@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Cowbee

@Cowbee@lemmy.ml

Actually, this town has more than enough room for the two of us

He/him or they/them, doesn’t matter too much

Dieses Profil is von einem föderierten Server und möglicherweise unvollständig. Auf der Original-Instanz anzeigen

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

America is a one party dictatorship, and in typical American extravagence, it has two of them.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Arce telling the coup leaders to fuck off to their face on live TV was wild, lmao

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Read Marx, it's comforting.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Yes, Marx makes it clear what's wrong with Capitalism, why it cannot last forever, provides a philosophical framework for viewing any problem, conflict, or struggle, and shows how to move beyond our present dystopian state.

Cowbee , (Bearbeitet )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Jumping straight into Capital is like going spelunking with no tools or training, it's Marx's masterwork but it's dense and complicated for those not versed in Marxism already, and it isn't targetting the average person, but economists and scholars. That's not to say you should never read it, just hold off, for now.

A few great primers for Marxism in general are Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein, The Principles of Communism by Friederich Engels, and How Marxism Works by Chris Harman, in the order I recommend reading them.

Marx did write for the common worker in several texts. Wage Labor and Capital and Value, Price and Profit are short and concise works on Marx's critique of Capitalism. After that, I'd wrap around to Engels again for Socialism: Utopian and Scientific to understand the history of Socialist efforts and how Marxism solves the problems they have faced, and touches on Dialectical Materialism, the philosophical framework of Marxism. Add on Critique of the Gotha Programme to see Marx critique a weak Socialist program and advocate for a better method, then swing over to Manifesto of the Communist Party to tie everything by Marx and Engels together and spur revolutionary fervor.

Finally, I would make sure to read Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by Lenin. This does not really get into Marxism-Leninism, this is Lenin as a Marxist examining how Capitalism has changed over time to exploit the global south via exporting machinery and predatory global bank loans, absolutely critical for understanding modern Capitalism. If you want to get into Marxism-Leninism, add on The State and Revolution by Lenin as well, but you do not need to at this point.

We are in the Age of Imperialism, specifically its decay. Over time, the global south is becoming increasingly revolutionary and are throwing off the IMF and the US. Eventually this will destabilize the US, the world's current largest Imperialist power, and give rise to the possibility of a Socialist movement within the US as commodities become more expensive and Material Conditions weaken. This will be due to a decreasing subsidization of cost of living in the US off the labor of workers in the Global South.

Let me know if you have any questions!

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

EReaders made a big difference for me. I now plow through books when I used to not be able to read a single novel in a year.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Steam Deck has made a huge difference on my backlog-clearing abilities.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I try to alternate between fiction and theory, helps me digest the theory better while maintaining interest and momentum in reading!

Cowbee , (Bearbeitet )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I've been working through classics and they are usually a bit dated. Dune is goodish, but also I prefer the new movies for their much better treatment of women, the Fremen, and removal of the wierder parts. Neuromancer feels like Gibson wrote it with one hand and has never spoken to a woman in his life.

I remember loving Roadside Picnic a while back. If you want to be incredibly sad, Han Kang's Human Acts is brutal but beautifully written.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

There are people that legitimately try to argue that Star Trek isn't a representation of an upper-stage Communist society.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Systems can be bad, and the people who support and work within bad systems are bad, even if they act nice outside of that system.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Becoming a cop is a life change, voting is standard, as is consuming bananas and using smartphones.

Deliberately choosing to become a cop is bad, because there are a wealth of alternatives. Not true for voting, bananas, smartphones, or cars.

A small subset of humans become cops, it isn't a thing someone just chances into

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Nobody is suggesting that, people are arguing in favor of dismantling a fascist ethno-state.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

A single state solution over Palestine and former Israel, with equal citizenship.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

How?

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Ethnostates are bad, and right now we have a fascist ethno state destroying people.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Israel is an ethno-state centered around Jewish identity. That is the literal entire point.

Israel is not the only fascist state that should he totally destroyed, of course others should be. The US is probably the biggest cause of conflict and exploitation worldwide.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

There is no such thing as the "middle class."

Cowbee , (Bearbeitet )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Yes, Engels does a pretty good job of explaining why "authoritarian" complaints are usually explained purely by vibes.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Revolution can only effectively happen with a mass worker movement, yes. Communists aren't advocating for coups.

Please read any revolutionary theory, even Lenin. None advocate for coups.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Marx and Engels considered the mere act of revolution to be authoritarian. Advocating for a worker state is at some level authoritarian.

Jumping straight to statelessness is Anarchism, not Marxism, and has a much lower success rate at lasting any amount of time.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Obviously they do, they are dunking on armchair leftists that judge every leftist movement on how perfect it is, but judge all liberal structures with supreme nuance.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

He has a great grasp on how often Anarchists operate mainly on vibes, even if in practice when they get into power they still implement some form of authoritarianism, such as the labor camps in Revolutionary Catalonia.

