Previous thread:
>>2381106Dump all the seemingly pointless, dubious, and frivolous questions that don't deserve their own shitty threads.
Got a question that's probably been asked a million times before? You're in the right landfill, buddy. Post it here.
Threads that otherwise might go in here will eventually find themselves become merged to this thread.
Previous QTDDTOT Archives
https://archive.is/ga3OGHow come I asked the first question in this thread?
>>2745685Because I didn't shamelessly repost my question from the last thread soon enough.
———–
Could an Iranian regime change be used as an exercise in dialectic thinking? I know that "thesis antithesis synthesis" is often oversimplified to the level of a meme but is there something to it?
The removal of an anti-American force in the world and the expansion of Ameri-zionist imperialism hurts poor people
vs
Many people in Iran have long suffered under the theocratic regime and have awaited it's downfall however it may arrive
Synthesis: ???
For the sake of learning I would prefer an answer that doesn't boil down to "one of the arguments is wrong therefore the statement is invalid".
Thank you!
>>2745894you dont seem to really understand dialectics or contradiction (or even interesting factual statements)
>that doesn't boil down to "one of the arguments is wrong therefore the statement is invalid".first you cant avoid this simply by asking people to not do it, because indeed, your statements are shit
> The removal of an anti-American force in the world and the expansion of Ameri-zionist imperialism hurts poor people"poor people" is way to wide and vague, and "hurt" as well
>Many people in Iran have long suffered under the theocratic regime and have awaited it's downfall however it may arrivewhat means "many people" there? and sure some people may think that, so what
second, those are not in direct contradiction, both can be true without ever interacting with each other, second they are just statements, not actual evolving dynamics of two forces fighting each other describing part of the current state of reality
a synthesis is something that solve the contradiction by creating a new state of affairs and dynamics, with new contradictions. But your statements being so shit, we cant deliver a synthesis here.
a dialectical analysis of the iranian situation would identify multiple contradiction, first the class contradiction ofc (workers and capitalist ruling class in iran have diverging interest but depend on each other, synthesis -> solved by socialism); the religious contradiction (ruling class depend on capitalism but justify themselves through religion, and their behavior can either tend toward religiosity but loose capitalist opportunities and loose economic power, or tend toward capitalism and loose legitimacy with the masses -> synthesis secularization of the state); but the primary contradiction right now, the one that must takes the forefront in any analysis, is the imperialist one (the ruling class want an independent foreign policy defending their interest, and to develop the country through capitalism and use their resources for it, but the US empire want to exploit them, control their resources and prevent them from being a threat to their interests in the region, chiefly israel ->synthesis either become vassal to the USor destroy US grip on the region and global economy)
note I'm myself not an expert at all on that dialectic shit, this is just an humble attempt to convey what I understood of it
>>2746158This was helpful. As you may understand, what I was geting as was "could the invasion be helpful for the Iranian working class?". Even I've understood as much as that marxism isn't based on morals, or generally used to determine what's right and wrong, but surely a material understanding of the situation is needed to make any kind of judgement. Based on your examples I feel like I'm a tiny step closer to understanding the mode of thought, and thought about how to rephrase the contradiction(s) more in dynamic opposing forces, but it's probably not worth discussing further here.
did cpusa anon ever sell his gme?
>>2746256>what I was geting as was "could the invasion be helpful for the Iranian working class?". yeah I got that
I think what you wanted to identify is a contradiction specifically among the people wanting to overthrow the regime who want to do it for the interest of the working class
a better formulation would then be
"downfall of current iranian government would be an imperialist victory and would eventually hurt the working class of iran" in contradiction with "current iran government doesnt rule in the interest of the working classes and we want its downfall for that". The only way out of this one that I see is to defeat imperialist aggression and plans towards iran first, so that you can then change iranian government without giving a victory to imperialism and actually improve things for the lower class.
Well, the other way would be that the current government go comprador, so then fighting imperialism and fighting the current gov would be the same thing, but I think you can see how thats not a solution to the contradiction the marxists would favor.
Has materialism always been a minority position/worldview?
>>2747241depends a bit how you define materialism precisely
but overall, on the scientific side it always had a following, you can argue Aristotle was a materialist and he was a big reference for science everywhere, including by religious people that conducted research (iirc even the catholic church recognized him as mostly right), and now the dominant liberal ideology claim to be materialist (but often isnt), and most modern philosophies are materialist. Even religions today avoid contesting materialism on its home turf (what science can explain adequately), they just moved their idealist shit further up on shit science cant answer yet
materialism is just too useful because it give results, so it was never completely outright rejected
Do I need to read Hegel to understand better Marxism?
>>2747336It seems to me materialism is not something most people hold.
>>2747353people hold plenty of contradictory views at the same time
>>2747338I means, it prolly help (if you can understand it), but most everyone agree he is fucking unreadable
>>2747473
The same thing it offers everyone else
>>2747336please stop shadowboxing ffs.
>>2747241in aristotle's metaphysics (book 1-2), he explains how most of the presocratic philosophers (600-450 BCE) were all materialists. The last in this line was Empedocles, who in positing the 4 elements as the composition of things, also established dualism, carried on into the pythagoreans, who to aristotle, were the first non-materialists (by positing the real essence of things as "number"). Later with Socrates do we get the burgeoning of idealism, by the inquiry as to the nature of things in themselves. Socrates' student, Plato, is most often seen as the father of idealism, by basing the reality of things in their abstraction. according to diogenes laertus, Plato is also the founder of dialectics (e.g. the socratic method). From this formalism, Aristotle later develops Logic. Plato also writes that the ancient poets (e.g. Homer, 800 BCE) were materialists, hence attributing the first cause of things as Oceanus - the same way Thales (the first philosopher) saw that all things are of water.
So then, we can deduce that materialism was the standard worldview of people before Plato, but it also persisted afterwards, such as in the atomism of Democritus and Epicurus, which was carried into stoicism, which took over Ancient Rome. After Theodosius canonised christianity as the official religion of Rome in 380 CE, we can see idealism as the appointed ontology of the ruling class, which for about a milennia, dominated by scholastic teaching. Coming into the mid-14th century, we see the decline of catholic authority in western europe, eventually leading to the Reformation (1517-) which is concurrent with the development of capitalism and technical achievement. Moving into the 18th century, the enlightened men of europe had become sufficiently deist and scientific.
>>2747473
>Self-employed
Better public services, a non-corrupt government, no wasted money spent on pointless wars, better environmental and safety regs so you're not breathing in toxic chemicals or eating poison, lower taxes for everyone who is making 200k USD/year or below, a path to home ownership through mass construction of housing, lower energy/utility bills, etc.
>Service industry
Unionization + Higher wages and everything above
>>2748563>please stop shadowboxing ffs.the fuck are you talking about retard
>>2747338It depends on what you want to understand.
