/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain't driving 20 minutes to riot."

Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 80.00 MB

Max files: 5


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Matrix: https://www.riot.im/app/#/room/!BnDgjhpLxZoHFVlyFA:matrix.org Onion Address: 3uruyn3iu4vqpbo2mx2s2qatourvgtzpadzlvdxo5trxe6zldp5tjcyd.onion Twitter: https://twitter.com/bunkerchanLP

(53.09 KB 651x679 cat reading marx.jpg)
For New Anons and Lurkers: FAQ, rules, and reading list Comrade 08/05/2019 (Mon) 07:32:55 No. 8537
Guide for new Anons: https://bunkerchan.xyz/.media/72a78f39a9a53439bf2bdc6aeb272f7e-imagepng.png Groups: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org http://steamcommunity.com/groups/leftypol http://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=leftypol Leftybooru: https://leftypics.booru.org/ FAQ: >How can you call yourselves leftist politically incorrect? /leftypol/ posters are allowed to voice opinions that offend liberals, SJWs, and so on. All sects on the left are allowed to post on /leftypol/, leading to plenty of fighting and shitflinging between leftists, which other forums might ban. However, this was only a minor consideration in the naming of /leftypol/. Since the concept is simply a leftist version of /pol/, the entire name of /pol/ was retained. >I'm not a leftist can I post here? Non-leftists can come here to ask questions. Board moderation here is more focused on maintaining a good board index, so non-leftists have to be on better behavior as OP than they do as participants in someone else's thread. If you aren't b8ing or shitposting, your thread is likely to stay up. >Are you liberals? Are you SJWs? Do you like Clinton? Are you all Zionists??? No liberals here. We hate the Democrat party. As for Israel, leftism is anti-Zionist. It is not anti-Jew. Unlike /pol/, /leftypol/ fully supports Palestinians, and doesn't think they're "mudslimes". Pretending to be an SJW or Zionist will very likely get you banned. >Why did you leave /pol/ and why does this board exist? /leftypol/ existed to help the 8chan community focus on leftist topics without being slid or flooded to death, and now has moved to Bunkerchan as constant alt-right chud murderers and Qanon boomers killed 8chan. >Do you support gun control? While posters on /leftypol/ have varying stances on gun control (training requirements, mental health checks, etc.), they are overwhelmingly in favor of arming the proletariat. >Do you support "national" socialism? No.
Edited last time by pask on 04/17/2020 (Fri) 09:58:39.
Comrades, the time has come. During the last few years I've been saving and collecting thousands of pdfs and it's time to share them with you, especially since I've noticed that there are a lot of newfags joining the board recently. Some of these were actually uploaded years ago, but I had not shared them with anyone until now. I'd recommend that you don't skip any of them even if they're not your specific ideology because they all have lots of interesting stuff. If anyone has more links with pdfs, feel free to post them here. Enjoy! >The Leftist Bookshelf (4.16 GB, 600+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!QUFQSBja!hPbmmLolJBGwSQ848nncnw This was originally a torrent but I can't find the link anymore. Its description was: "640 eBooks, mostly in PDF format (a bunch are CHM, DJVU or ePUB), from a revolutionary Leftist viewpoint. The main subjects are politics and philosophy, history, economics, and much much more." >Political Theory (MLM) (2.64 GB, 550+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!4M1FnTgI!CdM8WWjpBC_UHGCJk9AHzA I found this on reddit years ago (circa 2016) Don't really remember who made it or where it came from, but this is a reading course (politics, philosophy, economics, etc) focused on Maoism. Has many books and articles on the USSR, PRC, Stalin, Mao, etc. >The Anarchist Library (669 MB, 4000+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!gRFkQCLY!5gUkmaubpp_P_yKLZiBJ9Q This is a complete mirror of the anarchist library with pdfs and epubs >Little Bunker of Marxism-Leninism (680 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!0QtCiI7L!MJZJk-SdjyBuBZOuNJuOPQ Unfinished project focused on M-L with more than 100 books on several topics like history, economics, politics, etc. Lots of stuff on the USSR. >Historical Materialism series (330 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!9IkymYBZ!B8vB2yDP0Qv_-DPS2ro-HA A pdf archive of over 100 books from the Historical Materialism book series. I got this from thecharnelhouse.org years ago and the website had released many marxist books from other publishers but unfortunately it's been taken down. >/leftypol/ with a slash of liberty (239 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!sFMQXJ6J!JboByVCZScC6Jq2YXE0Exw I didn't make this, just reuploading it. This is a classic /leftypol/ link, marxist stuff mixed with anarchism. >Marx & Engels Collected Works (900+ MB, 50 files) https://mega.nz/#F!BJEmkQiZ!vylIbCWFrqIeYaLiuN2szg The official, complete works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels organized in 50 volumes and 3 categories.
Edited last time by antious666 on 03/09/2020 (Mon) 02:22:31.
Inequality in general is so much worse than most people realize and there's plenty of information that proves it. So, where to start? The ultra-rich are hoarding as much as $32 trillion ($32,000,000,000,000) in offshore accounts to avoid taxes. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-offshore-wealth-idUSBRE86L03U20120722 ) As a way to understand just how much 32 trillion is, let's use time as an example. One million seconds is 12 days, and one billion seconds is 31.7 years. That's already a massive difference between a million and a billion, but how much is 32 trillion seconds? It's over a million years. Most people know that wealth inequality is a huge issue, but they don't understand just how bad it is. Here's an example: If you had a job that paid you $2,000 an hour, and you worked full time (40 hours a week) with no vacations, and you somehow managed to save all of that money and not spend a single cent of it, you would still have to work more than 25,000 years until you had as much money as Jeff Bezos. I've been researching this issue for years because I was shocked at just how bad it really is, and I've put together some information to help illustrate it. IMF study on the concept of 'trickle-down economics' https://qz.com/429487/a-new-imf-study-debunks-trickle-down-economics/ Graphs: Possibly the most important graph ever: productivity is increasing but wages are stagnant, all the profit is going to the wealthy https://i.postimg.cc/Qtv9Sh1R/Screen-Shot-2013-03-08-at-11-36-19-AM.png Distribution of U.S. income https://i.postimg.cc/HLsykSTP/OSX-Ethics-08-04-Avg-Income.jpg Distribution of average U.S. income growth during expansions https://i.postimg.cc/Qdq7sLZT/qDWnA4s.jpg Income inequality in the U.S. compared to western Europe https://i.postimg.cc/XYW5TjmW/inequality.jpg Inequality is still an issue in Europe though, here's the distribution of German wealth https://i.postimg.cc/DZwSd504/screen-shot-2018-01-31-at-12-07-49-am.png U.S. economic mobility compared to other developed countries https://i.postimg.cc/j5DnzLwH/Relative-Social-Mobility-of-Wealthy-Nations-2-1024x639.jpg https://gfycat.com/fakecandiddungbeetle Taxes for the richest Americans have plummeted over the last 50 years Amazing info-graphic about U.S. economics over time https://i.redd.it/e8t78dn0d5h21.png In addition to all of that, there's another layer of inequality as well https://i.redd.it/e4uoe4w8z6r31.jpg Videos: A fantastic video that quickly illustrates wealth inequality in America https://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM How American CEOs got so rich https://youtu.be/ylLTMYt24lA What corporations want has more of an effect on U.S. law than what the public wants https://youtu.be/5tu32CCA_Ig The origins of conservatism https://youtu.be/E4CI2vk3ugk Neoliberalism explained https://youtu.be/7gQFvf19Jec Why inequality matters https://youtu.be/XLJl0AdhPjE Beware fellow plutocrats: pitchforks are coming https://youtu.be/q2gO4DKVpa8 Rich people don't create jobs https://youtu.be/CKCvf8E7V1g What the 1% don't want you to know https://youtu.be/QzQYA9Qjsi0 The Money Masters https://youtu.be/HBk5XV1ExoQ?t=22 Articles: Study shows it's better to be born dumb and rich than poor and smart https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/12/would-you-rather-be-born-smart-or-rich/281828/ Small farms are being consolidated up into big agriculture https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/07/23/concentration-in-u-s-agriculture/ "Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/goldman-asks-is-curing-patients-a-sustainable-business-model.html This scientific study concluded that banks can create money out of thin air https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001070 Being poor reduces your odds of being in a relationship https://www.bbc.com/news/business-40894089 Peasants had less work time than you http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html A few families in Canada own as much wealth as 3 provinces in Canada https://globalnews.ca/news/4360299/wealth-inequality-canada/
Edited last time by antious666 on 03/17/2020 (Tue) 19:39:56.
Seems like it's not possible to upload more than ~18MB at a time
Yeah, for me all in depth theory is fucking boring. I will never read Capital, ok you fucking nerds? History is far more informative anyway.
You really should read Kapital though. OR at least watch videos about it.
EPUB files. You'll need Calibre or Microsoft Edge to open these
Classical Econophysics - Cockshott et al
The Philosophy of the Encounter - Althusser
for history books then
Contending Economic Theories - Wolff
Another View of Stalin - Losurdo (Translated)
Arguments for Socialism - Cockshott
The Classics:
Red Star Over China
LTV Correction on Categories of Transformation - Ian Wright
Labour Values, Prices of Production - German Economy
Is there are /leftypol/ approved "Capital for retards"?
another good China book:
China Shakes the World

PhilosophyTube is pretty good, not perfect but good.
Communications: A Blindspot of Marxism
Weird Scenes in the Canyon (conspiracy theories about Rock music)
JFK and the Unspeakable
The Message is Murder
The Cinematic Mode of Production
^ two books from same author about the spectacle

History of Bourgeois Perception
Malcolm X Speaks
NATO's Secret Armies / GLADIO
The Prehistory of Language
Caliban and the Witch (Marxist feminist lit)
Coming of the Third Reich
Governance of China (Xi's book)
Letzte Aufzeichnungen - Erich Honecker (it's in German)
STASI: Sword and Shield of the Party
Antifascism and Memory in East Germany: Remembering the International Brigades 1945-1989
personally recommend season 1 of Marx Madness as they go through almost every chapter of volume 1
any books written by / about Thomas Sankara?
Most important Freud book is the one by Frederick Crews tbh. It's on libgen.
stephen resnick does a good job explaining marx's economic concepts
On Guerilla Warfare
On Practice and Contradiction (w/foreword by Zizek)
Quotations from Mao Zedong
Yes, if someone reads the Crews book, they'll be able to clog up threads about psychoanalysis and Freudo-Marxism with posts about Freud and cocaine ad nauseum.
Keywords: The New Language of Capitalism
A Reader's Guide to Marx's Capital
The Selected Works of Eugene V. Debs
(157.79 KB 1191x871 davidharvey.jpg)
David Harvey's lectures + his companion to Capital.
Tried uploading five .pdfs at a time, didn’t work. Can uploading one work?
Upload is limited by total file size. Around 18MB it craps out.
Oh, and also no more than 3 files at a time
It actually shits itself at 15+ MB.
Reading lists I saved that were posted originally on /marx/ and /marxism/ (although some of them are probably or certainly from /leftypol/)
Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR
Dialectical and Historical Materialism
Daily Life in the Soviet Union
Posting "The Anatomy of Fascism" by Robert Paxton.
Lenin's Moscow
Inside Lenin's Government
Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin, important AnarchoCommunist literature
The Revolution Betrayed
Stalin – An Appraisal of the Man and his Influence
Statism and Anarchy
God and the State
On Anarchism
Is there anything actually important in Kapital that can't be gleamed from Wage Labor and Capital + Value Price and Profit?
Yes, everything. I know we post WLC and VPP as "intros," but honestly you don't really understand them unless you read Capital (or at least some other big classical political econ book). It's a bit circular.
Capital is incredibly important for dozens of reasons. It explains how capitalism works, it contains a history of capitalism and class struggle, it teaches dialectical materialism by example, it touches on ecology, the list goes on... and that's just in Vol 1.
One big reason communists have to read Capital is that one of their central arguments is that YOU CAN'T REFORM CAPITALISM. Well, how do they know that? Why can't socdems win and give us ethical capitalism? If you don't understand political economy, you will end up accidentally conceding on dozens of points of bourgeois ideology. Lefts who don't read Capital are especially vulnerable to Keynesianism.
Doesn't he say that Marx doesn't have a labor theory of value though?
In my own opinion, this is little reason to discount some of the commentary on Capital. It's extremely notable that this shouldn't be extended to full identification with Harvey' argument, but rather that it's equally unproductive to simply do away with a resource that may be helpful in other respects.
It would also be worth examining in an immanent way, as in how does Marx not have a labour theory of value; Which is to say how does Marx's labour theory of value differ from that of the other classical political economists, and where is Harvey correct in his negation and what is the negation of the negation here?
The Ego and His Own

surprised spookman hasn't been posted yet
More Trotsky:
Writings in Exile
An Appeal to the Toiling, Oppressed & Exhausted Peoples of Europe
Stalin and Co. : The Politburo - The Men Who Run Russia
Hey Anons, should I read any of Bertrand Russell's essays or Sartre's works? Or are they way too bourgie/radlib?
If you're concerned about psychic bourgie radlib contagion just read Stalin's Dialectical and Historical Materialism each time you sense the whisperings of the spooks

It'll be somewhere in one of the following posts

Here ya go
Contributions to our new library

Books taken from cell of George Jackson
Revolutionary Suicide
Comrade, this is only 20 pages. Where is the rest?
>Upload all this shit into one place.
something equivalent to the /his/ megas here
is needed for /leftypol/ that way reading material can be just a stick OP and people can refer to what section of a /leftypol/ mega to find books in
Ladies and gentlemen, Das Kapital in the form of Jewish Klezmer.
this is Martens's book, not Domenic Losurdo's - though, if you do find Losurdo's "Stalin" in a translated pdf, please send it on.
Currently reading farm to factory and, wow, really blown away. Great book. Very informative.

I don't know if this has been uploaded but here is a PDF by paul cockshot on the labor theory of value; testing the law of value and exposing extremely close correlations with prices and labor costs.
Yeah I mixed it up. The Losurdo translation is about to come out, there is a draft going around on a Google doc rn.
Anybody have books or, even better, pamphlets, on Christian commmunism/ liberation theology? I am a materialist but I live in the american south where the words socialism and communism fall on deaf ears. However a "classless society free from exploitation based on the teachings of christ" would be much more well received, and I'd like to try to get through to some of these good ol boys before the fash do.
Check out the popular posts of /r/radicalchristianity for some agitprop maybe
(256.40 KB 1179x777 ice tray.png)
Some random recommendations:
>Jude Woodward - The US vs China
Seriously, if you want to understand the dynamics of the US/China trade war and the geopolitical position of China, look no further. This book is an enormously insightful discussion of China's role on the global stage from a sympathetic perspective.
>Pierre Bourdieu - On Television
A short book (actually a TV lecture) that illustrates with solid examples how television is commercialized and dumbed down under capitalism.
>Terry Eagleton - Why Marx was Right
Solid entry-level book debunking the most common anti-Marxist arguments. Eagleton is somewhat weak in his view of 20th century socialism but outside of that, gives a great and non-sectarian defense of Marxism.
>José Saramago - Blindness
Great novel that happens to be written by a communist author.
(these are all available online on libgen except for -sadly- the Woodward book)
Khrushchev Lied
>Libcom is run by a liberal retard
Is the owner/admin autistic?
anyone who believes in LARP concepts like authoritarian vs libertarian is bound to be autistic
(150.11 KB 541x770 Capture2.JPG)
(1.01 MB 2800x2000 1548298832185[1].jpg)
excavated pic related from /lit/. but if you have absolutely no education in philosophy then I recommend starting with "How to read Lacan" then "Living in the End Times"
Libertarian really just means Anarchist. The Anarchists in Spain called their state "libertarian communism"
Fascist material, but useful none the less.
but they lost
First as a tragedy then as a farce
>Rome - Flowers From Exile
That same band made an album on Rhodesia basically based on the idea that "both sides had their mistakes" and trying to show the white supremacists' perspective. Good music, but barely with a socialist message.
What is the ultimate black pill on state and violence?
(2.92 MB 291x300 1430761730963.gif)
>What is the ultimate black pill on state and violence?
Truthful Report on the Last Chances to Save Capitalism in Italy
>but they lost
werwolf has active after the war, dumb dumb. Just because they faded away from denazification doesn't mean their tactics are bad.
Essential contemporary blogs/magazines reading list (brainlets not allowed):

>follows class struggle and revolt in china (aka where all the stuff you buy is produced)

>ultra communist/insurrectionary anarchist writings about american issues/revolts

>lots of idpol/middle class stuff but there's a few good articles and I like the design

>the late mark fisher's blog. site is dated and difficult to navigate so I recommend reading his books instead. but still essential reading on capitalist realism, hauntology and culture
>mark fisher
why does everyone care about this guy
Chuang is really fucking good and everyone with an interest in China should read it.
i find his theory of hauntology very interesting as it deals with our current obsession of recycling cultural trends while not really coming up with new ones. also his take on capitalist realism is important as it challenges the neoliberal meme that 'there is no alternative. if its not your cup of tea then that's fine
But hauntology was Derrida
The Communist Manifesto book is actually pretty well structured once you get past all the million prefaces.
I think the manifesto should be one of the last things you read. It's not a good introduction to Marxism. Seeing that dumbass Jordan Peterson talk to Zizek about it is proof of this. I'd recommend reading Socialism: Scientific and Utopian, The Paris Manuscripts and the Germany Ideology first before you even touch the Manifesto.
>Seeing that dumbass Jordan Peterson talk to Zizek about it is proof of this
He didn't even read the damn thing.
that's asking too much of people. Critique of the Gotha Programme outlines his ideology quite well and is the same length as the manifesto.
it's riddled with superficial liberal dogmatism. Marx wrote it when he was 21 years old for crying out loud. I really think communists should stop shilling that drivel.
Does anyone have PDFs or EPUBs of any of the following?
Dialectical Materialism by Alexander Spirkin
Tony Cliff's Lenin Trilogy
Selected Writings by Alexandra Kollontai
Escape Velocity: Cyberculture at the End of the Century by Mark Dery
Lukacs Revalued by Agnes Heller
The Situationist International: A User's Guide by Simon Ford
Enrages and Situationists in the Occupations Movement
The Real Split in the Situationist International
Historical Materialism A System of Sociology by Bukharin
>Dialectical Materialism by Alexander Spirkin
Sadly scribd is demanding $$ now but there is a .PDF at this link
It's also available as a webpage on marxist.org
>Tony Cliff's Lenin Trilogy
>Selected Writings by Alexandra Kollontai
[.PDF related]
>Escape Velocity: Cyberculture at the End of the Century by Mark Dery
[.PDF related]
>Lukacs Revalued by Agnes Heller
Can only get my hands on non english versions atm, sorry comrade
>The Situationist International: A User's Guide by Simon Ford
NFI but it can't be that important since I can't find it
>Enrages and Situationists in the Occupations Movement
>The Real Split in the Situationist International
>Historical Materialism A System of Sociology by Bukharin
You can cite webpages if that's why you're specifically asking for .pdfs and .epubs
No this is precisely the problem, Peterson read it as a teenager and probably ignored the preface and overvalued it at the time
Fug, the pdf for Escape Velocity: Cyberculture at the End of the Century by Mark Dery is a book review, soz senpai
fisher elaborated on derrida's theory.
>>8537 I wouldn't recommend the manifesto, it's just a propaganda pamphlet. 'Principles of Communism' is way better IMO.
oh my lord thank you so much for this! It was like impossible to find these.
Wasn't Derrida boring af? His entire ideologue is based around signs and symbols. Navel gazing nonsense.
On the subject of anti-civ, opinions on Wendell Berry?
His hauntology/spectres of Marx is one of his better works since it is mostly dumping on end of history losers
So Kojeve rustled some jimmies I see? Nice.
yes I personally think derrida was a post modernist charlatan but fisher's expansions on his theory is really great
Any good books on the history of Socialism in Russia? From the very beginning of the socialist movement there all the way to the state of the movement now.
(28.57 KB 354x499 Class Theory and History.jpg)
This is worth reading but it's only about the USSR.
Books on the Cuban Revolution ples ples ples?

