No.8376[Last 50 Posts]
a dumb little thought experiment…suppose that you're a believer that all the current forms of 'activist' leftism are failing and we are running out of time, and you come under the belief that predatory multinational CEO's are a much more efficient force for change in the world, as well as, as a group, generally far more progressive than the governments which 'rule over them'. suppose that you believe the world is already moving towards a state of increasingly centralised and interconnected capitalism. suppose that you are desperate for a solution to the climate crisis, and believe that we instantly require drastic action before global society itself collapses (and perhaps it will anyway, and simply we can only reduce the damage as much as possible). might such a person start to critically support a kind of formalist corporate anarchy, under which the state's power is dissolved (or at least, the power of monopoly issuance is shifted into the hands of these billionaires) in order to concentrate real power in the hands of more effective and competent figures? obviously not whilst eschewing other forms of anti-hierarchical action and radical anti-civ/anti-capitalist/radfem/eco-extremist/whatever-you-like dissent. many have expressed the desire to take drastic action towards saving the world– if these people were in charge of lawmaking, not only would they be able to expedite the process of lawmaking, but have much more expertise in governance. do we really have the time as a species to spend on bourgeois democracy right now– OR on the vapid activism and slow-moving cold war of intra-imperialist conflicts?
i know what i'm saying is dumb and schizo, and very much neo-reactionary, but im evaluating what options we might have remaining in the most drastic conditions in order to bring the global system to a swift change. i am getting a little desperate, and nothing seems to be working. as it stands, the left is objectively entirely ineffective as an activist movement, pretty much all modern 'activism' is ineffective. There is an irreconcilable split between the spontaneous desire to schizophrenise society, and the need for a sustained 'activist' movement that could even bring about change which must ultimately turn sour and reactionary.
Maybe such efforts are better spent ensuring that the processes that are leading to our inevitable destruction come to a grinding halt as soon as possible, regardless of how it affects one's rose-tinted moral views. From Berardi on activism:
"activism is the narcissistic response of the subject to the infinite and invasive power of capital, a response that can only leave the sctivist frustrated, humiliated and depressed", a desperate attempt to ward of depression. (…) But it’s doomed to fail and, worse, to convert political innovation and sociality into its opposite, to 'replace desire with duty'"
don't bother taking this thread too seriously.
No.8377
in summary, fascism is coming. we need to take action fast. once they crack down on the corporate capitalists, it will be too late.
No.8378
>>8377The paper tigers will blow away. They will dig their own graves.
No.8380
Why would they crack down on the corporate capitalists? The corporations have all the political power. They are taking on more functions of the state.
No.8381
>>8379Read Mao. All reactionaries are paper tigers. Trump, Liz Truss, Hitler, etc. all dug their own graves and were/are being blown away. It's simple dialectics.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch06.htm No.8382
>>8380Fascism is the reaction towards the schizophrenisation of capital, right? So in order to prevent the schizophrenisation of capital further, fascists take over the state and merge it with corporations in order to crack down on dissent, on socialism, on difference, etc. they want control over the corporations, they want totalising power to 'save the west' and eradicate all difference. as of now, corporate capitalists are relatively liberal, moreso than the state, and they're taking on functions of the state which are deemed 'necessary'. So if we are 'fighting for state power' here, then we also may need to consider the corporations as something which must be, rather than destroyed, appropriated.
My point is that we may find ourselves in a situation where we are so desperate that perhaps it would be better to simply hand over total control of the state over to liberal CEO's, rather than allow fascists to take control of the state appartus from the children running the governmnet.
No.8383
>>8381Hitler killed millions of people. I'm talking about taking desperate action to prevent this happening. I consider mass genocide of innocents and total destruction of the environment to be a worst case scenario. If you don't see it that way, then kudos for not having any problems in life I guess.
No.8384
>>8383Study Mao.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch06.htm
>To destroy the rule of imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism in China took the Chinese people more than a hundred years and cost them tens of millions of lives before the victory in 1949. Look! Were these not living tigers, iron tigers, real tigers? Nevertheless, in the end they changed into paper tigers, dead tigers, and bean-curd tigers. These are historical facts. Have people not seen or heard about these facts? There have indeed been thousands and tens of thousands of them! Thousands and tens of thousands! Hence, imperialism and all reactionaries, looked at in essence, from a long-term point of view, from a strategic point of view, must be seen for what they are - paper tigers. On this, we should build our strategic thinking. On the other hand, they are also living tigers, iron tigers, real tigers that can devour people. On this, we should build our tactical thinking.
>I have said that all the reputedly powerful reactionaries are merely paper tigers. The reason is that they are divorced from the people. Look! Was not Hitler a paper tiger? Was Hitler not overthrown? I also said that the tsar of Russia, the emperor of China and Japanese imperialism were all paper tigers. As we know, they were all overthrown. U.S. imperialism has not yet been overthrown and it has the atom bomb. I believe it also will be overthrown. It, too, is a paper tiger. No.8385
>>8383If I can phrase it another way, I think we can all agree that voting for liberal bourgeois parties has proven time and time again to be totally ineffective in quelling fascism. We may need a dictator-CEO to step in to try and stop fascism in its tracks, and I think the multi-national corp CEOs we have today might actually be happy to oblige on this matter.
Ofc i could also be talking out my ass. I am just looking for any solution to this problem. We don’t have long until the collapse of global society itself under the weight of environmental and/or economic stress.
No.8386
>>8384Eh, maybe it is time. These quotes aren’t at all convincing or explanatory however but I guess I will just read the thing myself.
No.8387
>>8386Stop being utopian. Class conflict is the driving force of history. It takes broken eggs to make an omelet
No.8388
>>8384Ok Nvm this shit is just master-slave dialectic. I knew this was pointless… please read Desert. You are mistaking a dialectical process for teleological inevitability. We don’t have time for this process to play out, and frankly it’s a pretty shaky idea to begin with. In 30-50 years, ‘global’ society itself will collapse. Capitalism already destroyed global society. ‘Supporting China’ in protracted vague struggle of the ‘people’ isn’t gonna save us, this is naive as fuck.
