#17641

filler posted:

the point as I'm reading it is that if you've abandoned animal calories and replaced them with plant calories that are implicated in imperialist exploitation, you actually haven't done very much good on net. replacing your chicken from a broiler that was more or less tortured to death in the good ol' U$A with quinoa sourced from a village in the Andes where capitalist rationalization has driven the inhabitants to poverty and death isn't much of an improvement


didnt you learn about trophic levels?

#17642

tears posted:

didnt you learn about trophic levels?


I didn't, bad education. I'm just learning with my pals at the 'zzone

#17643

filler posted:

I didn't, bad education.


im going to destroy the education system

#17644
guys if we don't mostly stop eating meat there's no chance of the global climate system moving towards any state which can support the lives of most species existing today, and consequently humans. I think that fact is much more salient than all the other arguments for veganism, and it actually allows for some flexibility because it lets us set macro caps for animal product production based on emissions targets and other environmental degradation factors and distribute that amount among people who aren't interested in animal liberation. I think it's an interesting debate, but animal liberation is just so far down the line of urgent contradictions to dealt with compared to the mass extinction we're living in. If human society survives, it'll have to be in large part because of economically planned mass near-veganism and the animal rights discourse doesn't seem to be an effective way to move towards that.
What that means for the individual communist is that they should go vegan so they don't look like an idiot advocating for the abolition of their own dinner, to set a good example for others, and to voluntarily accept veganism so they'll be used to it when it's not voluntary anymore. There's literally no argument against veganism which makes sense if you want to keep living on the planet, so disagreements on which argument for it is best shouldn't turn you away from eating plants only.

Edited by colddays ()

#17645
#17646
I'm fine with looking like an idiot arguing for the abolition of my own diet
#17647
Impossible whoppers are really good. Some of you might want to start out with the Impossible Junior whopper though.
#17648
I say “Junior whopper“ instead of “Whopper junior” for a similar reason republicans call them the “Democrat Party”
#17649
rip david grabber, he fucked with debt



#17650
leave it to white intellectual leaders to try to make you always think about hitler and to tarnish the liberator of auschwitz
#17651

toyot posted:

leave it to white intellectual leaders to try to make you always think about hitler and to tarnish the liberator of auschwitz




Useless job imo

#17652

colddays posted:

What that means for the individual communist is that they should go vegan so they don't look like an idiot advocating for the abolition of their own dinner,


The idea that there are hard "ecological" caps on how its possible for people to live is mostly a fascist fantasy in the first place but a very important part about being a communist is arguing for the total reconstruction of society on radically different premises. These premises must necessarily influence the way food is produced and consumed and the idea that communists should larp as their ideal post-rev selves is an exercise in self-deleusion. This is sort of like saying that communists should enthusiastically work their jobs because theyre socially necessary for society to function (which is a not uncommon thing for right wing morons to claim) as opposed to working to halt social reproduction in its tracks in order to reestablish the relations that govern it.

#17653
I read part of a UN thing about trade where in the preface the guy running the un council or whatever says that countries should invest in infrastructure and increase minimum wages and support labor organizing and im wondering whether its just total naivete, malicious sheepdogging or both.
#17654
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.
#17655

c_man posted:

colddays posted:


What that means for the individual communist is that they should go vegan so they don't look like an idiot advocating for the abolition of their own dinner,


The idea that there are hard "ecological" caps on how its possible for people to live is mostly a fascist fantasy in the first place but a very important part about being a communist is arguing for the total reconstruction of society on radically different premises. These premises must necessarily influence the way food is produced and consumed and the idea that communists should larp as their ideal post-rev selves is an exercise in self-deleusion. This is sort of like saying that communists should enthusiastically work their jobs because theyre socially necessary for society to function (which is a not uncommon thing for right wing morons to claim) as opposed to working to halt social reproduction in its tracks in order to reestablish the relations that govern it.



yes i think the vegan critique of food production is if anything too narrow and must somehow include the farm itself. i have to say that we were talking about animal morality before, and my animal morality for what it's worth, sees the great loss of other animals across earth, even more strongly than this very historically-temporary mass livestock torture system. it takes many millions of years for life to come back and the meat torture system could end tomorrow. there will be humans experiencing degraded earth for millions of years because of the farm. they're both the same critique (trophic levels) on some level but like as happened with the adoption of clean energies, it did not displace any coal or oil (the labor-controlling class just cheered that they had more energy for their property), the replacement of cow pig chicken feedstock with human vegan feedstock could fail to answer the land question on the level of total acre at all, the extinction could continue and humanity could go from 30% of the earth's land to 40% of the earth's land used in ag. no more sounds of other animals at night any more, just engine noise for millions of years. that's more horrifying than the livestock system to me.

