I feel like I understand communist theory pretty well at a basic level, and I believe in it, but I just don’t see what part of it requires belief in an objective world of matter. I don’t believe in matter and I’m still a communist. And it seems that in the 21st century most people believe in materialism but not communism. What part of “people should have access to the stuff they need to live” requires believing that such stuff is real? After all, there are nonmaterial industries and they still need communism. Workers in the music industry are producing something that nearly everyone can agree only exists in our heads. And they’re still exploited by capital, despite musical instruments being relatively cheap these days, because capital owns the system of distribution networks and access to consumers that is the means of profitability for music. Spotify isn’t material, it’s a computer program. It’s information. It’s a thoughtform. Yet it’s still a means of production that ought to be seized for the liberation of the musician worker. What does materialism have to do with any of this?

  • PaX [comrade/them, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t say I’ve heard of that book. I’ll have to look into it.

    About your theorem:

    Tbh, I just kinda see it as an affirmation of the kind of materialism Marxism is talking about. There no eternal “Truth” to be perceived, it’s all relative. In the context of natural selection, maybe truth is the best strategy to survive. When organism are struggling for the best fitness they are entering into a complex web of material relationships with their environment. This process of natural selection has been going on for far longer than humans have been able to conceive of it. Marxism is just the theory of evolution by natural selection but for the development of human society. Unless I missed the point of your theorem…

    • DroneRights [it/its]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think you missed at least some of the point. Note that the theory of evolution holds true within any system of competing agents capable of hereditary changes. Even for memes, which can only exist in the minds of intelligent species. The theory of evolution holds true even in situations where the environment in which human beings truly exist is not a world. There must be an environment of some kind, yes, but that environment does not require matter, energy, spacetime, or any number of other symbols from our interface to exist. The FBT theorem does not depend upon there being a world in order to hold true. Rather, it erodes the concept of there being a world such as humans would understand it to be a world, because it confirms that our perceptions of the world are perceptions of fitness, not truth. Our reality is simply a tool to help us survive and reproduce. It is not passed down from God to show us truth.

      • WithoutFurtherDelay [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s certainly interesting, but it implies that there is still some kind of reality, just that the way we interpret it is somewhat false, which is probably correct. This is not at all incompatible with Marxist materialism, because our perceptions of reality not being literally true is irrelevant to if we’re influenced by it or not. It merely suggests that our minds evolved a specific way of perceiving reality and, until we can fundamentally alter our brain chemistry, it will be the best we’ve got.

        • DroneRights [it/its]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          We can fundamentally alter our perceptions. That’s what the entire field of chaos magic is for. And chaos magic is essential to trans liberation, pagan coexistence, and, in my opinion, the revolution itself.

          • WithoutFurtherDelay [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            If by chaos magic, you mean changing your mind about conceptions of things, that’s true to an extent, but there’s definitely different “levels” of perceptions that are more or less difficult to change

            We can often change abstract ideas all we want in our head. It’s still difficult and often still takes “external” prompting for your brain to even consider the possibility of doing so, but it’s possible.

            But when it comes to things, like a positive or negative reaction to something (pain or pleasure), that is extremely difficult to change by just thinking hard enough. You have to often be repeatedly exposed to seemingly external positive or negative stimuli to change responses like that.

            • DroneRights [it/its]@hexbear.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Archimedes said, “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to balance it, and I shall move the world.” Chaos magicians take a similar view when it comes to moving the mind. Tools of magic are levers, and your learned ability to control your own beliefs is the fulcrum. Any mental change is possible if these two tools are advanced enough.

              I seek to use chaos magic to effect societal change that will further the goals of the revolution.