>>8387 your revolution is never coming.
No.8389
>>8382Fascists call it the merging of state and corporate power simply because the fascists are doing their bidding by suppressing socialism, or at least its perceived power. The fascists then dole out contracts to perform functions that were previously done by the state to keep the corporations from asserting themselves.
This time the business class doesnt need the government to do this. Its the mainstream ideology.
No.8390
>>8388History has proven Mao right. You're saying nonsense
No.8391
>>8389That’s not true, corporate CEO’s are a lot more ‘liberal’ than the state right now.
No.8392
>>8390you have the autism score of a toddler if you think any of this crap about the master-slave dialectic has any basis in history, or that just because class conflict drives history that there’s some religious moral truth to the ‘end of history’. The end of history is heat death. Global society as it currently stands is dying. China will also die. Hope this helps u absolute infantile leftist tool.
No.8393
>>8376>the left is objectively entirely ineffective as an activist movement, pretty much all modern 'activism' is ineffective.That's right *schniff*, the world left is immersed in bourgeois democracy, myths and ethics, and is faced with ineffective repetition of liberal activism and faces psychological negation as the left is not stating important value theories etc.
That's why I spend my leisure time watching funni zizek jokes and vids on yt. And brek my min d pwhwhwh it was rly funny
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VXS2BJT2gtY&feature=share9 No.8394
>>8391I dont think so. I think they are 2 sides of the same coin. The liberal class doesnt give a shit about what happens to anyone as long as their profits and power are protected. Thats why the classic liberals entered into their unholy alliance with social regressives 100 years ago. They are the 1/3 who will watch as the second third kills the final third.
No.8395
>>8392The postmodern dogshit is so soaked into your brain. You're just spouting nonsense
No.8396
>>8395If you think pointing out the empirical fact that global society is collapsing due to climate crisis and that fascism is coming soon (tm) is ‘postmodern nonsense’ then idk what to tell U.
No.8397
>>8394I think neither is any good, but I am talking about a last resort scenario. There is no revolution coming,. Who do we trust more? People who spent their whole lives running a dictatorship-structured entity and know how to and have experience running a giant superstructure, spend significant money on foundations for ‘liberal’ purposes and have openly verbalised their desire for radical degrowth plans, yet are tempered on what they can do by the govt, or the clown circus bureaucracy of the liberal American government? (I also include China in this bc they are also an ineffective bureaucracy)
No.8398
>>8396>Master slave dialectic>End of history>The ongoing ollapse of global society>Fascism is comming were all going to die. We must ally with our corporate ceo masters to save the planet!Schizophrenia
No.8399
>>8398Pffft Marxist doesn’t even know his own movement’s terminology
No.8401
>>8399You're the one projecting it on to me. Those terms are for liberals
No.8402
>>8400I don’t think handing over total power to a dictator-ceo is liberal. Liberalism is when u have two ineffective little parties fighting for ‘control’ over an inherently uncontrollable leviathan. What I am talking about is a dismantling of the limiting apparatus of the leviathan so that it can at least DO something, rather than be totally stuck in stasis as its immune system destroys it from the inside out.
No.8403
your threads started out good but this one is complete shit
No.8404
>>8402Handing power to any kind of dictator has never ended class society but the opposite. From liberalism to fascism under 5 minutes. Like I said more radical collectivist approach is necessary.
No.8405
>>8402IMO this circumstance is an engineering problem and not a political one. Any solution is fine as long as it avoids complete destruction. We have 30-50 years before total collapse, maybe less. We need a radical action plan that can prevent total destruction. Even if that involves total handover of power to a dictator, that is better than the rapid decay of the social machine (which is what allows for your precious little modern class conflict to exist in the first place). The revolution isn’t happening. Something far more drastic is required.
No.8406
>>8403Yeah. It pisses me off how this person says to not take things seriously and then starts calling people retards for talking sense in response to this nonsense
No.8407
>>8404I am not talking about ending class society, I am talking about saving class society. Because a class society > zero society whatsoever, which is the path we are currently on. Total destruction of society.
No.8408
>>8406Nothing you are actually saying is sensible tho. Y’all keep repeating ‘le material conditions will save us’ like a bunch of lemmings, whilst the social machines’ legs are crumbling underneath it.
No.8409
>>8408i thought it was a thought experiment faggot
No.8410
>>8408Do you actually believe what you've been typing
No.8411
>>8410>>8409In the confines of the thought experiment, you’ve given totally nonsensical answers. Saying ‘I thought it was a thought experiment!! Heh’ when I point out you are not even answering sensibly within the conditions I laid out is the problem here.
No.8413
>>8411If I say ‘in this thought experiment, society is going to collapse’ and u say ‘nooo society is not going to collapse’ thats obviously not a very helpful exchange.
No.8414
>>8407I personally prefer nuclear war to class society. Why are you so willing to defend the liberal world order?
No.8415
>>8413What a useless fucking thread.
No.8416
>>8414I enjoy being alive
No.8417
Guys what if the bourgeois were good? What if? What if? What if? What?
No.8419
>>8417So you deny that society is on the verge of global collapse due to climate change? Or that the genocide of millions is a ‘worst case scenario’?
No.8420
>>8416You prefer to be a slave instead of dying.
No.8421
>>8419You will need to prove how my post leads to that conclusion NOW.
No.8422
>>8420Conflating wage labour with slavery and then saying it’s worse than death is a bit wild
No.8423
>>8408If this were the 1700's and the feudal ties were breaking down, you'd be saying that we must ally with the ruling classes to save feudal society.
>WE DONT HAVE TIME TO WAIT FOR IT TO RESOLVE ITSELF. LOOK AT WHAT THE BOURGEOISIE ARE DOING TO US. ALL THAT IS HOLY IS BEING DESTROYED. SOCIETY IS BREAKING DOWN. No.8424
>>8423So you deny that global society is collapsing due to climate change, and that the genocide of tens of millions is a ‘worst case scenario’ for most people?