#17656
it is true that intensive and imperialist agricultural practices are far great in scope than simply cultivating livestock, but i don't buy at all that ending meat production would not lead to a mass scale divestment and reduction of its production. obviously such an immediate shift is not feasible in any sense so it's purely speculation, but the returns to scale after an immediate halving (at least!) of material input demands could not fail to cause an immense crisis and collapse in agricultural production

it's true that ending livestock cultivation does not address the basic drivers that make it endemic to food production, but the conclusion to that is "such drivers will act to undermine any endogenous shifts within its own institutions," not "these drivers can happily adapt to and subsume them"

your comparison to energy generation is the exact opposite of what you're talking about -- it's a case of alternative sources being unable to displace those endemic to the institutions of capitalist production except in the most marginal of conditions. not a case of them successfully displacing them while the mode of production keeps intensifying without issue. it is unthinkable to conceive of capitalism without a reliance on unsustainable energy sources just as it is unthinkable to conceive of a capitalism without the cultivation of livestock -- because these are contradictions only socialism will be able to resolve
#17657
boy a lot of energy was built up about this question! thanking the horselord for exposing it
#17658
I will never forgive him for the state in which he left my stable
#17659

blinkandwheeze posted:

I will never forgive him for the state in which he left my stable


oh so that's what the big freaking sword was for!!

#17660

c_man posted:

colddays posted:

What that means for the individual communist is that they should go vegan so they don't look like an idiot advocating for the abolition of their own dinner,

The idea that there are hard "ecological" caps on how its possible for people to live is mostly a fascist fantasy in the first place but a very important part about being a communist is arguing for the total reconstruction of society on radically different premises. These premises must necessarily influence the way food is produced and consumed and the idea that communists should larp as their ideal post-rev selves is an exercise in self-deleusion. This is sort of like saying that communists should enthusiastically work their jobs because theyre socially necessary for society to function (which is a not uncommon thing for right wing morons to claim) as opposed to working to halt social reproduction in its tracks in order to reestablish the relations that govern it.



If someone holds an animal liberation perspective, then fighting against the systems of animal exploitation as is practicable and reasonable is a sensible action to take as part of a larger strategy. 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. From an animal liberation perspective, the boycott is a method of agitating and raising consciousness at a direct point where individuals and communities fully realize the transformation of sentient beings into being a resource. The point isn't to absolve an individual of guilt or make them feel good, but to expose the oppression of animals as unnecessary and cruel.

#17661

c_man posted:

colddays posted:


What that means for the individual communist is that they should go vegan so they don't look like an idiot advocating for the abolition of their own dinner,


The idea that there are hard "ecological" caps on how its possible for people to live is mostly a fascist fantasy in the first place but a very important part about being a communist is arguing for the total reconstruction of society on radically different premises. These premises must necessarily influence the way food is produced and consumed and the idea that communists should larp as their ideal post-rev selves is an exercise in self-deleusion. This is sort of like saying that communists should enthusiastically work their jobs because theyre socially necessary for society to function (which is a not uncommon thing for right wing morons to claim) as opposed to working to halt social reproduction in its tracks in order to reestablish the relations that govern it.



I'm not sure where you read that there's hard caps for human life in my post, given that we agree that the particular activity of animal agriculture has extremely detrimental ecological effects which will ravage the global and local food systems, and therefore it must be limited within a new revolutionary food system. The fact that eventually we'll run out of groundwater to grow cow feed with isn't a fascist fantasy.
I think it's kinda weird to call limiting your own consumption in accordance with your stated principles larping. As opposed to enthusiastically working at your job, abstaining from animal products does not promote the reproduction of animal agriculture. Although it's insufficient on its own, it's hard to imagine how someone earnestly working towards halting this system could not do the simplest, most reasonable thing they can begin with.

Edited by colddays ()

#17662

pogfan1996 posted:

Vimingok, I don’t think I understand your point. It seems very intuitive that one of the easiest first steps to ending the oppression of animals is to stop eating them and using animal products as much as is practical and possible. Is your concern that we wouldn’t be able to meet the caloric needs of people without killing animals?


I was talking about the food in "vegan" diets specifically, which contains just as much if not more tropical input content than the meat-inclusive ones. Just using common sense, a vegan diet would ramp up demand for cane sugar, spices, chocolate etc if it competes with the meat-based one in terms of the popular, commodified taste that both vegans and their class enemies love. Ending mass industrial meat production is pointless if the alternative is mass "veganism" in the above sense.

