ComradeRat

joined 6 years ago
[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 2 points 13 hours ago

Homura is a tankie after all

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 14 points 2 days ago

It will help you as much as studying the bible helps combat evangelicals (i.e., not at all)

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 2 points 3 days ago

"But sweaty my movement is successful, look how many socials programmes and votes we have and all the seats we have in the bourgeois state institutions"

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Reformists have been the same since 1848 their constant cry: "it will work this time bc [location] is [unique] and you are dogmatic for saying it wont bc real socialism is when workers feel slightly less exploited"

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What capital does to nature is definitely one of the things thats radicalised me hardest

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 7 points 3 days ago

Certified TACO moment

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago

Lenin had similar issues with PROLEKULT and modern art in general, he was a big classics enjoyer

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 9 points 3 days ago (4 children)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1907/agrprogr/ch04s7.htm

The bourgeois intelligentsia of the West, like the English Fabians, elevate municipal socialism to a special “trend” precisely because it dreams of social peace, of class conciliation, and seeks to divert public attention away from the fundamental questions of the economic system as a whole, and of the state structure as a whole, to minor questions of local self-government. In the sphere of questions in the first category, the class antagonisms stand out most sharply; that is the sphere which, as we have shown, affects the very foundations of the class rule of the bourgeoisie. Hence it is in that sphere that the philistine, reactionary utopia of bringing about socialism piecemeal is particularly hopeless. Attention is diverted to the sphere of minor local questions, being directed not to the question of the class rule of the bourgeoisie, nor to the question of the chief instruments of that rule, but to the question of distributing the crumbs thrown by the rich bourgeoisie for the “needs of the population”.

...

The philistine opportunism of that “trend” lies in the fact that people forget the narrow limits of so-called “municipal socialism” (in reality, municipal capitalism, as the English Social-Democrats properly point out in their controversies with the Fabians). They forget that so long as the bourgeoisie rules as a class it cannot allow any encroachment, even from the “municipal” point of view, upon the real foundations of its rule; that if the bourgeoisie allows, tolerates, “municipal socialism”, it is because the latter does not touch the foundations of its rule, does not interfere with the Important sources of its wealth, but extends only to the narrow sphere of local expenditure, which the bourgeoisie itself allows the “population” to manage.

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 13 points 3 days ago

CW old timey use of n word [Counter-Revolution of 1776]

This excerpt (especially "damned, infernal, diabolical proclamation declaring freedom to all our slaves") is really illustrative of a lot of his points in the book about how horrible and terrible settlers are

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Seconding Counter-Revolution of 1776 (and Horne's other books as well).

Absolutely GOATed author, everything by him ive read has been both very readable and well sourced. He's good at showing how terrible the colonists were and how opposed they were to even weak reformist criticisms of their slave state

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Do you think its noteworthy they used the same verse for cuba and hezbollah, or just coincidence/similar circumstances of the two?

[–] ComradeRat@hexbear.net 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I have recurring dreams where the creatures in my aquarium have somehow gotten out and hid everywhere and I have to find them and put them back

 

finished reading this book last night, was pretty interesting. Tries to create an "autistic marxism". Imo it lacks engagement with 1)bipoc, 2) global south and 3) exploitation (though Chapman at least acknowledges the gaps), but otherwise great analysis of the connections between disability and capitalism particularly in the global north over the last 80ish yearz. I also do like how he draws on the connections between disability and surplus population

 

Rly shit takes from Engels here [Engels - The Magyar Struggle] Apparently there's worse yet to come in "Democratic Pan-Slavism"

Its also a total reversal from his position in septemberish 1848, when he was castigating germans for their chauvanism being the cause of slavs opposing revolution

 

Reading this like "nope, sorry bud all ur hopes and dreams are gonna be crushed next year" Poor marx marx-doomer

 

Marx has been maintaining this nonviolent resistance stance since the first article in Neue Rheinische Zeitung back in June, in part bc he believed the reactionaries would definitely lose

However, counterrevolution rallies and two days later Marx admits he was wrong: [Marx - Confessions of a Noble Soul]

And two days after that, Marx is explicitly advocating violent resistence: [Marx - A Decree of Eichmann's]

Source is Marx Engels Collected Works vol8. Its very interesting to see Marx and Engels operating as agitators/organisers rather than theorists

 

From Marx Engels Collected Works vol7

Overall the Neue Rheinische Zeitung articles have been very interesting both theoretically and to see Marx and Engels engaged in organisational work during what they hoped would be THE revolution

 

been reading Barbara Allen's biography of Shlyapnikov. Very well written and sourced almost entirely by archival stuff. But depressing because the workers' opposition gets run roughshod over by basically everyone in power (Lenin, Bukharin, Stalin, Trotsky, Molotov, etcetc). Been wondering what others' have read on the workers' opposition and what your takes are.

The 1930s have been by far the most depressing

But even the late 10s and early 20s have some "dude wtf" moments from leadership imo

Somewhat relatedly, what do folks think of the Democratic Centralists? I've actually never heard of that faction in the 1919-21 debates before

 

Very good book on soviet nationalities policy using archival research

This one does a good job of showing how rapidly the (centre) of the party shifted lines on nationalism

Russian opposition to affirmative action programmes was pretty strong

Nationality could be shockingly arbitrary and sudden (and often informed by politics)

Stalin begins to turn towards supporting Russians

collectivisation interacted badly with the nationalities policy

The degree of internal conflicts within the party and soviet bureaucracy was also a huge part of the book.

Ethnic cleansings going on, and there's still tons of affirmative culture programmes running. Weird contradictions

 

(Not gonna spam any more books / articles [today at least] but this one is Important)

This is an excellent essay that examines the similarities and differences between Marxist and Indigenous critiques of Capitalism. Imo they miss a bit in terms of the Marx side (mostly I'm just salty that they don't cite Marx in the Anthropocene), but overall this is an excellent piece that every single settler should be reading

 

This is a very important contemporary marxist work imo (despite being published only this year). It's VERY relevant to climate change, the question of production under socialism and communism. It's also essential if you wanna have an idea of what Marx was up to (in terms of theory) in the late 1870s until his death bc Saito's source for his arguments is the previously unpublished MEGA2 (which he worked on) and others' work on MEGA2. Highly recommend it, though it is somewhat (prolly VERY) abstract/academic.

view more: next ›