No.8427
>>8426Not an argument :^)
No.8429
>>8424Why is capitalist society collapsing bad again?
No.8430
>>8424It is, and humanity will have to resolve the contradictions to exist. The paper tigers will be blown away, because they must for humanity to live.
Some people will die. It's always been this way. That's what motivates change.
No.8431
we should support the people that caused climate change to stop climate change guise
No.8433
>>8429Do you think the death of a large portion of the population of the world is a ‘worst case scenario’?
>>8430MLs will say this then cry about people not supporting china because ‘at least we are going somewhere’ x)
>>8431People who can effect change in charge > People who cannot effect change in charge, even if they are in many ways bad actors. Partially malicious yet effective > Ineffective. Change my mind.
No.8434
I cannot do things other than what I can do. The world is going to die and things are only going to get worse, but I can't protect more people than I already am. I cannot effectuate change beyond what I am already doing. I cannot combat the simulacra of the world more than what I strive to do every day. OP, you have to accept the absurdism of being a leftist. It is literally Albert Camus shit. The only way to have an actual conversation about this is if you stop Deleuze posting, stop using schizoanalysis, and stop changing the subject.
No.8436
>>8435its literally just a bunch of retards trying to bait each other for +50 posts LOL
No.8437
>>8434I already gave up leftism for post-left a long while ago. You people cling to a revolution that is never going to happen xd and ignore the reality of the situation. And any time anyone wants to actually talk about material conditions scientifically start screeching about ‘le Mao’ and re-iterating the most retarded outdated ideas that have been proven wrong through history.
No.8438
>>8434It's tragic that brainlets think Deleuze connects into any of the bullshit OP pulled out of his ass. Wow, he typed schizophrenic once!
No.8440
>>8438I am the epitome of the tragic figure, comrade. Thank you for noticing.
>>8437>you peopleAh yes, thank you, I see that dialogue is impossible still.
Can't win with either of y'all! heyyyyoooooo.
No.8441
>>8437another case of leftoid goes """post-left"""" (becomes a neocon)
No.8444
>>8392history is whenever men enter into relations to produce things not when things happen. this is marxism 101. read the German ideology you fucking retard
No.8446
>>8444>history is when men fight each otherLmao
No.8448
>>8405Typical bourgie behaviour to scream a dictator to save you when things look even a little grim.
No.8449
>>8445I don’t hate China. Most my friends are from China. I love China, and I think we should have a dictator-CEO from China, instead of an ineffective bourgeois partyism where nothing gets done and a bunch of imperialist infighting that will amount to nothing when the world collapses due to peak oil
No.8450
>>8448I don’t think a significant portion of the world dying off is ‘a little grim’ I think it’s an avoidable failure of engineering.
No.8451
>>8450What kind of imbecile thinks its "engineering" to have real political collective action to fix a problem?
No.8454
>>8452It's not ideology. It's what's happening lol
No.8455
>>8416Looking past the numerous dog whistles that crowd the OP and your science-will-save-us mentality, you are dead either way.
If the corporate CEO you admire does come to power, they will act in alignment with their material interests. Whatever bs they peddle about degrowth will never materialise. Even if they attempt to materialise it, they will be destroyed because the bourgeoisie is still the ruling class and this is against their interests. Extractive behaviour will continue until such time as it threatens them. By that time, the collapse will be too far along for any of us. Maybe a reason to support your scenario is to engender instability and division among the bourgeoisie, but no more
Catastrophic nuclear war – vanishing chance of survival, based on where the nukes fall
Your scenario – vanishing chance of survival, based on your privilege and relation to your anointed saviour
No theory to it, just pure emotion, but if we're going down either way I prefer the scenario in which the people who did this to us are more likely to be destroyed
No.8456
>>8454Nah, your revolution is never coming.
No.8457
>>8455Under a bourgeois democracy, there is absolutely nothing no one can do to degrow the economy. At least a dictator who has experience running a super-structure CAN do it, even if they may not. I think there’s a pretty easy decision between the two if we are talking about a last resort scenario.
No.8458
>>8457One is a slim chance of survival, the other is none. Nuclear war is incredibly destructive. Far more destructive in fact than what we are currently on a course to go through even through a climate crisis. But even then, I think there’s a pretty easy wager to make between no chance of survival due to bureaucratic fumbling vs. The likely chance of the dictator being retarded.
No.8459
This is just accelerationism with extra steps.
No.8460
>Teh left is doomed because my anarchist subsect of our bookclub hasn't achieved communism during the zenith of capitalism!!!
>Should we just give the fu k up, fellas?
No.8461
>>8459Accelerationism, like liberalism and run-of-the-mill leftist activism,still ends in mass genocide and global scale extinction events, which is precisely what I am looking to avoid here through any means.
No.8463
>>8461alllllllll weeeee are saaaaayinnnnnggggg
isssss give peace a chaaaaaaaaaaaance
No.8464
Very, very, very loosely I agree with you. There absolutely will come a fork-in-the-road point where only a few options remain. In the past, this has manifested as revolution-or-reaction. Now, it may manifest as reduction-or-reaction. Is that good - fuck no, but it might be the only thing left. It's the main two options posed as the only options in the American political system.
No.8465
>>8464Behold, a rational individual
No.8466
>>8465Your prose is getting much easier to digest, btw. I like seeing your writings. Even if they're a bit weird, they're thoughtprovoking.
No.8467
>>8462I find it funny how we much direct and sooner problems than green liberal climate hysteria. Maybe a corporate entity can fix that problem too.
No.8468
>>8462Will take decades to kill off a couple billion poor people, assuming no one decides to do some craze hecking science geoengineering or basically anything against it. I'd off myself if I doomed this bad. Should have included climate change more in the op btw.
No.8469
>>8456You can read the future?