We can see Hegel's logic as the preliminary basis of Marx's analysis of history and capital (which he regards as synonymous). To Marx, history begins in the abstraction of labour by exchange, which through its self-development (as value), establishes progress.
Hegel's logic is as follows: being-essence-concept
being is: quality-quantity-measure
essence is: essence-appearance-actuality
concept is: objective-subjective-idea
To Marx, the being of value has its quality in concrete labour, its quantity in abstract labour and its measure in money ("the absolute commodity"). The essence of value is mediated by its "necessary" form of appearance in exchange, which is actualised as a process by consumption. Once we thus have money, it gains self-determination as "money in motion" (which is the self-moving substance) which seeks to expand. So then, money (as the form of value) grows by surplus value (money making money is the meaning of capital). When capital is sufficiently developed, Marx informs us that it is made of two components; "living" labour and "dead" labour, which are its conceptual logic: living labour is subjective, dead labour is objective, and capital achieves "absolute knowing" by this perpetual self-relation. Thus, the hegelian "spirit" is to Marx, the substance of value become subject, in the force of capital. This we might then say is Marx's criticism of Hegel; that to Hegel, history is about progressing freedom abstractly, but as Marx sees, what is made free is abstract, but is thus alienated from man, as his spiritualised labour (this is following the young hegelian critique by feuerbach). So then, that is how you can adapt hegel onto Marx.
I was always hazy on how communism would solve alienation and the division of labor. Unless one envisions returning to modest settlement of small producers, where you have a little shop where you make shoes or clocks or whatever, I don't see how you have relations between people in a global industrial economy, let alone individual autonomy. Workers will still be in a factory, there's still going to be a division of labor for the sake of efficiency, and you'll be making shoes and clocks according to someone else's plan, it's just gonna be the "administrator of things" instead of the CEO. Any input you have will be diluted.
Basically: how to have "a society of individual producers associating freely" more complex than a feudal hamlet?
Marx said that it'd be the enslaving subordination to the division of labor that'd be abolished, not the division itself. Huh? So is the idea that we could take turns farming, or installing electrical lines, or roofing, or whatever, so surgeons and physicists would waste their valuable time? I thought communism was supposed to be more efficient than capitalism. What about dangerous jobs? Gonna let doctors die in collapsing mineshafts? Sounds like the stuff anarchists get mocked for.
>>2748671most importantly, dont forget that marx wrote that the division between mental and physical labour will itself be abolished (which of course, is utopian rubbish). to put it in context, we can see that the factory system to marx appeared to comprise the whole world of productive relations, which if we go back to saint-simon (1817) creates a sense of inherent order (the same way that engels sees the principle of authority as inherent in production). if we take the division of labour within factories, we then simplify, between those on the factory floor, upper managers, and technicians. making each worker sufficient in these seems adequate, the same way a manual labourer in a contemporary warehouse might graduate to operating machinery like forklifts, and finally becoming a manager.
in terms of wider society, however, it is necessarily impossible, especially due to specialisation. we see after the death of marx, new and revolutionary techniques which intensify the division of labour (the least of which being the fordist assembly line). we also have computers following ww2 and everything else which comes from this, stratifying management in increasingly authoritarian ways.
as for any positive solution marx suggests, the most i can find is in "the german ideology" (1845) where he suggests sharing labour between people - such as what concerned prehistoric man; e.g. hunting and fishing. of course, many positions are functionally "refundant" today, due to automation, which de-skills and proletarianises the masses (including elites, like university graduates), so the analysis still holds, but i ultimately agree with you, that abolishing the division of labour is a false start, the same way that central planning can become an inefficient way to distribute resources, if taken as an end in itself. you have to compromise with reality.
>>2748678China is already abolishing manual labor thru robotics, try to keep up
>>2748692did you even read my post?
How do to start start with Marxism for ignorant dumbfucks like me?
>>2748671>Workers will still be in a factory, there's still going to be a division of labor for the sake of efficiency, and you'll be making shoes and clocks according to someone else's plan, it's just gonna be the "administrator of things" instead of the CEO. Any input you have will be diluted.the effect will be greatly diminished though. First, the capitalist model force to impose a hierarchy made to enforce the will and interest of the capital owner, in a socialist run factory, the manager is just another worker with no higher status, and can be dismissed by the workers he manages if they feel his job is not satisfactory or if he is abusive. The workers can have a lot more say in how they work, the pace of work, the processes, the safety regulation etc.
Second, the specialization of labor is usually enforced by the capitalist through his managers who does not care for the input of the workers and pay them for a specific work that is contractually fixed, but if the workers in socialist enterprise want to involve themselves in the design for example, its a lot easier to accommodate in a socialist framework.
Ideally, a socialist factory is not simply swapping the private capital owner for public ownership, its also run a lot more democratically by the workers involved. This reduce the alienation significantly.
>>2748757read the communist manifesto first, it's short encapsulate the basis very well. Critique of the gotha program is often recommended early too
>>2748757Philosophy:
(i) Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Introduction (1843)
(ii) German Ideology - Chapter 1A (1845)
(iii) Theses on Feuerbach (1845)
Politics:
(i) Communist Manifesto (1848)
(ii) The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852)
(iii) The Civil War in France (1871)
(iv) Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875)
Economics:
(i) Wage Labour and Capital (1847)
(ii) Grundrisse, Introduction (1858)
(iii) A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Preface (1859)
(iv) Value, Price and Profit (1865)
Misc.
(i) 1844 Manuscripts (1844)
(ii) Anti-Duhring (1877)
>>2748757https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htmi think engels' principles of communism is actually one of the quickest, easiest intros out there, including the manifesto, which develops on the PoC.
>>2748903later editions of the manifesto include the principles as an appendix
>>2748757Read everything on redsails org, sorted from shortest to longest
>>2746264bumping for an answer to this. i gots to know.
What countries (In EU) are good to be in currently, for organising and political education? (global north, imperial countries and skkkandinavian countries don't count). Not being opportunist just seeking to escape the hellhole that is the global north.
Materialist explanation for the prospect of honest days work being a horryfying one?
>>2750798Considering you excepted all the good ones, bone whatsoever
>>2752846alienation, honest day work concept being a prole cope, shitty bosses and colleagues
>>2754296So because of le alienation one dreads the tomorrow's work?
>>2752846Different economic systems
generate their own concepts of what is fair and just. If cost-covering prices are considered fair, then a wage you can just survive on should be considered a fair price for your time.
Now, you may already know this and you didn't say "fair" or "just", you said "honest". But you conjecture that somebody is dishonest when the way they talk and act seems to go against common sense, the common expectation of fair behavior… So it's really about the same stuff.
Is it possible to destablize a nation with right wing values?