Cowbee , (Bearbeitet )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I have, I used to lean more Anarchist, until I read more Marxist theory. Concepts like ParEcon were extremely interesting, and could be applied to both an Anarchist system or a Worker State. I am aware of Anarchist principles of horizontal organization, and I think they are quite beautiful, but I am also aware that Anarchist critique of Marxism falls flat almost all of the time.

Cowbee , (Bearbeitet )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

How exactly would Marx denounce Lenin? Or Mao? That's a supremely goofy statement.

Bakunin was not correct in analyzing power. If saying "states have issues" counts as being "correct" enough to only approve a system that has only ever lasted a few years at a time, you're intentionally missing the forest for the trees. The USSR was by no means perfect, but it was history's first true Socialist state and managed to prove that Socialism does work.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Took advantage of a wildly unpopular government during WWI to hold a revolution, taking the Winter Palace.

It wasn't just a random strike and coup, but a revolutionary movement backed by a mass of workers.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

A coup is a revolutionary movement with mass support? Are all revolutions coups?

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

That's a bit ridiculous, with respect to the Marx claim. Marx was attacking Dogmatism, not his own ideas. Post-Marx's death, people following his ideas understandably called themselves Marxists not because they worshipped Marx, but because they were working with his ideas!

As for Bakunin, he's a pure idealist here. His rejection of the state is based on the notion that the elected cannot represent the will of the people because they are not the people. This, of course, is wrong, as it assumes the people do not want someone managing higher-order decisions! Letting vast improvements in material conditions be held back because workers had representatives is why Anarchism has failed to last very long.

As for the USSR being "State Capitalist," that referred to the NEP. Judging Leftist movements by their structure as compared to perfect Marxism in a vacuum without considering the historical context is deeply silly idealism. You would have to do some heavy justification for why you believe a worker state to form a new class that isn't just vibes.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Yes, all of the Marxists have failed to understand Marx, it is in fact Prunebutt who resurrected Marx and got him to denounce everyone who used his ideas.

That's a deeply silly statement, please explain why you think Lenin misunderstood Marx.

I believe that elected representatives can represent those that elect them if you don't have Capitalism. Saying you can't have that and just saying "no, you're the idealist" is unproductive and goes nowhere.

Material Conditions did improve in Catalonia! Never said they didn't, that's a claim you lied about me saying, though I'll let it slide this time. A lot did work, but a lack of proper organization led to losing to outside pressure.

Again, you claim that you know anything about anarchist and Marxist theory and show time and time again that you don't have the slightest of an idea.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I do argue in good faith, this entire time I have asked you to elaborate and you've ducked and weaved, now that you can't duck anywhere else you run.

Good luck wishing for leftist movement to happen, surely another faithful will make it happen!

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Are you conflating Capitalism with democracy?

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

That's a bit goofy, but then I will amend the original statement with clarity: revolutionaries do not necessarily support random individual movements, but mass revolutionary action among the workers.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Am I not allowed to make a joke? Your point was that since Marx dissavowed some self-proclaimed Marxists during his lifetime, that those that followed him and took on the moniker must also not understand his ideas. You have to admit this is silly and not logically supported, right? That's like saying burgers are chicken sandwiches, because both have meat in buns.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

What Communist says "Democracy must be abolished?"

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Do you have evidence of Marx and Engels, both who railed against so-called "anti-authoritarians," saying that "Democracy must be abolished?" Do you have evidence of Marxists who followed them saying "Democracy must be abolished" either? I do not believe you will.

What I do see is Communists advocating for the destruction of Capitalism and the structures that support it, replacing them with proletarian democracy.

It isn't a non-sequitor, your point itself was a strawman that doesn't exist.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Have you read Marxist theory? Marxists don't typically identify themselves as idealists, preferring instead Materialism, specifically Historical and Dialectical Materialism.

Reading theory may help you better engage with leftists online.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I understand what you meant, it's just that Marxists don't take on that mantle whatsoever. Same with your notion that we rely on some "super smart authoritarian," that goes against revolutionary theory.

That's why I suggested reading theory. You seem to have an idea of what you want your end to be, and why current Capitalism is bad, but you lack organizational and Dialectical Materialist theory.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Oh duh, just gotta ask the Anarchist necromancers

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Anarchists tend to fall for idealism, and see only Anarchism as "good" and therefore acceptable. That's really the key point, they feel like they must unify means and ends, and that the microscopic chance that one day Anarchism may be established is worth fighting for.

It's idealism to the core and puts the individual over the well-being of the group.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Dead and buried.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I spent a couple years reading anarchist literature, and turned to reading marxist lit when the anarchists started giving unsatisfactory explanations.

Are you me?!

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

I agree, post-radicalization Anarchism is a comforting and easy position to adopt, because western Anarchists tend to rail against Marxism, which fits with liberal anticommunism.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Hamas is a product of a brutal fascist aparthied regime targeting Palestinians, Hamas did not originate out of nowhere.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Video essays somehow skip past my eternally short attention span

  • Alle
  • Abonniert
  • Moderiert
  • Favoriten
  • random
  • haupteingang
  • Alle Magazine