No.8470
>>8466Yea, I’m making an attempt. This one was still rambly. Eventually I’ll figure out how to write well and then maybe leftypol will finally be able to understand that the fundamental issue I’m posing here is one of timeliness and the need to make sacrifices. No one wants to die for a ‘revolution’ that is never coming… We are at every moment losing the opportunity to have a solution to this problem, and moving further to a last-resort scenario: total dismantling of the bureaucratic leviathan, a dictatorship. Rationing, degrowth, enforced compliance, etc. Things are getting further from where they should be. MLs are still screeching, totally unaware of the fact that the world around them Is already too far gone to ‘save’ in the way that they might like. The anarcho-nihilists are along the right track, but I still think we can find a genuine engineered solution instead of totally giving up. It’s clear we can do SOME harm reduction, it’s just a matter of— how much?
Regardless, I think the time for socialism or barbarism might be coming to an end. Now it is just one evil vs a greater evil, and we have to talk about what we are willing to sacrifice.
No.8471
>>8446stop posting and kill yourself asap, you're the main ideological poison stopping actual revolutionary thought to occur with your dumb navel gazing
No.8472
>>8469There’s good models out there for the future of climate data. We are too late to save global society as it exists. The ‘multi-polarity’ you want is already too late to arrive (although it was already simply inter-imperialist conflict to begin with). This revolution is nowhere close to its entry onto the world stage, that’s obvious from the socioeconomic data. But the demolition of global society is already maybe inevitable.
>>8468I just thought it’s unnecessary to point out all the ways in which the world is already fucked bc its so obvious
No.8473
>>8471How exactly is your useless ‘activism’ not navel gazing? I’m trying to come up with a genuine engineered solution to prevent the deaths of billions, you’re focused instead on ideological purity. Get a life.
No.8475
>>8473You are not coming up with anything. Individuals do not make history but the masses do. Unless you plan on organizing a movement that'll wait for a crisis of capital to take political power, you are navel gazing.
>>8474Didn't say that. It's the depressed lefties that get inside organizations and disrupt organizing with their nonsense. I don't care that you are depressed. Communists can't be depressed. If you're a communist and you're depressed, you have completely missed the mark about what Marxism is and should appropriately ease the burden on all of us.
No.8476
>>8472Do you have sources to prove anything? I've read about climate change and it's not as bad as what you think. You're literally saying that all of humanity will die and it's already too late.
You're just some schizo screaming nonsense about the rapture. It's all in your fucking head. Take the meds.
No.8477
>>8475>I don't care that you are depressed. Communists can't be depressed. If you're a communist and you're depressed, you have completely missed the mark about what Marxism is and should appropriately ease the burden on all of us.No room for empathy I guess. Huh.
No.8478
>>8477Empathy is petite-bourgeois morality of good-doers and billionaires who donate a fraction of the fraction of their wealth. In the face of reaction, communists look for solutions, not empathy.
No.8480
>>8470Sacrifice is a tough pill to swallow for people. Leftist spaces (this site especially) still cling to the hope that revolution is inevitable that it will happen tomorrow, because they have nothing else to cling to. Harm reduction, even theoretically, sacrificing "ideological purity" also stings people. This place is all theoretical, anyway. I don't always agree with your work but I interact anyway because you're one of the only people actually putting in an effort to come up with new ideas.
also, omori mentioned No.8481
>>8478What the hell is the point of praxis and all this fucking theory if not for empathy with your fellow man? Why seize the means of production and have a dictatorship of the proletariat if you don't actually give a shit about the proletariat on a human level?
No.8482
>>8458I would agree with you that an overtly autocratic bourgeois dictatorship is preferable to a democratic one, because it does cast into sharper relief the contradictions of bourgeois rule. I also understand the calculus of uncertainty and risk here, even if my assessments differ because I have differently informed priors.
Where it seems we most disagree is (i) the ability of *any* bourgeois state to address the problem at hand, at least until such time that a critical mass of the bourgeoisie are directly threatened; and (ii) the feasibility of implementing your plan on any more an expedited timeline than (for instance) multipolarity – this for the same reason that it will simply not be possible until it gains sufficient currency among the bourgeoisie. It's hardly any easier to wave the dictator wand and give a few eccentric billionaires absolute power than it is to give the MLs power, because power comes from the social distribution of material. And so how are we not back to square one – how to overcome this?
No.8483
>>8481You're misunderstanding, and on purpose. Not to mention introducing these holy cows like "empathy." Stop thinking in bourgeois categories. Love for fellow men? Is the bourgeois a fellow man? Is the fascist a fellow man? No. I have empathy for the working class, not this Man you call him. You are so far deep up your ideological ass you can't even see that you are repeating Feuerbach's ideas. Now start thinking in actual historical terms and apply dialectics and you'll see that communists have no moral compass as to why they are communists, but they see the contradictions of capitalist society and the goal is resolving them, because that's the actual movement of history. Communism is not empathy for the holy Man, it is men consciously making history.
No.8484
If anything, the doomsday and the fascism we assume will arise will push people even further towards revolution. When supply lines collapse, they'll have to rise up to live. Simple dialectics
No.8485
>>8484It really is. People here don't seem to understand what historical materialism is. Men do not want productive forces to be destroyed, whenever they were being destroyed, rebellions rose. If push comes to shove and the proletariat is forced against the wall, it will either organize itself under the leadership of the most class conscious stratum of the proletariat or it will perish, as history has shown already.
No.8486
>>8475‘The masses make history’ is not Historical Materialism., you are actually so stupid.
No.8487
>>8486Did not say that. Dumb asshole.
No.8488
>>8476Not all of humanity, but society will be unrecognisable to what it is today, yet you tools are still bickering about ‘critical support for DPRK’ lmao
>>8478Go outside, touch grass.
No.8489
>>8483I greatly appreciate you explaining that to me. It was the bit I never quite understood. I thought all this shit was about trading coats for bolts of linen.
No. No. I'm joking, I got way further than chapter 3.
No.8490
>>8475>>8487>Individuals do not make history but the masses doLol
No.8492
>>8489It seems that you didn't learn anything then and all that time is wasted. Sit down, shut up and listen when an actual proletarian from the Third World explains how things work, crackkka.