>>2754510>>2754296Uygha im asking why work is scary
>>2752846>honest days workMarx points out that "a fair day's wage for a fair day's work" is a conservative motto which does not seek abolition of the wages system:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1865/value-price-profit/ch03.htm#c14
<[The working class] ought to understand that, with all the miseries it imposes upon them, the present system simultaneously engenders the material conditions and the social forms necessary for an economical reconstruction of society. Instead of the conservative motto: “A fair day's wage for a fair day's work!” they ought to inscribe on their banner the revolutionary watchword: “Abolition of the wages system!" >>2757246Superiority is a relative category which generally assorts itself into a division of labour, so the market solves that problem. On I.Q. it is also relative, since intelligence and creativity can be at variance, where for example, the "borg" civilisations of Scandanavia lack the degree of invention that continental and British societies do, with I.Q. being a deciding factor, in terms of width rather than length. A wider I.Q. band from a sample with lots of stupid and smart people will foster greater average creativity than a narrow band of generally intelligent people (e.g. women are smarter than man on average, yet are less inventive; the same is true for Scandanavia). Africans equally display a wide I.Q. bracket, which leads to greater inventiveness, even from the time of the "golden age" (1870-1940):
<With 50,000 total patents, Black people accounted for more inventions during this period than immigrants from every country except England and Germany. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-black-innovators-who-elevated-the-united-states-reassessing-the-golden-age-of-invention/So then, general intelligence is… general, so accounts for competency, but can lead to static equilibrium. The "whitest" countries are more stable, but uninteresting.
>>2754625Yeah, look at the Warsaw pact in the 1980s
>>2757246>transnaziwhat does this even mean
Most of my experience with women online are them being reactionary subhumans, which has nevatively polarized me on the gender, what should I do to approach them as a group (conceptually)?
>>2757371This post virtually raped me.
>>2757292nazism is vibes evidence #54489
>>2758250Idk, they're still out there, and if they arent garbage people, they're defending them.
>>2758420>garbage peopleWelcome aboard.
can i be both a communist and a member of a roman LARP group ?
why hasn't a group hostile to the US ever targeted the panama canal?
>>2759069Should I? I'm a little knew
>>2759069>>2759069I'm back now, here's the summary i got for pages 7-8 (Introduction)
>James P. Cannon, national secretary of the Socialists' Worker Party got put onto trial along with 28 other members of the same party and Minneapolis Teamers 558. James P. Cannon (the book's author) argues that America was in World War I & II in order to spread capitalism, despite what American slogans say. He also claims that the attempts to spread capitalism are reactionary (i.e. trying to control the masses). He says that Marxists are to help the oppressed of capitalism in these attempts of subversion. He adds that soldiers should be given all the rights of a basic citizen. How do I convince stalinists that trotskyism is the superior ideology?
Can religion and communism be compatible? Can a Muslim, a Buddhist, or anyone else be communist?
>>2759234Depends on the religion, but most religions come with laws included already that can't be replaced, like the Sharia in Islam.
proletarians as revolutionary class status?
>>2759133show them all the succesful trot revolutions
What is the difference between determinism and fatalism?
>>2759630One starts with a D and the other starts with an F
>>2759561Russian revolution
What happened to leftypol?
>>2763020Metzitzah B’peh.
>>2745331Hey can one of you guys come and pick up this lost child?
It's getting kinda sad
Do materialists believe that "time is an illusion?"
I see that posted sometimes but it doesn't make sense. Does it mean that we can live forever?
>>2764531Time is motion; this has been understood since ancient times.
whats the difference between strasserism and national bolshevism
>>2764531If you get up everyday at the same time, go to the same job, do the same things and go to bed at the same time, your brain starts to skip memory in order to safe power. Then some day you wake up and you are scared, because you are 65yo and wasted you life paying taxes to pedophiles.
>>2764647kek, also interested
>>2764647>StrasserismOtto Strasser was a 'guild socialist' who favored de-urbanization and agrarian self-sufficiency.. Basically what Marx would call a reactionary socialist. He was still completely anticommunist and an early proponent of a NATO/EU style alliance against the USSR.
>NazBolNational bolshevism was born from elements of the KPD and German leftcoms in reaction to the treaty of Versailles, when a lot of leftists were turning to nationalism. Decades later the Nazbol manifesto was published by Karl Otto Paetel which rejected marxist philosophy but advocated a planned economy and an alliance with the soviets. Russian Nazbol is a pretty different thing that came much later in the 90s with Limonov and Dugin and took some influence from the Germans but I'm not sure how much. It seems largely right wing mixed with some left-leaning nationalists like Black Lenin.
why is there a leftypol and a leftychan? personal drama or is one site for one leftist tendency and the other for another
so is Claud E A ShineBomb sending oil to cooba or not?
I don't understand how it is possible to define motion as being in two places at the same time. Am I a dumbass?
>>2746256>Even I've understood as much as that marxism isn't based on morals, or generally used to determine what's right and wrong, but surely a material understanding of the situation is needed to make any kind of judgement.Quick question then: if Marxism is based on material analysis of the situation and on the relationships of different classes to power and property, why are y'all still Marxists if Marxist analysis is virtually useless for analysing any world event past 1950?
>>2777313if it's so useless it should be easy to explain why. enlighten us
Where do babies come from?
>>2777372Mostly muslim countries.
Why are jannies being lazy and not banning weird nazi porn
>>2777814What weird nazi porn?
>>2777814Please link to me the posts containing wierd nazi porn and I will consult the moderators.
>>2765059>On August 8, 2021, a coup happened on leftypol.org caused by an administration dispute. This in turn gave birth to leftychan.net, a splinter group run by the disagreeing mods. tmk some guy tried to coup the site and it led to a split. the end result is that leftychan is just a board for ppl that are somehow too annoying and caustic for leftypol as it is. They're kinda like trots when you consider the following:
>split caused by failed power struggle>constant claims that the opposition is a tyrannical bureaucracy that sold out >basically the same shit but more annoying about it >>2777770Is that where they outsource the factories to?
does communism relies on class consciousness? what i mean by that is that communism can only be achieved with class consciousness?
How do trade unions form?
>>2781199Yuo see, when lots of proletarians love each other very much….
>>2778429killing is wrong. and bad. there should a new strong word for murder. like bad-wrong ,or badong. yes. murder is badong. from this moment i will stand for the opposite of murder: gnodab.
>>2781847What if you kill an animal in order to eat it?
>>2781893NTA but making that kind of post is just inviting essay length responses from resident vegans.
Murder is wrong and I extend that in principal to animals too.
I also however think we don't yet live in a society advanced enough for everyone to live as healthily as necessary without any animal based products.
Killing is an evil. But for the time being it is unavoidable. We have to be evil to survive but should strive to change that reality.
Is dialectics present in nature?
>>2781922as opposed to what? can you name a single thing that exists which isn't a part of nature?
