(Thread IKs:
dead gay comedy forums)
|
control systems control systems
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:I don't think it would hurt to normalize the understanding that where stalin is, hitler is not and where hitler is, stalin is not. the fourth reich would absolutely have been victorious had it not been for stalin. like, people don't need to like him or think the gulags were cool and good, just realize that's how history played out and that had things been different, they would've been different in an unimaginably worse and more nazi way. the people carrying out that smear campaign are the ones who are most bummed out that hitler lost and the end of that smear campaign is to get more people to also be bummed out that hitler lost eh, I ran into a lot of people running apology tours for Stalinist excess when I was a kid hunting for the proper ideology, and they turned me into a dumb loving anarchist for far too long. please don't waste your time explaining why the great purge was nbd or the cultural revolution was cool and good, just move the gently caress on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 02:09
|
|
|
I never read Capital because as someone else said it's very archaically written and that jumps out today. I was recommended David Harvey's Companion to Capital and dipped my toes into that, I found it did a good job of summing up how money is a mask of a mask, the law of capital accumulation, things like that. Has David Harvey fallen out of favor or something? People were talking about how we need an updated guide to capital and that was what was recommended to me
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/iconogasmic/status/1556697389913612288?cxt=HHwWgIChyeiBwJorAAAA
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 02:45
|
|
|
Has anyone else read / have opinions on "A Reader's Guide to Marx's Capital" by Joseph Choonara?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 02:47
|
|
|
coma posted:I never read Capital because as someone else said it's very archaically written and that jumps out today. I was recommended David Harvey's Companion to Capital and dipped my toes into that, I found it did a good job of summing up how money is a mask of a mask, the law of capital accumulation, things like that. Has David Harvey fallen out of favor or something? People were talking about how we need an updated guide to capital and that was what was recommended to me Harvey’s book is a companion not a replacement. granted it probably works as a replacement but it’s designed to be read after you read whatever passage Harvey is talking about in capital
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Harvey’s book is a companion not a replacement. granted it probably works as a replacement but it’s designed to be read after you read whatever passage Harvey is talking about in capital I remember using it mostly as a replacement unless he was talking about something that I would only know by looking up the original text
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
yeah he does a good job of summarizing or just block quoting Marx when needed
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
coma posted:I never read Capital because as someone else said it's very archaically written and that jumps out today. I was recommended David Harvey's Companion to Capital and dipped my toes into that, I found it did a good job of summing up how money is a mask of a mask, the law of capital accumulation, things like that. Has David Harvey fallen out of favor or something? People were talking about how we need an updated guide to capital and that was what was recommended to me I listened to both his older and more recent chapter-by-chapter lectures as a supplement when I read Vol 1. I didn't find his Vol 2 lecture series as helpful so dropped it partway through, but I would recommend his older Vol 1 lecture for the most part. The reason why any lecture or companion material doesn't suffice on its own other than garden variety biases of the lecturer is that - especially in Volume 1 - you have Marx's dialectical method on display in the book itself. You're going to glean all sorts of things that a lecturer may miss or under-emphasize just as a lecturer might point out things you overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
MeatwadIsGod posted:If you're talking later works of Marx, Capital is a fairly late work. Obviously only Vol. 1 was ready for publication in his lifetime, but Vols. 2 and 3 are taken from manuscripts written up to about 1870 or '71 iirc. Personally I think it's more worthwhile studying "late" Marx because, not to be flippant about it, more history happened and consequently his thinking is more developed than his earlier work. You could always read stuff like The Civil War in France especially because it was very influential on Lenin in State and Revolution. But it's similar to 18th Brumaire in that it was written for a contemporary audience and you would want to brush up on the period to get the most out of it. This is why people who prefer "early Marx" should be approached with caution
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
For those of you who have read blackshirts and reds, how do you feel Parenti's analysis of the free-market reforms in the surviving communist countries stands up to the context of the last 3 decades? He seems to take it as a surrender, rather than a retreat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 04:58
|
|
|
tokin opposition posted:What the gently caress is dynamical systems The lectures of Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park are a good primer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 05:05
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Has anyone else read / have opinions on "A Reader's Guide to Marx's Capital" by Joseph Choonara? I ordered this months ago I just haven’t gotten around to reading it yet
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
Someone a few pages back mentioned the HG Wells/Stalin interview and holy gently caress it owns: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1934/07/23.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
MLSM posted:I ordered this months ago I just haven’t gotten around to reading it yet I read it and really liked it. He specifically points out places where he thinks Harvey got it wrong, but having not read Harvey, I can't say if these points are valid or not. The fact that it's not as long as Capital itself seems to be at least one point in its favor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 15:26
