history or nothingread_a_fucking_book Read a Fucking Book
>Be once in a millennia genius
>Writes big book detailing and explaining all his ideas and findings
>Explains something via a concept that he hasn't laid out yet and without which nobody can fully understand the explanation
>"Oh, don't worry anon! This concept I use here will be explained in chapter 7 of Volume 3 of this work"
>Goes on eating drinking and smoking like a pig
>Dies before he even finishes Vol 2
>Leaves Engels to guesstimate and extrapolate what he meant
Thanks, Karl, not like we needed all the knowledge we can get to fight the most powerful oppressive force in human history or nothing
R: 14 / I: 2
Audiobook:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRNuTHEmgKU
Civilization and Its Discontents is a book by Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis. It was written in 1929 and first published in German in 1930 as "The Uneasiness in Civilization". Exploring what Freud sees as the important clash between the desire for individuality and the expectations of society, the book is considered one of Freud's most important and widely read works, and was described in 1989 by historian Peter Gay as one of the most influential and studied books in the field of modern psychology.
Feel free to post your thoughts, lectures, secondary reading material.
A reading group gets together Saturdays around 22 UTC and this is the next text to be discussed.
Audiobook:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRNuTHEmgKU
Civilization and Its Discontents is a book by Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis. It was written in 1929 and first published in German in 1930 as "The Uneasiness in Civilization". Exploring what Freud sees as the important clash between the desire for individuality and the expectations of society, the book is considered one of Freud's most important and widely read works, and was described in 1989 by historian Peter Gay as one of the most influential and studied books in the field of modern psychology.
Feel free to post your thoughts, lectures, secondary reading material.
A reading group gets together Saturdays around 22 UTC and this is the next text to be discussed.
R: 20 / I: 5
Im new here
so what does this board have to offer
R: 29 / I: 4
Whatever happened to the free/open culture movement?
In the late 00's there was this big push against copyright law and in favor importing/adapting the values of free software to general culture and media but once we entered into the 10's it puffed away like if it had never existed.
I made this same thread on lainchan months ago and one of the answer said that "Copyright law became more flexible and managed to adapt to the internet making Creative Commons and the like irrelevant" and that's truth, the issue now is if a free culture is still worth fighting for when it seems like content creators are protective as ever.
Whatever happened to the free/open culture movement?
In the late 00's there was this big push against copyright law and in favor importing/adapting the values of free software to general culture and media but once we entered into the 10's it puffed away like if it had never existed.
I made this same thread on lainchan months ago and one of the answer said that "Copyright law became more flexible and managed to adapt to the internet making Creative Commons and the like irrelevant" and that's truth, the issue now is if a free culture is still worth fighting for when it seems like content creators are protective as ever.
R: 1 / I: 0
For example, are there any negative things to say about the way music evolved during that period?
All I hear and read about Renaissance art (hell, anything to do with the period, for that matter) are positive things or at least it's talked about in a positive light. Zero criticisms of it whatsoever.
Art during Renaissance
Did the Renaissance change art only for the better?For example, are there any negative things to say about the way music evolved during that period?
All I hear and read about Renaissance art (hell, anything to do with the period, for that matter) are positive things or at least it's talked about in a positive light. Zero criticisms of it whatsoever.
R: 3 / I: 0
writings about the REAL "tragedy of the commons"
I've seen in a lot of leftist YouTube videos Communists typically respond to the "tragedy of the commons" argument by referring to the history of Europe and how lands that were actually held in common ownership had private property introduced by force to alienate people from their means of production. are there any books that elaborate on the history of private property in detail, with reference to specific political leaders, parties, and events?
R: 2 / I: 0
spoonfeed me books on learning mandarin
spoonfeed me books on learning mandarin
R: 15 / I: 2
how do I convince zoomers that watching YouTubers and streamers is not a substitute for reading original texts?
how do I convince zoomers that watching YouTubers and streamers is not a substitute for reading original texts?
