c_man posted:

Lessons posted:

Okay I finally finished the lecture. Pretty neat, now I know what Cybersyn was whereas I didn't before, (thought it was the star trek bridge room), still don't know what that worker self-management thing you end up talking about later is supposed to be but whatever. I feel like an ass saying it but you really need to work on your verbal ticks, you constantly say 'um' and 'like' and it makes you sound dumber than you are. Also lolling that one of your comrades didn't know what Chile was, however, overall Good Shit.

That's what everyone who isn't an experienced (or at least practiced) public speaker sounds like. You've probably been watching too many TEDTalks and CIA briefings (same thing lol) FYI.

Mad?

Lessons posted:

Okay I finally finished the lecture. Pretty neat, now I know what Cybersyn was whereas I didn't before, (thought it was the star trek bridge room), still don't know what that worker self-management thing you end up talking about later is supposed to be but whatever. I feel like an ass saying it but you really need to work on your verbal ticks, you constantly say 'um' and 'like' and it makes you sound dumber than you are. Also lolling that one of your comrades didn't know what Chile was, however, overall Good Shit.

do you mean the worker self management thing that beer proposed following the october 1972 strike? or something else. because that system was never even planned out completely. beer was just recognizing the need for something more democratic and adaptive than his original idea. i talked about it to point out that his ideas changed as the allende presidency progressed, not to, like, um, say; this is what we need to do now

stegosaurus posted:

Lessons posted:

Okay I finally finished the lecture. Pretty neat, now I know what Cybersyn was whereas I didn't before, (thought it was the star trek bridge room), still don't know what that worker self-management thing you end up talking about later is supposed to be but whatever. I feel like an ass saying it but you really need to work on your verbal ticks, you constantly say 'um' and 'like' and it makes you sound dumber than you are. Also lolling that one of your comrades didn't know what Chile was, however, overall Good Shit.

do you mean the worker self management thing that beer proposed following the october 1972 strike? or something else. because that system was never even planned out completely. beer was just recognizing the need for something more democratic and adaptive than his original idea. i talked about it to point out that his ideas changed as the allende presidency progressed, not to, like, um, say; this is what we need to do now

Yeah I meant the new ideas that Beer, (lol, beer ftw), developed through the experience, I'm not really sure what that's supposed to look like in practice at all, even abstractly, though yes I understand the ideas behind it, (more democratic, workers have immediate knowledge, etc.). I'm not even saying that as a criticism I just have literally no idea what sort of system you'd implement to achieve that or how effective it would be.

stegosaurus posted:

Lessons posted:

Okay I finally finished the lecture. Pretty neat, now I know what Cybersyn was whereas I didn't before, (thought it was the star trek bridge room), still don't know what that worker self-management thing you end up talking about later is supposed to be but whatever. I feel like an ass saying it but you really need to work on your verbal ticks, you constantly say 'um' and 'like' and it makes you sound dumber than you are. Also lolling that one of your comrades didn't know what Chile was, however, overall Good Shit.

do you mean the worker self management thing that beer proposed following the october 1972 strike? or something else. because that system was never even planned out completely. beer was just recognizing the need for something more democratic and adaptive than his original idea. i talked about it to point out that his ideas changed as the allende presidency progressed, not to, like, um, say; this is what we need to do now

THIS IS BECAUSE COMMUNISTS ONLY GET A REAL "VIEW" OF WHAT SOCIALIST SOCIETY WILL BE LIKE THROUGH THE REVOLUTIONARY WORKER'S STRUGGLE AND ITS SEIZURES OF POWER AND SUCCESSES, MARX ONLY KNEW THAT THE STATE HAD TO BE SMASHED AFTER THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PARIS COMMUNE, TODAY, WITH NO REAL MASS MOVEMENT OF THE EXPLOITED PEOPLES APART FROM REACTIONARY GROUPINGS AND RIGHT WING POPULISM, MARXISTS CAN ONLY LEARN AND EDUCATE THEMSELVES WHILST AT THE SAME TIME CONNECTING WITH WHAT LIMITED EMBRYOS OF RESISTANCE EXIST TODAY, WE MUST NOT TRY TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT OUR UTOPIAN SOCIETY WILL BE AMAZING, BUT THAT THROUGH THEIR STRUGGLES THE ONLY LOGICAL OUTCOME IS THE SEIZURE OF POWER

fleights posted:

THIS IS BECAUSE COMMUNISTS ONLY GET A REAL "VIEW" OF WHAT SOCIALIST SOCIETY WILL BE LIKE THROUGH THE REVOLUTIONARY WORKER'S STRUGGLE AND ITS SEIZURES OF POWER AND SUCCESSES,

This doesn't apply in this situation because it wasn't worker's strikes; he's talking about the 1972 lockout by Chilean business owners that was accompanied by strikes by petty-bourgeois truck drivers and a few others, which was defeated by the Chilean state. You'd know that if you'd watched the vid but you didn't so oh well, learning is for gaylords. But is what you're saying true in general? Probably not IMHO. Lenin thought that trade unionism was essentially hidebound by its focus on immediate gains for a narrow constituency which could never become revolutionary on its own, and he was probably right. That's not to say workers have nothing useful to say about a revolutionary socialist transformation of society, quite the opposite, but rather that exclusive focus on the economic struggle between workers and capitalist was necessarily limiting on real revolutionary communist struggle.

MARX ONLY KNEW THAT THE STATE HAD TO BE SMASHED AFTER THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PARIS COMMUNE, TODAY, WITH NO REAL MASS MOVEMENT OF THE EXPLOITED PEOPLES APART FROM REACTIONARY GROUPINGS AND RIGHT WING POPULISM,

This is just nonsense, reactionaries and right-wing "populism" are by no means "movements of exploited peoples". Like if you look at e.g. UKIP in Britain their voters are actually more well off than leftists or center-leftists like Labour or even the Greens, this whole thing about about the right wing being working class is and always has been nothing but bourgeois propaganda. You're also ignoring basically the whole world outside of the US, Canada and Western Europe when you say left mass movements don't exist but welp, First World Marxists.

MARXISTS CAN ONLY LEARN AND EDUCATE THEMSELVES WHILST AT THE SAME TIME CONNECTING WITH WHAT LIMITED EMBRYOS OF RESISTANCE EXIST TODAY, WE MUST NOT TRY TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT OUR UTOPIAN SOCIETY WILL BE AMAZING, BUT THAT THROUGH THEIR STRUGGLES THE ONLY LOGICAL OUTCOME IS THE SEIZURE OF POWER

You approach this like no one in the last hundred years of socialist organizing has thought of the brilliant idea of "hey, let's go out and organize the workers!" There have been hundreds of groups that have done this, are doing this, and while its certainly a good thing it doesn't necessarily create successful organizations let alone mass movements. And anyway if you want to understand why socialism is stalled don't look at communist tactics, look at history. Most people's views of socialism are informed by two things, A) The USSR collapsed and B) The Western capitalist countries are the richest and most successful in the world. Honestly I think the ~material conditions~ are going to have to change drastically before we can make any headway, especially in the West, but regardless the central questions aren't about communist "messaging" or whatever it's entirely about the supposed inevitability of capitalism.

fleights posted:

WHILST

all i read

TG posted:

i was getting all geared up to rejoin the church because of pope "cult of money" francis until he dropped this bomb

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/20/pope-opposes-legalizationofmarijuana.html

bad move frankie

a friend with weed is a friend in need. get help.