#18561

swampman posted:

readsettlers / readmarxeveryday being the only real accomplishment of rhizzone is more than enough. more than most other forums got done. we deserve a large number of plaudits.



was talking with a guy at a bar the other week and he told me to check out readsettlers.org :)

#18562

kinch posted:

swampman posted:


readsettlers / readmarxeveryday being the only real accomplishment of rhizzone is more than enough. more than most other forums got done. we deserve a large number of plaudits.



was talking with a guy at a bar the other week and he told me to check out readsettlers.org :)


*clears throat* get that bar patron an account!

#18563
speaking of readmarxeveryday, I haven't been able to access it recently--is it down or is my computer unable to handle the concentrated knowledge?
#18564
it's down

karphead posted:

i will be taking readmarxeveryday down over the weekend. it's hosted on google cloud and i want to get off. it will be back up in some other capacity afterwards. if anyone wants anything from it after it's down send me a pm.

do no evil my ass


#18565

Constantignoble posted:

currently working on Meister's "Justice Is an Option"; i know pathetically little about options theory


finished this one, very good overall, recommended. it's one of those books that may have permanently altered my frame of reference in minor but significant ways. that's always neat. I also appreciate that it doesn't just sit on the theoretical components, but actually ponders the matter tactically

interesting to read proximal authors beside one another to notice things like "drumm's critique of marx began as an elaboration on 3-4 paragraphs from chapter 7 of meister," which even uses the metonym v metaphor angle

#18566
reading roland boer's book 'stalin: from theology to the philosophy of socialism in power'. leaving aside the fact that boer is a pro deng revisionist, which doesn't seem to have too much bearing on this particular book, i'm not sure the book is as good as it ought to be given the subject matter(stalin's evolving political thought given the realities of socialism in power). he often seems to be writing quite a lot to say not very much, and the connection to theology mostly comes across as a fairly superficial influence on stalin/the bolsheviks most of the time. there is some relatively interesting stuff that seems to show an implicit, not fully formed concept of class enemies as internal in stalin's thought, rather than the more explicit conception of external enemies that was predominant in the ussr mostly, sort of a precursor to what is explicit and fully formed in mao. i have noticed echoes of this in a couple of stalin things before so it was interesting to see it here, but other than that i haven't found the book particularly revelatory. props for citing grover furr and ludo martens in an academic book published by springer though lol
#18567

lo posted:

reading roland boer's book 'stalin: from theology to the philosophy of socialism in power'. leaving aside the fact that boer is a pro deng revisionist, which doesn't seem to have too much bearing on this particular book,


i take this part back, in the conclusion he changes tack from what he was emphasising in the main body of the book and asserts that stalin's conception of a socialist society in which class struggle had been completed supports a program of peaceful reform and then immediately starts talking about the belt and road program. no mention of what mao had to say about class struggle continuing under socialism. file under productivist brainrot

#18568
so, just to draw out a bit more of a discussion on productivism, since it comes up in your ponderings a lot, what do you take to be the happy medium? like, there's what gets filed under the bukharinist/dengist heresy, but then there's also the view articulated the 1859 preface that everyone likewise swears to uphold. the former can easily look like fidelity to the latter; likewise, the latter can be seen as affirming the former. something i don't see very often is an attempt to articulate what must be the case for both of those takes to be held.



or, maybe as a more general point in my own mutterings and meanderings of late: it's one thing to denounce one or another error — productivism, voluntarism, tailism, revisionism, reformism, ultraleftism, and all the others — but much more interesting to me than the negative position is the positive position: what specific move is the remedy? (and, as seems to happen a lot: does that recourse open one up to charges of the opposite error?)
#18569

Constantignoble posted:

so, just to draw out a bit more of a discussion on productivism, since it comes up in your ponderings a lot, what do you take to be the happy medium? like, there's what gets filed under the bukharinist/dengist heresy, but then there's also the view articulated the 1859 preface that everyone likewise swears to uphold. the former can easily look like fidelity to the latter; likewise, the latter can be seen as affirming the former. something i don't see very often is an attempt to articulate what must be the case for both of those takes to be held.



or, maybe as a more general point in my own mutterings and meanderings of late: it's one thing to denounce one or another error — productivism, voluntarism, tailism, revisionism, reformism, ultraleftism, and all the others — but much more interesting to me than the negative position is the positive position: what specific move is the remedy? (and, as seems to happen a lot: does that recourse open one up to charges of the opposite error?)


i don't know that i have an idea of what the best medium is. i guess i tend to take a mao-like position where the primacy of class struggle has to be maintained even when you are, as is very often necessary, trying to build up productive forces. but otoh i'm not sure you can just theorise about this, if you're not actually in charge of an economy it's going to be difficult to come up with remedies(although i think that the line of some groups that are not even close to being in power is very much informed by productivism, e.g. the marcyite sects' support of post mao china). i'm not sure this is very helpful for a wider discussion though, sorry. the mention of bukharin/deng is funny though because i read something by some marcyite people recently where they condemmed bukharin as a traitor but were very pro deng, which i guess is sort of emblematic of how muddled this viewpoint can be

#18570
i’m reading mark neocleous’s book on immunity. i have had a terrible cold since starting it.
#18571
im reading your post about having a cold & i feel great. personally like healthwise doing p good imho


e: busted my leg the other day and will be hobbling around for a while. serves me right

Edited by zhaoyao ()

#18572
i'm reading 'dreamer of the day: francis parker yockey and the postwar fascist international' which has a lot of information about various failson crank nazis, many of the national bolshevik persuasion. there's a bit where they quote evola saying that jewish culture has a 'corrosive irony' and that was funny to me, a man poisoned by irony online
#18573

Constantignoble posted:

Just finished reading Colin Drumm's dissertation, "The Difference That Money Makes"...



Update: After chewing on this for a couple of months, I think I've gestated some responses to Drumm. I no longer believe that his chapter critiquing Marx succeeds, though the rest of the book is still plenty interesting, and I give points for at least making one of the more unique attacks I've seen.

If anyone else here has read chapter 1, let me know. I'm eager to discuss the specifics, but whereas the audience here is fairly sympathetic to my position from the outset, I'd prefer that folks look it over independently; when I attempt to express the arguments alongside arguing against them, I've found the feedback has been a bit less muscular than I've hoped. It's probably just not a good way to absorb an argument, to see it summarized and then immediately attacked.

Edited by Constantignoble ()

#18574
Recently read a few pro wrestler memoirs just because I needed some quick & breezy reads to cleanse my brain and get my numbers up. But then I read Yannis Varoufakis 'Adults in the Room' and realized, oh man, this guy lies about himself like a wrestler