Very extensive would be nice, but any kind would do.
Any books/pdfs about the Khmer Rouge Ideology and Economics?(looking for these only and not what happened/history as I already have them, I also already have Undervelopment by Khieu Samphan) as well as pdfs regarding Burmese Way to Socialism?
the Cuban Revolution specifically?
Yes. But you can give me what you have as of the moment.
Che Guevara – The Economics of Revolution by Helen Yaffe.
Since all the books are too heavy for the uploader I will provide the link to Bannedthought: http://www.bannedthought.net/Cuba-Che/index.htm

Really good overall
They're fine, I think some of Sartre's stuff about gaze and recognition is in a way similar to Stirner's stuff about love.
Sartre was kind of a cunt. He meant well I'm sure.
Dude I wish I had it. Everything written about them is begat and critical. I had one thing at one point but I don't know where I put it.

The old leftybooks torrent.
Maybe you're referring to this book?
I heard Michael Vickery is a good Marxist source, even though he did make the mistake of actually defending the Khmer Rouge members when they were put on trial.
Already have Vickery's books, he also defended the Khmer Rouge due to him being a sympathizer/supporter of the same
Hi Comrades I started reading Vladimir Lenin's New Economic Developments in Peasant Life. He mentions the allotment land and non-allotment land. Is allotment land the land which is common land like gardening and communal farming and the non-allotment land private land whereby it has been alloted to the individual by inheritance or purchase? Thanks
Is this a safe link?
Allotment land is land owned by Obshchina (peasant community). Obshchina periodically performs repartition of this land between its members.
Books relating Marxism, dialectical materialism, leftist thought/philosophy, etc etc to STEM subjects and history?
>Books relating Marxism, dialectical materialism, leftist thought/philosophy, etc etc to STEM subjects and history?
*no joke, just read it*
Any book that goes ultra autistic on Gorbachev and his policies? I only know perestroika and glasnost in broad strokes
Any resources on neo-imperialism? How exactly do modern states basically take over another country without changing borders on a map?
>How exactly do modern states basically take over another country without changing borders on a map?

Don't have any specific resources but the tl:dr answer is debt. If you trick a poor nation into taking a large loan it cannot possibly pay back, when it's time to pay back you basically have more control over their policies than a boots on the ground invasion could ever give you. See: The IMF in Latin America, the EU in Greece or China in Africa.
Haven't read these yet but they seem to fit the bill (1)

The Accidental Proletariat: Workers, Politics, and Crisis in Gorbachev's Russia
Perestroika in Perspective : The Design and Dilemmas of Soviet Reform
Also worth nothing these are bourgeois sources and in my experience with this publisher there will be retarded anti-communist shit sprinkled throughout
>Any resources on neo-imperialism?
Imperialism in the 21st Century by John Smith is supposed to be a good book.
>How exactly do modern states basically take over another country without changing borders on a map?
Other anon is correct that it's mostly through debt and predatory agreements. Military and economic imperialism also go hand in hand. A really concrete example is what happened in Iraq after the US invaded in 2003. Up until the invasion, there had been laws stating that only a certain percentage of the Iraqi economy's profits (I believe about 45%) could be extracted to other countries. One of the first things the Americans did was scrapping this law and all others of the kind so that all sectors of the Iraqi economy could be sold out to (mostly American) corporations.
>or China in Africa.
Ah but this is where you are wrong anon. China is completely distinct from the IMF and Troika's machinations because it doesn't trick countries into predatory loans, which is because it's not an imperialist state. The big difference between (for example) the Chinese AIIB and the World Bank is that China doesn't require you to sell out your country and enforce destructive neoliberal policies before you can join. I would even say China is actively pursuing an anti-imperialist stance by providing better alternatives to the predatory American institutions for the Third World.
>China cannot not carry out imperialist policies, because it is not imperialist!
Literal circular logic.
>China doesn't require you to sell out your country
They do though.

Stop being an ideologue.
>>China cannot not carry out imperialist policies, because it is not imperialist!
>Literal circular logic.
You are the one that came up with this strawman, not me. I gave concrete examples of China cooperating with Third World countries on a non-imperialist basis. The reason China is not imperialist is that Chinese capital is far from being developed enough to enter into the imperialist stage; also don't forget China still has its major industries nationalized and keeps tight control over the private capitalist sector. It's not a capitalist country, let alone an imperialist one.
>Links a wikipedia article about "debt-trap diplomacy" that doesn't even mention any actual imperialist institutions such as the IMF and literally consists of parroting of the Western right-wing rhetoric against China
Debt trap diplomacy is pajeet nonsense, fren. And the bottom line is that the number of aocialist revolutions crushed by the US ia staggering and only growing. Ppl with a real interest in socialism shouldnt be apologizing for the US under any circumstances based this fact alone. Stop being a such a useless idiot anon.
>I gave concrete examples of China cooperating with Third World countries on a non-imperialist basis.
No you didn't. I can however offer concrete examples of the contrary; for example giving Kenya huge loans (that they cannot possibly repay) for building the Port of Mombasa and the Standard Gauge Railway, only to take strategic control over them after they default is literally predatory loaning practices.
>The reason China is not imperialist is that Chinese capital is far from being developed enough to enter into the imperialist stage

According to what law?
China is far more developed than Britain was during their colonial conquests, so by your logic Britain didn't employ imperialist policies. I would even say China is following the same pattern as what Britain did: Following rapid urbanization and population growth, and the problems that come with it, they're expanding elsewhere for new markets and raw materials.

>Ppl with a real interest in socialism shouldnt be apologizing for the US under any circumstances based this fact alone

I'm not? I would never apologize for the IMF's ravaging of third world countries through debt traps.

(Maybe mods can move this discussion to a different thread since it's off topic.)
(348.27 KB 2542x1222 for new anons.png)
since this is the new /NEW/ shouldn't pic related be in the OP?
pictures can't be edited. afaik they can only be deleted or spoilered
>giving Kenya huge loans (that they cannot possibly repay) for building the Port of Mombasa and the Standard Gauge Railway, only to take strategic control over them after they default is literally predatory loaning practices.
I'll quote this article (whose arguments you hopefully will not discard for being tied to China):
>Financed and constructed by Chinese side, the SGR project has created 46,000 local jobs, cut the transportation cost between Mombasa and Nairobi by 40 percent, and increased Kenya's GDP by 1.5 percent.
No IMF "investment project" has ever achieved this kind of socio-economic progress for a country. Besides China tends to actually negotiate with Third World countries and never simply imposes predatory loans on them like the IMF does.
Same goes for the Sri Lanka "debt trap" drama that was played out in the right-wing media. It's plain Cold War style propaganda. See: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/sri-lanka-debt-port-borrowing-problem-not-made-in-china-11309738
If anyone here speaks Spanish and is a giga-brainlet who can't into theory, read Marx para Principiantes by Mexican cartoonist RIUS, this and his other works is what got me into Leftism. They're not even really books in the full sense of the word since it's mostly just comics and cartoons, so they're very beginner friendly.
I have the Pdf
(83.15 KB 750x600 federicohegel.png)
I love the doodles of historical figures these marx 101 books have.
Well, seeing that China Daily is literally a PR-organ for the Chinese state that surely does make me a bit skeptical. Anyhow, assuming the stats are correct, boasting that the GDP has risen doesn’t counter my original claim that the infrastructure is built for China to take over (as part of their Belt and Road Initiative), and that the loans are handed out to exert political influence. I wouldn’t put to much weight on how fairly they negotiated with Kenyan officials considering all they need to accept any proposition is a bribe big enough.

>Chinese engineers worked 16 hours per day, slept on the construction sites in night, and some even broke down from the constant work and sacrificed their lives because of lacking timely treatment.
How on earth is this supposed to be a good thing

Responding to the Sri Lanka article, it’s strikingly similar to the Kenyan situation except that they were already facing a debt crisis. You don’t give out huge loans to a country knee deep in debt to build a strategically important port, only to take over it through leasing as a debt-equity swap after they obviously can’t repay the debt, through sheer coincidence.
Also awaiting reply to how Britain was capable of being imperialist when their economy was less developed than China-who can’t supposedly be imperialist because their economy isn’t developed enough.
>>Chinese engineers worked 16 hours per day, slept on the construction sites in night, and some even broke down from the constant work and sacrificed their lives because of lacking timely treatment.
>How on earth is this supposed to be a good thing
Not a good thing as such, but it does show them viewing it as a calling or duty, not just a job

Lmao the same can be said of a Japanese salary man
Or American techbros.
Neither of those are improving the material conditions in africa
You can find plenty of techbros who claim that they are improving the material conditions in Africa by working 24/7: "I'm doing this for the betterment of humanity" is usually just a big cope.
What are they "coping" for? They are rich and just virtue signal to elevate their social standing even further.
If only the Mexican Revolution started at least 8 years later...
they're not actually rich. they might make twice to ten times more than the average worker, but they still are exploited laborers working for billionaires.
their general ideology is liberal and highly self-gratifying. turns out, working for the surveillance state, or other similar nasty shit can actually be turned into a moral good with a mission statement: "eliminating crime, together" or some shit like that. it doesn't even have to be good, techpeople will eat it up.
Feel ya mate, also quite a shame Zapata, Villa and Madero where murdered also...
Que se chinguen Huerta y la banda de caciques y charros que al final volvieron al poder mediante la institucional mentira revolucionaria.
(3.48 MB 2392x3348 books.png)
>if you haven't read these novelists adored by anticommunists or Greek meme philosophy then just refrain from political discussions
/pol/ypism is a mental disease
Why the fuck would I need to read the New Testament to engage in political discussion?
(1.70 MB 2892x2416 britpill reading list.jpg)
that looks practically scholarly compared to this
>not getting the meme
that image was obviously made by a Marxist to trick /pol/yps into radicalizing themselves. what kind of reactionary would put Adorno, Spinoza, and Hegel in a reading list?
not to mention Rousseau and Thomas Paine
Idk maybe you’re right but I wouldn’t put it past /pol/tards to read those works and give them their shitty interpretations. Remember that they think They Live is about da joos!
Thought the same thing when I saw that image. No way you can read those books and not turn into a socialist or at least en enlightenment era liberal
>great british railway jounreys
>a picrure of fucking nigel farage
this isn't real.
you think people on /pol/ can read for more than a 2 paragraph rant about jews or a 6 line long greentext? Nothing will radicalize these people because they'll never actually comprehend what the writer is talking about, because (((they))), the zog occiupied zionits zog government and other buzzwords don't show up every 5 seconds to keep their attention.
Comrade, what was the last book you read and how long ago?
literal anticommunist who might also have some progressive ideas but will surely not get you into actual Marxism let alone into non-armchair leftism
important influences for Marx's philosophy but neither would turn you in a leftist on their own (remember Hegel was a reactionary who thought enlightened despotism was the correct synthesis to 'balance out' the excesses of the French Revolution)
I would only believe this if the chart contained substantial Marxist or left-wing political theory
Does anyone have a copy of "The Advance of the Government of Allende and the Tasks to Pass from a Revolutionary State to Workers State" by Posadas?
(140.30 KB 1200x1155 british pepe.jpg)
Oh it's real alright.
Figured i should post this here too
anyone have a good PDF of P I Nikitin fundamentals of political economy?
I've only found good PDFs in spanish, and in english I've only found scans (one of them from based ismail)
Would you like to know how I can tell you've never read Hegel?
Rousseau is about as close to proto-Marxism as you can get.
Should I read foucault?
Postmodernism is a interesting study of culture, power relations, and language but i would suggest reading Frankfurt school and Athussar instead. you get a similar, but leftist perspective
Is there a good book about the development of capitalism since its inception up to, say, WW2 that I can read?
In my opinion not really. Like other postmodernists he tries to dissect power in a quite idealist way and without a really cohesive framework (he would probably reject the idea of such "frameworks" altogether).
But if you do read Foucault, you can also check out Daniel Zamora for some constructive leftist criticism.
Maybe Lenin's Development of Capitalism in Russia.
What does someone who has absolutely zero economic knowledge outside of wage labour and capital need to read before starting Capital to understand it properly?
Smith's the Wealth of Nations and Marx's manuscripts were helpful to me
nothing pretty much lol
I usually recommend this book but the last time I did some anon got extremely mad at me. Make of that what you will
Capital breaks things down to the metaphysical, and starts with the very ideas of what "money" is. You can start right off with it. No prior reading is required.
Does anyone have Aleksandr Dugin books in English? Want to delve into the mind of the man behind the NazBols without paying him.
Just look through some torrent sites, as easy as that.
Also why are /pol/yps so fucking cringy.
How on earth is Dugin even "behind" NazBol
Theorylet here. SOme time ago, I picked up this pamphlet, because I was interested in the subject and wanted to learn a bit about Marxist Economical Theory. However, at page 37, when it talks about the failing rate of profit, my brain just stops working. I tried to hit wikipedia, but that just confused me further.

Can someone help me understand what exactly the rate of profit is and why is it supposed to fall?

Also, while I understand that the labour poured into a product can determine its value, couldn´t an established brand sell the products for more than its competitors, despite being fuctionality identical? Or would marketin and the development of a brand name fall under capitalist production costs?
(29.99 KB 355x180 d6rftzuin.jpeg)

Profit emerges from money circulation, and is a result of worker exploitation. The time workers give up working for wages is less then the time workers receive back embodied in products and services they can buy with their wages.

The capitalists as a class cannot make profits on machines, because they have to pay all the cost for producing machines, unlike humans that reproduce them self's. As a result. The rate of profit can fall because of automation increasing the amount of machines relative to humans in production.

The rate of profit can also fall because the working class can do collective bargaining.

If the capitalists turn to rent extraction models for profit, and reinvest into unproductive sectors like high-end luxury production with larger margins (instead of worker productivity increases) to keep up profits by increasing their share on surplus rather than increasing the overall amount of surplus, they then become vampires that drain the life out of workers, i.e they use up the labour-power faster than it is re-generated. Which also leads to a falling rate of profit.

Usually there is combination of those factors.

What is particular to our time is that that expansion into new markets is no longer an option for keeping the rate of profit up, because the the hole world is captured. The neo-liberal phase has exhausted it's fuel. Wars are also reducing the overall rate of profit because war production is not productive and competes for limited resources. Additionally there is environmental harm causing a decline of "gifts of nature" provided by the bios-sphere, that will increase the cost of production.

Additionally there are full on retarded industrial cartels, like the car industry for example, that seems to be incapable understanding simple geometry, where cities cannot not have enough space for car based transportation. They don't seem to understand that people just want a transport carbine, they could explore more effective ways of making transport cabins that work for cities. Additionally there is a sort of psychological backlash against the car industry on the horizon. The car industry has marketed cars not only as status symbols but also as sources of fun, and this was sort of true as long as most people drove cars over rural roads, but now that more and more people are living in cites, driving cars is frustrating as hell.

The car industry is just an example, of a general trend of capitalist refusing to choose more effective technological configurations and with their political cloud the are capable of dragging out their demise, and hence further depress the overall rate of profit.
(100.21 KB 481x316 9385223.jpg)
i'm trying to find some books that critique the "Nuclear Family". I was thinking Origin of the Family by Friedrich Engels but i here it's a bit dated. any opinions?
The best set of theories on the Fordist nuclear family came from the Italian autonomist feminist marxist movement. I don't have any specific book recommendations but look up Silvia Federici and the 'Wages for housework' movement
yeah, you're a faggot

t. Lasch gang
>plays fallout once
Pretty sure Cockshott's TANS covers it to some extent
Does someone have "Stalin: A History and Critique of a Black Legend" by Domenico Losurdo in German?
(284.35 KB 1074x746 neolib1.png)
Book recommendations for the theories of Hayek, Von Mises, and Ayn Rand?
Any recommendations of marxist critique of the theories?
For Ayn Rand, kind of don't want to read shitty fiction, I'd rather just have it explained as it is.
I'd say Adam Curtis covers these topics quite well in his docs.
Watch part one of "All watched over" for Rand and "The Trap, what happened to our dream of freedom" for neoliberalism in general.
I did watch "All watched over". Pretty cool doc. I'm planning on inviting some rightist to discuss theory, and I want to understand their theories to better deconstruct them.
I didn't notice your name before I posted. I watched that and hypernormalization because of a `Watch Adam Curtis Gang` post/thread I'm sure you were involved with, so thanks haha
>He hasn't read all of Atlas Shrugged including the author self-insert 50 page rant/speech by Galt at the end of the novel.

lul you're missing out
(112.38 KB 609x633 1529944517892.png)
He was really different to FRanco
Like all fascists who espouse "left" or "anticapitalist" views, he was sidelined when he wasn't useful anymore due to fascism's innate need to suck up to the capitalist elite.
>He was really different to FRanco
The only notable difference I see between the two is that De Rivera didn't have an intense hatred of Jews
Rivera espoused Syndicalist views economically, it seems also he was a Monarchist, anyways many Falangists today hate Franco due to him not only cucking out to Capitalist but due to him merging the Falange with the Traditionalist Communion and basically withering away the Syndicalist aspects of the Falange, Franco and Rivera disliked each other
He was arrested by the Second Republic and tried for execution, there are many rumours that the Falange tried to trade him back but the Government refused, other's suspect Franco was behind the murder
Rivera often served as a middle way between the Reactionary Catholic Traditionalist Onésimo Redondo and the Radical Anti-Religion Syndicalist Ramiro Ledesma, without him there would be no Falange
On libgen there was this huge multivolume work that I saw and one volume seemed to be about his being pro-pinochest and authoritarian and seemed to he an analysis of these ideas in his thought
Hello guys, does anyone remember/can link a quote from Marx that goes something like;

"under capitalism, going out and having pleasant experiences consumes a man's capital, and so it is encouraged for each man to hoard his capital and become a miser. Under communism, where capital does not accumulate, man would be free to enjoy life's pleasures"

Or something like that. I can't find it on Google.
What you're after is in this text
>Thus political economy – despite its worldly and voluptuous appearance – is a true moral science, the most moral of all the sciences. Self-renunciation, the renunciation of life and of all human needs, is its principal thesis.
Just after this section of text
Does anyone have any good works on Marx's theory of alienation and alienated labour?

Marx, Engels: The German Ideology

Marx: Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts

Georgy Lukacs: In Defense of History and Class Consciousness
any book recommendations on the process of implementing socialism all the way to communism?
Michael Albret Parecon. Cockshott Towards A New Socialism. Can't remember the Soviet ones now.
State and Revolution.
Any books to understand occurrence of fascism other than Trotsky?
Marxism and the National Question has a little bit about it.
Try Zizek?
When Insurrections Die by G Dauve
Gaspar Miklos Tamas. He writes about fascism in the 21st century.
Reading borbiba taking a dump on Stalin for muh commodity production and it's getting pretty tiring, does he ever present his ideas for a solution anywhere?
Would dickblast system labor vouchers solve it?
Nevermind, he proposes rationing everything equally. That's pretty stupid.
>he proposes rationing everything equally
Should I gain a good understanding of neoclassical economics or is it a waste of time?
It's useful for debunking capitalism but not much of use outside that
Any good books to teach me a general overview of bourgeois economics? Where is Ismail by the way?
Pretty based, compared to Franco
Christopher Lasch is underrated, probably because he was a centrist conservative on social issues, despite having Frankfurt school roots
I need a good philosophy reading list that doesn't force me to digest the whole canon (too busy with work related stuff), something like a reading list that leads to Zizek or whoever. Can anyone help?
>Where is Ismail by the way?
eRegime, he has 2 FAQ threads there
Read some metaphysics. Anything by Graham Harman is good. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41300200?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
You don't need it for politics. In fact I guess some Marxists would argue Harman's brand of metaphysics is bourgeois indulgence. (Harman's answer, I guess, would be his philosophy of "object oriented ontology" doesn't contradict Marxist analysis of commodity production. The commodity is a subset of objects. It's just neutral on the subject. )
Metaphysics it's the most interesting branch of philosophy. Most philosophy is a challenging read anyway,so you might as well read some. (Otherwise it's like hiring a sex worker and just having a non sexual service. You might as well ask for sex as well because you're generally paying for time not services.)
I wouldn't bother reading Zizek.
>I wouldn't bother reading Zizek

Why not?
He likes metaphysics, and zizek being a good dialectical materialist is contrary to metaphysics
As a scholar Zizek is atrocious. He seems to skim or rely on secondary sources a lot. He has plagiarized from Wikipedia and presented a blurb from the back of a book as a quote from it. He is repetitive to the point that his book not just have repeated sentences, but whole paragraphs lifted from his other books and often not marked as such, and this repetition even occurs within the same book.
(34.73 KB 1017x254 wdhmbt.PNG)
(76.66 KB 1009x460 wdhmbt2.PNG)
So I've read the first chapter of the Communist Manifesto, so far I've learned that
>That the history of all societies is that of class struggle
>Capitalism has played a revolutionary role in that it has altered the meaning behind work to that of wage labour, people only work now because they have to, they need a wage to survive, they don't do it because they have a passion for it. It has also changed the meaning of the family to that of money relations
>Capitalism was started by events such as the rounding of the cape, and the discovery of America. This brought new resources into the mix, and revolutions in the modes of production like agriculture and machinery i.e The Industrial Revolution.
>Society has always been made up of confusing hierarchies and classes, for example; in Ancient Rome you had Patricians, Knights, Plebians and Slaves; during the Middle Ages you had the feudal lords to the serfs. Capitalism has only simplified these social rankings to that of Bourgeois and Proletarian.
>Nations are no longer self sufficient, the "civilized" countries of Europe depend on the countries of the third world for their resources, while the countries of the third world have been made to depend on the first world
>The modern Proletarian live only as they find work, and find work only as long as their labour increases capital
>The modern Proletarian depend on their wages
>Proletarians have lost all sense of character under Capitalism
If there is anything I misunderstood or missed at all, please do point it out. Marx also stated that Capitalism is self destructive, but I wasn't following what he said when he said this, so if someone could explain that'd be great. I didn't understand pic related either. Also when Marx says the Proletarians find work only as long as their labour increases capital, does this mean that they only find work as long as it has any value to their boss/the bourgeois?
>Capitalism has simplified these social rankings to that of Bourgeois and Proletarian.
No you still get some remnants of feudal relations. There technically also still are slaves with slave markets and all in some parts of the world. Also capitalism has not just bourgoisie and proletariat, it also has petit-bourgoisie, labour-aristocracy, lumpen-prole (which today has mostly been transformed into precariat doing temp-work contracts). The bourgeoisie itself can be divided into national and global bourgeoisie, as well as industrial and finance bourgeoisie. There's also new theory that sees "communicative capitalism" as a separate category as well, in the sense that it seeks to specifically commodify human relations.