I remember reading somewhere that Marx predicted culture would become increasingly bizarre as a means to cope with alienation. Does anyone know where in his corpus this could've been from? A bit vague but maybe someone here knows.
>>2781937just answer the damn question
>>2781953Jesus Christ bro, I just want to understand how can I see interpret nature in the lens of dialectics like Engels did. How can I do that?
>>2781942No, Marx rarely wrote of culture in such a conformist fashion, his favorite motto was nihil humani me alienum puto est. There is no conception of normative as opposed to bizarre in Marx. Secondly, alienation is not this psychological condition one "copes" with, it is nor even a question of consciousness, but rather of potentiality and capacity.
>>2781955You think dialectics is some key that will open le secrets of le universe to you?
>>2781958>nihil humani me alienum puto estI genuinely thought Marxist humanism was revisionist
>>2781955Anti-Duhring is a work that is in any intro reading list.
Who invented communism?
Recommend me a good book that I should read next.
Has anyone done any actual experiment on how to track labor time/intensity for lower stage socialism?
To the outside world, I look totally normal and healthy. But I have a medical condition (neuropathic pain from an injury) that leaves me in constant significant pain 24/7.
I haven't had a single pain free moment in years and I wake up from the pain multiple times every night.
In addition I have an allergy to most regular classes of painkillers and as such "simply live with the pain" as it were. Most high strength pain relief leaves you a mental zombie in any case.
I'm not suicidal, but how in such a state, can I contribute anything meaningful? What can I do? How can I help achieve global communism when I'm more or less house bound?
>>2782902You don't need to have a meaningful life, a good one is enough. Take care of yourself.
>>2782883what do you mean by that? I suppose ussr did account for labor time in their planning, and cybercommunist like cockshot have proposition and models for planning with it (check out the cybercom thread)
>>2782902gramsci lived all his life in chronic pain and was still a major communist thinker, might be worth it for you to read him although I havent yet so Im not sure he actually talk about it
How do trade unions form?
>>2782883It is measured by the total product.
Capitalism already does this.
>>2783193The answer to this question is illegal in my country.
Do any other ESL anons here think marxist terminology sounds cringe in english? Its almost like if english is inherently liberal or something its hard to explain
>>2784023A lot of the terms are just french loanwords so they do sound silly in the middle of a sentence in english yes
>>2784023This is why I support the use of the term "Epstein class" because it accurately conveys the social and economic meaning of the bourgeois class to the average burger
where do I buy physical copies of lenins complete work
What's the difference between Communism and Capitalism?
>>2784216This is actually a pretty good question.
>>2782902capitalism already measures labor time through key performance indicators and clocking in/clocking out. simply put: if you don't generate surplus in a commodity production setting, you get fired. in socialism the surplus is simply publicly owned rather than privately own. See gothakritik for more info.
Will disabled people who cant go to work starve, or does communism have welfare?
>>2784342Marx supports welfare (1875):
<There remains the other part of the total product, intended to serve as means of consumption […] funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is included under so-called official poor relief today.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htmLenin appears to not support welfare (1918):
<the prime, basic and root principle of socialism: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.” “He who does not work, neither shall he eat”—every toiler understands that.https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/may/22b.htm >>2784342it's a bit different from welfare but no the disabled do not work under communism (except for (You), (You) are going to the writing poetry gulag
>>2784216At first, I was thinking that communism wants more state and capitalism wants less, but then I realized, that in the end, capitalism becomes a state and communism ultimativly wants small communes and no state. What the fuck.
>>2784216who own the means of production, which class is defended or oppressed by the state, and for whose benefit the surplus is used for
>>2785045Kojima is right about elections being a sham, but overlooks the fact that politicians / the state favour capital and are beholden to it, not some secret cabal that run the world.
>>2785045>an elite who plans everything including who wins the elections, or which laws are passed.its called the bourgeoisie
I feel I have a very superficial knowledge of what liberalism is. Do you happen to know a very good source that describes what it is and criticizes it at the same from a marxist pov?
>>2785247Liberalism: A Counter-history by Domenico Losurdo
>>2785250Thanks a lot anon!
Been working my way through Capital, reached part 3 recently. Hope it's ok to post these questions all at once, sorry if some of them are stupid or answered later in the book.
What determines the value of fiat currency?
At some point Marx says that when you have two competing money commodities, one (I think the overvalued one) ends up being the actual general equivalent that the other measures its value in. Later he says that gold and silver work as dual measures of value on a global scale. How does that work?
Does the value of labor-capacity factor into the total value of a product? Like if I need 8 hours labor-time worth of products to sustain myself daily, and it takes me one eight hour workday to produce some commodity, is that commodity worth 8 hours labor-time or 16? If just 8, why?
So surplus value results from buying labor-capacity, the commodity that generates value on consumption. And apparently that commodity has to be sold for a limited time, by someone who owns their own labor-capacity. So does chattel slavery not result in surplus value?
Should I do drugs before going to work? Would it make easier for me to socialize with coworkers? I don't really want to but sometimes it might be for the better.
>>2785337>What determines the value of fiat currency?Its aggregate demand, recorded by rates of interest (which itself is relative to the rate of profit). Marx criticises the very idea of fiat currency [capital vol. 1, ch. 2, note 11] since he believes money is always a commodity [MMT disagrees with this assertion]. He as yet provides a robust theory of depreciation (e.g. inflation) in chapter 3, but ties it to the precious metal underlying currency. This can be understood in one sense by Gresham's Law, which Marx reproduces:
<The quantity of money thrown into the circulation at the beginning of each day is of course determined by the sum of the prices of all the commodities circulating simultaneously side by side. But once in circulation, coins are, so to say, made responsible for one another. If the one increase its velocity, the other either retards its own, or altogether falls out of circulationhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch03.htmThus, where values (e.g. prices) fall, currency increases its supply, which then replaces the more valuable money for the lesser. So, if we apply this to fiat, we see that inflation (e.g. depreciation) ideally expresses the growth of an economy. Marx in this primary case is only dealing with pre-capitalist notions of money, but later sees that credit-money plays a central role in capitalist dynamics (which he does relate to the rate of interest), from the mercantilist period. I write about the history of theories of interest here:
>>2755314The rate of interest is seen as proportional to the supply of money (since evidently, more money means less borrowing costs), which caused early mercantilists (Potter, Child) to view the rate of commerce as the effect of a primary cause of interest, while later mercantilists (Petty, Locke) viewed the rate of interest as an effect of the rate of commerce. Only later do we get Massie (1750), who sees that the rate of interest is determined by the rate of profit, which continues into Adam Smith (1776), etc.
