kinch posted:good shit as usual
https://medium.com/@jeff_kaye/a-real-flood-of-bacteria-and-germs-communications-intelligence-and-charges-of-u-s-4decafdc762
Thanks for posting this
pogfan1996 posted:The point of a labor strike isn't to stop working, it is to agitate and raise consciousness around worker exploitation at a direct site of conflict
The point of a labor strike is absolutely 100% to stop working. The point of a labor strike is to starve the bourgeoisie of what they need to survive. It also materially demonstrates that the proletariat is the ultimate source of everything that humans use to survive, and that the bourgeoisie can and should be dispensed with. Its much more than a propaganda event, it has a material purpose. This is actually the primary insight that marxism lends to the labor movement in the first place.
blinkandwheeze posted:accidentally downvoted c_man's post and have remedied this with an upvote as per poster's honor but i will publicly state that i have no strong opinion either way on its content.
Thank you for posting with honor
liceo posted:writing a dissertation proposal right now and am focusing extensively on lucien seve's work developing a dialectical-materialist psychology. most famous for "man in marxist theory". highly recommend.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/seve/works/1974/ch2/1_1.htm
thats cool im going to read this
edit: liceo if you got anything related to psychology-marxism and education/schooling hmu
liceo posted:tears posted:
edit: liceo if you got anything related to psychology-marxism and education/schooling hmu
sent you a pm
pm me this, as well. greetings to the zzone
that said, don't know if it's the imagery or the title's positioning (with the N sitting right under the L) but i got kind of a "dianetics" vibe
Acdtrux posted:I did not realize they had suck a sick cover! that's the one published by flp?
yah, they just reprinted it
karphead posted:
Do you think you could summarize the argument he makes, is he pushing for Settler communism? Espresso is tediously harping on whether or not Stalin personally agreed with the "Black nation" thesis, and I just don't care, but I am curious how that affects his politics.
Please correct me, but the real ramifications of the line he's pushing here is essentially Afrikans don't constitute a nation, therefore the Black national liberation movement is a revisionist line? That we should be working towards solidarity between settlers and colonized proletarians?
pogfan1996 posted:The APL doesn't believe that there was any sort of internal colonization, I'm pretty sure they hold to a "racism is a bourgeois plot to divide the workers" line.
Jesus, what use is it being an anti-revisionist ML if it brought them to this? It's like, everyone is wrong but me, but lets continue doing exactly the same thing we've been doing for the past century and hope it works.
Afaik the most important aspect of anti-revisionism in the first world is an understanding of the national liberation in the first place.
STALIN
History and Criticism of a Black Legend
http://www.readmarxeveryday.org/stalin/losurdo-en-20180311.html
dimashq posted:Someone tell “espresso Stalinist” that Stalin was black actually, start here:
STALIN
History and Criticism of a Black Legend
http://www.readmarxeveryday.org/stalin/losurdo-en-20180311.html
lol
still waiting on that translation from Sinistra though
pogfan1996 posted:The APL doesn't believe that there was any sort of internal colonization, I'm pretty sure they hold to a "racism is a bourgeois plot to divide the workers" line.
amerikkkano stalinist
dizastar posted:reading querelle de brest during commute
genet is really sick and i don't think many people are reading him nowadays, our lady of the flowers and miracle of the rose are my favourites i think.
Marx and Education - Jean Anyon (2011)
serafiym posted:First half of the Espresso Stalinist article isn't even good commu-theology folks. Lenin and Stalin never went around like nitpicky nerds with Marxism and the National Question trying to dispel something like Zionism by saying it was unscientific. Obviously it eventually formed a real country. Those national criteria Stalin laid out are important in that they would outline ethnogenesis campaigns which Bolsheviks would apply across the colonized Central Asian periphery; colonial and clan governments were replaced with national governments of trained native bureaucrats, common culture was funded by the state, borders were drawn, standardized written languages were made and taught. A foundation of Soviet policy was creating new nations.
This is so important to what makes "Stalinism" appealing, it's really disheartening that people will take up the title and miss this.