R: 2 / I: 0
He's not a hardline right-winger, but a "classical liberal" who thinks it's meritocracy out there and laissez faire is cool and good for "resource distribution", while governments are obstructive and corrupt. He is open to learning, but I struggle to offer anything coherent beyond "read these 20 transcripts of the episodes of Citations Needed".
Please share some medium-sized books on:
1. How poverty kneecaps people on every level and becomes a vicious circle;
2. How the US keeps segregating and repressing its black population even after the Civil Rights movement (he's against slavery but thinks Black Americans could do better "if they wanted" because Slavs also had it bad a century ago);
Books for normies about the structural causes of poverty in capitalism
I have a mate who's an Eastern European. He perceives himself as "self-made" because he escaped from childhood poverty in the 90s and he thinks other people could do the same if they "really" wanted. He also hates BLM because "African Americans have it better than any ex-USSR Slav just because they live in the US."He's not a hardline right-winger, but a "classical liberal" who thinks it's meritocracy out there and laissez faire is cool and good for "resource distribution", while governments are obstructive and corrupt. He is open to learning, but I struggle to offer anything coherent beyond "read these 20 transcripts of the episodes of Citations Needed".
Please share some medium-sized books on:
1. How poverty kneecaps people on every level and becomes a vicious circle;
2. How the US keeps segregating and repressing its black population even after the Civil Rights movement (he's against slavery but thinks Black Americans could do better "if they wanted" because Slavs also had it bad a century ago);
R: 4 / I: 0
I heard about it some time ago and read a small part of it about bipolar disorder. It sounded fascinating but for some reason the book costs like 80 bucks so I cant afford. Is anyone able to provide a pdf or knows a place where one could get the book cheaper?
Psychiatric Hegemony
Has anyone read this book or knows something about it?I heard about it some time ago and read a small part of it about bipolar disorder. It sounded fascinating but for some reason the book costs like 80 bucks so I cant afford. Is anyone able to provide a pdf or knows a place where one could get the book cheaper?
R: 6 / I: 2
I just finished uploading scans of Andrew Hemingway's Artists on the Left: American Artists and the Communist Movement, 1926-1956 to the internet archive and thought some of you might appreciate it.
https://archive.org/details/andrew-hemingway-artists-on-the-left-american-artists-and-the-communist-movement-1926-1956/
I just finished uploading scans of Andrew Hemingway's Artists on the Left: American Artists and the Communist Movement, 1926-1956 to the internet archive and thought some of you might appreciate it.
https://archive.org/details/andrew-hemingway-artists-on-the-left-american-artists-and-the-communist-movement-1926-1956/
R: 23 / I: 17
The Age of the World Picture
Essay by Heidegger.
The Age of the World Picture
Essay by Heidegger.
R: 10 / I: 0
Expect to read 50-80 pages a week. We will not be covering the introduction or preface, but you are encouraged to read it before the group officially starts.
We will be reading Volume III after our reading of Volume II. And I wouldn't mind tacking on Marx's Grundrisse as well.
Group channel:
https://matrix.to/#/!yiDRNQUOWVfxjUAqli:matrix.org?via=matrix.org&via=pixie.town&via=matrix.volguine.comacceleration Acceleration
Volume II Reading Group
The Bunkerchan (rip) Capital Reading Group recently finished Volume I and will be reading Volume II starting the second week of April! If you wish to join grab a copy of Penguin classics and be able to commit to a once a week discussion on Sundays - we are all US based and typically meet around 9 EST.Expect to read 50-80 pages a week. We will not be covering the introduction or preface, but you are encouraged to read it before the group officially starts.
We will be reading Volume III after our reading of Volume II. And I wouldn't mind tacking on Marx's Grundrisse as well.