>gold and silver work as dual measures of value on a global scaleHe is taking the position of Steuart (1767) in delineating between domestic coin and international bullion, as scaled by relative value. Copernicus makes similar comments in "Monetae Cudendae Ratio" (1526), that currency (e.g. that which is "current") limits circulation by trust (e.g. domestic policy) and so one should trade with debased coinage internally, but trade with bullion internationally.
>Does the value of labor-capacity factor into the total value of a product?Our capacity to labour (labour-power) is afforded by wages, and yes, wages are accounted for in the final product by costs.
>So does chattel slavery not result in surplus value?According to Marx, no, since slaves (like animals) are factored as fixed capital, not variable capital. This blog explains:
https://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2015/07/marx-on-slaves-as-fixed-capital.html?m=1 Is mayonaise bourgeois?
Who invented capitalism?
>>2785589Uygha is short for Uyghur. It's basically the n-word around here. Getting called that shows that people really hate you.
why is this website still called leftypol? most people here are some shade of liberal and zionist collaborator, and if you are to the left of kautsky or lasselle you get called ultra, glowie, thirdworldist, fed, etc. depending on what pole of class-collaborationism (western or eastern) you are not even opposing but just calling for what it is, and you might even get straight up banned for it
the faq page says the purpose of the website is non-sectarian unity against capitalism, fascism and liberalism, but none of this is true in practice
would it really be that bad to just rename it socdempol? everyone knows the communist/anti-capitalist movement is dead on an international level, why not just be more honest? if the situation changes you can always change the name to leftypol again
>>2785743 (me)
just realized maybe this doesnt fit the "dont deserve their own thread" category since its kind of a long question but whatever
>>2785743>>2785756have you considered suicide? would solve all your problems
>>2785743Least insane self described "M-L"
>>2785412The School of Salamanca and the rich families in the Republic of Venice.
>>2785915All compulsory labour has incentives; i think higher wages are probably better than gulags, but if you are attempting to overproduce (for example, steel) you must then underpay. So its a question of political Will, which we can compare to taxation. Would people worker harder or softer if they were taxed at an incriment to income? There must be a rate where people give up trying to make money when money is increasingly impossible to save. So its a balance of incentives and policy i would say.
What's the problem with liberalism?
>>2786052It killed 1 billion people
>>2786062I hate this double standard, when liberalism kills a billion people its bad but when I do it nobody cares!
>>2786087Kill people who matter next time!
Why do people here make no diffetence between Liberalism, Libertarianism and Capitalism?
>>2786052Liberalism (e.g. freedom-ism) we may initially regard as an economic movement to allow for free trade. I discuss this here:
>>2785881Political Liberalism if often traced back to English common law; in particular, the Magna Carta (1215), but this legal document was only actionable to members of the competing ruling class, not the common folk. The text is re-interpreted in the revolutionary period of 1628 - 1658 as pertaining to the freeborn rights of Englishmen in general, most especially Habeas Corpus (the right to not be falsely imprisoned). The true legal revolution occured in 1689 however, by the establishment of the Bill of Rights (1689) after the glorious revolution overthrew the restored monarchy. The revolution was also expressly protestant (which is the whig legacy). Revolutionary movements existed in the 17th century, such as the Levellers (1641-49) and the Diggers (1649-53) who were more radical in their approach. The levellers are regarded as proto-liberal and the diggers are regarded as proto-communist. Religious movements also arose, such as with George Fox, who founded the "Quakers", with a new doctrine of individual spiritual revelation (the Quakers in history have been ultra-liberals in every respect). The revolutionary protestants were the Puritans, such as John Milton, who wrote pamphlets defending freeborn rights and tyrannicide (regicide). He also attempted to make divorce easier. After 1689, the whigs then had political supremacy; famous whigs include Daniel Defoe and political Jonathan Swift. These were at the cutting-edge of culture in their day. A tract by the whigs named "Vox Populi, Vox Dei" (1709) circulated and it was a thoroughly democratic document seeing how all rights of kings derive from the will of the people (this idea is called "the consent of the governed" and is written about in Locke, to the Declaration of Independence. Thus, popular dissatisfaction justifies revolution).
Theoretically, we see the idea of social contract espoused by Hobbes (1651), which influences Locke (1689) and later, Rousseau (1762). The social contract sees that the state of nature (what Hobbes and Locke refer to as War, but Rousseau declines to), is different from the state of society (e.g. civil society), the first order of which is the protection of rights by the protection of property. Now, Locke apparently sees it twofold; in nature, property may be claimed and thus rightfully acquired by labour, but it may not be socially recognised until many people cooperate to protect their own property. Locke writes that any attempt to subvert the rights of another places one in a state of war with them, and thus one may aggress against aggressors (e.g. defense). War here is regarded in a Shakespearean manner of all being fair, which differs from later ideas, such as in the Geneva convention, that War itself has laws. Rousseau may be credited with this since he views War as a political activity amongst states, not individuals, and so, War is legally contracted by declaration. We may regard the origin of civil society thus as the means to protect property, with one's property beginning in oneself (e.g. the body). Thus, the liberal view is that the individual is legally protected against aggression by its status as property (this is not a new theory exactly, since humans have always been treated as property, and so may be alienated as such). Liberalism then, we can basically say, is the logic of private property - which differs much from Marxism's goals (but of course, you are not obliged to be a Marxist either).
Now, political liberalism (e.g. democracy, republicanism) are not modern concepts, but are ancient; democracy is Greek, Republicanism is Roman. Rousseau speaks upon types of Republics, seeing that a government is rightfully constituted by a people based on their "general will", which is thus politically sovereign. Thus, if a people prefer it, a monarchy may serve them well. Kant later says that forms of government are graded upon a people's collective reason. A simple people for example, have monarchies, while an advanced people, prefer democracies. As yet, Kant places exception to the Sovereign, who he sees has exception to the law, so as to not be subject (thw idea that all people ought to be conditioned by the law is called "the rule of law" and is present as early as Coke's "Petition of Right", 1628). In elaborating on this, we must discuss Montisqueau (1748), who establishes the logic of a tripartite state (executive, legislative and judiciary), which he bases off the British model (e.g. crown, house of commons, house of lords). This of course is wildly influential, being the basis of the American "separation of powers" (I would claim that the US is a constitutional monarchy, not a republic, since although laws are passed by the house, they may be denied by the senate and if passed, they are to be signed by the executive. Even though the UK has a crown, it is still more directly democratic, since the Prime Minister is sovereign head of the legislative branch - what is equivalent to the Speaker of the House in the US).
The separation of powers features in Hegel's Philosophy of Right, as a final logic of government, by a constitutional monarchy. Effectively, where powers are separated, one branch gains supremacy over another. We see this with the Magna Carta (1215), which pressed for a "counsel" or parliament to mediate decision-making, which eventually became the parliament which we still see today. The push for parliaments to mediate sovereign power by a legislative branch is a universal tendency in liberal movements of history. So then, liberalism we may further write, is the supremacy of the legislative branch of government (which primarily concerns protection of property). I would further state that all revolutions are in effect, legal re-constitutions.