If anything it has gotten more complex since the middle ages.
>dialectical materialist
>And even more astonishingly:"The true formula of materialism is not that there is some noumenal reality behind our distorting perception of it. The only consistent materialist position is that *the world does not exist*... The notion of the world as a positive universe presupposes an external observer, an observer not caught in it. " (harman quoting Zizek)

So without the observer, the world doesn't exist? Is this the " dialectical" bit of the materialism?
It seems just like solipsism to me.
>implying solipsism is bad
it's a magnet link. Just a collection of pdf files like any other, except you download it with medium-old p2p software
Zizek has quite clearly stated that he is an idealist in the german vein.
>0 seeders
and it's a dead link, just like everything else from old /leftypol/
What should I read to catch up with modern, contemporary world politics?
Wsws? I still mostly get my news from bourgeois papers tho.

Thread just detourned
Not everything. There is a webm collection and movie packs which still have a seeder.
(47.50 KB 1200x630 143294._UY630_SR1200,630_.jpg)
Has anyone read this? Is it worth reading?
Don't know where to drop this so I'll drop it here, got it from a tankie professor.

Basic rundown:
>Trade Unions were full of White Russians who just played the power game in the new regime
>Trade Unions have power struggles
>Kirov's death basically created 1950s Witch Hunt style finger pointing and a good excuse to get rid of political rivals
>Stalin didn't actually order any of the deaths, he or one of the 25 000ers just signed off a paper asking for the removal department heads and then the paper and signature being used as authority for stuff completely unrelated
>Stalin had didn't find out the great terror was going on until halfway through it because the trade unions were having a minor civil war
soviets were just unions with a different name anyways tbh
I haven't. Kolakowski was a critic of Marxism (he was actually a former ML who grew up in socialist Poland). Oddly, it was the favorite book by a Croatian dude I corresponded with, who grew up in Yugoslavia and served in the army there, and considered himself a democratic socialist and a Marxist in a broad sense, but didn't like Leninism.
IMO it's probably worth reading, even if you disagree with the conclusions, because Kolakowski knew a fuckton about Marxism-Leninism.
Has anyone got a decent copy of Fanged Noumena (or any other accelerationist lit for that matter)? I've only been able to find shitty PDFs with no contents page. Makes it hard to search for specific sections.
Hey we should have a list of 'easy to find in bookstores'or well known leftist books...
Let me give some exapmles
Das kapital
Ten Days That Shook the World
Communist Manifesto (duh)
State & Revolution
Quotations of Chairman Mao
That's all I can think of known leftist books that would be in a bookstore
Socialist history tends to be the easiest to find in mainstream bookstores. This is what I've seen around my college campus:

A People's History of the World
People's History of the United States
Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution
10 Days That Shook the World
Hobsbawm's "Age Of" trilogy
Capital Volume 1
Marx and Engels Reader
Frankfurt School stuff
Chomsky selected writings
Late Victorian Holocausts (leftist answer to "muh Stalin's gorillions". Interestingly was placed next to the Black Book of Communism in the campus bookstore)
Don't count on Barnes and Noble for shit, all they have is the Manifesto.

A lot of big cities actually have dedicated socialist/anarchist bookstores, I recommend you check around. Used bookstores are also a good source. The one on my campus has a dedicated Marxism section that's placed in plain sight at the front of the store, I guess they think people will steal them lol.

Best way to read leftist theory while in the political closet is to buy an e-reader. Doesn't matter which model as long as you get one with a frontlit screen. E-reading can't beat dead tree books but it comes surprisingly close, even highlighting and footnotes can be done easily.
So whats up with our booru? i heard that the owner abandoned it? can someone confirm?
Why e-reader? Why not just a phone with a reading app?
(184.33 KB 1024x631 rztui.jpeg)
e-paper > lcd/oled for reading
reflective-lit > back-lit for reading

It's reasonable to recommend dedicated e-readers until you can get smartphones with clear-ink displays, which are part lcd and part e-ink. And can do a good refresh-rate as well as colours, while still being reflective
That's wack. I do most of my reading in laptop and phone, don't have the luxury of buying obscure books on political economy or classical mechanics. Hope it doesn't have long term optical damage.
(21.06 KB 600x337 rzftub.jpeg)
e-readers are cheap if you can live with the inconvenience of converting everything to pdf epub or txt file-format. Your eyes will be destroyed by lengthy reading from lcd screens, this really is not a luxury.

If you really don't want to buy an extra device than use text-to-speech software. This has the advantage that once you get used to the computer-voice you can crank up the speed to 300+ words per minute. Which is decently fast considering than most people average around 200+ words per minute when reading.
pdfs are shit because they are just static images
(14.89 KB 568x351 ocr.png)
You can easily convert a image-pdf to text with OCR, there's even websites that do this like this one https://www.onlineocr.net/

If you are using a linux computer you install
gimagereader with tesseract-ocr or

for windows you can try these https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/top-5-free-ocr-software-tools-to-convert-your-images-into-text-nb/
Thanks anon, although the formatting does get lost and you just get txts which are not as pretty as epub but at least you can change the font size.
I'm looking for good biographies of Stalin and Lenin, as well as histories of the early Soviet Union, preferably newer ones written with access to the Soviet archives, that aren't full of Kruschevite lies, or bourgeoisie lies.
What do you guys think about Rhodesia and Mugabe
Avoid Kotkin's work on Stalin. It's full of mischaracterizations and outright falsehoods. I'm not sure what the best biography of Stalin is, but J. Arch Getty's work on the purges and R.W. Davies' work on collectivization are both good sources for the Stalin-era USSR. Lots of data and up-close accounts of what was happening with Stalin and the leadership during that time.

As for Lenin, there are a number of OK-ish biographies out there but I would recommend the work of Lars Lih since he deals with a number of historical myths. A word of caution - Lih can be a bit convoluted in his arguments and writing style meaning that you need to read his work slowly and think critically about the information he provides.

A catastrophe.
>Avoid Kotkin's work on Stalin.
strange, even finbol likes kotkins biography. the guys a rightwinger but his method of avoiding black book shit seems acceptable
anyone got any recommendations for books about the Korean war? Particularly about the American war crimes and cover ups and what not. Works from the north Korean side of things. There's a reason America calls it "The Forgotten War"
thank you comrade
>strange, even finbol likes kotkins biography.
FinnishBolshevik doesn't like Kotkin's work. What he likes are a few cherry-picked statements he can use to defend his own historical revisionism. For example, Finbol likes that Kotkin says that Lenin's "testament" was a forgery. (Pretty much the only historian I've read who believes this!) But finbol will conveniently ignore Kotkin when he calls Stalin "two-faced," "nasty," and "sociopathic." Anyway, if one starts to skim through Kotkin's biography it becomes apparent that his narrative relies on all sorts of mischaracterizations. The WSWS posted a huge take-down of his work. (Even though they're Trots most of their criticism has almost nothing to do with the portrayal of Trotsky.)

>anyone got any recommendations for books about the Korean war? Particularly about the American war crimes and cover ups and what not
"The Korean War" by Bruce Cumings. Progressive standard work. PDF copy attached.
>For Americans, it was a discrete conflict lasting from 1950 to 1953. But for the Asian world the Korean War was a generations-long struggle that still haunts contemporary events. With access to new evidence and secret materials from both here and abroad, including an archive of captured North Korean documents, Bruce Cumings reveals the war as it was actually fought. He describes its origin as a civil war, preordained long before the first shots were fired in June 1950 by lingering fury over Japan’s occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945. Cumings then shares the neglected history of America’s post–World War II occupation of Korea, reveals untold stories of bloody insurgencies and rebellions, and tells of the United States officially entering the action on the side of the South, exposing as never before the appalling massacres and atrocities committed on all sides.
I'm also going to give you a link to the film "Oppose Bacteriological Warfare" which was jointly produced by the Chinese and North Korean national film studios in 1952, an expose to the world detailing the widespread use of U.S. bacteriological germ warfare such as insect bombs on civilian populations, and the defensive measures the Chinese and North Koreans took to protect themselves. The details in the film (which are true) makes it one of the more disgusting films I've seen, just so you know. This was of course covered up by the U.S.
Does anyone have the link to the red pilled north korean defector
Well I just went through and read all that. Very informative criticism. A shame as the hype around the book as the definitive biography had me wanting to read it. Maybe i'll read trotskys book about him.
There is hipothetically, no reason to believe lenin´s testament to be false , if one would look to prove stalin´s innocence such is the fact that Lenin never truly throws no type disrespect or despise for Stalin, only critisicing him for being too "rude" which in it of itslef is already very vage...
Some of these are pretty bad mental gymnastics to be honest. If America is so bad why don't Americans rebel against it? Is it possible that the North Korean state can pacify its population with propaganda and ideology in the same manner that the corporate media does in America?
> Is it possible that the North Korean state can pacify its population ...in the same manner ... as in America?
No the DPRK simply doesn't have the nessecairy pharma-production for replicating that.
America has far more raw power to control its population than the Koreans have
America also has a far larger and more spread out population in which to do so.
There are some books by Ota Sik in my school's library, should I give them a read? I heard the guy was a market socialist but the titles of the books seem interesting
If the DPRK was even half as bad as it is portrayed in capitalist media, Kim would have suffered the same fate as Ceausescu decades ago.
i don't know about his books pre-80s, but after 70s he embraced market socialism as you say, and then socdem during velvet revolution era. i wouldn't read anything by someone who supposedly admitted to wanting to implement capitalism during prague spring.
r/ that image that prove that nazis are literally cucks.
It's sad to think about how many of these people could've been well-adjusted if it wasn't for being taught to be racist. How many normal people have been corrupted into /pol/cucks, and how many of them have isolated themselves out of a constant fear of da jooz and da blax. Really, it is.
The worst part? When you explain that this fetish, a fetish they hate themselves for having, comes from racism, they'll shut down and blame you for everything wrong with the world. When you explain that the taboo makes it hot, when you explain that racial stereotypes created the fetish in the first place, they'll refuse to listen, because you're a lefty, a jew, and a spoiled white college kid who simultaneously gets welfare and visits the synagogue every shabbat.
It's not nature or nurture, it's environmental factors that usually play into it. The idea of Running-Kruger is stupid because cognitive bias existed as soon as the first humans walked the earth. For some self-congratulatory hacks that thought they cracked a code for 1999 it was already too late. Everyone is more or less comfortable around their own kind.
>implying that you care about the mental health of others
Kill yourself freudposter you fucking retard
(113.32 KB 1080x666 1527895266659.jpg)
Do you want me to tell your teacher you're on your phone instead of paying attention to her lesson?
(17.94 KB 480x360 hqdefault.jpg)
The Free Market
An example of how the Free Market functions
(348.27 KB 2542x1222 for new anons.png)
it was here the first few days, you can see it in pic related.
I don't know what happened to it.
There was a longer, excellent article in 3 or so parts about the roots of communism in China, which I lost the address of. I vaguely recall the website having a Chinese-like name.

If I remember correctly, Part I contained the early history (e.g., it mentioned that anarchism was a powerful force and more classical communists became prevalent because of stricter, more authoritarian organization required by being essentially fifth columnists in Japanese industrial structure).

Can anybody help me find this text?
Anyone got "Writings of DeLeon", or at least a list of works which are compiled in that book?
I got some books, or used to

this is a good resource

(176.21 KB 291x350 Academician Prokhor Zakharov.jpg)
The popular stereotype of the researcher is that of a skeptic and a pessimist. Nothing could be further from the truth! Scientists must be optimists at heart, in order to block out the incessant chorus of those who say "It cannot be done."

Man's unfailing capacity to believe what he prefers to be true rather than what the evidence shows to be likely and possible has always astounded me. We long for a caring Universe which will save us from our childish mistakes, and in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary we will pin all our hopes on the slimmest of doubts.

Begin with a function of arbitrary complexity. Feed it values, "sense data". Then, take your result, square it, and feed it back into your original function, adding a new set of sense data. Continue to feed your results back into the original function ad infinitum. What do you have? The fundamental principle of human consciousness.

Have you ever wondered why clouds behave in such familiar ways when each specimen is so unique? Or why the energy exchange market is so unpredictable? In the coming age we must develop and apply nonlinear mathematical models to real world phenomena. We shall seek, and find, the hidden fractal keys which can unravel the chaos around us.

Scientists refuse to use ontological methods to find truth and science knew everything we wouldn't need science now would we?
>Begin with a function of arbitrary complexity. Feed it values, "sense data". Then, take your result, square it, and feed it back into your original function, adding a new set of sense data. Continue to feed your results back into the original function ad infinitum.

I doubt consciousness is a simple loop, it seems unlikely that it's that simple.
(128.00 KB 912x513 ski.jpeg)
> Scientists must be optimists at heart, in order to block out the incessant chorus of those who say "It cannot be done."
87. Science and technology provide the most important
examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim
that they are motivated by “curiosity” or by a desire to “be-
nefit humanity.” But it is easy to see that neither of these
can be the principal motive of most scientists. As for “cu-
riosity,” that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work
on highly specialized problems that are not the object of
any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a ma-
thematician or an entomologist curious about the proper-
ties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a
chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious
about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity.
Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification
of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest
only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only be-
cause entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist
and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to
obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exerci-
sed their abilities in an interesting way but in some nons-
cientific pursuit, then they wouldn’t give a damn about
isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles.
Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had
led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of
a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested
in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about
isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to
put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of
time and effort that scientists put into their work. The “cu-
riosity” explanation for the scientists’ motive just doesn’t
stand up.
88. The “benefit of humanity” explanation doesn’t work
any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable rela-
tion to the welfare of the human race most of archaeo-
logy or comparative linguistics for example. Some other
areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities.
Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about
their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pol-
lution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had
an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear
power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire
to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn’t Dr. Teller get
emotional about other “humanitarian” causes? If he was
such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the
H-bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is
very much open to question whether nuclear power plants
actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity
outweigh the accumulating waste and the risk of acci-
dents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly
his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not
from a desire to “benefit humanity” but from a personal
fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to
practical use.
89. The same is true of scientists generally...
90. Of course, it’s not that simple. Other motives do play
a role for many scientists. Money and status for example.
Some scientists may be persons of the type who have an
insatiable drive for status (see paragraph 79) and this may
provide much of the motivation for their work. No doubt
the majority of scientists, like the majority of the general
population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and
marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their cra-
ving for goods and services. Thus science is not a PURE
surrogate activity. But it is in large part a surrogate acti-
92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard
to the real welfare of the human race or to any other
standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the
scientists and of the government of ficials and corporation
executives who provide the funds for research.
>Scientists must be optimists at heart
115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways
that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of
human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists,
mathematicians and engineers. It can’t function without
them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in
these fields. It isn’t natural for an adolescent human being
to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in
study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in ac-
tive contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples
the things that children are trained to do tend to be in rea-
sonable harmony with natural human impulses. Among
the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in
active outdoor pursuits — just the sort of thing that boys
like. But in our society children are pushed into studying
technical subjects, which most do grudgingly.
why do you keep shilling Ted kazinsky

the people that initially build nuclear power were very much driven by the desire of improving the world and convinced nuclear power was going to bring about a new age of enormous prosperity.
Another book I wrote
(137.19 KB 971x762 fascistgarbage.png)
Fuck off fascist. Go peddle your garbage somewhere else.
Ted is one based motherfucker
He is not wrong about the Occident being a declining society. It's filled with libertines only seeking their own individualistic freedom do indulge in decadence, they walk all over others and create ideologies that cloud their selfish behaviour as benevolence. I don't know what you expect from people willing to burn the world down just to get their dick wet plenty.
cringe writing style tbh. Ted would never use such Jungian nonsense tbh.
That's not Ted's writing you retard.
jfc, I'm cringing so hard right now I almost feel ashamed of being associated with this retard. Ted would look down with shame at you tbh. gtfo.
Your condition is getting worse, I'm afraid to say, Justin.
>women shouldn't have as many freedoms as men
>women should be obedient second class citizens
<why won't women have sex with me??
<fucking hypergamy and women's liberation!
I have no idea where or how you learned your vile views. But my recommendation is that you re-evaluate your worldview unless you want to meet a premature and violent end. Battle lines are being drawn, and fascism has never won, and it never will.
What are some good Leftcom authors and books?
Why would you wanna become a leftcom?
read bordiga lmao
Read dune.
Are you implying leftcums are reactionaries??
They can be, in the case of Jacques Camatte
can someone tell me what a glowstick is
it's imageboard lingo for CIA agents
Best Marxist critique of post-modernism I can read?
That is a hard one to come by.

POstmodernism is a very recent thought trend in the history of Humanity, and coincidentally, it appear just at one of the biggest crises of the Communist movement -the counterrevolution in the USSR and the disentagration of the socialist bloc- and marxist thought.

If anyone knows something on the topic I am too very interested in reading about it.
Hello leftists. Natsoc here, I want to know your opinion on anprim, is it good or not?
It's bad, even more reactionary then you guys are. Building the productive forces of society is what has allowed mankind to escape from slavery, and building them further is the goal of socialism. Communist can only exist with extremely developed productive forces. Blowing up all our factories to go back to shitting in the woods and dying of preventable disease is pretty dumb.
< what has allowed mankind to escape from slavery
>hunter-gatherer society
Marxism not detected tbh.
AnPrim is for cucks, so you'll fit right in bucko.
Tell Jacques Camatte that
And not every socialist society has to be marxist
Is there any study on this? At this point I don’t think there is enough evidence to bring this up in a debate for example.
But the far-right is infamous for its lowkey widespread interracial fetishism. How do you explain this? I always thought it was due to interracial porn being more taboo among skinheads, and that turns them on like the animals they are
> fetishism of interracial is not only Jewish in nature
It's actually nazi in nature. Normal people don't care.
In a serious debate with well-read people, no. But then you would never have a debate about something retarded like this.
In a debate with a /pol/yp, definitely.
>Asks for study
>Claims out of nowhere that interracial porn is Jewish and mostly watched by black men
>Provides no examples or studies or any kind of evidence
At least we had some evidence /pol/up. You couldn't even live up to your own standard.
anyone can make a claim and never have the need to back it up. we live in the age of post-truth. nothing's real outside my own experience anyways. literally the guy from Screw magazine pointed this out and he's a full blooded jew. what more evidence do you need? its to divide the nuclear family but since you're not real I'm just replying to myself I guess.
I don't even understand what the fuck you're talking about. Living in a 'post-truth' age doesn't mean that you can just disregard all empiricism with no consequences and it doesn't mean I'm gonna take all your bullshit at face value.