No.8493
>>8491Master slave dialectic? What the fuck are you even talking about? You keep spouting these meaningless liberal terms.
No.8494
>>8482I don’t think any bourgeois state can address the problem at hand, since the state is totally clogged up in bureaucracy. However, I think CEO’s still have retained enough dictatorial power that they could be able to enact a radical degrowth plan under the necessary timeframe to drastically reduce the pain. As for feasibility, I think it’s far more feasible to go in this direction because I think capitalism is already tending towards further centralisation and accumulation. It always has been, as it’s the nature of capital to accumulate. I find ‘multi-polarity’ weird because of that reason. It goes against the tendencies of capital to centralise. Seems like an uphill battle to me
No.8495
>>8493Everybody please laugh at the pseudo-Marxist who doesn’t know what the original philosophical dialectic underpinning dialectical materialism was called
No.8496
>>8493Don't listen to them. At this point they're just wrecking this board and poisoning discussion with their utopian socialism and true communism. It's fucking annoying that mods don't nuke anfem threads whenever they are posted on leftypol. At the very least redirect them to siberia.
No.8497
>>8492This has to be bait right ? You make your movement look so dumb
No.8498
>>8495Can you actually explain what you mean?
No.8499
>>8497>This has to be bait right I ask myself the very same question whenever I see your threads.
No.8500
>>8498It's a Hegel joke. Cuz Marx wrote in response to Hegel.
No.8501
>>8498The premise which underpins the assumption
>>8484 is a belief in the validity of Hegel’s master-slave dialectic, under which the slave attains self-consciousness through their repression as they acquire the skills and actually are the ones producing through labour, and so the master stagnates whilst the slave attains wisdom. Marx extends this and extrapolates it into ‘therefore that will lead to progress of history through struggle between the two’. But the universal application of the master-slave dialectic to everything as if it’s some law of history, or that it has to always occur in its entirety and can never be interrupted (for example, through the collapse of society due to other material conditions that aren’t ‘class based’, like the fact that we are killing the planet) is basically infantile ideological purism
No.8502
>i know what i'm saying is dumb and schizo, and very much neo-reactionary
At least you're self-conscious enough to realize this. And you know what happens to reactionaries and people calling themselves shizo - a remnant of right-wing meme culture where dumb ideas are taken to be valid because they're hecking shizo and so fricking esoteric.
No.8503
>>8499Your revolution is still never coming dummy
No.8504
>>8503Okay? Never said it will come. A revolution presupposes many things besides tensions between labor and capital. You should stop straw-manning and actually read people who did something tangible to the communist movement and learn from them, not a bunch of French jack-offs and Western left-liberals pretending to be communists. You know Marx saw communism and practical materialism to be the same thing? So if you're just thinking about this holy History you presume, you're not even close to getting it.
No.8505
>>8502I am light years ahead of you in critique, and even more light years ahead of you in self-critique <3
>>8504So we agree your revolution is never coming. U might wanna sit this one out mister ‘history is made by the masses, also idc if a large portion of the world dies bc of ecological collapse + fascism’
No.8506
I'm thankful anfem posts their threads every so often. Gives me a chance to hone my skills and get into the mind of the wrecker. It's the reason our org is ideological strong and clean, not filled to the brim with utopians.
No.8507
>>8505Head full of air and of your holy Opinions. Individualism seeping from your ears. Petite-bourgeois excellence emanates from this post. Great example. Frustrating, but great. Hope you grow up and start engaging with the real world. Log off, touch grass and talk to people. Nihilism is reactionary and destructive.
No.8508
>>8501It's not the master slave dialectic, or whatever nonsense you're talking about. It's simple fact.
If I set you on fire with gasoline and a lighter, then you would have to jump into the lake to live.
You could conceptualize this within an 'ideological' dialectical framework, but it's still objective fact.
No.8509
>>8507‘History is made by the masses, idc how many people die I’m not doing harm reduction, I have to remain ideologically pure and support china even tho it wont even exist in 30 years!’ - average terminally online marxist-leninist
No.8510
>>8508It’s sooo wild to me that you hear ‘dialectical materialist’ and go oooo pog!!! New Nintendo switch!!!
But you hear ‘master-slave dialectic’ and ur like ‘fuck off with that bs’ even tho its literally the underpinning of ur entire ideology T_T
No.8511
OP is disgusting because the poster knows better.
No.8512
And another thing. Anfem never, and I mean never, engages with any posts "critically" (as they say) except those who agree with them. Those who call them out - they get the seal of approval, the snarky one liner, the reduction to platitudes.
>>8509Stop straw-manning and actually read Marx you dumb utopian kid. You are not worth my time anymore. I'm taking my melatonin and going to sleep.
No.8513
>>8512It’s not my fault that no one who disagrees with me ever writes an intelligent post
No.8515
>>8510So, because it's conceptualized with dialectics then it must be untrue and a false ideological claim?
No.8516
>>8515No? Never said that. I said you’re applying it where it doesn’t work. The master-slave dialectic doesn’t apply in a case where the slave dies before they can revolt. This can happen, you know. Marxism isn’t a teleological affair, it’s a method of historical critique. History must be understood backwards, but it can only be lived forwards. There is more to the story in this case, namely that we are heading towards a global collapse, so there is a ‘disruption event’ in your simplified dialectical representation of history. The relation becomes ruptured and never finishes. That is, presuming it even happens in the first place, and I think universalising the master-slave dialectic is childish.
No.8517
>>8516Can you show me data that proves that climate change will kill us all before we can over throw the capitalists
No.8518
>>8516>There is more to the story in this case, namely that we are heading towards a global collapseThis is literally eschatologicism for the XXI century. And you call yourself the One True Marxist. Lol. Lmao.
No.8519
>>8517Before you were saying that climate change wouldn't kil us all, just capitalist society.
Now you are saying that climate change WILL kill us all.