So, Liberalism is a political ideal of self-governed property owners (liberty, equality, fraternity). The reason people might disagree is because they disagree with the category of property as such - which I regard as contradictory (and thus communists always try to sneak the logic of property back into their supposed propertyless utopia). Property is the basis of civil society and is the foundation of justice.
>>2786166Impessive, very nice.
How would a trade between two people work in socialism and/or communism?
Communism historically killed millions of people. Isnt it dangerous to just try it again?
>>2786166>Property is the basis of civil society and is the foundation of justice.Libtard detected. I'm going to rape you to death. The only standard any society should aspire towards is justice. Private property is in contradiction to justice.
>>2787355>Private property is in contradiction to justice.Justice as defined by Aristotle is reciprocity; it is the owing of a man what he deserves. This can only be quantified in relation to property; thus, if a capitalist "exploits" labour, he is a thief and the labourer ought to be compensated. Justice then concerns the rights of property, where all crimes are trespasses against property.
>>2786166If you wrote this yourself, respect.
>>2787339This time we're gonna be veeery very careful with it.
>>2787356>Justice then concerns the rights of property, where all crimes are trespasses against property.This reminds me a lot of Graeber's conclusions about the origin of the modern concept of private property, he argues that it emerges out of the Sacred
>>2787376Well, we see in penal codes, "an eye for an eye" to balance the scales. Jesus also accounts for good works being rewarded by "treasures in heaven", so the logic of property had already colonised the numinous by this time.
>>2787387no it didn't happen as that would be retarded and class suicide given that they'd be dispossesed or executed
>>2787387That's the kind of schizogibberish invented in the bedrooms of tinfoil wearing flat earth nazoids and should be disregarded accordingly
>>2787387Ask AI. You'lll be amazed.
>>2787356Aristotle was a slave-owner I don't take my philosophy or moral lectures from retards like him. All the loudest libtard voices pushing for freedom were themselves slaveowners, imperialists, colonists, warmongers, drug pushers, pedophiles, etc. This proto-Epstein class has been afforded a free pass too many times and for too many centuries. Philosophy started with Lenin. Justice started with Stalin. Anyone who disagrees will get shot after I've finished raping them.
Can unemployed people participate in the class struggle and economic struggle alongside employed workers?
>>2787339liberalism historically killed hundreds of millions of people, and we still have it
How can I improve my vocabulary and writing skills for discussion?
I have seen a couple of anons write in a very well-written manner here.
My English isn't perfect, as I am from Germany.
>>2787556Reading, reading, reading.
>>2787556>I have seen a couple of anons write in a very well-written manner here.You… you have?
>>2787558Forgot to add: Books.
>>2787558>>2787562That's not gonna do shit. Best way to learn is actually doing it.
>>2787563Well, first you need to have and understand a set of vocabulary, then you learn by doing.
How come this question does not deserve its own thread?
>>2787930It doesn't require many anwers.
>>2787940
The third way will set us free from borderline thinking.
https://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/i/m.htm>Immanent critique is the practice of criticising a theory “from inside,” that is, by basing itself on the same premises as the theory which is being criticised.Isn't this what lawyers do? They argue a case based on the evidence and the law, not whether something is ethical or not. It's entirely based on the internal logic of the system.
Or am I halfwit faggot who doesn't understand anything….
Whats the final solution to the social-democrat question? Anarchist and communist replies only.
>>2788356The barrel of a gun
Why does this site not have MPA? I don't understand the desperate need to have any image instantly approved.
>>2788589whats mpa
if it's like captcha then I don't want it
>>2788653It's mod approved posting for pictures, which is worse than captcha, and why it's not implemented should be obvious to anyone (you feel the site isn't slow enough we need to add 10 more jannies?)
>>2788767If the image related argument had any sway Japans birth rate would be booming, but its not.
Turns out when women are under a male dominated culture sphere that portrays them as child like and has heavy emphasis on pedo-vision they just check out of society and refuse to breed.
>>2788767Same exact reason leftists thinks having monsters in your story is an endorsement of racialism and colonialism and will encourage beating up black people for xp, idealism
>>2788767to reiterate, it's a culture war thing. it's because the left have this idea that media will profoundly influence people, especially young people, so the content of said media should be carefully considered and safeguarded. the right won't challenge that idea, or critically explore it; their strategy is to run with it and assert that media should espouse messaging that they approve of, so they'll look for any media they think is representative of their world view and annex it as an example of 'media done right', whether or not said media was actually created by people who would agree with their interpretation of its messaging. 'death of the author' makes it possible to try and interpret anything in any way you so choose, so there may be left-leaning interpretations of the same media, and both sides will squabble over the finer details and try to gain narrative supremacy over how this game should be digested.
as for political figures like trump, elon, matt walsh, ben shapiro, dennis prager etc. they're all effectively demagogues for the right wing. a demagogue is a sycophant who spreads propaganda and messaging that is sympathetic to organizations and ideologies to which they belong, uncritically and for the sake of making political headway. they're bad-faith propagandists. they all have variances in their beliefs (shapiro and prager are zionists; elon is most likely anti-zionist; walsh and trump play to the fundamental christian interpretation of traditional values), but they all present a unified front against the left, and although no one is immune to confirmation bias, the right wing tend to value tribalism over critical thinking, so they'll make apologetics for the flaws in their world view that don't necessarily make sense when examined, and will be generally unwilling to change their world view to accommodate a wider and more nuanced perspective.
Why do anarchists think that they are left wing?
>>2789095because they are mostly. Communist arent alone being "left wing" sadly
>>2788754But I'm scared that someone will post CP
Image unrelated
> How does one overcome the psychological damage and idealist programming caused by years of childhood religious indoctrination and trauma?
It's hard sometimes to be a good materialist with a faulty monkey brain…
>>2790410LSD and a big titty goth
>>2790479you cant, which is why the party include checks and balances of power
Time of being alive is short. Why spend it with work instead of having fun?
>>2790479having a educated proletariat
>>2787387Communism is a class struggle of the
proletariat, the working class against the
bourgeoisie', the elites, otherwise known as the epstein class.
In conspiracy theories, da JOOOOOOOZ are represented as being in the government, owning big companies (i.e. Microsoft), and other ideas. Communism being pushed by da JOOOOOOOOOOOOOZ would be hypocritical of Communism.
>>2791075Armed action by a minority is called a "putsch", and those who follow the idea that there needs to be a small group to overthrow the government are called
Blanquists.
what technically distinguishes export of commodities from export of capital?
Why are jews over represented in the elites?
>>2791287Because they are superior to goycattle
>>2791287Its a good question.