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:For those of you who have read blackshirts and reds, how do you feel Parenti's analysis of the free-market reforms in the surviving communist countries stands up to the context of the last 3 decades? that stance was pretty much left-wing orthodoxy at the time he wrote it, things are very different now
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 15:28
|
|
|
coma posted:I never read Capital because as someone else said it's very archaically written and that jumps out today. I was recommended David Harvey's Companion to Capital and dipped my toes into that, I found it did a good job of summing up how money is a mask of a mask, the law of capital accumulation, things like that. Has David Harvey fallen out of favor or something? People were talking about how we need an updated guide to capital and that was what was recommended to me tbqh, I don't get this position John Milton and Shakespeare are much earlier and are lit af quote:By force, who reason for thir Law refuse, I'll keep banging this drum on the thread: read Capital straightforward and stop trying to read it with a companion, with this or that, just take it on without worrying about the language, whether or not you will properly get it, etc. Just make a casual read of it. Karl Marx was a outstanding writer to the point that even in a theoretical book he managed to put plenty of literary flourishes, through allegory and metaphor, that encapsulate many concepts therein extremely well. A famous one: quote:Vol 1, Chapter 10: Capitalists as vampires because they are agents of capital is something that everyone gets it and immediately can see where he is going with it. It's phenomenal in effect and no wonder why so much money was spent to form an army of fourth-rate thinkers to spam their bullshit in attempt to drown ideas like these. In my experience helping people out with socialist education, they might just not recall the more detailed workings (circulation, etc) but they get it just by a cursory, leisure reading. If you become intrigued and feel that "holy poo poo woah gently caress wow" sentiment about figuring something about the world, then it's totally worth it to come back to it again armed with companion readings, notebooks, essays, googling the poo poo out of every concept that comes up, etc. Even if most of it goes past you, you'll be surprised at how much you can retain and how much it leaves for your unconscious thinking to do the heavy lifting for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:02
|
|
|
I think its quite remarkable how some posters itt are saying dont read capital because its “too difficult” in the marxism thread. dead gay comedy forums posted:tbqh, I don't get this position Yeah this is what i recommend to people as well. Read capital by itself first and then read a companion or readers guide with it afterwards
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:10
|
|
|
my method has been to read a section/chapter, take notes, read the corresponding section in Harvey, and take more notes
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
I read a section and then watched a Harvey lecture and then read further etc. I need to pick up Vol 3 at some point but 2 was a real mess for me. Took me ages to get through where I couldn't put vol 1 down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:my method has been to read a section/chapter, take notes, read the corresponding section in Harvey, and take more notes This is pretty much what I did for Vol 1 with his lectures, then most of Vol 2 and 3 but without companion material. Imo reading at like one sub-section per day is a good way to break it up because you have (usually) pretty clear demarcation points from one point in the argument to the next. You can go at a faster clip with some of the more historical or journalistic sections like the working day, primitive accumulation, etc. but generally I got the most out of it slow-and-steady plus taking notes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:25
|
|
|
Shakespeare can be incredibly challenging for people to read. There are tons of Shakespeare supplements and summaries of his books to make reading him more accessible. Telling someone to "just read" Shakespeare is the best way to kill their interest in Shakespeare. If you consider yourself a politically active Marxist, spreading knowledge of theory to increase the development of people's class consciousness is one of the most basic, non-sectarian things you can do. "Just read it" is an abdication of duty. While specific supplements and summaries can be contentious as to how accurately they interpret Marx, the recommendations are at least an attempt to get people's foot in the door. Isn't it better for people to read a slightly wrong interpretation of Marx, than to get their information from liberal sources? In addition, it will be easier for them to read the original if they already understand the terms Marx is defining. This is also why a study group was suggested earlier, its a way to make it easier to get through theory. Especially if there's somebody in the group who's already knowledgeable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:27
|
|
|
I took the same approach with Capital as I did with far more difficult philosophy, which was to just blow through it and get whatever I got, then go back and do it again more carefully. that's not gonna work if you don't enjoy reading, but if you do, give it a shot. the first three chapters of Capital are simultaneously of critical importance and constantly under the strain of "why the gently caress is he going on about this" until it clicks. and there's plenty of fun flourishes and references and literary detail to keep you engaged as you keep moving along one could go, painstakingly, chapter-by-chapter until you feel like you "get it," but I'm not sure it's the best approach. it's not really a linear argument. I do recommend Harvey's companion, specifically as a companion, not a standalone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 16:28
|
|
|
Different people learn in different ways. Some people can blaze through capital and get a good enough understanding, some will take notes as they read/reread different sections to understand, some like a companion piece/lectures/study group, others are better off with just a summary/someone else to break it down for them. All ways are good and important and the more people who take in the ideas the better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 17:10