No.8520
>>8516Marx’s point was never ‘revolution is inevitable’. Marx’s point was just to describe the pressures of economic relations. We are seeing now that revolution is not going to happen, and that the modern choice (as for now) is not one of socialism or barbarism, but rather global society will disunity into a pluralistic post-civ future. How it will look is how we need to determine now, instead of continuing to just look at the present and at the current inter-imperialist conflict, which isnt going to last.
No.8523
>>8521You keep saying that applying dialectics is for infantiles and the conclusions made from doing so are worthless. It's just a method of conceptualizing facts. You may believe that the method is for infantiles, but it doesn't change the facts.>>1497553
No.8524
>>8518No it’s not actually. I am not saying ‘there is no after’. I am saying you are not THINKING about the after. My brain works many levels above yours. You are stuck in conflicts of the present, I am thinking of conflicts of the future, and in how to navigate the future pluralistic post-global society, as well as how we can disunity global society safely so as to reduce harm as much as possible as we enter into a new dialectic.
No.8525
>>8522Where is the data from primary academic sources to back these words
No.8526
>>8523I never said the former. I agree with what ur saying that it doesn’t change the facts. But it also isn’t a useful model for looking at the locus of history right NOW, because things are already changing drastically..
No.8527
>>8525The citation is in Desert. You should read it, it’s better than doing it through an offhand internet discussion.
No.8529
>>8527How long do we have then
No.8530
>>8488>society will be unrecognisable to what it is today good uygha, society as it exists today is literally the bourgeoisie enjoying the fruits of a socialized economy while proles eat dirt and are humiliated daily, if socialism comes at the price of a revolutionary holocaust then I will welcome it
No.8531
>>8529We’re already too late to save it, we’re in harm reduction phase. 30-50 years before the collapse enters full swing probably
No.8532
>>8530Please, touch some grass. We are not talking about le revolutionary holocaust. We are talking about a regular holocaust.
No.8533
>>8531Give me the quantitative evidence from multiple sources to back this baseless qualitative claim.
No.8535
>>8533You know climate science this isnt exactly fringe science right ? Google nasa climate data projections
No.8536
>>8535No evidence? As expected from someone who holds post-left gobbledygook in such high regar. Every Marxist cites data (sometimes too pedantically) but anarchist-nihilists never do. You know why? Cause your just a bunch brats
No.8537
>>8536In the biz we call this ‘bad faith’. It is common knowledge that the world is currently hurtling towards climate catastrophe. Don’t see what this has to do with ‘post-left’ or ‘nihilism’ you weirdo.
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/16/is-it-too-late-to-prevent-climate-change/https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2108146119https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/It’s retarded that I have to get these sources for common knowledge for you. It’s akin to
>gravity predicts this>SOURCE THAT GRAVITY EXISTS???It reminds me of back in the day when creationists would ask for a source on the most basic accepted science! You’re an embarrassment to the left.
No.8538
>>8534I’m a irl girl and I think you nazis should Kill yourselves NOW
No.8539
>you come under the belief that predatory multinational CEO's are a much more efficient force for change in the world, as well as, as a group, generally far more progressive than the governments which 'rule over them'
lol they're the ones that tell the governments what to do though.
But seriously if you feel like this then just focus on living a good life if you can.
No.8540
>>8539Yeah but Here’s some Facts
1. The development of material conditions is heading towards dissolution of the global order in favour of a post-civ pluralism
2. Many will die in the process
3. The state apparatus is incapable of dealing with this problem
I think on the other hand, the philosopher-queen-ceo will save us …. I have faith in the cross-pollinated network spiritual multi cardinal syncardial philosopher-ceo alliance I believe in hot girl summer… I’m just a silly little fragment of the leviathan… I have an anti-matter collider cannon pointed at u, it accelerates positrons straight at ur HEART. We are gonna produce so much raw energy, so much Desire, thats what life is all about. We have to save the flowers. Save the bees Nature is so good. Summer is so good. Life is so g ood!!!
No.8541
>>8535I read enough of Desert. No wonder the utopian anarchist lunatic who wrote this published it anonymously. None of the sources cited are primary sources. None of the sources provide academic quantitative evidence. The sources are all secondary sources that derrive their claims from outdated primary sources. The claims made are thusly riddled with errors and oversimplifications.
The entire text is just the shit scrawled writings of a madman on an asylum wall. The revolution that that the utopian lunatic describes is some explicitly anarchist revolution that will never happen. It's literally just some anarchist coming to terms with reality.
Did you even read this shit?
<Unfortunately, in most places, rebel movements are more likely to be statist than anarchist. This is partly thanks to the large number of established authoritarian political gangs compared to libertarian ones, but also because in extreme situations people turn to extremist solutions. In some places this might be self-organisation, decentralisation and mutual aid, but in many there will be no social solution possible, just the false promises of despots and prophets. That’s not to say we couldn’t compete with them by spreading rival millennial hopes of a new dawn, but if we are honest with ourselves, having thrown aside religion, it would be a travesty of our ethics to pick it up again in the cause of gang recruitment and the joy of trouble. No.8542
>>8540Well this is a bunch of psychobabble but I'm glad it gets you horny anyways. But seriously if you end up fighting for the corporats rather than the people when shit goes down I will end you.
No.8543
>>8541>None of the sources cited are primary sources that provide academic quantitative evidence, they’re all secondary sourcesCan’t argue with some1 this stupid actually genuinely
No.8544
>>8542I’m fighting for everyone for real <3
No.8545
>>8543What I said was valid.
No.8546
>>8545Aaand your response to all these primary sources?
>>8537 since you are arbitrarily rejecting secondary sources ? Even tho for the record the secondary sources cited in Desert are by the authors who did the original primary work IN climate science………. And even though there actually is primary data there but maybe if you haven’t noticed that’s not the point of the text, since it assumes a basic understanding of the science…?
No.8547
>>8544Hey now, no empathy in this thread! Loving other people isn't allowed! Mutual aid will not help the revolution! Only the logical application of the throws of history in which social groups vie for power to the material conditions in a pure logos is allowed in this thread.
