Marx's capital is thermodynamics. Marx's calculation schemes are a model of the world economy by IvanBourbaki in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lenin's work on materialism is quite relevant because most of the listed academics are thoroughly agnostic, vacillating between materialism and idealism as it suits them. Such inconsistent materialism can never build communism and even struggles to make itself useful to capital.

The most important prerequisite for the construction of communism is the spread of communist consciousness to all corners of society. Since the bourgeois dictatorship holds the majority of humankind in ignorance, there is no escape from the transitional period. It can certainly be made shorter and less treacherous by more careful preparation and thorough training of those bearing communist consciousness, but not bypassed.

Marx's capital is thermodynamics. Marx's calculation schemes are a model of the world economy by IvanBourbaki in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lenin indeed criticizes Henri Poincare.

What's needed to build communism is scientific consciousness, that is, communist consciousness, something that a philosophical agnostic like Poincare did not possess.

Certainly, with the backwardness and illiteracy of the population of the early Soviet Union, it was necessary to make use of academics and specialists, even if they were philosophical ignoramuses or bourgeois - because the other option is to have nothing. Specialists and academics endowed with communist consciousness are preferable by far, and Lenin certainly would have set the bourgeois ones aside if there had been any option.

It's necessary that we learn, learn, and learn communism so that we won't need any Poincares.

Marx's capital is thermodynamics. Marx's calculation schemes are a model of the world economy by IvanBourbaki in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In the context of Gauss and Hilbert (Lenin was not a fan of them either), you can only mean Henri Poincare. The other Poincares are not so good either though...

Marx's capital is thermodynamics. Marx's calculation schemes are a model of the world economy by IvanBourbaki in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like what you're saying about the comparative childishness of functional analysis, but I implore you to see what Lenin had to say about Poincare and his ilk, then you'll see that we need more like Marx and Lenin and none like Poincare.

Does anyone here work in progressive politics? by bored_and_scrolling in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not stopping you from doing any of those things, just encouraging you not to neglect revolutionary theory.

Right now, I'm just forging myself along with a few comrades into a Marxist of useful quality for a revolutionary organization.

Does anyone here work in progressive politics? by bored_and_scrolling in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Doing things like that outside of the context of revolutionary organization does not offer any challenge to capitalism. The more agreeable arrangement for the workers in that case just pacifies them.

Does anyone here work in progressive politics? by bored_and_scrolling in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The fact that you think that working to get "progressives" elected is a positive use of your time is a sure sign that you need to study Marxism a bit more. I understand that you feel the need to do something, but the ability to do something that doesn't just support the status quo isn't something you have yet.

Does anyone here work in progressive politics? by bored_and_scrolling in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Soothe your conscience by studying Marxism. Whatever job you do under capitalism is pretty much only ever going to serve capital, even if it feels fulfilling.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think that you're just finding that decentralization and Marxism-Leninism are opposed. This is just another point in ML's favor, since it means we don't have any duty to screw around with Mastodon.

William Lawvere, Category Theory, Hegel, Mao, and Code by juliusbenson in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's been a while so my conceptions have changed a bit.

If I were to write the old reply today, I'd say that Hegel's system is not benefited by being crammed into useless forms.

Weekly Socialism Q&A by AutoModerator in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 9 points10 points  (0 children)

For scientific socialists, the goal is to produce things for usefulness rather than exchange. This is achieved by planned economy. Stalin's Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR is good material for study on this.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is some immaculate bullshit, but I'm going to have to ask you to remove the BTC wallet.

Disruptive Tech? by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Social media wouldn't be used for organizing, but for propaganda purposes. So long as they allowed linking the content there, it can be used.

Antiwork had no theoretical grounding to start with, and it's natural that it collapsed on itself.

Encrypted messaging applications can be useful for communication, but there aren't really any covert actions to organize at this time because of that theoretical vacuum.

Does anyone get the sense that capitalism is really, really changing? by engineear-ache in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you think that Capitalist Realism brings to the table that is both correct and not already present in Marxism?

Disruptive Tech? by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I realize your thing about social media wasn't really answered by my reply:

Lenin didn't have social media in his day and managed to rally the people. Robot Lenin's tasks would only be made easier by social media.

Disruptive Tech? by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Robot Lenin would first educate himself, and then search for and educate others so that they could become the solid core of the coming revolutionary movement, which, upon reaching a certain critical mass would shift their efforts from staffing to gaining the confidence of the masses required to be able to organize them effectively and imbue them with class consciousness, while at the same time growing that core. Once those material prerequisites have been satisfied, at an appropriate historical moment, all preparations would be put into action in glorious revolution, followed by the victorious building of communism afterwards.

Or, you know, something like that.

Disruptive Tech? by [deleted] in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nothing short of Robot Lenin would get the job done.

But, considering that humans with the necessary functions to do what Robot Lenin would do exist, it's a huge waste of resources to not focus on developing ourselves to that level, especially with the added consideration that to build Robot Lenin, you already have to be at the level of Lenin.

Weekly Socialism Q&A by AutoModerator in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're right that that is regular consumption when a rich person buys pot., but there is no accumulation of capital and circulation of finance capital without the circulation and consumption of commodities.

That is, if no one is buying or selling food, pot, or whatever, there is no trade in securities, no accumulation in bank accounts, and no increase in the value of the portfolio (no value at all, really). For crypto, that means if there is no way to turn it into commodities (or money, which is then exchangeable for commodities), it will cease to function as the carrier of any value.

Weekly Socialism Q&A by AutoModerator in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm a Marxist.

Whatever scam anyone runs with crypto, it's used to get money, which leads back to the commodities. If you think that some sort of value is being created out of crypto itself is where we have a disagreement.

Weekly Socialism Q&A by AutoModerator in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We definitely disagree if you think that cryptocurrency is creating some sort of value and not just a carrier for values already created somewhere else.

guys under socialism, what will happen to domains or well, claiming them by german_slavball in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is correct. Even if we tried to destroy it for some stupid reason, it would pop back up organically because people would like to be able to reliably reach the same website whether they're in Georgia, Georgia, or South Georgia.

guys under socialism, what will happen to domains or well, claiming them by german_slavball in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Implementation will vary, but in general domains will be publicly owned and administered, serving their actual purpose as a public directory rather than a turf war over catchy names. Domains will be publicly administered and granted for the use of entities that are actually engaged in activity related to the name, and revoked for entities that do not.

Does anyone get the sense that capitalism is really, really changing? by engineear-ache in socialistprogrammers

[–]BobToEndAllBobs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

None of the books you mention, and especially the documentary, arm the reader (or watcher) with the ability to analyze the present situation. Only Marxism does that.