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

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.
[ Return / Go to bottom ]

File: 1640690467177.jpeg (33.33 KB, 679x451, fuko.jpeg)

 No.663892[View All]

Why don't marxists utilize insights by postmodernists? Like you don't have to agree with foucault's politics(neoliberalism) but you can adopt his galaxy brain insights or gain inspiration from his methodology.
It's cringe how marxists still haven't updated their philosophy or methodology even after 120 years.
112 posts and 10 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.665058

File: 1640747677127.webm (13.66 MB, 1280x720, Why-Study-Postmodernism-a….webm)


 No.665083

>>665058
based

 No.665098

>>664788

 No.665299

>>664778
>I think Foucault belonged to post-modern thinkers who thought that there could only be subjective narratives about reality, that makes it an idealist philosophy.
>Marxism is a materialist school of thought which is based on there being an objective and physical reality.
False binary. Read metamodernism by Jason Storm to understand why.

 No.665441

>>663937
>Talking about individual liberties is a fucking taboo in marxist circles.

Glowing

 No.665466

>>665299
>False binary.
Binaries are boolean and Marx said that all philosophies had to be either materialist or idealist

The middle ground fallacy you and so many others are trying to re-invent again and again rests on a misconception about materialism.
Materialism is the believe that material reality comes prior to ideas and now the important part: that ideas it self are entirely material. When materialist talk about ideas they mean physical processes like thinking. Idealists mean something else entirely with ideas. If you try to combine idealist and materialist thinking you will create infinite regression paradoxes.

 No.665469

>>665466
So Foucault isn't an idealist philosophy, got it.

 No.665477

>>665469
>So Foucault isn't an idealist philosophy
Yes Foucault was a man not a philosophy.

 No.665479

File: 1640780625515.pdf (1.53 MB, 170x255, Jason Ananda Josephson Sto….pdf)

>>665466
Just read the first chapter of this book and you'll realize how stupid you are. Your post is so misinformed and full of strawmans that one has to write an entire essay to debunk your bullshit.

 No.665522

>It's cringe how marxists still haven't updated their philosophy or methodology even after 120 years.
What are you even talking about? There have been many different "updates," and many different "Marxisms." At present, "Marxism" more signals a direction than it does a single coherent philosophy or methodology.

Judging from >>663896, you have a Wikipedia-tier understanding of Foucault anyway. There are insights in Foucault, but just saying "why don't you combine the two?" demonstrates your own unfamiliarity with the matter in question. Off the top of my head, I can name two fairly well-known Marxists with strong Foucauldian influences and who have even written books on this sort of fusion (Antonio Negri and Jacques Bidet), and there have been many other appropriations of concepts and the like from Foucault and other "postmodernists," as well as attempts to account for and ground postmodern insights within Marxism or a form thereof.

 No.665610

>>665522
>At present, "Marxism" more signals a direction than it does a single coherent philosophy or methodology.
So it's a buzzword please like to identity with to seem cool and hip

 No.665619

>>665522
Just from this thread alone it's obvious no one on /leftypol/ knows anything about postmodernists and you still think marxists care about postmodern insights because some obscure Italian ""marxist"" academics.

 No.665680

>>665610
>So it's a buzzword please like to identity with to seem cool and hip
It can be a buzzword, but "direction" normally implies meaningful movement toward an intended goal, in line with some purpose. Without further clarification, though, it's impossible to determine what a declaration of "Marxism" means exactly. In this, it's like virtually any other political affiliation.

>>665619
>Just from this thread alone it's obvious no one on /leftypol/ knows anything about postmodernists
It doesn't seem so, but this is true on most left-wing forums. As a rule, most people haven't read much.
>you still think marxists care about postmodern insights because some obscure Italian ""marxist"" academics.
Negri is obscure? Other than Zizek, I doubt I could have picked any living figure affiliated with Marxism who's less obscure.

 No.665687

>>665479
>t. jason storm

 No.665689

>>665680
>Negri is obscure
His older stuff definitely is. His new and popular stuff is really surface level and in many ways a step back from what he wrote in the 70s and 80s.

