I remember a point, where I was like:"I already know capitalism is bad, why do I need to learn this complex shit on top of it? Is dialectics even real? Marx and Engels probably just read too much Hegel." Now I try to explain Engels three laws to my bookclub in the first session and frame everything in terms of contradictions. I still have a lot to learn though.
woodenghost
joined 1 year ago
Hedgehogs
What else can be eaten with lingonberry jam? Or rather, what can't?
That's it. What they're saying with this law is, that the US needs more landlords.
Same
Not saying it's always a great tactic, but here are some answers to your questions: It's usually for prisoners. If you're a prisoner, you could easily be killed. If you're still alive, that means they want you alive. Usually for ideological reasons. To showcase their "justice". A hunger strike prevents your enemies from using you for their propaganda. By starving yourself publicly, you gain an opportunity to publish your reasons and spread your own propaganda in turn
Another thing is, that you make a credible case to the target audience of your enemies propaganda, that their "justice" is not just at all. It becomes credible, because your suffering acts as an "honest signal" (that's a term from biology for a costly action, that's hard to fake). It's meant to suggests strong commitment to higher ideals on your part. Your enemy will have a harder time arguing you only did your "crimes" for personal gain. It's hard to argue you don't believe in things, if you're willing to starve for your convictions.
Yes, I realize how idealist this whole argument sounds. Again, I don't really know, how to tell when this is actually a good idea. Just answering the questions.
Yes, exactly. Even if Trump being not totally wrong is a weird coincidence.
What many people ignore about magnetism, is that you can use special relativity to transform any situation involving only a magnetic field into a situation involving only an electric field, simply by changing how you look at it.
We have found that we get the same physical result whether we analyze the motion of a particle moving along a wire in a coordinate system at rest with respect to the wire, or in a system at rest with respect to the particle. In the first instance, the force was purely “magnetic,” in the second, it was purely “electric.”
I love them, but almost never cook with them, because they are slightly more effort than other carbs.
Money gives you a claim on labor, so what it does is, it gives you the privilege to command others around and order them to do and make stuff for you. I'd like stability for my family and friends, but I'd find that unethical (beyond a certain point). So I would try to use that power for political purposes funding comrades. Basically what Engels did. He supported not just Marx but also the communist underground in London at the time. I'll never live a live of luxury, because I don't want to. I'd just give it away to help friends and to fund class struggle.
About exploitation and celebrities: if celebrities were to put all their content out for free and relied only on generous gifts of their fans, than I guess in theory, they could get rich without exploitation. But even then, given the state of the world, they would still have more and more responsibility to try and change it the more privilege (money, fame, influence, etc.) they have. In practice, the people who make the merch, set up the shows, handle distribution and all that behind the scenes stuff are the ones who produce most of the value.
But what if they aren't white, though? /s
As some feel too hopeless to get out and organized, I was reminded of this quote:
The first lesson a revolutionary must learn is that he is a doomed man. Unless he understands this, he does not grasp the essential meaning of his life. [...] I have no doubt that the revolution will triumph. The people of the world will prevail, seize power, seize the means of production, wipe out racism, capitalism. [...] The people will win a new world. Yet when I think of individuals in the revolution, I cannot predict their survival. Revolutionaries must accept this fact.
- Huey P. Newton
I like this sense of letting go. Letting go of the necessity to personally catch a glimpse of the new world with my own eyes. Maybe I will. I almost surely won't. And yet, I want to help us get there. Even if things have to get worse before they get better, I want to help keep that spark alive.
Activism burnout is real and valid. If you're effected, take all the time you need to heal. But recognize it's similar to depression in that it lies to you. It lets you see reality through a distorted, non-materialist lense where everything is hopeless. (Might even lead to actual depression.) Don't confuse it for wisdom. Material contradictions will move history forward.
To avoid that burnout in the first place, if we organize around a moment that arises outside of our control, we should anticipate the ebb and flow of social forces, of action and reaction. Use any arising moment to agitate, grow our forces, raise class conciseness, strengthen our orgs. And don't be surprised or disappointed when inevitably the moment passes and forces of reaction take the stage. The moment will only not pass once. Until then we have to endure. And only personally commit what we can sustain long term.
Also we should be understanding towards people who feel burned out from activism. Don't call them weak or pressure them, but invite them to come back in their own time (but don't let people spread nihilism either).
view more: next ›
Thanks for the write up, I'm just unsure about this last part:
Which decisions could have achieved that? Nixon and Kissinger deciding to go to Moscow to make a deal and the USSR fueling the Walmart economy for the next decades instead of China? But than China wouldn't be the same today.