/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain't driving 20 minutes to riot."

Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 80.00 MB

Max files: 5


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/

Anonymous 11/17/2020 (Tue) 00:17:27 No. 1142468
So who of the people currently alive are at the forefront of advancing Marxist theory? Any prominent figures? Name anyone else besides Peepee Explosion.
>>1144106 >Marxist theory is the fanfiction of western world. Marxist theory isn't something simply within the confines of the west. >You're just writing shit up that nobody cares about outside your little bubble, just like the faggots at evageeks. Worst part is that there's no entertainment value to it either A lot of people don't give a shit about math past what they learned in high school. Does that mean that math has no relevance or use? >Write about something productive. How is learning about Shaikh or Cockshott not a good use of our time to read?
>>1144106 Replace "marxist theory" with literally any area of study and the intent and IQ level of your post remains intact.
>>1144115 >>1144123 Math has an actual use case, they're not in any way comparable.
>>1144127 >Math has an actual use case So does marxism
>>1144127 You don't study math. By your criteria, most of math and most mathematics research would be considered "useless". The only math you don't consider useless is the rote memorization of algorithmic problem solving. It's solving boring puzzles. Read up on the discovery of imaginary numbers. They were called imaginary as a pejorative, nobody thought they were useful. Look at Terrence Tao's research and tell me which one is "useful" by your standards: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~tao/ Marxism has a lot of components. It has a philosophical component that deals with epistemology and ontology. It has philosophy of science. It has sociology, anthropology, cultural analysis. It also has strong implication in psychology (psychoanalysis being the most popular of its influences). It has obvious implications in economics, and politics, and, of course, in political economy. In every area I have mentioned, marxism has profound implications. How is this "fanfiction of western world"? You're like a child complaining about learning calculus, exclaiming that he will never use this "in real life". Maybe not you, anon. Some of us adults work on our mental tools to expand the horizon of our capacity for thought. Criticizing things you don't understand is pretty lame.
>>1144141 You could've just provided an existing use case over few big words.
>>1144151 Use case is serving as the foundation of scientific thought. Providing a context with which to push thought forward. Opening new areas of research based on dialectical materialism. All of this is used to further the understanding of humanity, both as a society, and individually, in the past and the present, and giving insights into the future. It provides a framework for people to understand political power, how it is obtained, how to wield it, and how to use it effectively. Do you have specific questions about what I said? You seem to have little knowledge about the subject matter (math, marxism, philosophy in general).
>>1144158 Sounds overly ambiguous bullshit and but I'll believe it. Not surprised at a socialist being condescending towards those worse off though
>>1144167 ok boomer
>>1144167 The callous disregard for anything that is outside your field of knowledge makes me angry. It's fine not knowing, but there are no excuses for willful ignorance. If you'd ask, "hey, what is studying marxism useful for?", my answer would've been completely different.
>>1144170 There's no reason to study with an average IQ anon. If all you can do is to learn through repetition then higher pusuits like math or philosophy are doomed to fail. The kid who complains about calculus is correct, it's no use to him and he'd be better off playing video games or lifting weights.
>>1144182 >Studying is useless and you can't get better at being smart by practice.
(13.77 KB 480x360 michael hudson.jpeg)
In his work recompiling Bronze-age debt jubilees with others at the Harvard Peabody Museum, it is no understatement to say that Michael Hudson has become the most important Marxist scholar of the last century. His diligent work has managed to overturn literally millennia of ahistorical false assumptions about debt and opened up space for ideas people once thought were impossible.
>>1142552 >Gerald Horne Total charlatan, if this guy is actually a Marxist I'd be shocked. He sure doesn't let it on in interviews where he constantly bloviates about historic wrongs and his spooked race essentialist view of the world.
