teeforlove [they/them] @ teeforlove @hexbear.net

Posts

11

Comments

34

Joined

2 yr. ago

A law that applies to all ethnicities except non-Muslims is for no other purpose than to further the agenda of the fascist goverment's plan of a "Hindu state", as such, the idea of such an ethnostate is extremely reactionary. Although the states where CPI (Marxist) has control won't implement this, so that is an extremely rare W by them. Modi's continous rule over the nation as well as the military occupation of Kashmir is bound to be the destruction of the Hinduvta project

What genre are they? Also, do it. ill buy a copy :)

thanku!

The world was peaceful when I was a child because I didn't know what the world outside really was, the world to me back then was just my home, yet it wasn't really peaceful, it was hell because of fighting, alcoholism, the usual trauma a child faces.

The world as I see it now is a shithole, but precisely due to it being a shithole did I discover how to really love, and do it correctly. Love people, love animals, love nature. You can relate this to how the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and its efforts to maintain the status quo precisely due to its contradictions gives the proletariat everything necessary to fight. But I'm isolated right now, I don't really have anyone here, but I have more than enough love that is going empty due to not that many people being there to give it to, which I think of as a contradiction.

Marx says how you can't liberate others without liberating yourself, or at least I think he was the one who said it, but I see it as a contradiction with what I say here, that you can't liberate yourself without liberating others. The solution here precisely lies in the act of liberation. You don't liberate others necessarily during dialogue, during educating yourself through everyone, neither do you necessarily liberate others during this long, tiring process of waging a war. But people liberate each other. I think I got this from Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire, which I recently finished. I see its influence on the words I typed out in the post just as I'm typing this right now lol, its a really good work that talks about education through dialogue, criticizing the banking mode of education (used in college, schools, etc) as preserving the status quo. He uses examples from Mao's cultural revolution to say that cultural action is a process of education that has to start before, and not after taking power. I can't describe everything ofcourse, its a short read, around 150 pages and I'll recommend it.

I think I lost track there and switched topics, anyways, that's about it, hope I was able to explain why I wrote that. I just write things and finish it off whenever I'm not in a particularly good mood. I think you should understand it for yourself too, instead of relying on my explanation. Your subjective perspectives of a work (or anything) also matters as much as that of the creator.

Anyways, have a good day!

Monopoly

I think R did you a favour by eating your "snack"

thank you for clarifying

sorry this is so funny to me thinking of a situation where someone's partner is mad at them, tells them they need space, starts crying while staring at a page of Capital Volume 1 in Arial size 25 and saying out loud "at least you wouldn't do this to me"

okay, I have to ask

"large Marxist texts"

does this mean works with relatively high number of pages (unlikely), or does this mean your partner has relevant texts from Marxists framed on the wall with a huge font size (likely)?

If I'm embarrassed by any of my partners pulling the shower curtain (as if there needs to be one, but for the sake of it, let us imagine there is), and seeing me jerk off, then they aren't my partner.

good luck?

yikes

This is a purely non-antagonistic contradiction, regardless of your opinions on the PCP. As for the RGS, they maintain a political line, which you have to follow if you want to get in, like any other party.

Maybe start by studying PCP, they have multiple volumes from the 1960s till now. But for that you have to study M&E, Lenin then Mao.

As for the answer, Maoist analysis is that there is always potential of an inner bourgeoisie forming within the party, because class struggle continues under socialism, and the bourgeoisie will do anything they can to gain power back. If that is universal, then so is Maoism. Continuous purges are necessary, and the proletariat needs to get rid of the existing remenants of capitalism not just in the economic base, but in the cultural superstructure as well. I don't think it is any different from what Stalin did, and I hold that this is the praxis of Gramsci's theory of cultural hegemony.

I don't really think anyone should look at self-identified Maoists on twitter and call them dogmatic, endless debates will not result in anything, the internet is not the class struggle. I think you should talk more with RGS, I don't hold them in any negative way, I've heard decent things from them. They are student groups afterall.

they deliver consistent information about the various class struggles around the world, so I don't really have any negative opinion about them

100 updoots and I will make this my Phd thesis once I get in next year

this is mostly related to what is brought up in Origin of Family. Class society was historically progressive due to the evolution in generalized commodity production, however, it also brought about a contradiction of private accumulation. I bring up this being related because primitive societies lived as a community with a matrilineal framework, and the contradiction of private accumulation (origin of private property), coincides with the first class division, that between man and woman, which starts the eventual alienation of the working class from their labour, from others, and effectively from themselves.

"In an old unpublished manuscript written by Marx and myself in 1846 I find the words: “The first division of labour is that between man and woman for the propagation of children.” And today I can add: The first class antagonism that appears in history coincides with the development of the antagonism between man and woman in monogamous marriage, and the first class oppression coincides with that of the female sex by the male. Monogamous marriage was a great historical step forward; nevertheless, together with slavery and private wealth, it opened the epoch that has lasted until today in which every step forward is also relatively a step backward, in which prosperity and development for some is won through the misery and frustration of others."

"We liberated Europe from fascism, but they will never forgive us for it" ~Georgi Zhukov

damn that's crazy, anyways, any of my trans and NB comrades want to hop into tf2 and legally convert everyone into a femboy?

Although Franz Joseph Gall made an important contribution to neuroscience proposing the functional localization of specific psychological traits, his analysis was far from correct, leading to the pseudoscientific field of phrenology.

The direct consequence of phrenology can be seen as a talking point for a specific community on the internet known as "incels" who attribute size of the body parts of man (and in many such cases, to that of women) to intelligence and strength. This is nothing but a very misogynistic argument that is the result of patriarchal capitalism.

Recent studies have found such "incel" talking points in twitter.com users to analyse politicians, and it is a future implication to research how these two areas intersect

good luck!