>its to divide the nuclear family
Fucking why? The nuclear family is 'under threat' but it has nothing to do with interracial porn or the god damn Jews, and there is no conscious effort behind it. It happens because the pressures of international capitlism forces women out in the workforce while introducing housekeeping appliances (like the washing machine, etc) that drastically reduce the need for the traditional housewife role (and thus the traditional male breadwinner/female housekeeper family model). At the same time, people have longer and more erratic workdays and they have less economic security than before, which also makes family life much more challenging.

The nuclear family isn't being attacked by some outside force like the Nazi brainlets would have you believe, it's just slowly becoming obsolete because of capitalism.
I swear to god, 99% of /pol/'s crackpot theories amounts to blaming the JEWS/"cultural marxists"/liberals/ancient aliens for something that capitalism does.
>Once upon a time a valiant fellow had the idea that men were drowned in water only because they were possessed with the idea of gravity. If they were to knock this notion out of their heads, say by stating it to be a superstition, a religious concept, they would be sublimely proof against any danger from water. His whole life long he fought against the illusion of gravity, of whose harmful results all statistics brought him new and manifold evidence. This valiant fellow was the type of the new revolutionary philosophers in Germany. - Marx, The German Ideology
"Post-Truth" is a manifestation of bourgeois ideology masking the true material conditions we are under.
Nice. Dint red.
CIA manual used in Nicaragua to educate rebels on counter-revolutionary tactics.
Is this a non-sequitur?

Anyways, this video can help you:

