|
well, perhaps i'm mistaken:rudatron posted:Your entire chemistry/biology metaphor was, as it turns out, totally worthless in justifying yourself, because you can, actually, decompose all biological processes to chemical ones, it just takes a lot of time and isn't necessary. in context, i saw two ways to interpret this. either 1) you weren't actually disputing a stratified ontology, but nevertheless were pointing to generative mechanisms (whose existence was never in dispute btw) in an entirely impractical way that misses their significance, hoping to score cheap rhetorical points through overweening pedantry, or 2) you were actually making an argument, positing a different, reductive approach to ontology — likely, though not necessarily, bent toward a "fundamental level" with a more authentic existence i went with the latter reading, thinking it more generous to you. but if i'm wrong, i'm wrong; i'll own it Aeolius fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Apr 4, 2018 |
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
In that argument ovet the structure of the soviet union, you were making an argument of a holistic vs reductionist approach - but the key assumption is that one still sits atop the other, such that reductionism makes sense. That is not the argument here. The argument here is that imperialism does not sit atop capitalist class relations, and therefore reductionism is non-sensical, not merely unenlightening Is not that there exists emergent phenomena not expected from its basic atoms of composition, but that the nature of its composition is different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
the issue with anti-imperialism is you aren't going to win power in the united states by focusing on it, and unless you control the U.S. government you aren't going to be able to stop it
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 03:43
|
|
|
I was also not being 'pro-reductionist', but was rejecting your deflection of my claim that the nomenkletura does not constitute an ownership class, because they were a 'political not economic elite'. Yet if we substitute the 'chemistry' of the econony ussr into the 'biology' of its political reality, we see in fact that they are, and that the claim of worker ownership is also false. Thats not being pro reductionist, that's simply requiring that the constuitive base relations not conflict with the abstracted representation - we should never get a contradiction if we choose to reduce.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
to clarify, i wasn't arguing for holism, which generally just winds up being a reduction in the other direction. Anyway, I don't know precisely what you're claiming re: where imperialism likes to sit. I see bits of what you're not claiming, which was a problem I can recall us running into some years ago. If you're making a case that will ultimately lead us to an anarchist theory of the state as a locus of oppression completely independent of class considerations, well... I don't think it holds much water, but if that's your bag, don't let me harsh ya.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Of course not, the state is merely another terrain of conflict, not its source.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
Ok lemme try again: nothing sits on anything. You're not a reductionist; you subscribe to a radically horizontal, unordered ontology, without complexity in the sense of emergence, but also with complexity in the sense that something's "composition is different." Quick question: Huh? e: is there like an author you like that you can suggest for further reading on your take? Aeolius fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Apr 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
Of course not, the ruling ideology and dominant culture must sit atop whatever the material class relationships are, because it is through those class relationships that the society as a whole is able to reproduce itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 05:21
|
|
|
Aeolius posted:but nevertheless were pointing to ________ (whose existence was never in dispute btw) in an entirely impractical way that misses their significance, hoping to score cheap rhetorical points through overweening pedantry ah I see you're familiar with rudatron
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
Aeolius posted:e: is there like an author you like that you can suggest for further reading on your take? rudatron posted:Of course not man, i give up on verbal communication let's just puckishly clap our sleeves at one another
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:the issue with anti-imperialism is you aren't going to win power in the united states by focusing on it, and unless you control the U.S. government you aren't going to be able to stop it maybe instead of hoping the people you're trying to dethrone award the power to you, you just take the power. yeah, we gotta take the power back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
dude ur the one who said i was pro-reductionist. i responded to ur claim, nor your edit/question. i will, of course, never read a book
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 06:04
|
|
|
book bad
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 06:07
|
|
|
rudatron posted:i responded to ur claim, nor your edit/question yeah no, i was just being a turd because i suck, i thought that was clear anyhoo after all this time, i still really can't say with any confidence what your philosophical orientation is. like if i had to hazard a label, maybe some kind of... apophatic eclecticism? which is fun to say, at least. w/e Aeolius fucked around with this message at 06:54 on Apr 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KELLYWEILL/status/981505303408766981
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