 No.665709

>>665479
I have been reading your book suggestion, and it's got ridiculous stuff in it like this

<By “mixed race” I do not mean to imply that there are any pure or unmixed “races,” much less that race is a useful biological category. But “race” is a relevant cultural construct.

If you know that race is not " a useful biological category", then the only valid conclusion is that you have to led go of race theories, period. Because that " relevant cultural construct" is just racism.

 No.665722

>>665709
>If you know that race is not " a useful biological category", then the only valid conclusion is that you have to led go of race theories, period. Because that " relevant cultural construct" is just racism.
That's ridiculous. You don't have to believe that "black" is a race in the biological sense to admit that it's a social construct which in America has serious consequences for people's material existence, shapes social contradictions, etc.

 No.665788

>>665722
>You don't have to believe that "black" is a race in the biological sense to admit that it's a social construct which in America has serious consequences for people's material existence, shapes social contradictions, etc.
Racism has serious consequences for people's material existence, shapes social contradictions, etc.
Racism is a social construct.

If you are looking to uphold racial division in theory, you're at best just another race theorist, unable to let go of certain strands of bourgeois idealism, or at worst a crypto racist.
At the moment i think that you are the former, if you keep pushing this point, that will be evidence that you are the latter.

 No.665796

>>665788
If you're using race to analyze racial discrimination that doesn't fucking mean you're upholding racial division wtf

 No.665804

>>665788
>If you are looking to uphold racial division in theory, you're at best just another race theorist
What do you mean "uphold racial division in theory"? Were the CPUSA doing this when they acknowledged that black workers faced "double oppression" from capitalism and racism, and this required special solutions like autonomy for the black belt?

 No.665825

>>665788
>unironically arguing for a colorblind view when race has real material effects

 No.665837

>>665825
This is literally what MLK did, what's the problem?

 No.665853

>>665837
No, he didn't.

 No.665857

>>665837
What's the problem with not acknowledging that black have to face a deeper kind of oppression that is a result of racial discrimination? Who knows bro.
It's a voluntarist idealism that if you just stop believing in something that is socially constructed then it will cease to exist.

 No.665869

>>665857
Define oppression.

 No.665872

>>665796
If you are a materialist , you can analyze racial discrimination, but you can't apply a race-lable to people.
For materialists: Race = idealist believe and people =/= believes

>What do you mean "uphold racial division in theory"?
You can't make materialist theory where race is a theoretical category that references actual people. You can only say that some people say they have racial identities, and that there are racist believes and so on. But as soon as you state that a person X belongs to "race" Y, you're off to bourgeois idealism lala-land.

>they acknowledged that black workers
That's incorrect for a materialist , you'd have to say something like "workers that identify as having a black racial identity" or "workers upon whom's't a black racial identity is imposed".

Basically everytime you name-drop a racial term, you have to make very clear that you are talking about bullshit believes that other people hold and not you. Like if you were talking about flat earthers. Treat "race" like it's the edge of the "earth-disk"

>>665825
>unironically arguing for a colorblind view
It's not blindness to adapt your views to reflect scientific findings

>race has real material effects
racism has real material effects
"race" is an idea, if you you say that it has effects, you are by definition an idealist.

>>665837
>This is literally what MLK did, what's the problem?
The problem is liberals white washing socialist revolutionaries.

>acknowledging racial discrimination
Materialist acknowledge racial discrimination as real but that doesn't mean we would accept the worldview of the discriminators. There never were "black" or "white" -people in the first place, they just made that up to dehumanize one group of people to justify their enslavement.

 No.665876

>>665872
>But as soon as you state that a person X belongs to "race" Y, you're off to bourgeois idealism lala-land.
So we're the Bolsheviks engaging in bourgeois idealism when they recognized the social reality of nationality and created autonomous republics? Again, even if these categories are social rather than material, that doesn't mean they aren't real and don't need to be taken into account when crafting policy or doing analysis. The key difference is whether or not you are working to lessen and eliminate antagonisms between them and transform the social reality.