This video is a bit longer on the same topic:
Response there btw --> >>168242
>>98214 I'm late to this, but: - Read Gramsci. - There is an amazing book by Arno Mayer called "Why Did The Heavens Not Darken?" that demonstrates how fundamental the anti-communism of the Nazis was for their politics. - Kurt Gossweiler is another, East German historian who wrote many pages about the connection between fascism/nazism and capitalism. Pretty sure there have to be some English translations. - Ico Maly is a very interesting author who writes on the Alt-Right, modern far right and what he calls the Anti-Enlightenment tradition. Sadly most of his work exists only in Dutch but I think you can find some English articles and talks. - Michael Parenti's "Blackshirts and Reds" is mostly about socialism but has some stuff on fascism as well. - If you are interested in a detailed account/criticism of the Nazi economy there is "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze.
>>184181 Parenti is what's up
>>184810 >Not that there's anything wrong with being a sexual deviant per se. Bourgeois decadence, sex is for making babies and promoting pair bonding between the mother and father in order to raise healthy intelligent children until full communism is built All other activity is masturbation or mutual masturbation unless the infertile couple adopts children and raises them as their own Unless its pairing off with the approval of their comrades to promote cohesion and morale Dumping a few random books to drag the thread back on topic
Any good audio books? Going to be traveling a lot next year and I want to be able to listen to Marx and other socialist works.
>>192324 try the audio thread >>46642
>China: dictate who can run businesses and who can't, you're still a commie even if you do it really well and efficiently. >Nazi Germany: They privatized industries in name only. The state controlled all production and the means at which is was distributed and at what prices it would be distributed at. They were fundamentally against capitalism. Still commies. Is this true?
>>193368 It has been like this ever since bunkerchan was taken down by a spammer
What are some books that can let me understand why the world right now is the way it is? Stuff like: how the Middle East turned the way it did, the escalations towards Brexit and the economic messes in the EU (i.e. Greece)... I'm a zoomer (but 18) so I never really got to digest or understand stuff that happened before Gaddafi's death, so I lack a bit of context.
>>197331 I just deepdive wikipedia. If you go to the citations sometimes it links to book pdfs :)
>>197331 I'm reading "Buying Time" (The crisis of democratic capitalism) by Wolfgang Streeck right now, it's a fairly easy read that covers the rise of neoliberalism in the "Western World", and the conflict between citizens and lenders of a state, and how this is an extension of the contradiction between wage-earners and capitalists. This book is not strictly "Marxist" but it's a good informative read. Nice analysis of the crises of modern capitalism. Also "Neoliberalism" by David Harvey was a good read on the subject, with a bonus chapter on China.
>>197331 >anything with praise from Foreign Affairs Can't blame you for not being unaware since you are a zoomer but FA is run by these glow boys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations >The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), founded in 1921, is a United States nonprofit think tank specializing in U.S. foreign policy and international affairs. It is headquartered in New York City, with an additional office in Washington, D.C. Its membership, which numbers 4,900, has included senior politicians, more than a dozen secretaries of state, CIA directors, bankers, lawyers, professors and senior media figures. As for actual book suggestions, read A Line in the Sand by James Barr. It's not especially woke or anything but it's a good history of Iraq and the Levant since 1914.
Do you buy Marxist books or just read them online?
(103.54 KB 1536x648 jacobin.png)
>>210046 (me) fuck these guys so much. We need a leftypol-fund to pay for this, also to promote good leftist content creators.
>>212133 Usually buy them, prefer to get old used ones online for cheap.
>>212133 I plan on buying physical books later but for now I just read online.
>>212133 Secondhand book shop and buy them, I usually end up getting cool historical or more obscure political books at the same time that the shop owner will recommend or I find on the shelf beside what I actually came in for
>>212147 Where do you get them?
Does Kissinger provide any insightful geopolitical/IR-related knowledge or are his books full of spooks and neocon propaganda?
>>214786 Kissinger is a based pragmatist who just so happenes to be on American side, so I would guess so. I personally believe that any upcoming socialist power needs to look at him for inspiration on how to conduct foreign policy. Also he definitely wasn't a neocon. In fact neocons ruined a lot of his carefully set up plans (like his sponsorships for dictators) because they thought that was un-American and anti-liberty. Can't say much about him in the current day though, his mind may have been rotten by being so close to neocon power for many years.
>>216119 This. IR Realism is probably generally the most applicable paradigm of geopolitics IMO. You should also check out Mearsheimer.
(101.39 KB 1013x515 crewsbtfo.PNG)
(134.18 KB 1029x655 crewsbtfo2.PNG)
(109.41 KB 1017x685 crewsbtfo3.PNG)
Anybody have a better scan of Black Bolshevik then this one? https://libcom.org/files/Black%20Bolshevik%20Autobiography%20of%20an%20Afro-American%20Communist.pdf Shit sucks and is pretty hard to read, and the physical book is hundreds of dollars
I just found this old as fuck Audiobook website where they made tapes for blind people. Turns out they have Lots more leftist audiobooks than librivox and audible. Can anyone access these?
>>222203 I uploaded What is to be Done? to youtube here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ_GfPz6vbY no copyright claims. If someone has access to learning ally hundreds of texts could also be uploaded without being taken down
>>222432 thanks I'm reposting this in the Audio thread >>46642
>>221527 So Castro is now a Glownig... good to know.
>>223258 Fidel Castro was anti-gun? How do you think he got to power?
>>223265 >How do you think he got to power? his beard-powers <In 1960, the CIA planned to sabotage Castro's speeches by spraying his broadcasting studio with a chemical that would make him suffer similar hallucinations to LSD.Other plots included spiking the dictator's cigars with a chemical that would disorientate him, hoping he would smoke one before delivering one of his marathon oratory performances.They also tried dusting his shoes with thallium salts — which would have made Castro's iconic beard fall out.Like the hundreds of other plots against Castro, all failed.The LSD-like substance was abandoned because it was too unstable, the cigars were never smoked, and Castro canceled the overseas trip that would have given spooks the opportunity to dust his shoes.
can anybody point me toward overt anarchist critiques of idpol, preferably in reviewed journals not idpol but would just prefer the chance to read further
>>230251 if i ever had to cite that i'd look like a massive spacka
can you recommend me some entry-level books about the law of value? this series that I saw posted around here was very helpful ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4MbUx-il6c ), and I want was something like this that starts with the analysis of the commodity and then shows how it's tied to the bigger picture of capitalism. also, something that deals with criticisms from bourgeois economics. Is pic-related a good place to start?
>>231666 i always thought wage labour and capital by Marx was a good entry level book.
>>231666 That book is the absolute best place to start. It makes everything really easy on the reader.
>>231666 Just a word, you should read Capital, but don't expect it to be amazingly groundbreaking. Pretty much everything in it is covered in Kapitalism101's law of value series, just in a much more concise, understandable way. Marx drills basic concepts for like 50 pages too long, continually illustrating them with more examples when you got it the first time. At least, that's how it was in Capital volume 1 and 3. I haven't read volume 2.
>>232131 >>232133 >>232755 I began reading Volume 1 at one point and it wasn't that hard to follow, but I got discouraged by the length. I was looking for a shorter way to understand the basics, but I'm planning to read capital as well. thanks for the suggestions!
>>229954 would love some critiques of idpol which aren't from dog larpers pls...
>>8537 I know about Michael Roberts' blog The Next Recession, but are his books any good? Where can I find them for cheap?
>>238915 I'm about halfway through The Long Depression and it's been a good read.
>>239162 How did you get it?
>>239605 Library.
>>239605 have you checked libgen?
>>239685 Yeah, I can't find him there.
>>240000 Posted it in the economics thread, I'll post it here again, why not.
>>240150 Thanks! Does anyone know how I can convert it to epub or mobi to remove the page numbers for an ereader?
>>240270 No prob. I've heard many people have success with calibre. I tried to use it once, it wasn't cooperating so I stopped and haven't tried since.
>>240270 If you had success with making it an epub or mobi, could you post what you did here and also the results for other anons?
>>241600 I wasn't able to get the mobi version from the pdf, so I ended up buying it. The last time I made a mobi from a PDF was when I converted Robert Thurston's Life and Terror.in in Stalin's Russia to word then removing all the unnecessary stuff and converting to epub and mobi. Let me know what you want me to post.
Perhaps the site doesn't allow epub. Filetype is .pdf, change it to .epub.
>>241675 Still error. Do you have a link?
>>241680 It's on libgen libgen.is http://gen.lib.rus.ec/
>>241687 It's a PDF though, I was offering to give a mobi for Thurston's book or Robert's book.
>>241695 I'm not personally interested but someone else might if you want to upload them. I wanted to share The Long Depression on epub that I found on libgen, but it seems that the site doesn't allow epubs. So I changed the file name from .epub to .pdf. To use it, change the termination from .pdf to .epub. Sorry for the confusion.
I'm feeling slightly dilliusioned by leftwing policies right now. Whenever you look deep into you just seem to find a group of people who defend or deny atrocities whenever it's their guys doing it, like stalin with the volga germans, chechens and others. Am I just looking into the wrong communities, is any lefty doomed to repeat this sentiment?
(20.82 KB 250x324 250px-Friedrich_Engels_HD.jpg)
>>255698 >I'm feeling slightly dilliusioned by leftwing policies right now. My advice is to read a lot and slowly come to your own conclusions. I think the attitudes you're talking about often comes from people who dive in and get over-radicalized in a way, or like they latch onto left-wing politics as an identity and then settle on a tendency that seems true to them, and then they dig a moat around that identity and reject contrary information. I don't have any easy solutions to this problem as my guess is that it probably comes from a much bigger problem which is frustration and atomization and alienation and the frantic search for meaning and identity. So it's probably healthy to cultivate some distance from this thing instead of running into a "camp." I've been enjoying the "You Can't Win" podcast which are some old Rhizzone posters. They talk about left and Marxist stuff but it's very chill, and while they're just some posters they've informed a lot of my outlook. One of the themes in the pod is the danger of thinking about politics as like being on a personal quest or something. This tends to lead to a lot of frustration. >defend or deny atrocities whenever Have several thoughts about it. For one, rushing to defend atrocities almost feels like internalizing right-wing propaganda and mirroring it in a way, and I think the Cold War contributed to this problem, and that still weighs heavily on the present. Because when the Cold War froze the situation everyone was pushed into picking a side and a camp. And if you were a communist in the West, socialism was presented by your own regime as a Moscow-directed plot, so you're left with the choice of rejecting the USSR and becoming a Trotskyist or defending / denying everything bad about the USSR in every circumstance. I also think we should avoid the idea that socialists can't get things wrong or fuck things up. At the same time, not to say the gulags were awesome or whatever, but the gulags also existed before Stalin came to power (he was in one) so you wonder whether this was just a Russian thing that carried over after the communists took power. And if so, what that says is that socialist experiments uncovered structural challenges with the whole deal -- that it's really fucking difficult to transition from an effective fighting organization into a flexible and realistic managerial organization when revolution and war seem to be joined at a hip and no stable peace is offered at any point. The repressive infrastructure of empire that you capture isn't so easily rearranged or demolished in those circumstances. And popular initiative doesn't fully serve as a counterweight to managerial mistakes, seeing as both Stalin and Mao stayed extremely popular figures and random workers often took the hyper-antagonising "enemy of the people" narratives even further than the more educated cadres did. Basically there's a messed up balancing act involved in the whole deal. And let's not forget that it was capitalism that spurred on the whole slave trade and genocided indigenous people everywhere -- untold millions of people killed not because of some looming crisis which required ruthless measures but just for money. They were killed for cold hard cash. And no one has ever taken responsibility! But people sure deserve a lot of credit for putting an end to its most overt forms. As Engels wrote: >All this, of course, relates merely to theory; in practice we shall, as always, be reduced to insisting above all on resolute measures and absolute ruthlessness. And that’s the pity of it. I have a feeling that one fine day, thanks to the helplessness and spinelessness of all the others, our party will find itself forced into power, whereupon it will have to enact things that are not immediately in our own, but rather in the general, revolutionary and specifically petty-bourgeois interest; in which event, spurred on by the proletarian populus and bound by our own published statements and plans — more or less wrongly interpreted and more or less impulsively pushed through in the midst of party strife — we shall find ourselves compelled to make communist experiments and leaps which no-one knows better than ourselves to be untimely. One then proceeds to lose one’s head — only physique parlant I hope — , a reaction sets in and, until such time as the world is capable of passing historical judgment of this kind of thing, one will be regarded, not only as a brute beast, which wouldn’t matter a rap, but, also as bête [stupid], and that’s far worse. I don’t very well see how it could happen otherwise. In a backward country such as Germany which possesses an advanced party and which, together with an advanced country such as France, becomes involved in an advanced revolution, at the first serious conflict, and as soon as there is real danger, the turn of the advanced party will inevitably come, and this in any case will be before its normal time. However, none of this matters a rap; the main thing is that, should this happen, our party’s rehabilitation in history will already have been substantiated in advance in its literature.
>>256053 That Engels quote is prophetic, I can't believe I've never seen it before. What's the context for it?
Anyone have kapital vol. IV in pdf form? all i an find are epub versions
>>260754 You can convert it to pdf using this: https://ebook.online-convert.com/convert-to-pdf
>>260754 Here's a copy of "Theories of surplus value" pdf I found on libgen
>>255698 >In every revolution some follies are inevitably committed, just as they are at any other time, and when quiet is finally restored, and calm reasoning comes, people necessarily conclude: We have done many things which had better been left undone, and we have neglected many things which we should have done, and for this reason things went wrong. >But what a lack of judgment it requires to declare the Commune sacred, to proclaim it infallible, to claim that every burnt house, every executed hostage, received their just dues to the dot over the i! Is not that equivalent to saying that during that week in May the people shot just as many opponents as was necessary, and no more, and burnt just those buildings which had to be burnt, and no more? Does not that repeat the saying about the first French Revolution: Every beheaded victim received justice, first those beheaded by order of Robespierre and then Robespierre himself! To such follies are people driven, when they give free rein to the desire to appear formidable, although they are at bottom quite good-natured. t. Engels
I've just uploaded the works of Deng Xiaoping in german language: >DENG XIAOPING - Ausgewählte Schriften (1975-1982) https://archive.org/details/28_20200211 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1QVCE9sckU0itB9-9ONFW7N8Nc3Hc7SAc
(4.95 MB 1640x1701 swcc gang.png)
>>271222 Absolutely based, Kameraden
(101.83 KB FOUR FUTURES.pdf)
Here's a book-formatted PDF ver. of the Jacobin article 'Four Futures', which looks at four models for humanities future: 2 good (socialism) and 2 bad (barbarism).
>>276225 here a few criticism of that text: >it has the theme of ever increasing automation, even saying that capitalism being very efficient at incentivising labour saving devices but labour productivity is not rising any-more, so the automation narrative is just not true, and wile capitalism does pursue labour-saving devices it is not very efficient, because it does prefer to seek out lowering wages over improving technical means for the purpose of labour saving devices. >there's the theme of hierarchy = wealth concentration this isn't actually true (there have been very hierarchicle societies with very low levels of wealth concentrations), and this is also falsely attributed to Marx. This is a recurring theme in this text all hierarchy is reduced to a class based one, it's the liberal thinking error that sees the world on an axis of liberal v authoritarian. it's fundamentally a right-wing concept because there too all Authority is equated with concentrated wealth, which grants power through the ability to bribe others. But this is not the only form of Authority. >moving past fossil fuel in combination with automation will end all scarcity And then the falling price of solar panels is cited as way towards post scarcity, which use scarce rare-earth minerals and hence Solar will have diminishing returns like any other measure. The subtextual assumption here is neo-liberal theme of markets causing acceleration in technology. While in reality markets reduce the speed at which technology is adopted, because basically it's putting a pay-wall in front of technology and then fewer people can use it because the are excluded via the money barrier. >decentralisation and absence of hierarchy is once again linked to a society with low wealth concentration, and then as example to illustrate this, the SciFi TV Show Star trek is pointed out, which is hyper-centralised it's got a world government and all of it's major production facility are centralised on Mars in a single facility ... >in the absence of money and property an new system of decentralised reputation hierarchies emerges, that while not perfect, will be many hierarchies instead of just one Yeah this is nonsense, reputation hierarchies are subject to network effects and coalesces into monolithic power even faster than capitalist money market schemes >Class society could be retained in A scifi world that has replicators locked down with Intellectual property rentier-ism. It isn't actually possible from an information theory standpoint to completely lock down computer devices But even if it were, physical access to hardware means that you can flip the switch in the DRM-module from NO to YES by external means All it takes is one unlocked replicator getting out and people using that one to replicate new replicators. Heck you don't even need people you could just instruct the unlocked replicator to self-replicated with a set of wheels and tell it to seek out people. It's not likely that the development of replicators can be done in a hermetically sealed box, so the chances of IP-locked replicators becoming 100% of replicators is unlikely to begin with, and it's a statistical certainty that eventually an unlocked replicators self-replicates and displaces the locked ones, even just as a result of an error. >Leonid Kantorovich is accused on advocating for markets, It is true that the Soviet orthodoxy interpreted it that way, but he just advocated for a type of consumer feed-back, which is not what markets are about. >Leonid Kantorovich is then cited again as a advocate for CO2-emmisions trading. This is a preposterous misrepresentation. Financialising CO2 emissions is nothing but a theocratic measure where you can purchase in indulgence in the neo-liberal church of market fundamentalism, to reduce your Sins against the environment. This measure will have no effect on the environment, you can't pay nature to forgive your climate sins, because nature is a moneyless dictatorship that imposes it's laws with a will and ferocity that makes Stalin look like an Anarchist. >The forth scenario where the 99% are killed off, and communism originates from the descendants of the 1% is not possible, because capitalism will not generate full automation, in capitalism profits are the driving force and those can only be produced by human labour. Machines are not exploitable, they do not produce surplus, hence capitalism ends before automation can reach anywhere near completion. The future scenario where the 1% are not overthrown, capitalism collapses and with it most of civilisation, the 1% will not be able to adapt to this, their entourage will disappear and they wont be able, survive the withdrawal symptoms of having all their privileges revoked. And pretty much the same will happen to all the other aspects of society where your survival will correlate with how close you are to the bottom of production especially food production. So some subsistence farmer in a 3rd world country has a very good chances of being part of the progenitor-group of the future communist society. The parts of the pre-collapse capitalist society that will hold out the longest is military because they have big fuel reserves that grants them ability to run a protection racket for a few years. The winners/survivors in this scenario are probably the bottom 10% of society and they will likely build a communist society because they live in a communal society model that inherits a large part of the left over technology base of capitalism, without any of the societal baggage attached to it.
Collection of texts written on Dialectical Materialism by Lenin, Marx, Engels, Trotsky. Really worth your time I promise, especially if you are just getting in to this topic!
It's ya boy Engels back at it again with 'THE PRINCIPLES OF COMMUNISM' - reformatted two-column PDF.
>>280201 I feel like I have been overcomplicating some stuff. This makes a bunch of things very very clear that I had previously been unsure on.
Anyone got a PDF of 'J is for Junk Economics' or any of Michael Hudson's other books?
>>284938 it's on libgen
(14.03 KB 300x200 _120208_bevan2_300.jpg)
What books would you recommend someone who is interested in Michael Parenti?
>>288914 I read Blackshirts&Reds and Profit Pathology. Both good tbh. The first one has a lot of interesting stuff/data on the transition to capitalism in Eastern Europe but also other topics. The latter has several short articles on different shady outcomes of unbridled capitalism. As a European it was eapecially interesting (and shocking) to read the sections on American healthcare and PG&E's antics. Both of these books are easy to read. I also have To Kill a Nation, didn't read it yet, however you really have to take that one with a pinch of salt since Parenti tries to cover up for any bad thing Serbian troops did and soms of his claims have been refuted. Love his article on Tibet as well (top lazy to link buy it's online)
>>288914 He's got some pretty hot takes on the Soviet Union, but as a student of Roman history I really enjoyed this one.
Repost: Telling people to " read capital " is retarded, most of you who say it haven't even read capital yourself. Here is a collection of lectures of interviews that I have found to be the most helpful and the best resources for radicalizing and educating. <IMPERIALISM: >Michael Parenti: Globalization, the "New" Imperialism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnhYOvPvNEQ[Embed] >Michael Hudson: Resisting Empire https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xluStDQp9yE[Embed] >The Face of Imperialism-Michael Parenti- part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKhRE61VE0E[Embed] >History is Marching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S-CwVJxxug[Embed] <MARXIST ECONOMIC THEORY AND BEYOND: >Crisis and Openings: Introduction to Marxism - Richard D Wolff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9Whccunka4[Embed] >Anti-Capitalist Chronicles: How Capitalism Works https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGmEUR3gDew[Embed] >Left Out: Michael Hudson on Junk Economics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6y35aO_fpU[Embed] >Empire and Economics: The Long History of Debt-Cancelation from Antiquity to Today https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4DkZ3CWFOk[Embed] >Dr. Michael Hudson: Economic Lessons for 2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nluLNA30e8k[Embed] <LEFTIST CRITIQUE OF CULTURE: >What are societies of control? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_i8_WuyqAY[Embed] >Hauntology, Lost Futures and 80s Nostalgia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSvUqhZcbVg[Embed] >Capitalism, Cultural Disintegration, and Buzzfeed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9srhgHzUFd4[Embed] >The Emoji Movie, Adorno and the Culture Industry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-m_7G31yh4[Embed] >Capitalist Realism, Mental Illness and Societies of Control https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPeBEcsmWTY[Embed] >A Dying Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jLbq9VwOK8[Embed]
I found a book that's a companion to chapter 1 of Capital. It's called Reading Capital Politically by Harry Cleaver The introduction basically says everyone is a revisionist except me, which I believe to some degree. It also has an interesting critique about Critical Theory and theorists. Anyways, my question is, is it any good?
A State Adequate to the Task - Conversations with Lao Xie Interview with dedicated Maoists in China about the state of the Chinese (and global) left.
From Marx to Goldman Sachs The Fictions of Fictitious Capital - Article by Micheal Hudson
>>291852 >Interview with Lao Xie- by anti-state Chinese communist journal Chuang here is the source http://libcom.org/forums/asia/interview-10102018 http://chuangcn.org/journal/two/an-adequate-state/ it seems that Lao Xie is a pseudonym, and since libcom is shilling this, there are some doubts the motivations, because libcom tends to hold the position where they paint all socialist states to be capitalist. This text goes so far as call current China imperialist, and that's just adopting mainstream talking points. Other criticism: >I heard that in Russia, some people who were Stalinists and Trotskyists in the 1990s have ended up becoming fascists over the past few years. And I see that possibility here among some of these Maoists promoting Sectarianism >We need a mental breakthrough, a qualitative leap. But on the left there’s this ridiculous phenomenon: lots of self-proclaimed theorists... promoting anti-theory and idealism ---- I have come across this text now multiple times on bunkerchan, it was heavy criticised every time it was posted and it seems like somebody is aggressively pushing this, despite the problems with this.
>>295213 Pretty weak criticism, to be honest.
>>295706 >Pretty weak criticism, to be honest. you mean Lao Xie's
>>297127 No, I meant yours. You should probably link to something more substantial.
>>297579 he holds a principled anti-state position, while the Chinese state is expanding public infrastructure and implementing quite effective poverty reduction methods, and pretty much all their strategic industry is in the public sector. Their foreign policy has the effect of increasing the level of development of weaker nations. They don't warmonger, they don't push embargo's or sanctions that harms people, they don't fund terrorism. Yet because of of the retarded notion of conflating all authoritarian measures as the same without any regard towards evaluating the material effects, this is somehow bad.
(72.47 KB 638x967 LENIN4BEGINNERS.PNG)
'Lenin For Beginners' - A humorous biographical comic book focusing on Lenin's life, theory and practice.
(913.01 KB 562x834 marxu.PNG)
(416.00 KB 504x766 mowmow.PNG)
>>304045 Here is 'Marx for Beginners' and 'Mao for Beginners' in the same vein and by the same author/artist team. (I would post them here, but the filesize of each is too large) Marx: https://ia800204.us.archive.org/1/items/MarxForBeginners-English/marx_for_beginners.pdf Mao: https://linx.li/sopikyte.pdf
Here's a BIG ASS site I found with links to every good theory reading list, commie myth debunks, first-hand resources and documentaries on socialist history, PDF and audiobook stashes plus YT uploads and articles: https://marxist.space/
>>255698 Tbh anon, at some point you just have to accept that, unfortunately, "it's ok when we do it" is true. Obviously there are some things that you'll never think are good, regardless of who does it. This comes down to your own subjective morality and/or that of a group that thinks similarly, but after all, would we really say a coup is bad if it's socialists doing it? Or if a socialist nation rigged elections of another nation? Deep down we may know it's bad (I know multiple people here wouldn't give a shit) but at the end we still accept because we know how fucked the socialist movement is right now, so we simply say fuck it and move on with it, we know it's sometimes necessary and even when it isn't we still take the easy way out as any means whatsoever may end up being useful to help revive how dead as fuck the left is right now.
>>307398 >>>307398 No there is no moral equivalence, you have to look not only at the means but also the ends, if a socialist coup leads to the betterment of people than it is justified, if a right wing coups leads to death-squates gunning down the lower classes than this is not justified. Stop with your liberal idealism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npkeecCErQc