I would say that the cultural elitism of the European Jew is in the fact that he is truly metropolitan. He is unrooted by his diaspora, yet passing well enough for partial legitimacy. The modern Jew has always been Liberal, which is the cutting edge of culture. Of course, his ascendancy did not come without conservative criticism. In terms of economic elitism, it is likely due to the heritage of Jews as bankers and merchants, though of course, banking itself is not a Jewish invention. We read in the Old Testament also, a policy of protecting one's tribe from usury and the imposition of interest on others, so there is a sense of in-group loyalty for these practices. Of course, overrepresentation does not mean monpoly or exclusivity.
>>2790813>which is why the party include checks and balances of powerSuch as?
Do the proletarians become the new bourgeoisie when they get into power?
>>2791975in marxist theory class distinctions are made on the basis of a persons relation to the means of production. namely, whether they own them or not. holding political power does not necessarily make one bourgeoisie.
What's the best reply to the lassallian idea that "labor is the source of all value and culture"
>>2792183Labor is not the source of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labor power.
>>2792186So what is to be done?
>>2792187What has to be done is instead of setting down general phrases about "labor" and "society", is to prove concretely how in present capitalist society the material, etc., conditions have at last been created which enable and compel the workers to lift this social curse.
>>2792186most of nature use value has to be harvested through labor to be used though, even a waterfall you gotta at least go there and gather the water to drink it, the only use value I can think of nature give without any human effort is sightseeing
and when you speak of exchange value it literally measure (socially necessary) labor
>>2792183>labor is the source of all value This is true.
>>2792898he preached a stoicist philosophy
>>2792898It depends on what you mean.
Jesus preached an apocalyptic gospel of rectification upon the earth, where the meek and poor shall inherit a kingdom, where the last shall be first. He says that a rich man shall not enter heaven, for worldly riches are opposed to heavenly riches, where reward is given for thankless deeds rather than prideful displays of virtue.
He said that one ought to not simply love their neighbour, but also to love their enemy; to give one's cloak to the thief, and to turn the other cheek. Upon unrighteousness, it is seen that sinners ought to be forgiven and not punished, for they "know not what they do". The criminal should not be executed, for only he that has not sinned has right to cast the first stone.
On money, it is seen that the love of mammon is the root of all evil, and that the rich should sell all their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. On family, Christ claims that one must love God more than his earthly father, elsewise he will be left behind. Tradition is expelled by the New Covenant, as the old vine dies off and a new one is attached. And finally, one should not fear death, for in Christ is the Resurrection.
The sublime cannot be wholly politicised, only aestheticised.
Has anybody go through Anark's or Daniel Baryon's work? I'm thinking about reading A Modern Anarchism in a book club and I was wondering if anyone has any critiques that I should be aware of. Is it a good starter text?
>>2793004all the early prophets were just the social struggles against empire and division in ancient forms
Do people in Iran enjoy Islam or do they want to get rid of it?
Every time I lay down I fart. Is that normal?
Does anybody have the /crisis/ OP saved? I think we need that general more than ever right now
>>2796171Bad diet due to capitalism.
Should i study accounting
and finances as a socialist, or is not worth it? Please answer in a serious manner.
>>2800160Space communism is next
im a newfag, can someone tell me what people mean when they reference /z/ and “zigger”?
>>2800754A russian soldier.
>>2800160if war and struggle is cool why haven't you joined the military anon?
What exactly is Post-Marxism?
Are Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, Guattari, Negri, Fisher, Zizek, etc worth reading at all?
>>2800166Will the space communists be able to defeat the space invaders? Or are space invaders the communists ?
>>2800160>wouldnt that be kind of shitno
>no wars, no struggle, no nothingglobal communism and no wars doesnt mean everything is solved, theres no problems and its all love circles. And I dont think we're gonna see "global communist peace" in any reasonable timeframe anyway, if it ever happens.
>>2800754>what people mean when they reference /z/ and “ziggerpro russian people in the context of the ukraine war
>>2801104>What exactly is Post-Marxism?"post marxist" are CIA pushed, retards infantile that claim to be communist or "radical left" but are in reality mostly idealists anticommunists, they have no realistic plan to change the world and are often actively hampering the people that do try to move toward socialism in reality. Well thats what I got, I dont think theres any hard definition, its a fuzzy category, but all the people that claim to "move beyond marx" often reveal themselves to be be morons, socdems or anticommunists
>Are Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, Guattari, Negri, Fisher, Zizekthere can be some interesting shit, but theres also loads of bullshit, and nothing actually useful for changing the world and making a communist revolution
>>2800754As for the reason - it's because most of the Russian vehicles had big white 'Z' painted on them at the start of the war as their brigade identifier or something
Would starting with Adam Smith be a correct move as a completely illiterate person on political economy/economics? If not, where to start? Where to proceed? I was planning Smith > Ricardo > Marx with essays or secondary literature along the way as difficulties arise. How's that?
How do trade unions form?
>>2802153So they dont form then? Is that what you are saying?
>>2802154Not today, not really, since any big company will have established their own union. Smaller places could form their own union and go on strike, but its not common.
>>2802157So how do trade unions form?
>>2802158They have formed by canvassing to workers, whether in a particular field or to workers in general. Thus, there are plumbing unions, teacher's unions, etc. But also general labour unions.
>>2802160So its spontaneous and not something that can be "forced" or hastened?
>>2802160>general labour unionsClass unions?
>>2802163General trade unions like Unite and GMB in the UK have around 1.7 million members, collectively and span various industries.
>>2802162How do you mean? You generally pay a membership fee in a union, so if someone is forcing you to pay something, they're robbing you.
what the FUCK is a human being anyway?
Is there any contemporary marxist literature about the gig economy?
>>2804486A very intelligent monkey.
>>2805685breen is peak not just for the unintentional comedy but also because its literally how your typical Qanon-flat earth-antivaxxer burger views themselves in relation to everyone else, history and the world in general.
How does a communist state look like? A single party like in the GDR?
Is left-wing politics good or bad?
>>2805969historically speaking there have been one party states, communists that win on a regular basis in multiparty elections, societies that outright reject having a nation-state in the first place and everything in between. It can vary a lot depending on the material conditions.
>>2805969a communist state is an oxymoron. communism is stateless.
for a description of the form of a socialist state i recommend reading anton pannekoek.
>>2805969The GDR did not have a single party
>>2792624the anon you are replying to is quoting marx in gothakritik and the rest of that paragraph after his quote explains exactly what you explain here.
How to handle my Eastern European friend who claims they were traumatized by communism?
>>2806225Don't. As someone living in the butthurt belt, you can tell these people any idea you have for socialism and they'll still equate it with the worst aspects of the Stalin years or call their own capitalist countries communist and bad. It's a special kind of mental illness born from nationalism and having a failed form of socialism imposed upon your state
>>2806225Just tell him it wasnt real communism.
