I get the feeling that this can somehow be interpreted as a lesbian tale in disguise through history… But I can’t figure out how.

If someone has tons of tattoos and a couple of runes, I’ll guess they’re aesthetic until some other indication arises. If it’s mostly just runes (even if it’s like their only one), I’ve had like a 90% success rate in assuming they’re horrible. But to be fair, like 70% of everyone in every place I’ve lived was a POS lol

Angola’s is definitely my favorite. WPK is indeed the next best, but Angola’s is just so cool

Definitely top 5 best, most applicable piece of theory of the past 10 years, if you ask me. Short, to the point, powerful, Marxist critique is hard to find

Well that 1% is my whole world

(Meaning our beautiful man of steel)

Damn, Roderic and Nia had a pulse on the most important, recurring topics of our time really well. Every time I see a post of Redsails, it’s genuinely as relevant and perfectly touching the point as the best of them have done.

Oh fuck now I definitely fo hatr him for that too

Cesaire was the one who first articulated this effect in the way we think of it today, calling it a terrific boomerang. Then others repeated it, then Foucault regurgitated it as an analysis or Pure Power (instead of the material analysis of Cesaire) but Foucault gets to have people think he made it up. We gotta respect Cesaire, call it his boomerang or just the Imperial boomerang if we want to avoid obscurity.

I don’t really care that much about the term tbh, but I personally despise Foucault for being anti-marxist and taking many older ideas but being french so it got popular

Yeah we should likely be reading the slop as ‘non-rich people should focus on saving their money to be rich instead of caring for an animal with their money which they do have’. It’s the conservative argument usually made.

‘I am once again asking you’ to stop citing Foucault for an idea a much better thinker first had, namely Cesaire. Foucault is a fuck, Cesaire is good. Imperial boomerang is the term we should use (the ‘you’ isn’t you specifically, it’s the Bernie quote)

I was told recently by a management type that a software tool could be installed on every laptop because ChatGPT had given him the advice that he should do that. It needs a full server dedicated to even run. I barely convinced him to stop with trying to get people to install it

Oh yeah that’s all shit and horrible. I guess I still see all of this as following from the simplified and entirely incorrect analysis (or at least it could explain it, I guess maybe for Haz it went the other way by starting at conservative and nationalistic values and then finding an analysis that supports it).

I guess the more important question than “how did they reach these shit standpoints”, it’s more important to know how to propagandize and work against it. Does the way we answer the ‘how did they get here’ question have an impact on that? I think so, and that it’s more useful to start with the mistake in class definition than to start at the nationalism as their kernel. But I’m not like super convinced of this

Not gonna say you’re wrong because I only see shit online about them, just that everything I’ve seen up to know can be clarified with my analysis. Very open to hearing that they’re also just outright US nationalists, though. Makes em easier to write off

From what I’ve learned about them (just online shit, idk, not amerikkkan), this seems like it’s not explicitly a goal, but a result of their ‘direct industrial proles’ vs everyone analysis. Because they truly believe that this is the only contradiction that matters, they strategically don’t push back against American nationalism. It’s what anyone would do with that analysis. It’s just that analysis is completely wrong and horrible lol

I, a communist 100% opposed to their vision and analysis, think it’s good to have a better analysis of exactly where they are wrong. Just “class reductionism” doesn’t really cover it, because it’s a very specific sort of limited scope. Sometimes class reductionism is saying that an analysis limits itself to only class (harmful in the long run, but not terrible to work with), but the ACP limits itself to a narrow view of what class means (worse). They look at only direct industrial production as “value creating” and take the hard stance that arises out of that assumption, and they limit “class relations” to “direct industrial production proles” vs “everyone else.” There is no other mode of dialectics relevant in their eyes. They are anti-identity politics (in the bad way, like anti-Losurdo’s inclusive “class” definition) and ultra about the strategies to be used for the chosen class.

I don’t think I’m directly disagreeing with you or anything, but I do think it’s important to name the exact disagreements or else it’s just throwing terms that not everyone understands. I, for example, don’t actually get what exactly you mean with “maga communism” or “nazbol” or “national socialist” in your comment. I’d guess we agree 100% but, you know, clarification for others is helpful, I hope

GOOD comment. Marx wasn’t saying “those ignorant philosophers wasted time analyzing.” He was saying that they wasted their analysis by not following it with change (or, more likely, by not having change be the goal of the entire process of analysis)

Still Mt shoulder is fucked up, and I’m just running a lot. But got sick so I missed 5 days. Today back at it though and had a good run!

Damn it, I thought Trump was comparing him to Kwame Enkrumah and I was excited that trump even knew to make it. Thought for a second Trump might actually know about him

Had a discussion just recently here about this. There are so many good reasons to ignore this critique about DPRK. There’s also just this assumption that every representative body works so that you have disagreements and such up until the very final vote. Any reasonable system would have that worked out and have everyone agreeing before it gets there. Or at least everyone knowing how everyone will vote. Then, it being a 100% vote is just a rubber stamp that, indeed, the procedures were followed and we take responsibility for the actions now. It’s basic democratic centralism one where or another (either hiding disagreement from the West or deciding to agree after all previous steps)

And some pictures of the pages! I’m willing to share any out of my vegan cookbooks of course. This is a good idea for like a mega thread lol. Just share a recipe you like with the site.