Chavista Club World • Page 11

fwiw it looks like he apologized in this thread? it's not like the greatest apology but at least it's not like "sorry you were offended"

 

just to add, in case people don't click on that tweet

if true, this is why people gotta learn to read better and not just casually skim over things though. i've made that mistake before lol

 

yeah i realized my edit made it even less clear lol thanks

 

I would trust that apology much more if he actually said what he was apologizing for/what he does or not believe.

 

That's what I was thinking as well. It wasn't very direct. He's been vague this whole time lol

 

mike pence, steven bannon

 

Has anyone read Lefebvre's Metaphilosophy ? While he was dancing around Hegel I was on the level but now I'm struggling with the way he is invoking Nietzsche. I'm assuming that he took an unannounced step back to examine mimesis and poiesis. Maybe by the end of the chapter it will make sense, but I feel like I'm missing some connection. It's in the fifth chapter when he wanders off on a diatribe about poetry. Maybe it's the Nietzsche-Heidegger relationship that I'm missing...his citations are all fucked up and half the time idk wtf he's referencing.

 

Any opinions on Fredric Jameson?

 

Feel really tempted to show my barber a pic of young Stalin as an example of what I'd like ngl

 

I did an entire presentation on him a couple years ago but can't find the powerpoint. From what I remember I found him interesting but don't have enough knowledge to form an opinion one way or the other

 

I found you

How to get a haircut similar to Joseph Stalin without showing the girl who cuts my hair a picture of Joseph Stalin?

 

Tankies are fucking weird. Need to escape their hellhole corner of twitter. They'll make a decent point about how perhaps we should consider the implications of imperialist US backing of YPG or something, and then they'll completely undermine it by doing something like putting "Russian 'Imperialism'" in quotes as if the US is the only possible imperialist????? Or call Assad a "lion of anti-imperialism" lmao like son. You love to quote Lenin saying "any capitulation to bourgeois interests under any circumstances is betrayal," "there is only one war," etc and then hold up Assad????? The only war is class war. oh but uhhhh also the anti-imperialist war too. lmao.


Idk man fucking morons

 

Also, here's my judgement of US backing of YPG: it has helped YPG, who have only fought ISIS and similar, not any positive force, so who cares, especially considering that the US will 100% definitely abandon them eventually anyway. Its the result of US realpolitiking not any kind of genuine ideological or political support. Will tankies think the YPG is good once the US drops them?

 

You think I'm dumb enough to believe that Stalin "turned the USSR into a peasant society" ?????

 

No offense meant, comrade

 

Regarding the dates on the tweets - he RTed these today lol

 

How to Be Okay with Having a Communist Friend

 

Up until that statement where the WH mentioned they might put boots on the ground I was assuming that we'd end up backing Turkey and they would go in. 45 is pretty fucking thin-skinned and volatile though. Depending on how this Russia thing pans out things could get bad. Hopefully not Sixth Fleet bad, but...idk.

 

what are everyone's thoughts on Erik Olin Wright?

 

He loses me instantly at the idea of capitalism transforming into socialism and that whole "no bullshit marxism group" is ironic in its level of bullshit, but since I'm going to assume you're asking our opinions on his class theory I'll continue.

So I know Wright in particular loves shifting the debate to empiricism, but truly analytical Marxism's dismissal of LTV on the grounds of empiricism is completely undermined on a societal level by existential discrimination. When someone says "empiricism" in a Marxist debate I assume any time they say "dialectical" before "materialism" it's in jest because the labour of the people who are denied their existence and codependently the opportunity to contribute their labour is always conspicuously neglected in the math. That is to say not only do I disagree with the non-recursive valuing of a marketable product, but also each precursive component (and the labour of its production) of a marketable product has a likely distribution of sources of labour tapped in its production that is measurably affected by existential discrimination.

 

"Marxism and Form" is one of the best books in Marxist literary theory. His prose can be a bit difficult, though I find it enjoyable for some reason. I haven't read any of his recent stuff, however.

 

Leftist notions of reform, progress, tolerance, and social justice always come up against the harsh reality that any progressive development can only mean a more sophisticated system of misery and exploitation; that tolerance means nothing; that justice is an impossibility. Activists, progressive and revolutionary alike, will always respond to our critique of the social order with a demand that we articulate some sort of alternative. Let us say once and for all that we have none to offer. Faced with the system’s seamless integration of all positive projects into itself, we can’t afford to affirm or posit any more alternatives for it to consume. Rather we must realize that our task is infinite, not because we have so much to build but because we have an entire world to destroy. Our daily life is so saturated and structured by capital that it is impossible to imagine a life worth living, except one of revolt.

We understand destruction to be necessary, and we desire it in abundance. We have nothing to gain through shame or lack of confidence in these desires. There cannot be freedom in the shadow of prisons, there cannot be human community in the context of commodities, there cannot be self-determination under the reign of a state. This world—the police and armies that defend it, the institutions that constitute it, the architecture that gives it shape, the subjectivities that populate it, the apparatuses that administer its function, the schools that inscribe its ideology, the activism that franticly responds to its crises, the arteries of its circulation and flows, the commodities that define life within it, the communication networks that proliferate it, the information technology that surveils and records it—must be annihilated in every instance, all at once. To shy away from this task, to assure our enemies of our good intentions, is the most crass dishonesty. Anarchy, as with queerness, is most powerful in its negative form. Positive conceptions of these, when they are not simply a quiet acquiescence in the face of a sophisticated and evolving totality of domination, are hopelessly trapped in combat with the details of this totality on its own terms.

baedan | The Anarchist Library

daily I drift further toward nihilism

 

Quick disclaimer: NOT an anarchist, have many anarchist friends.

Are there any anarchist formulations for how a society can achieve something akin to a Universal Basic Income without a robust state apparatus? A UBI appears to be integral to a healthy and sustainable populace alongside the now obvious trend of intense horizontal automation. This ideology doesn't seem to be able to reconcile that without entertaining a fanciful departure from the current material dialectical movement.

 

Of course the new Jacobin magazine release party in Chicago is tonight at the same time as the Menzingers show.

 

Reading Capital | Jacobin

"David Harvey on a new book that looks at Marx’s Capital through the lens of political theory and Dante’s Inferno"