>>2804508Any specific questions you have regarding 'gig economy'? I ask because in the end 'gig economy' merely is a fancy word describing a way for capital to deminish or outright ignore whatever is left of workers' rights. So to understand the destitution of a worker without any rights or leverage to enforce his demands you can just read Marx and other 'classic Marxists'.
>>2806225Just insult them or laugh at them. Tell them yes, it was in fact better than the system we have today. If they can't handle it that's on them.
>>2806247Just broadly what a gig worker's relation is to the means of production. How does a gig worker sieze the means of production if the means of production is an electronic app?
Are gig workers a new class within late stage capitalism, similar to a guild journeyman who own their own tools, but are unable to sell their labour other than at a value dictated by the guild master (uber, doordash, amazon)?
>>2806225ask what specifically traumatized them, I'd bet money it's something that happened after 1989-1991
Why didn't guilds ever have the same class consciousness as unions once had?
….Or did they?
If globalism is capitalists wet dream, why is nationalism not considered left wing?
>>2806538Left and Right are both bourgeois politics
>>2806444>Just broadly what a gig worker's relation is to the means of productionSame as for any other worker: he doesn't own means of production. He has to sell his labour power to survive. The novelty is that this happens via an information service provided by a monopolist via an 'App'. Stuff that before the rise of these platforms already was facilitatet by telephone books, black boards, homepages such as craig's list.
>if the means of production is an electronic app?These apps are not means of production. These apps are systems to distribute information. While they offer some form of information service to the users that results in some (perceived) level of convenience, they primarily aim to become monopolistic platforms taking the form of basic infrastructure to then extract rent from the users. They don't produce. The way they are structured and positioned in capitalism, is mostly parasitic.
>Are gig workers a new class within late stage capitalismNo. They are not even a new class in capitalism. They are merely workers without job securtiy and with even less workers' rights than a conventionally employed worker. They are akin to day labourers and are close to (becoming) 'Lumpenproles'.
>similar to a guild journeymanNot really. Guilds were a form of organizing (skilled) labour and represent interests in the middle ages. They faded away alongside the development of capitalism. One could argue that trading guilds facilitated the development of capitalism but thats a different matter.
>other than at a value dictated by the guild master (uber, doordash, amazon)As mentioned earlier: uber, doordash, amazon (mechanical turk) etc. connect supply side and demand side and integrate a myriad of information services to do so. They do not, primarily, organize how the actual providers of the 'downstream service' do the work to provide their service. Nor do they dictate how many workers are allowed to offer their work via the platform. They provide an interface via which users interact.
>>2806444>How does a gig worker sieze the means of production if the means of production is an electronic app?Build another one. I read about a city in North America running an Uber alternative, but I forgot which one.
Isn't it kinda funny that the guys who went out and made actual experimental societies in the real world are the utopian socialists, and the guys who sat around in libraries speculating about future society are the scientific socialists.
>>2807535Idiotic idealist nonsense from someone with 0 understanding of history
those people in libraries used that knowledge to organize those reading groups into revolutionary vanguards that were able to mobilize a militant working class by participating within the struggle and establishing solidarity instead of petite bourgeoisie dream of dropping out of the struggle and being a collective of property owners that support each other but have no incentive to actually participate in the liberation of the working class as a whole and who inevitably die out or get crushed
>>2807540>Utopian socialists were actually counter-revolutionary opportunistsYou know nothing. Robert Owen spent his life in the annals of power trying to establish a global revolution based in his model of a new society.
>>28075450 comprehension you dont think maybe the entire reason that it didnt work at all is because when people drop out of society it removes them from struggle
>>2807548Owen frequently petitioned the British government to enact his reforms and even gave a cost analysis of the materials needed. He was not attempting to remove himself from society, but to prove the efficacy of a new way of society to exist by; what he called the "rational system" of society.
>the reason it didnt workWhy didn't Europe become communist?
Because Marx was a petit-bourgeois opportunist?
>>2807569except half of europe was
>>2807584>It wasWhy isn't it anymore?
>>2807169Thank you for the consise response.
>>2807737
>>2807686
You must be over 18 to use this website.
>>2806521They did, but it's an apples/oranges comparison. Guild members weren't proletarians, but typically self-employed artisans, or even members of the nascent pre-industrial bourgeoisie. They owned their own means of production, employed workers (typically apprentices), and sold commodities for a living. Marx specifically cites them as the precursors of the industrial bourgeoisie as a class.
I don't understand what is "riseup.net", does anyone have experiences using their tools?
What does mean when a post says (me) or (you) after it? Is that to show that a poster is responder to xirself? Does it say (you) because of my IP range? Cause it's usually not (me) or (you) when I read them. Thanks,
t. new channer
>>2810091Yes, (you) means the post is made from the same IP address.
If you use a public IP address, then it can relate to different posters.
Anyone got a good book that gives a good overview of "Maoism", whatever that means?
I just have no god damn clue
>>2810891start with the little red book maybe
>>2810101I'm pretty sure the (you) are made locally from your browser cookies actually. They can get fucked sometimes after a crash and backup restore. You can clear them in the options (top right, in the ribbon with boards links)
>>2811160Lets experiment then; clear your data and then reply to yourself.
Oh marx I ate too much pizza and now my tummy hurts, why did capitalism make me do this?
>>2811154You can't learn anything from some dispersed quotations
>>2810891Take a look at whatever seems interesting:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/index.htm>>2811154I can't remember a damn thing from that. Just a collection of tiny snippets lacking context.
Is scarcity enforced?
>>2815351It is "enforced" by our systems of distribution, if thats what you mean:
<In the EU, over 58 million tonnes of food waste (129 kg/inhabitant) are generated annually (Eurostat, 2025), with an associated market value estimated at 132 billion euros […] At the same time, almost 42 million people cannot afford a quality meal every second dayhttps://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/food-waste_enThere is enough food to feed the whole world, yet so much is wasted because it isnt sold.
Asked this in the China general but didn't get much response.
Could someone give me a quick rundown on the hukou system? Dividing the populace into strictly defined urban and rural classes with distinct rights seems totally antithetical to communism, but I'm open to the idea that there's nuance I'm missing as an outsider.
>>2816579Because of German language which is not English and has to be translated. A lot of words are composite words made from other words which is a feature that English in principle also has but in practice is not used like in german. Also because he picks up and transforms a lot of traditional and contemporaneous terms, also colloquial terms. For example, aufhebung does in German sound at the same time to "lift" as in, "pick up" or "elevate" in this sense, but also as some form of negation, hence why some people translate it as "suspension" rather than "sublation". The term was first used in this double sense by Schiller, I think in the letters, but I'm not sure. He used it very sporadically and never aimed at forging a new concept or term, but Hegel was impressed by it and made it a key term in his philosophy.
Unique IPs: 198