 No.665931

>>665872
>racism has real material effects
And racism depends on a social construct called race.
> "race" is an idea, if you you say that it has effects, you are by definition an idealist.
Just cause race is a social construct doesn't mean it isn't real in some sense. This issue is addressed in part 1 metarealism of that very book you're talking about. The writer mentions how "real" is a buzzword unless you mention what you're contrasting it with and various types of mind-dependence. Social science isn't same as natural science. That's the whole point of that book.

 No.665944

>>665872
>it's not blindness to adapt your views to reflect scientific findings
If you go by that logic nothing is real other than quarks and forces.

 No.665964

>>665876
>So we're the Bolsheviks engaging in bourgeois idealism when they recognized the social reality of nationality and created autonomous republics?
Nationalities exist because of regionally separated administrative organization in governments, that has nothing to do with race-theories, unless you are an ethno-nationalist.

>Again, even if these categories are social rather than material,
No social realities are material and objectively speaking "races" are identities which are derived from incorrect biology that was intellectually massacred by bourgeois idealism created for political support of chattel slavery for humans.

>that doesn't mean they aren't real
It's egregious dehumanizing shit that a bunch of slave-capitalists rammed into biology 300 years ago, and i grow tired of this shit.

>need to be taken into account when crafting policy or doing analysis.
Nope socialist countries will not implement structural racism. Are you petit bourgeois by any chance ?

>The key difference is whether or not you are working to lessen and eliminate antagonisms between them and transform the social reality.
The imposition of racial identities is a antagonism.

>>665931
>And racism depends on a social construct called race.
>Just cause race is a social construct doesn't mean it isn't real in some sense.
this either is race realism with extra steps, or a dog-whistle tactic.

>The writer mentions how "real" is a buzzword unless you mention what you're contrasting it with and various types of mind-dependence.
Semantics

>Social science isn't same as natural science.
If you want the ability to contradict natural science, you want religion, if you base laws and societal norms on it, it's theocracy.

>>665944
>If you go by that logic nothing is real other than quarks and forces.
Why ? quarks and forces are not contradicting higher level physics abstractions, the way genomic-theory contradicts race-theories. You're not drawing a valid comparison.

 No.665967

>>665964
You're so fucking naive it's embarrassing to read this post

 No.665968

>>665967
Arguments: none found.

 No.665971

>>665964
>Nationalities exist because of regionally separated administrative organization in governments
No they exist because there are groups of people who are culturally similar and perceive themselves as a nation. There are nations which exist despite having no recognition of administrative apparatus.
>It's egregious dehumanizing shit that a bunch of slave-capitalists rammed into biology 300 years ago, and i grow tired of this shit.
I agree, but it's still a social reality we need to take into account when acting in the real world. Just as an example, Indigenous people in Canada were subjected to deliberate attempts to destroy their language. As such a policy which does not grant any support or is actively hostile to the proliferation of indigenous languages is obviously going to cause friction. Just like if a socialist government in the US were to conduct a war on drugs without account of how such a move could he perceived or actually affect black people, given the history and prevailing conditions in America. Sure, the difference between nations and races is a social construct, but it's one with real world consequences that can't simply be ignored.
>Nope socialist countries will not implement structural racism.
Nobody suggested otherwise. Taking account of race as a social reality =/= structural racism.
>The imposition of racial identities is a antagonism.
Racial identities already exist, it's an issue of managing them in non-antagonistic ways (and ideally deconstructing and eliminating them). However this requires us to recognize them as a social reality. If you want to eliminate race in America, you have to eliminate the issues which face black people specifically, which means you need to recognize that black people exist as a distinct social category. That doesn't mean doing woke apartheid shit, but it does mean taking race and ethnicity into account.

 No.666015

File: 1640810509592.gif (193.18 KB, 500x333, noooope.gif)

>>665971
>No they exist because there are groups of people who are culturally similar and perceive themselves as a nation.
So you're low key ethno nationalist then ?
If cultural battles negated the concept of nations, there would be hardly any.
>There are nations which exist despite having no recognition of administrative apparatus.
No there's people who want to have a nation, but are denied the dedicated administrative apparatus that nations have.

Nation states are administrative regions, don't get sidetracked by the propensity of nation states to instill sentimentality in their citizens.