#17663
even increased plantation production of stuff like cane sugar would likely be less environmentally damaging than meat though, if only because growing crops for food animals to eat is far less efficient than growing crops for human consumption directly. but its not like radical vegans are in favour of plantation monocultures either so that seems like a non sequitur to me
#17664
I've been reading all of marx's obscure essays published in the marxengels reader and there's a lot of great quotes that strike me as relevant. From the Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, published in 1850 (in response to the 1848 uprisings but two decades before the paris commune):

Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.



In opposition to this plan the workers must not only strive for one and indivisible German republic, but also, within this republic, for the most decisive centralization of power in the hands of the state authority. They should not let themselves be led astray by empty democratic talk about the freedom of the municipalities, self-government, etc.



As in France in 1793, it is the task of the genuinely revolutionary party in Germany to carry through the strictest centralization.



sound like these were written by lenin

Edited by Acdtrux ()

#17665
finished reading that marxengels reader. Does anyone know anything about the editor, Robert C Tucker? He seems to be an authority on soviet history and he made a few comments about stalin was a revolutionary after all in the footnotes.
#17666
all I know about Robert C Tucker is that he also edited a Lenin anthology in addition to the Marx-Engels one (out of print, of course), and for whatever reason a huge number of copies of that anthology have come unstuck from their covers because the glue dried out. the one I ordered had the defective cover, there are multiple reviews on Amazon from people who's copies just fell apart, even the version that the Internet Archive digitized looks worse for wear. what's going on here? did the publisher decide to sabotage the printing for fear that the Lenin Anthology would achieve the same cultural status as the Marx-Engels Reader? much to consider
#17667

filler posted:

all I know about Robert C Tucker is that he also edited a Lenin anthology in addition to the Marx-Engels one (out of print, of course), and for whatever reason a huge number of copies of that anthology have come unstuck from their covers because the glue dried out. the one I ordered had the defective cover, there are multiple reviews on Amazon from people who's copies just fell apart, even the version that the Internet Archive digitized looks worse for wear. what's going on here? did the publisher decide to sabotage the printing for fear that the Lenin Anthology would achieve the same cultural status as the Marx-Engels Reader? much to consider


sounds like rob tucker should have invested in a higher quality glue

#17668
I couldn't imagine publishing a book only to watch every copy disintegrate before me.
#17669
Bad post. Sorry if anyone was offended.

Edited by vimingok ()

#17670
I started thinking today - why haven't I reproduced? I mean, philosophically?

After a few hours of meditation on the subject, I snapped out of the fuzz I’ve been in and threw out every last drop of alcohol in my apartment.

I also threw out 1.5 ounces of weed.

I made myself an onion, green pepper, jalapeno and pickle omlette with a quartered orange on the side.

First healthy meal I’ve eaten in 2 months.

Today I begin a new life.
#17671
While it’s easy to use revolutionary theory in describing which man a woman chooses to have sex with, how can that possibly be correct if the man used condoms or the woman used birth control?
#17672
Maybe the rhizzone should stop reading
#17673


what's the deal with indians and obsessively posting about sex?
#17674
In the past yeaw a thought entewed my bwain that I had twoubwe addwessing: why have I yet to wepwoduce? I’m nyeawwy 36 yeaws owd, with ampwe wesouwces, intewwect, heawth, biowogicaw “stwength”, and access to femawes, but I have nyot yet pwoduced a chiwd. It’s nyot that I’m ejacuwating inside women but faiwing to impwegnyate them, but I’m consciouswy and dewibewatewy hawting inseminyation fow weasons that Dawwin and his fowwowews have nyot addwessed, such as bad mawwiage waws and wanting to be fwee without obwigations.

I’ve had mowe fewtiwe sexuaw pawtnyews than some kings and nyobwes of owd, but have nyot wepwoduced once, meanying that game, in the way I have pwacticed and taught it, has gonye squawewy against evowution. In othew wowds, wemainying a viwgin to this day as opposed to embawking on a muwti-yeaw wowwd sex touw with twipwe-digit pawtnyews wouwd nyot at aww have changed the chiwdwess wesuwt I face in this vewy moment.
#17675

pogfan1996 posted:

Maybe the rhizzone should stop reading


- Mao Zedong

#17676
do not copy paste the rapist rooshv even as a joke please
#17677
Yeah that was inappropriate. Deleted.
#17678
The Education Debate - Stephen Ball (2008)
Philosophy of Educational Research - Richard Pring (2004)
Philosophy in Educational Research: Epistemology, Ethics, Politics and Quality - David Bridges (2017)
Wasted: A Memoir of Anorexia and Bulimia - Marya Hornbacher (2006)
#17679

Acdtrux posted:

lo posted:


does anyone know if there are any marxist books about mesoamerica, i'd really like to read some crap about the political economy of blood sacrifices



not marxist but the anthropologist who made these kinds of analyses popular was claude levi-strauss. Freudian marxists are frequently influenced by him

The United States should be opposed at every opportunity.