>>1144233 seconding, while not explicitly marxist theory, every marxist should read hudson(or listen to his many, many interviews and lectures)
(87.85 KB 922x1200 Ef9UB0fWAAED_XP.jpeg)
>>1144106 Lol, not our fault you're to retarded to understand Marx. You realise Marxism also had an impact in other fields like biology, ecology and population genetics in particular right? Or is that also some kind of fanfiction? You and simular retards are the prime examples why philosophy majors should be illegal, people who study philosophy should also take up at least 50% hard science classes so they can observe that their philosophical interpretations have a real material objective basis, and is not some arbitrary category you can pick and choose from for your analytical philosophy debate classes .
(25.62 KB 600x628 smug anime girl 95.jpg)
>>1142468 >advancing marxist theory kek, nice meme. Marxism became stale in the early 20th century and basically dead at this point. the fact so many ppl on here still try to hang on to these outdated theories and dogmas that haven't been able to mobolise ANYONE in the last 70 years is just really sad. get with the time, buckos. Marx is nice and all but its been like 250 years, move on!
>>1144317 Based...NOT!
>>1144319 Very nice!!
>>1144304 >Muh hard sciences I'm doing bsc in elec and hopefully get into masters program next year But yes, I don't get Marx
>>1144317 >250 years = irrelevant Jesus Christ since when are there so many retards on this board. Marx is as relevant as Darwin is today. Just because you don't understand why is not a valid reason for rejecting Marx. Do you also have a problem with people in biology still holding on to the 200 year old ideas of a dead old white man named Darwin?
>>1144317 T. Never opened a book
>>1144317 Thats it, im now motivated to do Revolution just to enact a second Kronstadt. Kiddies and wreckers gotta go.
>>1144330 >>1144332 That's funny coming from leftypoltards! 99% of the posters here can't even into dialectics (I have tested it!)
>>1144325 >I'm doing bsc in elec and hopefully get into masters program next year. But >yes, I don't get Marx Some basic ideas of Marx: He argues hat men can be distinguished from animals as soon as they begin to produce their own means of subsistence, which is conditioned by their physical organization. And by producing their own means of subsistence men are indirectly producing their material life. This labour is a collective process, which results in the formation of social relations, which are again conditioned by production. From these relations ideas form, religion, ideology etc. Eventually due increase in productivity, a surplus was created which allowed the existence of a non-producing class and a producing class. They have opposite interests and Marx describes this as class struggle which is the real motive of history.
>>1144317 >Marx is nice and all but its been like 250 years, move on! Honestly the loudest people I've seen who like to make variations of this point are usually market anarchists stanning Proudhon; which, lol.
>>1142493 >Ian Wright I always love when my lil leftypol niggas mention people who I know for sure I was the first to bring up here Brings joy to my heart to see people check out the readings I recommend
>>1144358 Yeah some retard here said USSR is the reason we don't have socialism, i guess he forgot about the Paris Commune and the rest.
>>1144362 Do you have a source on that pic, anon
>>1144364 Anarchists are unironically a joke
>>1144349 Thanks for the write up anon
>>1142493 never heard of any besides Wolff, and he's a west masshole sp opinon immediately discarded.
>>1143878 Which states that...?
>>1143522 Some more I thought of: >John O'Neill >Ariel Salleh >Nick Snicek >Garyanti Spivak >Aijaz Ahmad >Christopher John Arthur >Samuel Bowles >David McLellan >Schlomo Avineri >Andrew Levine >Eliott Sober >Terrell Carver >Meghnad Desei >Steven Lukes >John Maguire >Richard Miller >Rodney Peffer >Ziyad Husami >Sean Sayers >Nick Hardy >Francois Matheron >Warren Montag >Andrew Feenberg >Pablo Gilabert >Nancy Fraser Also Erik Olin Wright is dead, oops. So scratch him off my first post. >>1144376 Same; seems like a list of nobodies, other than Harvey
>>1143720 His "bureaucratic socialism" makes sense to me.
>>1143908 I've heard good things about Thomas Sekine and Makoto Itoh as well.
agent Kochinski