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Shakespeare can be incredibly challenging for people to read. There are tons of Shakespeare supplements and summaries of his books to make reading him more accessible. Telling someone to "just read" Shakespeare is the best way to kill their interest in Shakespeare. "Can be" is what I am getting at. People are putting the cart in front of the horses, which is a problem that permeates all literature - a lot of good reading doesn't happen because a lot of people are continuously intimidated by opinions of others about how hard that reading is. Which brings me to the second part of it. I was a volunteer in socialist education here in Brazil for a while, and one of the best things I was taught there was to let people there surprise you. This is a program for people like rural workers who at most got to the end of basic public education. I had a guy who worked in construction coming to me, chapter by chapter, asking me loads of questions and figuring out a lot of poo poo by himself ahead of time. When I was helping other students back at the uni, they responded a lot better by reading it like literature. The hardest part of that initial phase was, personally, getting that "Can be" out of the way so that we could start dealing with actual pedagogy. Sure, English isn't my first language, so telling people to "just read it" may sound stupid. I want to encourage people to believe in their capacities and surprise themselves, however.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Its great that there was a lot of stuff he could figure out on his own, I don't deny people's capabilities. However: 1) You were available as a resource in person to help him, and answered the questions he asked. You were doing the thing I'm asking people to do. 2) If somebody tells you that they can't get through it on their own, it is best to believe them and offer help or a resource.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 17:39
|
|
|
but "sink or swim, pal" is a central tenet of communism, says it right on the first page here
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:tbqh, I don't get this position while I mostly agree with you there are a few points of difference. first, milton and shakespear only had to be translated from english to english, not from german to english. for an english reading audience that adds a layer of difficulty becuase there are going to be single words expressing loaded concepts translated or footnoted into paragraphs of explaination. second, not because of laziness or impatience, but because the world is basically ending and there is a pressing desire to understand why and to know what to do about it, people want apprehension now, not leisurely and organically some years or decades from now. whether. instant gratification is possible in this matter is debatable, but there are very good reasons to want it. third, there's a lot of context and background that needs to be established for people to really form their own understanding and opinions. a background in german idealism, one of the more inscrutable branches of philosophy, is necessary to be able to evaluate dialectical moves on a basis more informed than "marx said". even if marx was right, an appeal to authority isn't very satisfying. the same can be said for the historical economic study. I don't want to read ricardo, but I'm sure there's a level of understanding denied to me because I won't. a case can be made for brief, accesible primers for people who feel they need them or want them. a case can definitely be made for companion material, in fact a case could be made for a whole bunch of different companion materials written by different people with different backgrounds, history, economics, philosophy, anthropology
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:17
|
|
|
my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:41
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to. That sounds like a lot of work though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to. the problem there being that the lineage of evolving the theoretical work progressed from marx/engels to lenin to stalin and mao and it p' much stopped there. maybe because most of the theoreticians were exiled or executed
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
Is there a book on the federal reserve banking system from a marxist perspective?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to. What a silly post
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to. -hey turns out imperialism is really good at focusing the crises of capitalism on people who are less able to do anything about it there we go
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
MLSM posted:Someone a few pages back mentioned the HG Wells/Stalin interview and holy gently caress it owns: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1934/07/23.htm i have heard this interview described as "like watching two men have a swordfight, but one is also eating a sandwich"
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:my primary objection other than the difficulty of reading it is that its been one hundred and fifty fuckin years. a lot of things have happened in that time, marxism isn't a dogma where you have to read the original sacred text and defend marx's carbuncled butthole at all costs, there should absolutely be a standard modern (post ~1985 at the very least cutoff) text updated with all the things people have learned since marx's time that you can refer people to. you gotta read at least a couple sacred texts (or pretend to have read them). the butthole defense is optional but it's the fun part so I don't know why anyone would want to skip it
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:20
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Is there a book on the federal reserve banking system from a marxist perspective? Douglas dowd has some good books on American political economy but he hews to some Norwegian economist named Veblen views rather than Marx. but both he and Veblen are anti capitalist so the analysis is still good
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
Capital in the 21st Century is an update so people don't need to read Capital 1-3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
Thorstein Veblen is a great read being one of the last great political economists, especially because he does the job through mainstream concepts of macroeconomics/microeconomics (he is the one who came up with conspicuous consumption as theory for example) and because he is American as well. If you like Veblen, Gunnar Myrdal from Sweden is the natural follow-up in some practical aspects of Western socialism and institutional economics
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:Capital in the 21st Century is an update so people don't need to read Capital 1-3. lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2022 20:16
|
|