No.8548
>>8547I’m a silly love/acc Maxxie -> infinity.I live/acc, laugh/acc, love/acc. We don’T do dick measuring contests. We do heart measuring contests. If u lose the game, you get absorbed into another person. A total seduction -> bio-mimicry
No.8549
>>8548>If u lose the gamefuck, bros… I lost the game.
No.8550
>>8546Only one of those is a primary source. The other two are secondary.
I never denied climate change. I am only criticizing Desert, which you referred me to.
Obviously Desert is not an academic or scientific text. It doesn't presuppose scientific knowledge. This was written for anarchists. It's just the shit scrawled writings of a madman on an asylum wall.
No.8551
>>8550The first is a nasa article with no links to the primary source that provides the quantitative data.
The second is.
The third is a secondary source
Pull your head out of your ass
No.8552
>>8550>>8551you’ve convinced me that talking to you about anything pertaining to reality is not worth my time. Well done
No.8553
>>8552Yeah this whole thread is based on nothing but an idea in your head. Same to you
No.8555
>>8552now you know how everyone else feels when seeing ur threads
No.8556
>>8554ur rehashing class collaborationism but with an eco spin, wowowwwwowoow
No.8557
>>8554The first source is a summary with no links to primary sources
The third source is a press release
This is not creativity. This is lunacy. You are an ancap
<might such a person start to critically support a kind of formalist corporate anarchy, under which the state's power is dissolved (or at least, the power of monopoly issuance is shifted into the hands of these billionaires) in order to concentrate real power in the hands of more effective and competent figures? obviously not whilst eschewing other forms of anti-hierarchical action and radical anti-civ/anti-capitalist/radfem/eco-extremist/whatever-you-like dissent. many have expressed the desire to take drastic action towards saving the world– if these people were in charge of lawmaking, not only would they be able to expedite the process of lawmaking, but have much more expertise in governance. do we really have the time as a species to spend on bourgeois democracy right now– OR on the vapid activism and slow-moving cold war of intra-imperialist conflicts? No.8559
>>8422wage labour is slavery, lib
No.8561
>>8558yeah basically. i see guys in the /ukraine/ thread act like climate change isn't a problem at all and that the global south can just wage unlimited genocide on the global north to bring about communism with no consequences at all on a shared planet.
No.8563
>>8422Someone pls post the Frederick Douglas quote on wage slavery
No.8564
>>8376This thought experiment is based on a fundamentally backwards idea, that the predatory multinational CEOs are ruled over by the governments of the world, rather than being the powers behind the thrones and the primary drivers of climate change.
>you come under the belief that predatory multinational CEO's are a much more efficient force for change in the world, as well as, as a group, generally far more progressive than the governments which 'rule over themThis is an utterly erroneous belief. The billionaires of this world are a very specific group of self-selected hungry sociopaths, whose sole motivation is to grow their wealth until the day they die. Men born into overwhelming privilege, who then took that inherited power and wealth and used it to step on everyone in their way until they became one of the richest men in the history of humanity. They buy legislators like they're government bonds and warp policy around themselves like a black hole drawing all towards its gravitational center, and they have led us to the precipice of global collapse, knowing full well that they will shuffle off the mortal coil before it all falls apart.
>might such a person start to critically support a kind of formalist corporate anarchy, under which the state's power is dissolved (or at least, the power of monopoly issuance is shifted into the hands of these billionaires) in order to concentrate real power in the hands of more effective and competent figures?Capitalism IS statism, there is no such thing as corporate anarchy. All this would really result in is oil barons buying hordes of mercenaries to replace the police force they previously had to protect themselves from disgruntled workers.
Yes, we are inching towards the apocalypse year after year. Yes, bourgeoise democracy is incapable of preventing it. No, this is not a bug, but a feature, and it's a feature that the parasitic bourgeoisie has no intention of sacrificing in the name of future generations - you will not find willing recipients for your corporate anarchy among corporations. The bourgeoisie WILL leech every drop of life on this planet for just one more yacht if they can get away with it, and whether or not they can is going to depend on how organized the working class is by the time we're teetering on the edge of oblivion. Such is the nature of collapse and rebellion.
>>8377Fascism IS the corporate capitalists, and I refuse to believe you actually don't understand this.
No.8565
>>8561truly dumb post made by a western neet leftist. maybe the global south, 80% of the global population, should hold off on revolution because western climate warriors are worried about climate change. get your priorities right.
No.8566
>>8565Climate change will make zones around the equator uninhabitable for humans so the third world has the most to loose from it, but they should actually prioritize revolution so the north and China can't use them for imperialist extraction anymore, this way they could develop healthy economies while the global economy would slow down and stop emitting so much carbon dioxide.
No.8567
>>8566>they should actually prioritize revolution so the north and China can't use them for imperialist extraction anymoresafer just to join BRICS and participate in a managed dedollarization and dewesternization of the global economy. less chance of coup.
No.8569
>>8567lol no BRICS is not even an organization, it's a meeting of wannabe capitalist superpowers that are each out for themselves but have the common goal of contesting American hegemony, it's not something you "join". The only country that is extremely threatened by global warming in this group and that would eventually take drastic actions against it is India btw and they are in bed with the west.
No.8570
>>8568None of those things are positive in themselves. Stop clinging to false hope that history will just sort itself out.
No.8571
>>8570it obviously won't. thoughever better political conditions are coming and we can use those to our advantage as leftists. even climate change can be an opportunity comrade
No.8572
>>8501Let me be clear of your term.