>>307398 Alternatively, get out of the mindset that we are better people or "more moral" or something like that. It's hard to say whether the Soviet leaders were "better," but there were also reasons they came into power in that country that wasn't just because they were mean sons of bitches, although some of them could be pretty mean. It's more of a historical process and that all revolutions -- the liberal revolutions too of course -- have had their reigns of terrors and their excesses.
(108.80 KB 1430x774 Catholic Left.jpg)
(379.77 KB 512x512 neo.png)
I'm a Leftist who has become increasingly tired of petty consumerism, be it; products, brands, or the people who identify with them. In other words, neo-liberals attached dearly to things without any genuine value, like knick-knack bullshit void of both utilitarian use and artistic merit. I understand I am petty, but what do I do to remove myself from such rumination? Anything I can read to help reinforce my viewpoints or even distance myself from my obsession?
>>316395 I would suggest Simulacra and Simulation, or System of Objects, if you aren't allergic to French literature.
Any kind souls have recommendations for an unbiased book on the Russian revolution? Mainly the history of it, important figures, etc.
>>307704 "Justified" is the language of idealists, you have a pretty childish understanding of politics. There are no good guys, there's just groups of individuals with goals based on what they believe is best, either for them, for the rest, or both. "Betterment of the people" is a spook, yes statistically socialism ends up helping the majority, but socialism, like any other ideology/economical system isn't to help everyone. Nothing exists to help everyone, anyone that tries to convince you of that is a lying populist. Capitalism is meant to strengthen the ruling class, socialism strengthens the oppressed class, in both scenarios someone loses.
>>318017 The History of the Russian Revolution by Leon Trotsky
(183.51 KB 583x485 wojak_Yes_mask.png)
How come no matter what I read/watch I still end up returning to right wing thought? I believe that the left has more facts then feelings yet I have to think twice whenever asked for my opinion on something. Basically I have a few contradictory opinions and can't make my mind up, am I just too brainwashed? This is a serious post
>>322931 >I have a few contradictory opinions and can't make my mind up Can you be more specific?
>>322999 Well I was raised by a fairly conservative family (my dad moved the family from south africa due to the violence against whites) So for example I understand that race isnt really a thing yet I still believe in some form of nationalism (maybe its embedded in me??) There a few others but I can't really think of any at the moment (am a bit tired but I might reply again with some other beliefs of mine) For the record I haven't really read any leftist theory because of these contradictions that I can't figure out.
>>323031 Read theory, understand Marx. Then you can apply your values on top of it. If you're still racist, well, at least you'll know why, and if you're ever in power, how to influence politics to create the world you want to see.
>>323031 >So for example I understand that race isnt really a thing yet I still believe in some form of nationalism The problem with nationalism is that it's absolutely pointless. If you went sick for three months in your country, nobody would cure you, if then you went homeless, nobody would house you, and if you then died, they would throw you body in a dumpster since even a burial costs money. However if some big porky started losing money, his country would bail him out using your money they took as taxes. Your nation isn't yours, it belongs to the bourgeoisie and you're not wrong to say it's some degree of brainwashing. If I remember correctly, there's a Mark Twain quote about how travel is the best antidote against prejudice, so I would recommend talking to proles of different races, nationalities, etc. and see for yourself how similar the things you want are. If you lived and worked in a socialist country where you were an immigrant, you would be taken care of in a tragedy. In the capitalist country you were born in, they would leave you to die.
>>323031 >For the record I haven't really read any leftist theory because of these contradictions that I can't figure out You should read some concerning these contradictions, instead of avoiding it because of them. It will help you figure things out. (Also quite possibly lead you to new ones).
>>323106 >>323265 >>324768 Thanks for answering, I will give classic Marx ago and I'll go on from there. Is there an official /leftypol/ reading list?
>>326886 Not them, but yes, second post under OP here >>10435 I'd honestly recommend starting with https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm Since it's an easy read, Stalin aimed his writing at newly literate workers and peasants as introductory writing Sometimes this means he over simplifies things though, fair warning; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbjZlKqDCMA Cockshott shows how Stalin oversimplifies modes of production here for example http://paulcockshott.co.uk/reality/polemic/socmod.htm This is a good follow on from Cockshott's youtube talk btw
Adolph Reed: Identity Politics Is Neo-liberalism
>>62737 yeah but i hate jazz
>>331004 >quantum physics is reactionary
>>331832 >The Tyranny of the Consciousness-Raisers >Raising consciousness is a process thatmust separate the subject from allwrongness, or ‘false consciousness’ asDebord would write, and which must bepractised in the heart – and only theraisers of consciousness know exactlywhat the new consciousness is. In theend, of course, a raised consciousness issimply a new loyalty to another ideologyand, more importantly, the proponents ofthat ideology. Seriously ? this isn't just idealist relativism, and anti-communist slanders This is some hardcore reactionary that sais raising class conciseness is bad
>>331832 >The Mass Line and Student Organizing |Revolutionary Student Movement >Finally, the mass line is not massfetishism. There is a tendency,predominately but not exclusively amongwhite male communists in the first world,to fetishize the masses. Everything thatthe masses do, according to thesepeople, is somehow sacred and shouldn’tbe questioned or criticized. Thisphenomenon is closely linked toworkerism, or the extension of identity-politic type concepts to class: to be aworker is considered another aspect ofone’s identity. This approach to themasses is usually rooted in a romanticized view of the masses andclass struggle, and is usually found withinpeople that have very little connection tothe masses or class struggle.Revolutionaries can and must criticizebackwards practices found within themasses, practices like, but not limited to:racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. . Themass line is a means by which theseincorrect ideas can be systematicallyabolished, not encouraged simplybecause the masses hold them. The mass line as radlib purity spiral ? not to mention "white male" is the calling cry of the neoliberal id-pol pseudo left this sounds like it's the aspiring labour aristocrats and Petit bourgeois fighting for privilege
>>332365 >>332375 Just to let everyone know, I don't read these articles before I make PDFs of them, I make them so I can read them offline at a later date and upload them here for others to use.
>>333293 >Interesting part is that things are getting messed up too quickly it might end up crashing their party prematurely. Extremely based. Boomers eternal btfo.
Comrades, the time has come. During the last few years I've been saving and collecting thousands of pdfs and it's time to share them with you, especially since I've noticed that there are a lot of newfags joining the board recently. Some of these were actually uploaded years ago, but I had not shared them with anyone until now. I'd recommend that you don't skip any of them even if they're not your specific ideology because they all have lots of interesting stuff. If anyone has more links with pdfs, feel free to post them here. Enjoy! >The Leftist Bookshelf (4.16 GB, 600+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!QUFQSBja!hPbmmLolJBGwSQ848nncnw This was originally a torrent but I can't find the link anymore. Its description was: "640 eBooks, mostly in PDF format (a bunch are CHM, DJVU or ePUB), from a revolutionary Leftist viewpoint. The main subjects are politics and philosophy, history, economics, and much much more." >Political Theory (MLM) (2.64 GB, 550+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!4M1FnTgI!CdM8WWjpBC_UHGCJk9AHzA I found this on reddit years ago (circa 2016) Don't really remember who made it or where it came from, but this is a reading course (politics, philosophy, economics, etc) focused on Maoism. Has many books and articles on the USSR, PRC, Stalin, Mao, etc. >The Anarchist Library (669 MB, 4000+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!gRFkQCLY!5gUkmaubpp_P_yKLZiBJ9Q This is a complete mirror of the anarchist library with pdfs and epubs >Little Bunker of Marxism-Leninism (680 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!0QtCiI7L!MJZJk-SdjyBuBZOuNJuOPQ Unfinished project focused on M-L with more than 100 books on several topics like history, economics, politics, etc. Lots of stuff on the USSR. >Historical Materialism series (330 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!9IkymYBZ!B8vB2yDP0Qv_-DPS2ro-HA A pdf archive of over 100 books from the Historical Materialism book series. I got this from thecharnelhouse.org years ago and the website had released many marxist books from other publishers but unfortunately it's been taken down. >/leftypol/ with a slash of liberty (239 MB, 100+ files) https://mega.nz/#F!sFMQXJ6J!JboByVCZScC6Jq2YXE0Exw I didn't make this, just reuploading it. This is a classic /leftypol/ link, marxist stuff mixed with anarchism. >Marx & Engels Collected Works (900+ MB, 50 files) https://mega.nz/#F!BJEmkQiZ!vylIbCWFrqIeYaLiuN2szg The official, complete works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels organized in 50 volumes and 3 categories.
(24.28 KB 188x338 medal.png)
>>334678 I haven't answered so more people could see your post, but infinite thanks, based AF. BTW, added it to the second post of this thread.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this but I couldn't find any that seemed better. In about a week I will be starting college, where I'll study Geography. However, it seems that the field is not as well established as others such as History, Political Science or Philosphy. Could you fellas perphaps recommend me content that would be useful in the areas of Geography? I have found some authors like David Harvey but would like to find some books or content that is not as popular and of great quality.
Does anyone have that Yuri Gagarin image with the text talking about how for a short moment in time, we won?
is there any interest for a torrent that contains all files posted thus far in this thread?
>>342287 I don't think any of the files posted here are exclusive to this thread (or site), but if you could make one big torrent with a file structure imitating a reading list (3 levels of difficulty for each relevant subject; 'Begginers Philosophy', 'Medium Economics', 'Advanced History') for newbies, that would be pretty great!
Anyone having a reading list for anarcho-communism and post-left?
>>345294 read the classics. read the critiques of them but only from lile-minded thinkers. read recommended reading. don't have some nerd compile a list for you when you can do it yourself.
>>349774 like-minded*
>>345369 why do I get so emotional?
I made this easy reading version of Einstein's 'Why Socialism?' essay to give out locally. I just replaced some of the academic language in here with more common words and phrases. Tell me if ive spelt anything wrong pls.
>>353257 >ends with the phrase "cuck philosophy" wow normal people will love this fuck off moron
>>353491 Despite the name, Cuck Philosophy is one of the best philosophy channels on Youtube and frequently basis his essays on Marxist authors and forms of analysis, see here: https://invidio.us/watch?v=J8LxORztUWY I understand your point though.
(18.67 KB 800x800 456ftg4z.png)
>>353257 >A planned economy may also, if we're not careful, be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. Either get rid of this part altogether, or elaborate how the planned economy empowers the individual. But don't put in your propaganda that you might end up enslaving people. Seriously you don't see car-advertisement that show mangled car-wrecks.
>>353838 Hey tankie, planned economies dont have to be communist, a elite can use a whole population and economy and take control of it and turn it into a planned economy that only benefits them. In fact this is the future of capitalism, a future where companies will be so monopolycal that they will control everything and there won't be competition. It's a good thing that tankies are basically non existant and no worker supports anymore your bullshit. And i support a planned economy, just in a context of a democratic and free society, where workers control everything instead of what happened in your leninist shitholes
>>357684 monopolistic* excuse my shitalian autism
>>357684 Do you have any argument for your claim that you can have a planned capitalist economy. I mean asides from insults and historic distortions. The claim that you can have a continuation of capitalism with large monopolised mega-corporation, has already been refuted. Basically the economic basis for this would be the ability to keep making profits, which Nobuo Okishio has attempted to prove, and failed. The jist of it is: that the attempt to overcome the falling rate of profit, mega-corporations would try to implement new countermeasures against declining profit rates resulting increasing the exploitation of workers beyond their ability to reproduce their labour power. You would see declining live expectancy and declining birth-rates. The result is a degraded people and a society that disintegrates into tiny fiefdoms, which would shatter large corporate structures. I don't think you can have a fully planned economy as long as class antagonisms persist. Just consider the dynamics of class societies, you have factions whose economic interests would align with sabotage of the plans, not the fulfilment of plans.
>>358047 I don't see any reason why you couldn't have say, the government or one large corporation owning and planning everything. Profit is meaningless if you literally own everything so the falling rate of profit wouldn't apply, and plus, it only applies when you have to compete to lower prices due to competition involving productivity and automation. In a planned economy, it doesn't matter if it takes you 2 seconds to make a commodity, if you want to, you can still keep the price of the commodity artificially high, thus avoiding the falling rate of profit. It wouldn't be Capitalist, but if one group is the administrators and owners and the other is workers, its still very clearly a class society.
>>358100 I'm not sure what you mean here 1 property has a condition that it can be bought and sold in a market. I don't think that you can have property if there's only one owner. it has to be something else. 2 Corporations have as legal definition that they have to pursue profit, and they are organised to do this, i don't understand why you think this structure could continue to exist without profit. Are you suggesting that they turn into something else after they have captured everything ? >In a planned economy, it doesn't matter if it takes you 2 seconds to make a commodity, if you want to, you can still keep the price of the commodity artificially high, thus avoiding the falling rate of profit. I addressed this in my previous post, there is no fix for the falling rate of profit, if you do systemic price gouging you increase the exploitation of workers if you continue doing that long enough eventually the workers will no longer reproduce their labour power, you cannot look at an economy without looking at population and demography. The thinking error here is that you probably think oh the mega-corp that runs everything can capture all the value-add from improving technology and continue to have profits for ever. But that is not so profits do not come from machines they come from people economies are about people. >It wouldn't be Capitalist, but if one group is the administrators and owners and the other is workers, its still very clearly a class society. Ok now you changed the premise, this is a new debate, you seem to be referencing technocracy or at least a variant of that. Technocracies tend to replace the money commodity with something else. The original technocracy movement that coined the name wanted to use energy as currency. Is that what you mean here ?
>>358221 >property has a condition that it can be bought and sold in a market. I don't think that you can have property if there's only one owner. it has to be something else. I agree. It not really "property" and its not really "Capitalist". Its still clearly a class society though. I'm not the same guy you were talking to previous by the way. >Are you suggesting that they turn into something else after they have captured everything ? Yes, sort of. If you control all production and property, there really isn't such a thing as profit. You are giving people money to buy from you, you produce the commodities that they buy with the wages you pay. It would be fundamentally different from Capitalism, the motive being power and control rather than solely profit, but it would still very much be a class society with a working class and a group of rulers who have very different relations to the means of production. >I addressed this in my previous post, there is no fix for the falling rate of profit, if you do systemic price gouging you increase the exploitation of workers if you continue doing that long enough eventually the workers will no longer reproduce their labour power, you cannot look at an economy without looking at population and demography. The thinking error here is that you probably think oh the mega-corp that runs everything can capture all the value-add from improving technology and continue to have profits for ever. Practically, Why does monopoly pricing necessarily mean increasing worker exploitation? The falling rate of profit works like this in my understanding: >One company produces new constant capital technology, which grants them super profits >Other companies get this new technology, and soon the general price has been lowered through competition. >But now, thanks to an increase in Capital over Labor within the organic composition of Capital, the amount of surplus value decreases, and the margin over cost of production is smaller. The rate of profit has fallen. But say this one new company has a total monopoly over its industry. >The company produces new constant capital technology, it can now produce twice the products with half the labor >with no one to compete with, they maintain the same price as always >their rate of profit increases, because cost of production has decreased.
tl;dr- capitalism bad
>>358255 >It would be fundamentally different from Capitalism, the motive being power and control rather than solely profit, but it would still very much be a class society with a working class and a group of rulers who have very different relations to the means of production. Ok power and control aren't proper materialist concepts. You'd have to describe a model of the relations between people and how that relates to material conditions. >falling rate of profit, monopolies , Exploitation ... Ok what you have to understand here is that capitalists as a class do not make profits from machines, Machines have to be payed in full. capitalists as a class can only make profits from workers because workers can be underpayed. What you are proposing here is just a slight of hand of accounting, whether you reduce wages or over-price commodities doesn't matter. Consider that if the capitalist class continuous advancing technology that means that machine capital will increase relative to labour in the economy and since only the labour part can be exploited for profit, that means that profit either declines or people are exploited harder. Consider that in this case accumulation of capital decreases profits, and not the technology competition. Now what has to be said here is that capitalist look at labour as a cost, rather what it is, the source of all value, this is money-mystification.
>>358762 >Ok what you have to understand here is that capitalists as a class do not make profits from machines, Monopoly bypasses the normal mechanisms of Capitalism. Rosa Luxemburg knew that, and said that: >“Cartels are fundamentally nothing else than a means resorted to by the capitalist mode of production for the purpose of holding back the fatal fall of the rate of profit in certain branches of production”. Its not a slight of hand trick of accounting. You can keep wages the same, keep prices the same, but because you reduced cost of production, you increase profit. In a fully monopolized system, there is no falling rate of profit and the general laws of value do not apply because the value of a commodity is not determined by market competition, but rather solely by the Monopolist. >Consider that if the capitalist class continuous advancing technology that means that machine capital will increase relative to labour >in the economy and since only the labour part can be exploited for profit, that means that profit either declines or people are exploited harder. Imagine the case of super profits in a normal competitive capitalist economy. The organic composition of capital shrinks in favor of more capital and lass labor, but because other companies have not caught up, you can sell at the same price but with a lower cost of production. Thus you gain an additional super profit without increasing exploitation, and perhaps actually lessening it by replacing workers with more efficient machines. In a normal competitive capitalist system, this doesn't last. The innovation is taken up by the others, and the general price goes down, ruining your super profit. In a Monopolist system, this super profit can last forever because there is no competition.
(11.57 KB 572x417 capturejap1.png)
>>358805 No Monopoly Super-profits come at the expense of profits from other capitalists. These capitalists will then fail and the super-profits of Monopolists will go away as well. Again profits do not come from machines, they come from labour, in your example profits will at best correspond to population growth. If the capitalists can set prices of commodities as they like without any interference from competitors, then it makes no difference whether the capitalists over-charge for commodities or weather they lower wages. The capitalist class can make profits from workers because they don't have to pay workers full price for their labour power, they cannot make profits on machines because they have to pay full price on machines. Competition is not the only factor that drives down profits, if capitalist increase automation they will decrease the relative share of the "exploitable component" (workers) and hence profits will decline. Capitalists would than seek to increase exploitation, but that too is not a fix because if you exploit people too hard they can't reproduce their labour power, and that will cause profits to decline as well. There is no eternal profit and there is no way capitalist can bypass the laws of motion of capitalism. Stop saying that workers are a cost, to capitalists, workers are the ones that are forced to pay capitalists in terms of surplus. If the source of surplus shrinks then so do profits, just have look at Japan (pic)
>>358951 If you switch to a socialist mode of production with planning, and have solved the contradiction of class society, profits go to zero and the surplus that workers produce can either be invested in labour saving devices or in leisure time.
>>358951 >No Monopoly Super-profits come at the expense of profits from other capitalists. True. >in your example profits will at best correspond to population growth. Why? Explain in practical terms, not just by saying that machines can't create profit and that less workers means less total profit. I know the theory. Explain why keeping prices and wages the same but lowering the cost of production does not increase profit in this scenario.
>>358951 >No Monopoly Super-profits come at the expense of profits from other capitalists. This only happens if some of the Capitalists can't sell all their commodities because of limited demand. If instead this expansion of production corresponds with an increase in demand then all Capitalists could sell all products, and super profit could be had without any capitalist paying the price.
>>358805 <Cartels are fundamentally nothing else than a means resorted to by the capitalist mode of production for the purpose of holding back the fatal fall of the rate of profit in certain branches of production Well that's only half the story, this was a critique of Bernstein who said that this was a method of adaptation of capital to prevent the fall in the rate of profit indefinitely. >Cartels are fundamentally nothing else than a means resorted to by the capitalist mode of production for the purpose of holding back the fatal fall of the rate of profit in certain branches of production. What method do cartels employ for this end? That of keeping inactive a part of the accumulated capital. The accumulated capital is the highly important part here. Capitalism is a victim of its own success. It has developed technologies so good that it has gone beyond scarcity. However, too high supply lowers prices which lowers profits. That's why they have to inactivate capital. A good example of this is the US agriculture industry. To maintain profitability the US government buys up unsold food, poisons it, and destroys it. This inactivation of capital is necessary since it prevents the fall in the rate of profit, at least for a time since as Rosa Luxembourg writes: >When the outlets of disposal begin to shrink, and the world market has been extended to its limit and has become exhausted through the competition of the capitalist countries – and sooner or later that is bound to come – then the forced partial idleness of capital will reach such dimensions that the remedy will become transformed into a malady, and capital, already pretty much “socialised” through regulation, will tend to revert again to the form of individual capital. In the face of the increased difficulties of finding markets, each individual portion of capital will prefer to take its chances alone. At that time, the large regulating organisations will burst like soap bubbles and give way to aggravated competition. This is what is meant that monopoly super-profits are at the expense of capitalists. All that held back capital is preventing competition and thus further concentration of capital into fewer hands. Take the example of Russia and OPEC. Just like in the case of US agriculture, oil companies have to limit production in order to be profitable. OPEC has tried to do this as much as possible, but this cannot go on forever. The US has been able to expand its shale oil production, effectively releasing more capital into the market. That's why countries like Russian and Saudi Arabia now have to break off any production limiting deals since the holding back of capital now harms them individually. Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this.
>>359009 >Why? Explain in practical terms, not just by saying that machines can't create profit and that less workers means less total profit. I know the theory. Explain why keeping prices and wages the same but lowering the cost of production does not increase profit in this scenario. I already answered this if the capitalist class is able to artificially set commodity prices they are just reducing wages by other means. It doesn't really matter whether you take from the workers pay check or whether you take it at the cash-register in the shops, this is just a accounting trick. It's an an increase in exploitation, if you keep increasing exploitation then workers will not be able to reproduce their labour-power and the rate of profit is going to decline, because it degrades people birth rates will go down as well and then the capitalist class has fewer workers it can exploit and that's a negative spiral. I don't really know where you got hung up.
>>359091 >This only happens if some of the Capitalists can't sell all their commodities because of limited demand. If instead this expansion of production corresponds with an increase in demand then all Capitalists could sell all products, and super profit could be had without any capitalist paying the price. Yeah I already addressed this,the profit rate would then correspond to population growth. But that is just a abstract thought experiment that requires profits to be balanced across al sectors, and have no environmental constraints. That just never happens in the real world. In the real world you do not get balanced profit rates across all sectors and you have environmental constraints and the result is population decline and a falling rate of profit.
>>359605 I thought it over, is this the logic your using? Say I can produce an apple with 2 dollars in wages and 1 dollars in machinery. I sell this apple for 5 dollars All my workers get paid two dollars per hour and work 8 hours, meaning they end up with 16 dollars. I then make a better machine that allows me to produce 5 apples with 2 dollars in wages and 1 dollar in machinery. I continue to sell this apple for 5 dollars. Workers can still buy the same amount of apples with the same wages. My profit rates goes up if I can increase demand by population growth or advertising, or more likely, they stay exactly the same with the extra apples being tossed out as if I never actually had any innovation. Profits don't grow without growth in demand here, but they don't fall either, expect the problem is that with each growth in automation less and less workers are needed in the production process, meaning more and more unemployment and less and less demand. The only way to solve it would be to pay workers to do useless jobs or give money for nothing, which locks profit back into corresponding with population growth because you are literally paying people to buy from you. Is that the idea? There is no falling rate of profit, but profit rates are instead just stagnant?
>>360093 good grief, now i know where you hang up is. if your apple company makes the same amount of money this year as last year then your profit has gone down.
>>360255 No? Lets assume demand is static. I make 5 apples with 5 dollars, and sell them all for 2 dollars a piece. I make 10 dollars, a 100% rate of profit over investment, in total earning 5 dollars profit. I make 10 apples with 5 dollars, and sell 5 of them for 2 dollars a piece, throwing out the rest. I make 10 dollars, a 100% rate of profit over investment, in total earning 5 dollars profit. Rate of profit is the same.