When I made the above comment, I hadn't read any books of Levi-Strauss. I just finished Tristes Tropiques, and some of the stories were interesting. But, for a book about Brazil, I did not expect the islamophobia!:

At , in Buddhist monasteries bristling with statues because of the influence of Greece, I was aware of the slim opportunity of remaining united which is open to our Old World; the schism is not yet complete. A different future is possible, the very future that Islam opposes by erecting its barrier between the West and the East, which, without it, would perhaps not have lost their attachment to the common ground in which their roots are set.



Mankind has made three major religious attempts to free itself from persecution by the dead, the malevolence of the Beyond and the anguish of magic... it originated in turn Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam; it is a striking fact that each stage, far from constituting an advance on the previous one, should be seen rather as a regression.



Mohammed intervenes with uncouth clumsiness, between our thought and Indian doctrines that are very close to it, in such a way as to prevent East and West joining hands, as they might well have done.



Islam cut a more civilized world in two.



(p. 406ff). I guess I should not have expected more from an who writes, despite claiming to be influenced by marx, an idealist claim such as:

The dialectic springs directly from the cwtoms and the philosophy of the group.



I think dizastar's comment is entirely correct:

dizastar posted:

levi strauss and other structural anthropologists are a fun read but the structuralist methodology is opposed to historical materialism in the sense that structuralism applies a priori structures to all type of societies that is kind of a breakthrough from the marxist tenet that man, his cosmology and culture is a direct result from history and production. the objectivity structuralist anthropology tries to pretend holding is nothing more than trying to canvass pre-agricultural (or agricultural but not on the scale needed for population growth) societies with categories that only 'exist' in bourgeois society - exist in the head of the structuralist intellectual, living in bourgeois society

society of the spectacle kinda sucks but it holds a good bit on structuralism

In order to understand “structuralist” categories, one must keep in mind, as with every historical social science, that the categories express forms as well as conditions of existence. Just as one cannot appraise the value of a man in terms of the conception he has of himself, one cannot appraise–and admire–this particular society by taking as indisputably true the language it speaks to itself; “...we cannot judge such epochs of transformation by their own consciousness; on the contrary, this consciousness must rather be explained in the light of the contradictions of material life...” Structure is the daughter of present power. Structuralism is the thought guaranteed by the State which regards the present conditions of spectacular “communication” as an absolute. Its method of studying the code of messages is itself nothing but the product, and the acknowledgement, of a society where communication exists in the form of a cascade of hierarchic signals. Consequently it is not structuralism which serves to prove the transhistorical validity of the society of the spectacle; it is on the contrary the society of the spectacle imposing itself as massive reality which serves to prove the cold dream of structuralism.




Levi Strauss makes the relevant claim here (p. 178):

The ensemble of a people's customs has always its particular style; they form into systems. I am convinced that the nnmber of these systems is not unlimited and that human societies, like individual human beings (at play, in their dreams, or in moments of delirium), never create absolutely: all they can do is to choose certain combinations from a repertory of ideas which it should be possible to reconstitute.



Anyway here's some weird observations about the philosophy of writing:

the primary function of writing, as a means of communication, is to facilitate the enslavement of other human beings... Writing may not have sufficed to consolidate human knowledge, but it may well have been indispensable to the establishment of an enduring dominion. To bring the matter nearer to our own time: the European- wide movement towards compulsory education in the nineteenth century went hand in hand with the extension of military service and the systematization of the proletariat. The struggle against illiteracy is indistinguishable, at times, from the increased powers exerted over the individual citizen by the central authority. For it is only when everyone can read that Authority can decree that 'ignorance of the law is no defence'.



Again, imo, an example of anti-materialist idealism. Apart from the bad philosophy, using the n word in 1955, and sudden islamophobia at the end, the data and stories were interesting. Although the writing needed to be edited a bit.

#17680
good shit as usual

https://medium.com/@jeff_kaye/a-real-flood-of-bacteria-and-germs-communications-intelligence-and-charges-of-u-s-4decafdc762