>>1142468 There has been no advance of Marx's theory (not "Marxist theory" whatever the fuck that is) since Marx and Engels died. At best, we have had some more or less very good and profound restatements of their basic tenets. The most important failure among the scholars of Marx has been the inability to understand the collapse of production based on exchange value and its aftermath. None of the folks I see on these various lists have even noticed the event. It is as though the Sun went nova and no astronomer noticed because they were looking the other way at the time.
>>1159203 Are you really jehu?
We don't need theory. We need party discipline.
>>1142468 >So who of the people currently alive are at the forefront of advancing Marxist theory? Red Kahina
>>1159203 Jehu when are you compiling your hollowing out series into an essay?
>>1159203 explain?
>>1143584 If you have to ask you probably won’t be able to
you, the worker But also anyone involved with Energy Dept policy, especially at the technical day-to-day level. Labor Theory is ultimately a theory about the exploitation of energy specifically human energy. Any discussion about socialism requires a discussion about material conditions, which are primarily defined by energy. By "energy" I mean how it's made, how advanced it is, and who actually owns it. For example, it's easy to have a discussion about socialism in a place with something big like a nuclear power plant, coal mine or hydro dram. All three are huge jobs centers with potential safety issues (radiation, suffocation, flooding) that must be carefully managed by the government because industry considers accidents unavoidable. This is why there is class consciousness in France, Norfern Britain and Tennessee - even if reactionaries are in charge there is at least an awareness of what class is which is step one in achieving socialism. Likewise, it's hard to have a discussion about socialism in a place with a lot of gas. Not only is gas much safer but it's harder to quantify, the average person can't really conceive of it as it is not a physical object. Most of the people involved with it work in distribution where it's just a big metal tank or a big metal pipe with gauges. Then when people go to buy gas, it's always the individual with their own vehicle at the gas station never a collective street, neighborhood or town requesting gas. When gas stops existing there are no plant closures, no explosions (PG&E excepted), no visible smog and radiation clickers. It's just a sign that says No Gas and society just stops until gas is brought. Typically foreigners can be blamed for it and not local energy planners. This is what occurred during the Oil Crisis. So, where's the "best" (ie, most informative) energy policy debates today? It's within the very very niche and dying realm of nuclear arms control where regulation of the nuclear industry is considered relevant beyond just banning it all. It's here where the uses of energy are considered - it's purpose (peaceful or malicious), it's design, it's location and it's final delivery. Here, it's where people actually debate whether or not railroads should be required to transport the energy, where the energy can be transported, and what the minimum staffing level should be. Same for it's production, although it's significantly more technical and shrouded behind government secrecy. Even if the authors of these debates are not class conscious or mention socialism they are contributing to the theory with their discussions about profit, worker safety, energy demand and utilization.
>>1159203 Is this a "real subsumption of the whole process involved in a circulation of capital changes the subject character of capitalist accumulation and the basis upon which capital extracts surplus value; sublating the social relations from exchange values between owner/producers into the scientific management of the total reproduction of labour" kind of argument which just scales it up to entire economies? orrrr... something else?
>>1159358 Yes. Al least, my parents still think so. But they lied to me about a lot of things.
>>1159362 After the holiday. I needed a break from it.
>>1144233 Not only debt, but the coloring-book fairy tale of the origin of money. The state theory of money won, everything else is liberals trying to save their careers. >>1159467 There used to be a top-quality discussion on a peak oil blog called The Oil Drum. Lots of collaborative science and theorizing going on in that commentariat. TOD closed a few years after the 2005 oil peak, and their commentariat scattered to the winds and took their high standards with them wherever they landed.
>>1168211 >Not only debt, but the coloring-book fairy tale of the origin of money. The state theory of money won, everything else is liberals trying to save their careers. Anwar Shaikh disputes the state theory of money. I know he's not 100% a Marxist but he's definitely friendly towards Marxists like Vivek Chibber.


no cookies?