>>360776 These kinds of thought experiments aren't particularly useful, nothing is really static, and you just ignored to ad the money you made from one year to the capital stock of the following year. Anyway you have to look at the economy as a hole. What you have to realise here is that there is not just a falling rate of profit due to technological competition but also do the rate of accumulation. And the measures you advocate just shift causes of the falling rate of profit around: you reduce competition at the expense of an increase in rate of accumulation.
since we're anonymous let's use that for the sake of asking a question: do you lads talk about books you haven't read? i'm fairly new to leftypol i'll admit. in my short time here it appears to me that whenever i talk to people about the books they mention (and often cite) the majority miss details that couldn't be more obvious were you to have even quickly skimmed through. this is highly frustrating because these people will create threads, comment and compare, and even critique things they have probably only seen a youtube video/read the wikipedia article thereof.
>>375241 You know to be honest I used to read alot more, but now I have to work so much that the only theory I'm really able to regurgitate is stuff I can quickly remind myself of. I read capital and a bunch of secondary literature on it some years ago, but I'll be dammed if I can remember much of it. It's definitely a problem, but there are some things that are fairly easy to convince people of: universal health care, stagnant wages, inequality, etc. The bigger problem I have is despooking boomers on race and nationality; but younger people are less racist, especially those who work abroad. What I mean by this is Mao was right. You have to go out of your room at some point and that necessarily means cutting down on how much you read.
>>375323 >but now I have to work so much this is unlucky. i have managed to find time to read even with a job, political engagements, and a decent social life. but i understand that there are times where you either don't have the time or you don't have the energy. still, you wouldn't be the type of person to get into conversations about books you've never even touched. these are the people i am chiefly bored/annoyed with.
>>375241 I've perfected it into an art.
>>375241 What teh shit is a book?
big book
>>375241 From Marx to Lenin, from Lenin to Mao, from Mao to Cockshott, I've never read a single one of their works, in fact I don't even know most of their ideas, I don't even know what communism is, I just post here to try and look smart
>>375241 This is extremely common behavior across leftist circles, online and offline, and directly proportional to the notoriety of the work or author in question. Your observations are correct, though it goes further: there are a great number of people here who have convinced themselves they are literate on an author or a work while they are really not. These same people prefer slinging sophistry over humility. Marx' writing is the primary victim here. It's always transparent to people have put in the legwork. Or even leafed through the related work. Read fucking Marx. >>375323 I have given up on further progressing in philosophy, because I just don't have the time anymore between subsistence and passion. Every single topic, let alone field, feels like it is endlessly expanding in every direction. This is miserable enough for something abstract like philosophy of logic, but when it comes to any philosophy that seeks to change the world the pitfalls are many and very real. That's to say: don't beat yourself up over it. What sticks in your memory seems to me to be intuitive by that very fact, and that intuitive understanding is more useful than any number of quotations.
>>384723 >Every single topic, let alone field, feels like it is endlessly expanding in every direction. Fucking this. There's too much of everything. I get overwhelmed frequently :(
>>385595 oh good grief this is horrible its full of idealism, anti-communism, and contains ridiculess phrases like <In the course of revolutionary struggle, everyday people dramatically change their personalities. I tried to rewrite it, i can't say that i succeeded making good propaganda, but it's a little better.
Anybody have volume 2 of this?
should i delete all the pol tier memes and infographs off of my pc?
>>393410 keep them if they're funny (to dorks like us) but not if you intent to use them as legitimate agitprop.
>>393467 For context, I downloaded them when I believed lots of pol rubbish
>>393490 Keep them so we can laugh at them
>>393490 If they cause pain, get rid of them.
>>8537 are workers a mean of production since you need workers to produce?
>>394983 By means of production, we mean things like factories, not people.
>>395001 so what about living non persons like animals, are they a mean of production?
>>395031 We won't collectivize your donkey if that's what you're asking. At least I don't see any reason to do so.
>>395031 Yes, if they are used to produce something for others.
(88.65 KB 784x708 concern hmm umm uhh.jpg)
>>41840 Anybody feel like seeding?
Does anyone have a complete PDF or epub file of "The Paradox of Plenty" by Douglas Boucher?
houses are not a mean of production right? so are landlords then really part of the bourgeoisie?
>>400509 bourgeoisie are made up of landlords, who live off rent, and capitalists, who live off surplus labor.
>>400509 No, houses are not a means of production. Basically, the means of production are anything which can be used to make commodities (things to be sold) from raw materials (wood, metal ores, sand, etc.). In the modern context, this means machinery in factories, mines and forests such as conveyor-belt mechanisms, diggers and combine harvesters. The workers themselves don't own the tools they use or the profit they generate by using them. That is the biggest contradiction in Capitalism and why leftists often repeat the phrase 'Seize the means of production!' so much. From 'Marxists.org': Means of Production The tools (instruments) and the raw material (subject) you use to create something are the means of production. >If we examine the whole process from the point of view of its result, the product, it is plain that both the instruments and the subject of labour, are means of production, and that the labour itself is productive labour. <Karl Marx <Capital: The Labour-Process And The Process Of Producing Surplus-Value
if you dont extract surplus value but still indirectly profit from it (being the child or wife of a porkie) are you still part of the bourgeoisie?
>>401923 No as you must own the means of production to be bourgeoisie
>>401923 Yes, though you aren't directly responsible for wrongdoing. >>402751 incorrect, especially since landlords are also bourgeois
(263.61 KB 1000x1000 external-content.duckduckgo.com.png)
>>402805 This is blurring the line between idealistism and materialism. Housing and Shelter aren't means of production, technically, but, they are property where surplus value can be extracted. The owner of the property is bourgeoisie but the family members are not until they inherent it or own it in some way. They do not actually own the property and therefore are not bourgeoisie in the sense of property ownership for the surplus extraction of labor....That's my take on it anyways, what did Marx have to say about such a thing? Anything? I would say that, from a cultural standpoint, this people will exhibit bourgeois behavioral patterns, however.
>>403478 so your a bourgeoisie once you extract surplus value? then what about kulaks? they just own means of production without doing that, if your a bourgeoisie once you own the means of production (regardless whether or not you extract surplus value) and landlords are bourgeoisie then what about people who own there own house but dont extract surplus value from it?
>>404020 No, you are bourgeois when you own property in absentee that is for the purpose of the generation of profit. Kulaks are petty bourgeois. Again, this is just how I understand it.
I'm not sure if this's a correct thread/board for this, but I've digitalized and translated a work written by Felix Dzerzhinsky because it made me feel, it's a quick 2.5 page long read, however I've never translated anything as long as this and I'm not a native speaker, so if anyone notices anything that sounds funny, let me know, so I can correct it.
commiebois I have a question: how do you estimate use value? i just finished the 2nd chapter of Capital, does Marx say something about use value later?
are politicians proles or bourgeoisie?
>>406234 burgeois exists because of politicians. USSR had politicians, but they were not tools of the burgeoisie. politicians are not burgeois because they are part of the public sector (while the burgeoisie is part of the private sector), so they are not inherently burgeois. They can be easily corrupted to favor the burgeoisie over the prole tho. So basically, in a possible revolution, current day politicians would end up on the fork (except if they surrender to the new system).
>>406234 it depends usually the cost of engaging in politics prevents workers, but you do have some politicians that are working class
>>406194 >>406234 Friends, a better thread to ask questions like this is here >>331128
>>411425 >>411425 What a weak bait. 'v' can be simplified.
does any anon have that corona virus study that said the virus went from bat->pangolian->human it credited university ecologists and a botanist or something
So, what does the F number mean in the sidebar? I assume the number by the R is the number of replies.
>>406194 Use values are all qualitatively different. The use-value of steel is the mass of steel you have, the tensile strength of the material, it's density, it's chemical properties etc. The use-value of a machine is the reduction in socially necessary labour time that it provides for a given production process. The use-value of the pudding is in the eating. Use value cannot be reduced to a single scalar.
>>412873 how many files(images,pdfs,videos) are in the thread
>>412881 Hammers provide stronger analogies, friend.
(48.72 KB 571x571 mango.jpg)
Any good history books on maoist China? Im not a tankie, but yet I am not sure about the western sources, is there something relatively objective, informative and perhaps a bit entertaining to read? Im interested in the 1949-1976 period, but some specific works about things like Cultural Revolution or Great Leap Forward would interest me too. Id also like to get some knowledge about Hua Guofeng period.
>>413543 Is that am egg Mao laid?
>>413806 who is this mike.b how does he fund the site?
>>414175 This is so editorialized I feel like a liberal is spitting at me through the screen. Cool story, though. Mangos are delicious and objectively good.
>>8537 i was just wondering if i am breaking the "pretend to be SJW". i always thought it was a muddy term that people just define it as a sort of boogeyman. Am i an SJW for being anti capitalist but also sometimes talk about social issues?
>>417111 so what does SJW mean in the context of this website? i mean we are majority leftist communists, im sure by majority of people, we would be considered sjw.
>>417058 The only way to use the term with any significant meaning greater than "fuck you, poopypants" is to interpret it as "one who advocates for social justice," social justice being that concept originated by the jesuits and various religious self-help authors to describe opposition to imagined non-economic forms of oppression.
>>417420 Good explanation. I'd also add aggresive gatekeeping of identities and of dialogue (who can say what), extreme essentialism, antagonizing people for not being interested in niche issues.
>>417267 phony who cares only about the optics and does nothing to fundamentally change them or is interested in changing them other than using hastags and policing the terms. For eg currently the women who were all pro believe women etc but changed tides and started ignoring or defending biden when he got accused of rape.
>>417420 is just me or they sound incredibly easy to radicalize or at least easily radicalized them compared to edgy gamer type people.
>>417669 >currently the women who were all pro believe women etc but changed tides and started ignoring or defending biden when he got accused of rape. I don't think bots are women though anon.
>>417840 Yeah they are. More concerned with how things should be. Edgy gamer types, or atleast the more antisocial of them are the first to try and shut down any critical discussion.
(20.63 KB 354x350 download.jpg)
hi /leftypol/, i am struggling to understand terms like libsoc or ancom as the more i see that communism is to ultimately result in a stateless society, right? why is there such a divide between these camps and what they call "tankies"?
>>418243 I've found lots of people have different ideas of what constitutes a "tankie" in their minds, with some people using the general definition and others using the term to refer to anyone who wants to co-opt class struggle / socialist rhetoric and wrap it up in nationalistic / fascist tendencies. The classical definition of a tankie is someone who supported the Soviet Union through and through, dismissing or applauding its harsher elements and poorer choices, such as allowing for famines and the repression of Hungarian and Czechoslovakian revolts; the name itself refers to someone who believes that Socialism should be brought about and / or enforced by "sending in the tanks," so to speak. Tankies tend to have authoritarian leanings, and, some would argue, are obsessed with the aesthetics of the USSR and similar socialist / communist societies; such idolization of the government as an enforcement body goes against the idea of a stateless society where--at least in the case of ansocs / libsocs and ancoms--unjust and unnecessary hierarchies (such as a potentially oppressive state that sends in tanks to enforce the ideology--or indeed, the concept of the State itself) are done away with in favor of communes, co-ops, soviet councils, etc etc. Tl;dr, tankies tend to idolize the state as a structural / enforcement / aesthetic body (a nationalist position), whilst ancom/socs are against the idea of statehood entirely. There is no place for nationalism in an ideology which seeks to abolish the nation.
>>417947 >Feminists being humongous hypocrites are bots. Cope
>>417947 All bots can be awoken. >>418423 They were never feminists tho as revealed by their silence in this horrible matter.
>>418305 this explained it for me thanks anon
(29.03 KB 640x571 ers43w5rftz.jpeg)
>>418305 >"tankie" ... fascist tendencies. liberal horseshoe fallacy also quit with the sectarianism, it's embarrassing.
>>418737 Tankies are literally fascist bootlickers >muh libs piss off
>>418243 honestly its alot of dumb historical animosity which does nothing but further entrench sectarianism.
(14.22 KB 880x981 projector2.png)
>>418802 You are proving my point >>418802 that is so true
>>418737 What a dishonest greentext quote. If you're gonna go that way with it then maybe the libcucks really are on to something with that whole horseshoe theory shit. What the post *actually* says is merely that there are people who define tankies that way. It then proceeds to operate on an entirely different definitional framework.
(25.92 KB 773x578 dishonesty.jpeg)
>>419104 the entire post in question us using the authoritarian v liberal political spectrum. If we are going to talk about dishonesty, we ought to start there
>>419184 And? Are you going to argue that ansocs / ancoms don't advocate for the abolition of the state? Are you going to argue that using state forces to suppress worker action that *you don't like* isn't authoritarian and / or diametrically opposed to ancom / ansoc thinking?
>>419273 No i'm not going to argue based on authoritarian v liberal framework because that's not how the world works. This framework is called horseshoe fallacy for a reason.
(78.15 KB 1200x1153 EJQ1kI_XsAU4LhN.jpg)
>>419408 You're literally just saying two things that are 100% true are not true because they happen to sit on some libcuck framing that you pulled out of your ass specifically for this discussion. Get the fuck out of here anon. You can't accuse other people of not knowing what they're talking about while you try to spook people by throwing the word "lib" around regardless of the facts at play. If you want to advocate for an iron hand soviet state then just fucking own it dude, don't cuck out to weasel-word arguments like braindead right-wingers do.
(12.16 KB 326x331 floatingcity.jpeg)
>>419498 You are still stuck on describing social models based on platonic ideals divorced from material reality.
>>419618 >tankies idolize the state as an interventionist entity that perpetuates socialism / communism >ansocs / ancoms literally want to ABOLISH THE STATE >therefore, these two ideologies oppose one another. These are hard fucking facts, anon. Horseshoe theory and libcuck spookery has absolutely nothing to do with this because it's entirely possible for two ideologies to be close to one another by one measure or another but still oppose one-another. If pointing out facts is being a libcuck or a sectarian then the revolution is 600% fucked and we all might as well facetank some buckshot or play in traffic together. I'm not even a full ansoc / ancom because, though I'm sympathetic to their viewpoint, I have yet to encounter an argument as to why or how some of the organizational models they propose would come close to Statehood in terms of the mass organization we need as a globalized society, but even *I* think you're being a dumbass right now. Pretending that we're all the same and that there's no ideological differences between Leftists is the height of the libcuckery you so fervently shit on. Do whatever you want at this point buddy. You're driving me to drink.
>>419754 >Marxists don't want to abolish the state How many drinks have you had
(12.16 KB 326x331 floatingcity.jpeg)
>>419754 >Horseshoe theory and libcuck spookery has absolutely nothing to do with this because it's entirely possible for two ideologies to be close to one another by one measure or another but still oppose one-another. Then stop reducing the idealogical spectrum to one dimensional authoritarian v anti-authoritarian >the mass organization we need as a globalized society will either be build in international cooperation between nation states or they wont exist at all. >>419933 Not until after capitalism is overcome.
>>419942 >Then stop reducing the idealogical spectrum to one dimensional authoritarian v anti-authoritarian Literally nowhere did this happen. This is *your* phrasing. You brought this shit in out of nowhere when the disagreements between the two ideologies were all that was discussed. Political axis shit was never even mentioned.
>>419754 Anarchists want to abolish the state, the police, labor camps and prisons and replace then with the workers non-state council of democratically elected workers who make workers non-laws, the workers non-police, the voluntary communally operated labor-camps and voluntary collective rehabilitation centers.
>>421082 Anarchists are glorified marketing grads basically.
>>419933 based and checked
Is reading Greek philosophers worth it?
>>339377 Don't study Geography dude. That's such a bougie field
>>422615 To learn leftist theory? No. Are they interesting and valuable from a wider philosophical perspective? Yes.
>>422615 Epicurus is fun. Aristotle is interesting, even if his Physics is a collection of hilariously wrong conclusions.
>>422615 If you truly desire to learn the history of thought as a hole, and have desire to measure yourself against what used to be considered as the greatest minds of their epoch, well yes i do think you should.Besides, whilst critiquing their thought, maybe you´ll pick up on something interesting you can write about and that can end up being very enlightening.I´d recommend starting with Plato thought.
>>419933 We only want to abolish "some" states, not all of them.
>>424376 For example, left-monogamists want to abolish the current state of "affairs", amirite?
>>424376 Holy fuck, neck yourself.
(29.52 KB 306x400 Epicuruslasereyes.png)
>>423751 >Epicurus is fun. Yes
>>424944 >hUR DuR aBoLIsH ALL dADs i DoNT WAnnA EaT My vEGTaBLeS Anarchists are all miserable degenerate headcases.
>>426921 Stay man vegtablenigger, enjoy your brocoli.
>>425171 he's good but too much of a rationalist, not as much as the Cynics were, but humans are not even that rational, hardly at all. at least Platonists understood this.
>>427714 >but humans are not even that rational, hardly at all. Not individually they are not. On the other hand, if you get enough humans together they will become so predictable that you will be able to set your watch by them. >at least Platonists understood this. Plato was rationalist as all hell. His entire theory is based on knowledge being "remembered" truth. Inb4 Plato and Socrates were not the same person.
(29.52 KB 306x400 Epicuruslasereyes.png)
>>427714 Yeah but humans also live in a social and economic environment that is not conducive to reason. That environment can be changed. Consider that reason is something that is learned and after that practised. It is a category of doing not being.
communism is defined as a stateless, moneyless society without social classes right? but couldn't a communist society then still have a wage system?
>>428171 No because in a communist society we labor for all; need and ability.
>>428212 so a stateless, moneyless society without social classes is not a good definition of communism?
>>428216 >so a stateless, moneyless society without social classes is not a good definition of communism? Yes because it fails at grasping the philosophical foundations, that do not work with static categories. Consider socialism is working to overcome the contradictions of capitalism, new contradictions will arise and then communism will work to overcome the contradictions that arose in socialism. new contradictions will arise in communism, well we haven't gotten far enough with theory to consider what those contradiction could be or how they be overcome, that's basically for future people to deal with.
>>428216 It's an *ok* definition for communism. But like all definitions, definitions will be myopic and not fully contextualize and grasp the implications of any given ideology or philosophy. To truly grasp and understand these concepts one most come to their 7understanding by reading the source material and debating in the discourse with the opposition to achieve a valid narrative about their world view. That's why I don't really prepose people confrom to definitions, rather, we have an actual dialauge and reach an understanding about what communism means itself rather than trying to prescribe rigorous definitions; To my understanding, communism is defined as a Classless stateless moneyless society in which the means of production are owned by what once would have been called the working class. Where the means of prodution are owned collectively and ran dem0cratically not for profit and genralized commodity production, but, rather, by need and ability. Where each man and woman produces according to their need and by their ability and takes as they need themselves.
>>428384 dialogue** holy shit my retard brain.
>>428378 Contradictions are unique to the capitalist mode of production. There were no contradictions in the ancien regime, nor will there be any in communism. The contradictions built into capitalism are both its unique power and the ultimate causes of its eventual annihilation.
(65.81 KB 807x531 marx-facepalm.jpg)
>>428823 >Contradictions are unique to the capitalist mode of production. There were no contradictions in the ancien regime, nor will there be any in communism. The contradictions built into capitalism are both its unique power and the ultimate causes of its eventual annihilation. This is wrong. For example there were class contradictions in slave society like the Roman empire and there were class contradictions between serfs and lords in feudalism. Epochal changes happen as result of productive forces being developed, changing the material conditions giving rise to new contradictions, that induce class struggle that then moves history forwards, the contradictions of late feudal society gave rise to capitalism, the contradictions of capitalism will give rise to socialism,... Capitalism is not a aberration to history, it's the continuation of historic processes. There is not a return to an ancient state without contradictions, because that never existed in the first place. the socialist epoch will end class contradictions and as such end prehistory, meaning where people did not have full control over their own development. But that doesn't mean the end of contradictions.
>>428922 >because that never existed in the first place what about a hunter gatherer society? which contradictions did that have? or a what kind of contradictions would a communist society have? and if you dont know how can you know it would have contradictions at all? (not the guy you are responding to btw, i am >>428216 )
>>429162 Hunter Gatherer society was a form of primitive communism, if I am not mistaken.
>>429162 The contradiction between man and nature will remain even if we made it to a communist society tomorrow. It doesn't mean that it can't be managed better under communism, but it still remains.
Anyone have good books about the KGB and their operations?
>>428922 I was talking about contradictions inherent to the mode of production, not mere class contradictions. Capitalism is unique in that it contains within its own framework contradictions that will ultimately become fatal (eg. the need for perpetual expansion in a finite world). There is nothing similar to the falling rate of profit or the crisis of overproduction inherent to other modes of production. A slave society like imperial China or a hunter/gatherer society like the Australian aborigines may exist as such in perpetuity until they are interfered with from the outside.
>>429415 >a hunter/gatherer society like the Australian aborigines may exist as such in perpetuity That's not really true, humans are inherently too good at hunting stuff to the point that they've wiped out the large mammals everywhere they migrated out of Africa, the evidence is especially clear in Australia. Hunter-gatherer societies are too isolated to collectively manage resources in a sustainable manner, eventually dooming themselves to change to something else. In fact there's good reason to believe that civilization originally developed as a survival strategy.
>>429688 All that does is to limit the human population, which in turn leads to an increase in the number of game animals in a given area. It does nothing to change the hunter/gatherer mode of production. The advent of a food surplus due to the development of a sufficiently sizable and reproducable food species is what destroys hunter/gatherer tribalism, not a contradiction built into the mode of production.
>>429766 >It does nothing to change the hunter/gatherer mode of production. When there's nothing left to hunt and gather, I'm afraid it does.
>>429777 No, all it leads to is death and migration.
>>429780 Or development of agriculture.
>>429793 The development of agriculture can only happen when one of those productive food spieces is present, and they only ever get developed over centuries, not in response to some immediate crisis. That is why large grains were developed in places like the Yellow River Valley, the Valley of Mexico, and the Indus Valley and not in places like the Congo with its recurring drought patterns.
>>429803 I mean animal agriculture too. There is no reason to maintain animal and plant populations around the year when food is plentiful, it only happens as a reaction to scarcity.
>>429807 Now you are talking about pastoralism which is fitting, since you keep wanting to put the cart before the horse. Animal domestication is, like the development of species of grain, done over a long period of time as a suppliment to an established diet or to aid in given tasks (hunting dogs being the classic example). It doesn't work like "ZOMG the elephants that we hunt are dying out! Better start training zebras to help us sow millet." It works like "These steers that we hunt are really yummy, but they are a lot bigger when they migrate from those plains over there. Maybe we should try getting them to go to those plains every year."
Someone once asked if category theory had ever been applied to marxism, and I was thinking about this yesterday. I think it can't form a category because it doesn't have an identity operator, since all objects are contingent on all other objects. Just a thought.
(176.05 KB 1808x1254 EVXPn2RWAAEtoBK.jpeg)
Found this in /r/neoliberal
>>432373 >pakistan, saudia arabia, iraq, "health democracies" >nazi Germany on left I never realized how much I hate liberals tell now..
>>432373 This HAS to be ironic
(375.17 KB 326x323 1584849433607.gif)
>>432373 God bless America!
>>432373 With the Harry Potter references, Third Riech in the Internationale and Russia Gate crap, it has to be a parody.
(26.80 KB 308x499 marx-engles.jpg)
I'm new to Marxist theory, and I want to know which I should read out of the two first, Capital or the Marx-Engles reader.
>>432668 Even just flipping through the reader and reading sections that strike your interest will prepare you for digging into Das Kapital lad That's precisely what that sort of text is for pedalogically speaking
>>432373 >Pakistan, saudi arabia >Free democracies >bernie sanders, xi >socialism my god, what faggotry
Was gonna post this here, but I wanted to make it a thread instead, but here is my question to all you theory readers >>432903
(319.97 KB 1008x389 Capital.png)
>>432668 I read Capital without the reader, and I can say that the first two-thirds of Volumn 1 that dissects and explains capitalism is tough going. I had to reread every paragraph at least once--and occasionally several times--in order totally comprehend what was being described. It can be a slog, but it is also fun if you happen to enjoy those "Eureka" moments that you get when you figure everything out, like when reading a mystery novel. Perhaps a reader would make the process easier; I don't know. Just know that it is an adventure without it. One thing that I know for sure does help is to suspend your own expectations of what it is going to say. The concepts in the book are largely not what you expect them to be, and how they all fit together is entirely different. At least that is how it was for me.
>>432668 THIS ONE!
I think I’m going to compile some books on organizing by union workers and some labor histories. I see so many lists filled with theory, but relatively few on the practice of organizing and the first-hand experiences.
>>433687 I would personally welcome some military theory books that were written after the 1980s.
Wait a second didn't we used to have a reading club? What happened to it? There was even a rotating strawpoll that would always decide the next book. I think it was run by sabocat poster?
