MLRL_Commie [comrade/them, he/him]

Marxist-Leninist-Rondeyist-Losurdoist, the only correct combination of names.

Life motto: If Deng didn’t do it, did it even happen?

  • 2 Posts
  • 955 Comments
Joined il y a 2 ans
cake
Cake day: 10 novembre 2024

help-circle

  • Then no, I think you’re just wrong. A victim who misunderstands their oppression should be critiqued for such for both moral and strategic reasons. They should be helped to understand it better to better resist and overthrow their oppressors. The only exception is when their misunderstanding presents no contradiction with the strategy of liberation. But I think here it is reasonable to think thats not the case. Either their oppression is supported by structure of the vast majority of Jewish institutions and thus their liberation requires a significant change in that structure, or it doesn’t and they can win by focusing only on Israeli zionists. And I think the latter is a much worse analysis.


  • How do you square allowing Palestinians to have a less nuanced view (implied by you directly) on the situation? It seems you’re sneaking in some infantilizing view of Palestinians here. I think that Palestinians can completely understand the system which oppresses them, which includes the direct support of the vast majority of Jewish institutions, organizations, and cultural identity across the world. Westerners aren’t capable of understanding this better because of distance or such.

    I don’t think I can really find the perfect answer here, but I’m skeptical whenever someone makes it seem like westerners should just be better at understanding it holistically or something. That’s ridiculous. If the split you insinuate does exist, then either we westerners know better and should inform the Palestinians (big doubts), or we should learn that they are correct and figure out how to act with thay knowledge, while protecting any and all supporting their liberation regardless of religion or race. I clearly lean towards the latter, and am sensitive to how dangerous that rhetoric can sound (is close to conflating Judaism with all individual jews and with zionisn). But I think there is some sublation possible here, and I am not the expert to find it, unfortunately.






  • I guess I mean like: a drone is useful for a war like Russia-Ukraine for reasons that wouldn’t be really relevant for defense of leftists. I feel like I’ll be fed-posting if I go too much deeper in my descriptions, but just the scenarios that communists are preparing for defense aren’t much similar to the scenarios where drones are now dominating. But that might be a paradigm shift thats just not yet clear in every case…




  • I think it’s often important to sometimes (though dont get carried away and lose the kernel) discuss how Marxism is really at least 2 major schools/claims brought together. The method of analysis call dialectical materialism is a sort of ontological and historical claim about how the world works, which makes no prescriptive claims about what that exactly means for 'good’and ‘bad’. Then you have marxism as a normative system which discusses how the system of inefficiencies and exploitation are good to be removed through processes which the former side of marxism can describe. Marx was a much more interesting polemicist than many because he was able to freely move between these fields throughout a work, and really gives no indication that I know of that these are really separable to any meaningful extent.

    But this reading means that the morality might not be central to scientific claims, but cannot be seen as apart from the whole of marxism, which makes claims about exploitation with the assumption that it’s bad (actually marx argues why, including in efficiency terms instead of morality)