>Nobody suggested otherwise. Taking account of race as a social reality =/= structural racism.
"race as a social reality" ?
It's not structural racism when you call it a "social reality"
Are you pulling my leg ?

>Racial identities already exist, it's an issue of managing them
We need race-identity-managers ?

Nope, I'm out, you're trolling me.

 No.666025

>>666015
>So you're low key ethno nationalist then ?
Uhh no? I didn't endorse the creation of ethnically pure nation states. I just described what a nation is.
>Nation states are administrative regions
Yes, nation states are, but nations are not. The Polish nation didn't magically pop into existence when Poland became independent in 1918. The entire concept of a nation state presupposes a nucleus of a self-idefnified nation around which to base the state apparatus, borders, etc.
>It's not structural racism when you call it a "social reality"
What about anything I said implies structural racism? I'm saying that race as a social construct impacts how people behave, see the world, and interact with other social categories. This has to be taken into account when making policy and addressing social contradictions.
>We need race-identity-managers ?
We need to consider how race affects people's behaviour, perceptions, and relationships. We need to examine and solve problems which stem from structural racism, which by definition requires the recognition of race as a social reality. Again, you can solve the unique problems which face black Americans without acknowledging that "black" exists as a social category.

 No.666028

Because postmodernism is fake bourgeois psychosis who’s only use is in allowing retards to pretend that they’re smart and for fucked up freaks to rationalize their sick perversions. Anybody advocating postmodernism should be shot, as they were under Stalin

 No.666047

File: 1640812101305.gif (4.45 MB, 592x296, 1640708285355.gif)

>>666028
Postmodernism didn't fucking exist until after Stalin died

 No.666053

>>666047
Obviously Stalin used the immortal science of dialectical materialism to predict exactly which unborn children in the USSR would grow up to be postmodernists, and then had them all aborted.

 No.666065

>>666047
Yes, because the Soviet Union nipped such decadence in the bud before reactionary ideologies could form. There’s a reason China, the DPRK, and other AES states have no concept of postmodernism or the things that directly lead to it. Zhdanov was right again

 No.666129

Love how it's always the same cretins being pushed on here.

Foucault. Stirner. Nietzsche. Bordiga. Deleuze.

These people have nothing to offer us proletarian communists. You're better off wiping your arse with them.

>>666028
Don't forget Zhdanov, another great Bolshevik murdered by reaction.

 No.666132

>>666129
Indeed, may Trotsky and his lackey Khruschev burn in the deepest pits of hell. When socialism triumphs, they will be regarded the world over on the same level as Hitler

 No.666166

>>666132
I really hope this is b8, because it would be really unsettling to know that there are people out there posting stuff like this unironically.

 No.666179

>>666166
Leave it to the retard flying anarchist colors who always concern trolls about Stalin to claim the truth is “just trolling”. How about go fuck yourself and cry back to your Twitter safe space?

 No.666190

>>666179
>Leave it to the retard flying anarchist colors who always concern trolls about Stalin
Idk what that even means. Stalin was based but the shit you posted is actual insanity.

 No.666625

File: 1640856162498.png (13.35 KB, 600x600, 017.png)

>>664563

 No.667535

Bumping to recommend this article I found: https://onkwehonwerising.wordpress.com/2019/08/28/marxism-coloniality-man-euromodern-science/

 No.668098

File: 1640964591545.png (1.48 MB, 1080x2444, racialization.PNG)

>>665788
>>665872
I'll just share this excerpt from this book I am reading now. This will explain why your understanding of race and racialization is very outdated and narrow.
>Language, Nation, Race: Linguistic Reform in Meiji Japan (1868-1912) ​by Atsuko Ued

 No.668461

>>664806
>>664816
It rejects "narratives" and thinks all ideas have equal value. This sort of thinking goes back to Nietzsche and beyond. As communists we stand for proletarian hegemony and the correctness of our scientific outlook.

https://www.bannedthought.net/India/PeoplesMarch/PM1999-2006/publications/post-modernism/contents.htm

 No.668512

>>668461
“proletariat” isn’t a word for you to throw around like a toy

 No.668513

>>664278
да


Unique IPs: 26
[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]
[ Return / Go to top /