Group channel:
https://matrix.to/#/!yiDRNQUOWVfxjUAqli:matrix.org?via=matrix.org&via=pixie.town&via=matrix.volguine.com
R: 22 / I: 4
For example how to get NEET buxs
How to cope with the mental consequences of beeing a NEET
how to overcome the creeping loneliness and slow mental declince
How to occupy yourself during these long boring lonely nights
I'll start I really love nightwalking the night time is my only possibility to get out of my room without having to cope with the anxiety that comes with going outside
So that really gives me the possibility to get some fresh air and exercise without stressing myself out
NEET General
This thread is for us NEETS to help each other and give tips to aspiring NEETSFor example how to get NEET buxs
How to cope with the mental consequences of beeing a NEET
how to overcome the creeping loneliness and slow mental declince
How to occupy yourself during these long boring lonely nights
I'll start I really love nightwalking the night time is my only possibility to get out of my room without having to cope with the anxiety that comes with going outside
So that really gives me the possibility to get some fresh air and exercise without stressing myself out
R: 6 / I: 1
Anyone have those guide to organizing books? I think sage was on here recommending em but cant find the thread
Anyone have those guide to organizing books? I think sage was on here recommending em but cant find the thread
R: 21 / I: 2
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: 6 / 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: 13 / I: 11
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: 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: 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: 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: 9 / 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: 30 / I: 23 tankie Tankie
> / 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: 2 / I: 0 think Think
Capital in the 21st century by Thomas Piketty
Is this book worthy of reading?
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: 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: 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: 2 / I: 0
hopefully unrelatedd.read_a_fucking_book Read a Fucking Book
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: 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: 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: 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: 21 / I: 3
My professor gave us this math lesson on white privilege.
Do you agree with her?
R: 44 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 15 / I: 2
Penguin Random House Parent Company buys Simon & Schuster
Penguin Random House Parent Company buys Simon & Schuster
R: 5 / I: 0
Academia
What is the primary contradiction inside Academia? Is it between the Sciences and Humanities or something else?
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: 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: 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: 1 / 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: 23 / I: 3
How does this make you feel?
How does this make you feel?
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 6 / I: 2
Theodor Adorno
Frankfurt School Thread.
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: 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: 9 / I: 1
Any historical books similar to this?
Any historical books similar to this?
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: 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: 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: 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: 46 / I: 19
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: 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: 2 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 1 / I: 0
What are the prerequisites for understanding this book ?
Is college alegbra enough?
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 3 / I: 0
this chart
How accurate is it?
R: 73 / I: 7
How do dialectics explain evolution?
How do dialectics explain evolution?
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: 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: 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: 131 / I: 94
Audio thread
Post audio sources
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 2 / I: 0
Historical Determinism
Why some marxist use historical determinism as a pejorative and how can someone be marxist and reject determinism?
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: 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: 4 / I: 0
Adorno
Were his works a coping mechanism because dialectics failed? 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: 39 / I: 4
Is math invented or discovered?
Is mathematics invented, discovered or both?
R: 26 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 101 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 27 / I: 3
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 12 / I: 0
What makes someone a nazbol or "reactionary leftist"?
What makes someone a nazbol or "reactionary leftist"?
R: 15 / I: 6
Cuckoldry
Does anyone have a PDF of Charles Fourier's "The Hierarchies of Cuckoldry and Bankruptcy"? 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 1 / I: 0
Sun Yat-sen
Can someone redpill me about this dude?
R: 14 / I: 2
Time Travel
What can you guys tell me about "Time Travel"?
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: 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: 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: 44 / I: 9
Is there any Marxist historians you recommend?
>inb4 Grover Furr
Is there any Marxist historians you recommend?
>inb4 Grover Furr
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: 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: 12 / I: 2
What is postmodernism?
explain in simple terms pls
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: 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: 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: 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: 16 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 50 / I: 5
Do you prefer physical or digital books /edu/?
Do you prefer physical or digital books /edu/?
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 2 / 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: 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: 14 / I: 5
Educate me on weapons
Educate me on weapons
R: 21 / I: 6
Western Marxism
What are some essential western Marxist works? Which work(s) would you classify as your favourite(s)
R: 64 / 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: 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: 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: 13 / I: 8
Et tu, brute?
Et tu, brute?
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: 13 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 75 / I: 10
Which of these books do you recommend?
And which should I skip?
R: 2 / 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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?