bonclay posted:

I don't really know what you mean by the truth. What is the truth of reality that I have mistaken for a void? Tell me more about it. I don't want to write the long, thoughtful responses that your posts deserve and suddenly have them be irrelevant because I have argued with a different conception of truth than the one you're using.

I would also note that I believe in truth, and my entire argument is a vindication of Marxism against small-n nihilism, petty skepticism, and the various forms of surrender to futility they entail.

Edited by blinkandwheeze (Oct. 24, 2012 03:03:38)

bonclay posted:

if we cant learn from people who arent perfect then ill eat my hat

but that's kinda what i have been trying to say, if that hasn't come across then i've done a bad job of expressing myself. you explicitly defended the use of simple narratives because they're effective building blocks for the change of other peoples ideologies. if that's where you identify the role of a marxist, preaching the truth of our beliefs to the masses, that we as the intelligentsia know better than them and should maneuver ourselves so that this change can better take place (and the antisemites of the exiled, even though they are not marxists themselves, have value because they can aid this particular teleology) then i really question what interest you have in learning from the people. i don't really see how any position that starts with the assumption that we know better than others, and must talk down to them in order to convince their sweet little minds away from their misguided beliefs, i don't really see how that doesn't just succumb to academic elitism and dogmatism itself

at its worst marxism might play this role, but at its core it's the accumulated knowledge of the proletariat, their victories and failures, rather than the philosophical speculation of petit-bourgeois academics. a lot of this is down to my own flaws as a writer or thinker but if the way i am expressing myself is too abstract or wordy a lot of that is out of a reverence for proletarian thought, the m-l-m philosophy is of such quality that i think it absolutely has to be interrogated at the highest levels (i mean, it's not that i embody those but you get the sentiment) of academic discourse because it deserves it, it dwarfs any other philosophical project with its stature. but most importantly, while it is in my mind totally capable of holding its place in the most speculative fields, as a proletarian philosophy i also have complete faith it can be grasped by the revolutionary subject when it is needed. i maintain that the practice of dialectical materialism is the strongest tool for the realisation of truth (and if this isn't a belief that is shared then why consider yourself a marxist?) and it's a practice that has repeatedly been completely understood and utilized by the people. if it's a practice that can be grasped by the radicalized indigenous peasantry of the naxal corridor, despite the total impoverishment of their material conditions, that is evidence enough it continues to have a place in proletarian struggles and requires no modification or simplification in order to be readily accepted. rather than seeing it as an insufficiency on their part, if this utilisation isn't occurring elsewhere then maybe it isn't what the proletarian requires. he was obviously no marxist but the panthers leaned as much on the experiences of malcolm x as they did mao, and frankly malcolm was probably a better model than any marxist could have been. i don't know what the ideological character of future proletarian militancy will be, but mobilizing simple narratives in order to convince them of my own perspective and understanding won't do them any justice at all

swampman posted:

While the vanguard sits around dialectically realizing truth the global proletariat is getting fucked

i think i've made myself pretty clear, even to the point of hueyp accusing me of ultraleft deviationism for valuing practice over theory, that the only real way to realize this truth is completely through militant action by or in service of the global proletariat?

cleanhands posted:

i dont know what taibbis antisemitism has to with anything in this thread

it's just me & jools being jerks about analysis of financial crisis that places the blame on goldman sachs or whatever corrupting the system mirroring nazi rhetoric about the jewish financial elite

bonclay posted:

instead of being dogmatic, overbearing, and uncritical, we should be humble, critical, and willing to talk about our ideas in ways that people understand.

who are "People" lmao

tpaine posted:

jools posted:

bonclay posted:

instead of being dogmatic, overbearing, and uncritical, we should be humble, critical, and willing to talk about our ideas in ways that people understand.

who are "People" lmao

i too am profoundly autistic.

cleanhands posted:

i dont know what taibbis antisemitism has to with anything in this thread

substitute discipline for taibbi and you'll unlock the hidden message!

blinkandwheeze posted:

if that's where you identify the role of a marxist, preaching the truth of our beliefs to the masses, that we as the intelligentsia know better than them and should maneuver ourselves so that this change can better take place (and the antisemites of the exiled, even though they are not marxists themselves, have value because they can aid this particular teleology) then i really question what interest you have in learning from the people. i don't really see how any position that starts with the assumption that we know better than others, and must talk down to them in order to convince their sweet little minds away from their misguided beliefs, i don't really see how that doesn't just succumb to academic elitism and dogmatism itself

Hey appreciate your post, didnt mean to imply you are an advocate for thumb-in-butt Marxian Meta Analysis, at least not in so rude a way, anyway i think there's a normal tendency, since the communist vocabulary is now so firmly fixed to certain bits of history, and I certainly do it all the time, in fact I'm even more guilty of it than you are in this thread, eg my previous post, to allow anachronistic notions about social relations to creep into our thinking, where otherwise we'd be more on guard. Consider modern education strats & tactics for use in an undergraduate setting (that's just an example but also not just an example, yknow): academic reciprocity, group discussion, promotion not of learning so much as the love of learning, explosion of the concept "intelligence" as a single or even meaningful trait, etc, and more etc. All very familiar tools to a good & thoughtful educator. Every rhizzone poster is partly a book-addled vanguard mutt, sure, but except for myself, they dont believe they're reserved a special seat on the revolutionary high council or whatever. the point is not that vanguard-people have special knowledge that has to be sold to the proletariat for their own good, its that they can help the proletariat speak a truth they already know.

Crow posted:

cleanhands posted:

i dont know what taibbis antisemitism has to with anything in this thread

substitute discipline for taibbi and you'll unlock the hidden message!

lol fuck off man

sosie posted:

youve got to admit jews are pretty awful though

hate the sin love the sinner.

discipline posted:

I'm staying with an old friend who is jewish and who seriously confessed to me that maybe, just maybe the holocaust was about natural selection. her grandparents escaped a ghetto in poland

i've heard this before as a theory for high ashkenazi IQ