>>434134 If people want to restart one, they should look into Perusall. The Chapo reddit reading club uses it, and it looks useful for engagement. The reading can be uploaded to the site, and everybody can put notes on the same document and comment on each other's notes. So it is a little easier to make it genuinely collaborative and create discussions.
>>434483 that sounds amazing. I was planning on starting Capital, and it would be nice to have other people's notes there too.
>>435595 Sweet. Count me in.
>>434483 >>435636 There's two options. Either make a study group with their material (to buy it), or make a course with an institution. Does anyone know who the chapo people made their group?
>>435694 Sorry for the terrible writing. I meant to write: To make a perusall group, we either need to pay, or join an institution. I have no idea how the chapo trap house people did it. If someone knows, I'd appreciate some help. If possible, I would prefer having a perusall course specifically for leftypol. I would rather have fewer users but (hopefully) better quality comments.
>>435700 Seems like nobody gives a fuck, but such is the nature of our small community. Anyways, the administrator for the chapo one was very helpful. Big shout out for the camaraderie. I have a course now. I'll see what I can upload, what I can organize, then make a thread with the result.
>>432668 Political Economy: A Beginner's Course Leontiev, A.
Any islamic socialism that would be a nice introductory read?
(203.27 KB BeginnerList.pdf)
Beginner list Any criticism is well received. I didn't brand it with any leftypol logos.
>>435818 How did you manage that? I was genuinely curious how the Chapo guys did it. Did they just have someone employed at a university make a fake “course” for them?
>>437091 Just picked a random institution tbh. Do you want to help organize this?
In what order is it recommended to read Marx's works? I've read Manifesto, Gotha Program, Wage Labour and Capital. What other works of his should I read before throwing myself into the jaws of Capital vol I?
>>437641 Yeah I'd be cool with it, though it sounds like you already have a Perusall. The Chapo model for it was to have a bunch of books in basically a library that anybody can read and put their notes on, but they have "assigned reading" for the weekly reading group. So we could load up the Perusall with a bunch of books in some categories and then have the actual group readings scheduled every week. The Perusall courses also come with a message board, so people can discuss everything there and then just have a thread here to direct people who want to take part to the group. Like all reading groups it feels like there is a good chance it gets pretty barren, but I think the flexibility of the notes where you can ask questions and make observations directly in the book will make relevant discussion easier.
>>439811 You should not need anything else. If anything, you are overprepared.
>>436372 Socialism and Islam are incompatible. t. Ex-Muslim
Please make George Mason the institution so we can REDpill the dumbass amerikkkans who most need our help.
>>439811 >>439852 You're ready, just take it slowly and thoughtfully. Even simple ideas in the beginning have significant implications.
Marx said communism is a stateless, moneyless and classless society right? did any other communist disagree with this definition? can you believe in state communism or communism with money?
>>440444 Socialism and Islam *are* compatible t. Pakistani “ex-Muslim”
>>441182 To the first question, yes. The trick there is that the word "communism" refers to both the predicted mode of production that will follow capitalism and also to the ideology that is dedicated to hastening that inevitability to fruition. Communism the theoretical mode of production is a stateless, moneyless, classless society in which production will be done specifically for use as opposed to exchange for profit as is the case now. Communism the ideology, on the other hand includes the ideas of a profoundly diverse collection of theorists from Amadeo Bordiga to Deng Xioping with various wildly different plans to achieve the communist mode of production. In answer to the second question, no. Surprisingly, pretty much every communist has a similar end game in mind. Even arch-statists like Stalin dreamed of a planet without states in the distant future. There are a few non-communist socialists like mutualists who want to keep money around for some reason, but they tend to go red as soon as they read Capital Vol. 1. There are also nihilist socialists and a few other scattered groups with partially black flags. No, one should never trust a state, because where there is a state there is a ruling class. The aim of many statist communists is to create a state that acts according to the interests of the working class thus making the working class the ruling class, but the problem that they often run into is that the working class is by its definitive nature subject to capital. Perhaps Cockschott's sortition idea holds the key to making it work, but who knows? We will eventually find out.
>>441593 >mutualist's who want to keep money around no they dont >pretty much every communist that is not the same as literary every communist >The aim of many statist communists is to create a state that acts according to the interests of the working class many is not everyone, can you just believe in to each according... and still believe in a state or money (btw i do want to get rid of those two things, i am talking about hypothetical's)
>>441840 >many is not everyone Jesus, go take an opinion poll then. If you want somebody to speak for everybody, you are being disingenuous.
>>441906 i am asking if people who believe in a communist state exist, not for anyone's opinion
>>441977 The plain answer to that is that people do believe that a state can be communist ideologically speaking, but by definition a state cannot be communist in function.
>>442011 so, are these people communists?
>>442038 Of course. What are you not understanding?
>>442050 >but by definition a state cannot be communist in function. that implies there not real communists
(215.72 KB 1024x646 Transition.png)
>>442075 Okay, you just do not understand the difference between an ideology and a mode of production. Statist communists wish to achieve communism but cannot simply order it into being. It can only be achieved, to which end they form states that, in various ways, are intended to hasten the collapse of capitalism. They are ideologically communist, and their goal is communism. None the less, their states are not communism, as communism can only arise with their destruction.
>>442098 >communism can only arise with their destruction so if communism has to be stateless then people who believe in communism with a state dont believe in communism and are therefore not communists
>>442179 No bro. Thats stupid
>>442251 >communism = stateless >communists = people who want communism conclusion, communists dont want a state, how is this wrong?
>>442267 Some communists think that you have to do a state for a while to get to the stateless stage.
>>442292 i mean as end result, i am not talking about MLs, i am talking about people who want a communist state forever and think this is the best possible system
>>442584 what i said there is obvious, that is the point, the other guy just doesn't seem to get that
>>442350 Even MLs do not want a state forever. They build a state that they hope will be torn down when it is no longer needed to defeat the counterrevolution.
>>442719 >Even MLs do not want a state forever yes, that is what i was saying, and i am not talking about ML's, i am talking about people who believe in to each according to... but dont believe in the abolition of the state or money, i am also not talking about any transitional period, i am talking about someone who believes in to each according to... but not that the state, money or both, should ever be abolished
>>442780 How would that even work? A state cannot exist outside of class; it would have no purpose. Money is not needed to set prices where no prices exist, neither would it be needed to balance exchanges when all exchange involve readily available goods going to people who will use them.
>>442810 >How would that even work? it would not, but the people who believe this, would they be communists?
>>442823 No, considering they do not want communism.
>>442845 okay, they what are they?
>>442914 Incoherent. It is a nonsense concept.
>>442947 so is fascism and ancap, but we still need a name for those two, so what name do we have for "state money communists"
>>442950 Why? I am fine with leaving it at "incoherant nonsense."
>>442963 i am not, if something exists then we need a name for it, that is why words are important, so we can effectively describe things
>>442965 It does not exist, but by all means coin a new name for the contradiction in terms. You have the power.
I'm extremely curious about leftism, I won't go into my background and why I want to understand and maybe get involved in leftist politcs but lets just say that less then 12 month ago I was in legit nazi discord servers. >inb4 read the OP for beginner material ok but what should I know before I dive into breadtube + literature? How can I adapt a new world view based on the stuff I might learn from reading this stuff?
(203.10 KB BeginnerList.pdf)
>>443064 You can also check attached pdf and read/watch whatever captivates your attention. Your question is extremely context dependent, and the best answer I can give is "have an open mind". If you think something is truly wrong with society today, if you think we need to get together to change it, if you think that the powers that be are fucking things up, you're right. In fact, if you want an ethnostate, or you want to exterminate a race or whatever, the best way to wield power is to understand it. It is in your best interest to truly understand the capitalist machine. And for that, there is truly nothing better than Marx's Capital as foundational text about capitalism (perhaps don't jump right into it, it's a big book). On top of that, leftists have been organizing since way way back, so there's also a shit ton of organization theory. Even if you are a right winger, you would do well to familiarize yourself with that theory. So, whatever your morals and personal values are, there is no better way to understand how power works and how to organize a mass movement against the elite than leftist theory. You can always ask for reading resources regarding specific reactionary views you still hold. A lot of members here are ex-/pol/ users and have tons of material that clearly paints a more realistic picture on many topics, if you know what I mean. It takes a while to rehabilitate your mind, be patient, ignore the assholes, the wokescolds, and the theoretical purists. Baby steps, but keep on reading, and come here or elsewhere to discuss what you read.
>>443064 The first concept that really makes sense of things is that everything happens for a reason. Social systems are all built atop of knowable material realities that you can discover through rigorous analysis. Break everything down into its component parts to learn how things tick. Once you know how things fit together you can see precisely the effects that they have. Keep that in mind, and complex concepts start to make a shocking amount of sense.
I'm a socialist I think, but the shitty half-assed kind. I don't see anything inheritanly wrong with capitalism, but that's probably because I've benefitted from it my entire life. I feel drawn leftward, but see most stalinism/leninism/etc. to bee too far, but perhaps that's because I'm weak. It's all so confusing, I just want people to have a more equitable existence. Am I an ordoliberal? oh god oh fuck ;_;
(149.74 KB 500x500 smirk.png)
>>446209 Just become a social democrat and then come back in a couple years when you finally realize that social democracy does not go far enough.
>>443243 >>443489 Thanks for the responses to my post (sorry for the late reply) I'll definitely have a look at the OP material as well as some of those books in the beginners list. I much prefer it here on this imageboard over 4chan/8kun etc As this place actually answers my questions and seems to be mostly honest about stated goals.
>>446270 t-thanks...
>>446209 what do you feel is going "too far" ? I don't understand how you can't see inherently wrong,but still want change. Also: >equitable existence 1.this sounds like POMO bullshit,you should actually think about what you concretely mean by that. 2.Probably impossible to attain under capitalism,depending on what you mean by it. You just sounds like you want attention more than actually thinking about society and what you want to make of it.
>>446426 Probably all the edgy memes.
Guys how do I become a good writer? I'm so bad at writing essays
>>449609 Read some pamphlets just because they aim to explain things without being rambling
This thread is for the discussion of /lit/. Let's keep it that way.
>>449609 To appropriate Elmore Leonard's Ten Rules for Good Writing, 1. Never open a book with weather. 2. Avoid prologues. 3. Never use a verb other than "said" to carry dialogue. 4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb "said" ...he admonished gravely. 5. Keep your exclamation points under control. You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. 6. Never use the words "suddenly" or "all hell broke loose." 7. Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly. 8. Avoid detailed descriptions of characters. 9. Don't go into great detail describing places and things. 10. Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip. My most important rule is one that sums up the 10: if it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.
>>454010 1. sure 2. several excellent pieces of classical literature do this, in addition to featuring epilogues 3. how pretentious. 'never' is far too strong a word here, a much more appropriate choice of wording would be 'generally avoid'. if a story is long, it will invariably contain the word 'said' at least occasionally, or sparsely. to pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant of pretty much everything ever written. 4. again, countless pieces of famous literature do this at least occasionally. just like point #3, it's far more appropriate to emphasize how sparingly such adverbs should be used. 5. agreed, no controversy here 6. this is more of a general gripe against cliches than anything, and doesn't really function as novel advice 7. sure, although sometimes this can be done tactfully; it's just a delicate tightrope to walk, because it can easily come off as cheesy 8. what is defined as a 'detailed description' here? if Leonard is being conservative in this context, then he's being patently absurd and too restrictive. this surely qualifies as at least loosely being a 'detailed description', yet it's an award winning example: ‘I could picture the smooth oval of Laura’s face, her neatly pinned chignon, the dress she would have been wearing: a shirtwaist with a small rounded collar, in a sober colour – navy blue or steel grey or hospital-corridor green. Penitential colours – less like something she’d chosen to put on than like something she’d been locked up in.’ 9. i know it's pop-drivel, but nevertheless, i can think of a highly renowned best-selling series that violates this rule tenfold. game of thrones is infamous for its excessively thorough descriptions of places and things--we're talking pages of prose here. 10. this is a non-point feigning itself as something. too nebulous/subjective to count as anything real/can be interpreted however you'd like. ALSO, WHO THE FUCK IS ELMORE LEONARD AND WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT HIS INPUT OMEGALUL--interview any number of decently accomplished authors and they'll have a wide range of differing opinions on what constitutes 'good' writing. there is no magic formula, only personal refinement and fundamental rules of grammar/syntax (which can exceptionally be violated).
>>454132 >if a story is long, it will invariably contain the word 'said' at least occasionally You may want to read that rule again. >this is more of a general gripe against cliches than anything, and doesn't really function as novel advice Its purpose, as is the purpose of most of these rules, is to avoid leading the reader through the action. Ideally, the reader should forget that he is reading a book instead of experiencing an adventure. Adverbs, exclaimation points, prologues, verbose descriptions, etc. all make the author visible, which takes the reader out of the story. >game of thrones is infamous for its excessively thorough descriptions of places and things--we're talking pages of prose here. The books are called A Song of Fire and Ice. The TV show is better. Daenarys Targarian makes a far better heroine that she does a looming threat, and anything with CIA in it is cool in my book. >ALSO, WHO THE FUCK IS ELMORE LEONARD AND WHY SHOULD WE CARE ABOUT HIS INPUT He was known as "the genre writer that serious writers take seriously." His books were known for their uniquely "alive" dialogue, much of which can be ascribed to the minimalist system that he developed. I am surprised that any enthusiast of fiction would not have heard of him. There were like a dozen movies made about his books from Hombre to Get Shorty. I loved the guy. His writing style always reminded me of a more happy and extroverted Ernest Hemmingway.
>>454010 Those are some shit rules m8
where can I get an beginner introduction on Dialectics I've been reading through Marx, Engels and Lenin but they really address it too much. My interpretation from what I read is that it related to interconnections of the ruling and ruled classes. And that this class conflict is the driving force of history. Could be wrong which is why I'd some texts/videos on marxist dialectics explained. Thanks
>>456742 Sorry that was supposed to be: *don't really address it too much"
>>456742 This should work just fine.
>>457020 Yeah this one should be good lad, if that one's a bit too much for you try https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm
Hey, I may be a blind retard, but where the heck is "watch the thread" button? Pls, help.
(44.58 KB 800x331 3XAWJJNC2FJ46EY3SMLXQ5OYZI.jpg)
Although democracy is flawed it is the closest system to equality and totality. If you disagree why?
(7.93 KB 181x152 e4e5ftgz.png)
>>459076 ask Eva Morales
>>459076 What demcracy? Hahaha, when the only people you can vote for are billionaires there is only democracy for 1% of the people
>>459103 >EVA Morales Is she the wife of Evo Morales?
(6.05 KB 300x168 evo.jpeg)
>>460385 whoops
(68.12 KB 800x600 friendhip.jpg)
>>459103 >The "antimperialist" army.
(89.31 KB 940x450 Ill-be-back-940x450.jpg)
>>461313 The soviets achieved nationalistic state socialism and preserved their society and culture. Just like DPRK, Yugoslavia, Libya, Vietnam, PRC, Iraq, etc.
>>461319 This is the stupidest shit I have ever heard in my life.
>>462796 I mean wasn't the USSR itself a conglomerate of different ethnicities?
Some Marx and Engels books in French: - Friedrich Engels : Les Principes du communisme suivie de Contribution à l’histoire de la Ligue des communistes (Nouvelle traduction, Février 2020), epub. - Extraits sur la commune russe des textes choisis Sur les sociétés précapitalistes, de Marx, Engels et Lénine, pdf. - Karl Marx : Salaires, prix et profits (édition de 1973), pdf.
(5.53 KB 316x263 2020-04-27 (2).png)
what are these white boxes meant for?
>>466123 You tick them. Go ahead, try it, it's very satisfying. Pro tip: you can untick the box, so that you can tick it again. Indefinitely. The fun never stops.
>>466136 but what does it do? is it broken? what was it supposed to do?
>>466160 Mods can use them for mass actions, I don't know if users can use them for anything though. But hey you can always tick the ones on posts you like and pretend you're giving it an updoot.
>>466439 Wow anon! That was great advice. Just gave you an updoot and maybe even some leftypol gold
>>466123 Once you tick the box, scroll to the bottom of the page and click on where it says "show forms". This will open up a panel where you can delete your own post or parts of it, and report a post with a custom message if you want. Please note that you can only report one post at a time.
>>466136 haha that is very fun anon thank you, this will help me get over my ex-wife who killed me today.
>>467238 Thank you kind stranger!
>>466439 Good post, I give you a tick
Hello, I'm looking for a book or two on the mentality of reactionarys. By reactionary I mean fascists, traditionalist cults and so on.
>>476337 False Prophets by Leo Lowenthal The Authoritarian Personality by Theodore Adorno.
>>476337 Go to the source, read Breivik's manifesto, Tarrant's manifesto, Ted Kaczynski's manifesto, Mein Kampf, etc.
I recommend that you guys read these so you don't became a cringe leftist like most Twitter leftists: Books: >Principles of Communism by Engels >Communist Manifesto by Marx/Engels >State and Revolution by Lenin >Introduction to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of the Right by Marx >Socialism, Utopian and Scientific by Engels >Political Economy: A Beginner's Course A. Leontiev >Towards the Understanding of Karl Marx: A Revolutionary Interpretation by Sidney Hook >Indefensible by Rohini Hensman >HATE: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship by Nadine Strossen >Mistaken Identity by Asad Haider >Betraying Big Brother by Leta Hong Fincher >The People's Republic of Walmart by Leigh Phillips Michal Rozworski >Austerity Ecology & the Collapse-Porn Addicts by Leigh Phillips >Hired: Six months undercover in low-wage Britain by James Bloodworth >The Wind in My Hair: My Fight for Freedom in Modern Iran by Masih Alinejad Articles: >https://thecharnelhouse.org/2017/05/15/dont-bother-reading-settlers-by-j-sakai/ >https://medium.com/@buffsoldier_96/a-marxist-defence-of-consumerism-c307f9186921 Thank me later.
>>482226 You have any good recommendations for Biographies and History events?
>>483257 >Trial of Henry Kissinger by Hitchens >The Omni-Americans by Albert Murray >History of Christianity by Diarmaid MacCulloch >Revolutionary Iran by Michael Axworthy >Pity the Nation: Lebanon at War >Black Skin, White Masks fanon >Black Jacobins C. L. R. James >Stalin Vol 1 and 2 (3 coming out end of this year I think) by Stephen Kotkin >The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity >Racecraft: The Soul of Inequality in American Life >Avengers of the New World: The Story of the Haitian Revolution >Socialism From Below by Hal Draper >Karl Marx’s Theory of Revolution (5 volumes, you can get it at montlyreview.org) by Hal Draper >The Prophet by Isaac Deutscher >The Letters of Rosa Luxemburg >Ghost Wars by Steve Coll >Directorate S by Steve Coll
>>483724 Thanks
Any good recommendations for places to pirate audiobooks from? I find it easier on my tism-addled brain than books, and the free audiobook places don't usually have good narrators.
>>485301 Seems like this website is good. I'm reading this audiobook. It's unfortunately not *exactly* the same as the Penguin Edition I have, but it is very close to it. http://audiobookbay.nl/audio-books/karl-marx-capital-volume-1/
>>485807 Do people really understand capital through audiobooks? I feel like I wouldn't properly absorb the information, although I am a brainlet.
>>486619 no. u must read it slowly and take notes
>>486619 I cannot imagine a Books On Tape version of Capital being helpful. You would wear out the rewind button with all the times that you would have to go back over every paragraph.
>>486619 Yes, I listen to it while doing another activity, then I actually read the book. It also helps to start reading. I put the audiobook on and read, that's why I complain that they are not identical editions. After a page I just stop the audiobook and keep reading without it.
(720.43 KB 220x146 monkey.gif)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nPVkpWMH9k Someone posted this video elsewhere. It's really thorough. It BTFOs the compass meme with a full explanation of materialism.
Is this a good recommended reading order? I was using this before : https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1FGglsoevXdK-e0TX6sT2cxaO7f9CPkdYCTXoc-oDD20/edit But found if full of less essential texts
Don't know if this is the right place, anyway some of Opera VPN IPs are blocked as spammers. I can post with the "Europe" one but the "Optimal location" and "Asia" - and are blocked as spammers. I get there are dickheads abusing those services, but please there are legitimate users too. Thanks.
>>491512 Good order if you want to read nothing but Marx and Engels. I think it's excessive to be honest but maybe that's me.
>>491608 Could you post a picture of the ban message? If it's cloudfare, you're basically out of luck :-/ Otherwise, we could undo the ban. I suspect it's cloudfare though.
Привет, друзья. Please check out the links I posted and participate in this thread. https://bunkerchan.xyz/leftypol/res/492458.html
>>492022 Hey, there is plenty of Lenin in there too. But yeah, that list has way to much build-up to Capital. Just read the damn thing.
(549.42 KB hook1968.pdf)
Marx & Enlightenment
>>492395 I'm posting right now with an "Optimal location" IP, from the same range I got the serial spammer message. If you can read that, the block is obviously gone.
(19.11 KB 354x295 1584253372949.jpg)
Reminder to visit >>>/roulette/ if you want to talk about anime.
(387.42 KB 429x308 killallweebs.png)
>>495081 haha girl go sleepy in a non existent white void of existential horror
what exactly is personal an what private property? if someone has (a) cow(s) or chicken(s) as a pet is that personal property? is a cow/chicken a mean of production? if i have more milk then i can drink is that extra milk private property?
>>498544 Any products you buy is personal property. Anything that makes sense to be communally owned is so.
>>499342 >Anything that makes sense to be communally owned is so that is subjective though, and what counts as a "product"? is your house a product? if you get a second house is it still? is a backyard personal property? is a whole farm?
>>499856 >is your house a product? It is not a thing that you would buy. >if you get a second house is it still? You do not get a house that you do not live in. >is a backyard personal property? It is land, and as such it is only yours in so far as you make practical use of it. >is a whole farm? A farm is means of production and is thus collectively owned. It would be stupid to allot an entire farm to one person; one person cannot operate a modern farm. Farms must be operated--and thus occupied--by as many individuals as is necessary to operate it.
>>500089 >It is not a thing that you would buy. ??????? what if you own means of production but you can operate it on your own? like backyard where you grow food?
>>500213 there is no property, so there is no personal property either. if society allows you to obtain a toothbrush for your exclusive use, the you will use it. if society need your toothbrush for the biggest toothbrush tower in history, well you're shit outta luck.
>>500213 >??????? What is there not to get? You would never buy a house. You just put in a claim for an available home near wherever it is that you produce whatever it is that you produce. Do you know how miners claimed a plot back in the gold rush days? Like that. >like backyard where you grow food? That is just a garden, recreation not production. You grow vegetables that you eat yourself for no better reason than to experience the act.
>>500264 >You would never buy a house >for no better reason than to experience the act. what if it is a big garden? what if i sell some of the food i grow?
>>500282 Hahahahahaha How The Fuck Is Selling Real Hahahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away And 𝕒𝕓𝕠𝕝𝕚𝕤𝕙 𝕔𝕠𝕞𝕞𝕠𝕕𝕚𝕥𝕪 𝕡𝕣𝕠𝕕𝕦𝕔𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 Hahahahahaha
>>500400 No, you would not get to sell your home. If you want to move, return your home and apply for another. >>500282 >what if it is a big garden? Hardly a "backyard" then. If you want to grow flowers and tomatos on vacant land there would be nothing to stop you from doing so, although if the land were required for some public project you would be uprooted. >what if i sell some of the food i grow? What for? You would not get much of a return on food that is in abundance. Who would buy carrots when they get carrots for free? On the other hand, you may socialize the produce, adding it to your own occupational production to earn access to some luxury goods or services.
>>500968 >What for? i am not saying it would be smart, i am asking (for a capitalist society btw) if you have a backyard and you sell vegetables grown from it, is your backyard private or personal property?
>>501045 where exactly is the line? is personal property things you can personally use and private things you own but dont personally use? or is that a simplistic view? a cow for example, those create products (btw would that make it a mean of production? are humans means of production because you can make lamps of their skin? so you can use them to make a product, a mean of production) is a cow personal or private property? what about two or three? a hundred?
>>501045 If the economic purpose of the land is commodity production with access to it determined by an owner, then it is private property. In capitalism, land that is used for subsistence by its occupant is personal property. People frequently have an upside-down view of what property is. To say that something is property is not to allow a certain individual to use it. Rather it is to deny everyone else access to it. Private property declares specific means of production inaccessable except by permission of the owner. Personal property declares means of subsistence inaccessable except by permission of the owner.
>>501050 First bear in mind that property, both personal and private, predate the capitalist mode of production. That is useful to keep in mind when considering things like the ownership of cows. For example, a pastoralist patriarch may claim a herd of cattle as his own, but he does not eat all of their meat or drink all of their milk himself. He does indeed live off of the produce of his animals but only some of it. Also, he does not raise and herd his animals by himself. He retains the services of a band of men who travel with him and tend to the needs of the herd. They also live off the procedes of the animals. At first blush, the herd of cattle may seem like personal property, because everyone who works with the animals also subsists off of their produce, however the actual property relation betrays the illusion. In fact, the patriarch personally determines who does and who does not have access to the herd. If an individual within his band displeases him he may expell that individual thus denying him access. Thus we see that cattle are in fact the private property of the patriarch exclusively. They are utilized by other people to produce goods that the patriarch exchanges for both the labor or the band of herdsmen and various luxury items. What makes a thing private property is that relationship. Does that make sense?
>>501087 i guess, thanks for answering
(1.92 MB 1470x2134 Sxl_starterpack.png)
(1.26 MB 800x3300 1589111940042.png)
(3.93 MB 1510x5055 1589107282108.png)