id like to argue that while outright US imperialism isnt behind every place of unrest and war or w.e. in the world, the capitalists sure are. of course even then its not always foreign capitalists. hot take here folks: global revolution now
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
socialism in one country has proven a failure under multiple varied attempts, only a global revolution can defeat capitalism, and we are nowhere near globalized enough yet for that neoliberal globalization is a necessary phase of development
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:socialism in one country has proven a failure under multiple varied attempts, only a global revolution can defeat capitalism, and we are nowhere near globalized enough yet for that nah mate you only need to have a revolution in the most advanced countries, which have plenty of communicative/cultural links with each other for said revolution to occur the rest would fall into place rather easily thereafter
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Straightforward from here: 1. organize the third world working class 2. crush the global capitalist hegemon 3. world proletariet revolution
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 17:27
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Straightforward from here:
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
good news: the revolution is already beginning bad news: its fascist as poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
Speaking of that, has anyone here heard anything about Stalinist entryism into the Green Party? Or tankies in groups like PSL or WWP drifting toward Alexander Dugin's orbit and using the (((echoes)))?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
I'm no political stragegist, but if youre gonna attempt to use entryist tactics to capture a party, would one as marginal and ineffective as the greens be the best target?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:Or tankies in groups like PSL or WWP drifting toward Alexander Dugin's orbit and using the (((echoes)))? would be the least surprising development on the left
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
im pretty convinced the only way to defeat capitalism would be revolution in the US and western europe, which will likely require an economic shock worse than the great depression, but even that opportunity is fading as capital internationalizes more and more
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im pretty convinced the only way to defeat capitalism would be revolution in the US and western europe, which will likely require an economic shock worse than the great depression, but even that opportunity is fading as capital internationalizes more and more But as capital internationalizes, the US and Europe become less important Hell, I'd argue the rise of the right wing, particularly in Europe, is just as much due to increasing national irrelevance as it is the fear of refugees These people can't fathom a world that isn't euro-centric, it's broken their brains
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Same as the U.S. which is undergoing relative decline. It's one helluva identity crisis.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:But as capital internationalizes, the US and Europe become less important yes but capital is still vastly concentrated in teh US and Europe. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:yes but capital is still vastly concentrated in teh US and Europe. curious how they decided to include a country or not in this graphic. it looks to be the first world. also income =/= capital
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:curious how they decided to include a country or not in this graphic. it looks to be the first world. also income =/= capital id guess capital is even more concentrated in those countries than income
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:yes but capital is still vastly concentrated in teh US and Europe. Sure, but China and to a lesser extent India are looking like the next big boys on the block, and that's largely due to the relative size of their industrial populations Also what KB said, income isn't the same as productive capital
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Dreddout posted:But as capital internationalizes, the US and Europe become less important
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
rudatron posted:In the US, yes, but i don't think that's also true for eurotrash, especially the more marginal eu states like Hungary, Poland, etc. Its pretty much just refugees + scapegoating them for austerity and such. I was thinking of the UK and France when I made that post A lot of Tories just can't handle their country losing great power status
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Oh sure, the UK is forever cucked that they lost their stupid empire, that's just a given
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
I don't think eastern Europe is feeling the decline malaise, especially since Poland is a way more important European country than 30 years ago
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
I accidentally called Poland eastern European to a polish person and got yelled at
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
U were correct
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Eastern Europe is everything east of the Elbe, and this is trivially true to anyone that isn't afraid of being called slavic don't @ me
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
China and India are only relevant powers as long as America and Europe allow them to be, for now at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
Wheeee posted:China and India are only relevant powers as long as America and Europe allow them to be, for now at least. If that was true, America and Europe would never have allowed them to be powers in the first place
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:37
|
|