>The conclusion of the slave-master dialect; >aka the system will grant consiousness to the workers because capitalism design of inifinte growth on a finite planet with people, and designed to have infinite competition despite clearly studied wealth competition occuring, both of which leads to the system undergoing to more and more frequent crisis, leading to the system to make the workers bail it out (aka a wealth transference), while also deepening its level of exploitation, will in a result lead to the workers realizing that the system can't work and they must choose being murdered by the system, or change society and possible be murdered earlier; >the analysis based on a scientific (testable) approach, based on the physical world (materialism), and categorizing the analysis based off the thinking of processes (dialects);>the analysis comonly misinturpreted as a science like how math is a science. Your counter, (correct me if I'm wrong), is:
>the universal application of the master-slave dialectic to everything as if it’s some law of history<even though it was never used as some law but rather a framework in analyzing the worldand
>or that it has to always occur in its entirety and can never be interruptedalternatively
>Resistance to the growing consiousness can't occur, or the world can't be destroyed before <even though the interruptions, which are in wanting to reverse the stage of capitalism to a more competitive moment of its existence, even if successful, will just lead the system to develop and go back to a stage in which massive crisis will occur again <and the attack against workers developing class consiousness won't work since with the further deepening of crisis and exploitation, the worker will know that the one progressive system has now over stayed its welcome. <Then the world going into extinction, something that can't be done since those who want to continue capitalism the most, the bougeosis, the same class that has nothing to escape the planet, want the world to continue so they can keep said ownership. I don't understand your point, or your aggression.
There can't be an infinte capitalism; fascism is nothing but a temporary solution for the bougeosis; global warming, a non-human ending issues, that
absolutely should be fought against and if possible ended before its massive destuction occurs; and the owning class can't escape to another planet and continue capitalism there.
It's like taking the doomer thinking of the frog in the pot experiment to its extreme – an experiment that was made with a frog without a brain, and when retested found that the (full brain) frog always jumped out when the water was too hot.
Processes change and go into different stages; the workers will crack – just as a road will crack and break after years of trucks driving over it despite suface analysis giving you the idea that they will last forever.
>>8521Other than the gaia argument, why?
I don't know much about the book, I genuinely don't know.
>>8522>>8531Let me be clear: I'm only a computer scientist (software engineer to be more specific).
But this analysis of the world seems to be still debated about, as seen here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_philosophy#Range_of_viewsUnless there is a strong reasoning behind this theory being correct – something I can't say on either, nor know if there is one – then I don't agree with the argument that: a communist revolution occuring because of developed class consiousness, will not actually happen.
Nor do I see handwaving and cherrypicking with these responses:
>>8543>>8546>>8552>>8554 Last one though can easily be someone using their flag.
Maybe if you're going to debate people in the thread you use that tag+name trick,
(I don't remember what it's called, or how to do it).
No.8573
>>8376>suppose that you're a believer that all the current forms of 'activist' leftism are failing and we are running out of time, and you come under the belief that predatory multinational CEO's are a much more efficient force for change in the world, as well as, as a group, generally far more progressive than the governments which 'rule over them'. suppose that you believe the world is already moving towards a state of increasingly centralised and interconnected capitalism. suppose that you are desperate for a solution to the climate crisis, and believe that we instantly require drastic action before global society itself collapses (and perhaps it will anyway, and simply we can only reduce the damage as much as possible). might such a person start to critically support a kind of formalist corporate anarchy, under which the state's power is dissolved (or at least, the power of monopoly issuance is shifted into the hands of these billionaires) in order to concentrate real power in the hands of more effective and competent figures?I'm a lifelong liberal in my 30s and you pretty much summed up my philosophy, minus dissolving state power. I still find states important. They're just often very inefficient and ineffective. (I don't necessarily even advocate for small government. I just acknowledge the difficulties and weaknesses when it comes to getting things done.)
>obviously not whilst eschewing other forms of anti-hierarchical action and radical anti-civ/anti-capitalist/radfem/eco-extremist/whatever-you-like dissent.So dissent for dissent's sake? Why all this obsession on being "a rebel"? It almost seems like it's just aesthetic for you. Not to be uncharitable but one can easily read this as wanting to be radical simply because it's cooler than being one of those normie NPC sheeplols.
And you just admitted the value in some level of hierarchy! The issue with hierarchy is when it actually imposes restrictions on your rights or tries to push you to act or be a certain way. Especially in your daily life. (So, I'm definitely not a conservative or traditionalist.) When it comes to who makes decisions and who doesn't, a mix of hierarchy and decentralization/democracy generally works best. This is why the concept of corporations structured in a hierarchical top-down manner will always persist. And in any organization without a formal, de jure hierarchy, a de facto one will almost always form. Valve's famous flat hierarchy just leads to a different sort of nebulous shadow hierarchy:
https://archive.is/BrIP1In any hypothetical communistic and/or anarchistic society, you will almost certainly see similar dynamics play out. If there's no de jure structure, things will eventually converge on a de facto one, which may be a lot less accountable and a lot more harmful than if you just had the de jure one.
Also, what you describe reminds me a little of Silicon Valley rhetoric. Or Thielism/Yarvinism without so much of the anti-democracy/monarchy stuff.
No.8574
>>8570>None of those things are positive in themselves. Stop clinging to false hope that history will just sort itself out.It's all teams and factions. America/first world bad, communists/China good. (As an illuminated centerist I'd say obviously all four are bad.)
No.8575
>>8573>So dissent for dissent's sake? Why all this obsession on being "a rebel"? It almost seems like it's just aesthetic for you. Not to be uncharitable but one can easily read this as wanting to be radical simply because it's cooler than being one of those normie NPC sheeplols.I think hierarchy is bad. I don't really care about being 'different' or whatever you're implying. I dislike how hierarchy makes society ugly.
>And you just admitted the value in some level of hierarchy!In order to avoid a worse hierarchy
>The issue with hierarchy is when it actually imposes restrictions on your rights or tries to push you to act or be a certain way.That is the essence of hierarchy
>In any hypothetical communistic and/or anarchistic society, you will almost certainly see similar dynamics play out. If there's no de jure structure, things will eventually converge on a de facto one, which may be a lot less accountable and a lot more harmful than if you just had the de jure one.I don't necessarily disagree but I also think this analysis is shallow.
>Also, what you describe reminds me a little of Silicon Valley rhetoric. Or Thielism/Yarvinism without so much of the anti-democracy/monarchy stuff.Yeah I recently was reading Moldbug.
Unique IPs: 23