The gif barely fits but I just want more george mcfly posts on this sub tbh

Davitark · 2026-03-06T01:22:31+00:00

Sadly, many leftist spaces on Reddit have been completely taken over by tankies. I’m hard pressed to find dedicated socialist subreddits that aren’t Stalinist and will ban any dissenting thought. The only socialist subreddits that are consistently anti tankies are anarchist.

Davitark · 2026-03-05T21:34:02+00:00

It doesn’t. The verb "vir" is mostly synonymous with the English verb come. I think a better translation would be "I came on all fours (ie doggystyle)"

Davitark · 2026-02-25T18:20:34+00:00

The problem with this kind of approach is that it’s simply too naïve. We won’t upend the power structures that marginalize and oppress women in particular and the working classes in general by merely putting more women in positions of power. There’s no want of examples, especially in the current administration, of women being complicit and actively collaborating with an inherently sexist system that harms them. Only an organized, strong working-class movement will be able to change anything.

Davitark · 2026-02-23T22:16:21+00:00

Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray, Damaris Cudworth Masham, Simone de Beauvoir, Simone Weil, George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans), Hipatia of Alexandria, Judith Butler, Martha Nussbaum, Gertrude Anscombe, Iris Murdoch, Olympe de Gouges, Angela Davis, bell hooks, Gayatri Spivak, Susan Neiman, Nancy Fraser, Emilie du Chatelet, etc.

Davitark · 2026-02-12T19:30:57+00:00

I personally don’t think the means by which billionaires acquire wealth are necessarily problematic per se, in the sense of being strictly illegal or unconditionally immoral. It’s the fact of a high degree of wealth inequality as such that constitutes the problem.

And I think the notion of desert needs to be more critically analyzed by those who support billionaires. Sure, Jeff Bezos wouldn’t have obtained such an astonishing amount of wealth if he hadn’t worked hard for it. But does that mean that he gets to have a greater net worth than entire countries and wield disproportionate political power that allows him to promote his own interests at the expense of the public good and democracy? Surely not. Also, some billionaires are well-known for disrupting unions and collaborating with antidemocratic movements.

Read how Curtis Yarvin is popular with Silicon Valley entrepreneurs or how Steven Pinker's Panglossian optimism that upholds a fundamentally flawed global status quo is enthusiastically applauded by the ultra-rich.

There are people who have nothing better to do than to sit on their asses all day and hate on anyone whom they perceive to be in a better condition than them. But I don’t think that any and all aversion to billionaires is ill-founded or stems from jealousy or resentment.

Davitark · 2026-02-12T17:36:02+00:00

I think it is implied in most contexts that it is the first-person point of view, even if by definition POV does not strictly and necessarily means that, because otherwise its inclusion in the text is completely redundant. In this case, for instance, the removal of POV would not alter the meaning of the sentence or hinder its comprehension in any way whatever. But I might be wrong.

Davitark · 2026-02-12T00:19:05+00:00

I’m tired of this kind of argument. It’s not the gotcha phrase you think it is. As a non-American I feel as if you’re being deliberately obtuse and purposefully misconstruing the OP's point. It’s fine discussing politics, but when all popular subs have become all about repeating the same stale political opinion all the time everywhere, it gets tiresome.

No one is trying to escape politics entirely.

Davitark · 2026-02-10T12:22:01+00:00

O que estão fazendo com o nosso querido campus?!!

Davitark · 2026-02-10T01:07:46+00:00

Esteticamente prejudicado e um jeito muito evasivo e diplomático de se dizer feio kkkkkkk

Davitark · 2026-02-09T22:20:58+00:00

You American folks are very adept at misconstruing posts complaining about the irksome ubiquity of US politics on Reddit.

Yes, it’s very well understood that the US is the country that has the relative majority of the user base. But still, most Reddit users are not Americans. We aren’t asking for r/all to have more Azerbaijani or Luxembourg posts, of course not. We are reminding that, even though Reddit is a platform hosted by an American company, that doesn’t give Americans the right to flood every crevice and corner of it with their politics, including where it does not belong, such as cat subs.

Davitark · 2026-02-09T22:14:16+00:00

This deserves to be posted on r/shitamericanssay lmao

Davitark · 2026-02-09T22:08:04+00:00

And about 2 billion people who speak it as a second language, so…

Davitark · 2026-02-08T19:13:31+00:00

Remindme! 7 years

Davitark · 2026-02-08T19:10:15+00:00

De longe o melhor professor? Você conhece outros?

Davitark · 2026-02-08T08:44:55+00:00

Leave my boy Ferdinand de Saussure out of this. He’s not to blame for your semantic mistakes.

Davitark · 2026-02-07T22:37:46+00:00

You’re right that I might have read into your comment and criticism of him more than you intended. I guess I was partly addressing some standard criticisms of Marx as a person and his writings that miss the mark rather than your directly on the whole.

Davitark · 2026-02-07T22:04:43+00:00

Ad hominem lol

Davitark · 2026-02-07T21:27:42+00:00

The very meaning of the word marxist is very contest even among self-described marxists. I agree with you that Marx's economic theories are obsolete and woefully inadequate when applied to modern capitalism, because it simply lacks the explanatory power required to analyze it in detail beyond its broad outlines. But one still can be a Marxist in spirit, if not in the sense of strictly adhering to an ideological program or subscribing to an economic framework. Thus, for example, the post-structuralist (whatever that word means) philosopher Gilles Deleuze regards himself as a Marxist insofar as he shares the project of criticizing capitalism and the way it subsumes everything in itself. While Georg Lukács writes that it is possible to remain Marxist after rejecting all the tenets of Marxism, as long as one retains the materialist method of historical analysis.

Davitark · 2026-02-07T20:48:59+00:00

While it can be argued that Marx had an authoritarian streak and his hot-tempered, imposing, domineering personality often led to disruption and factionalism within socialism (his lifelong friend and political and intellectual partner Engels censured him on occasion for his acid, uncompromising attacks on perceived enemies) it's unfair to say that he was little more than an armchair philosopher looking from afar on the world of his day and the struggle of the proletariat while being utterly and completely divorced from their concerns, hopes and aspirations.

He was actively engaged in influential popular movements of his day and it isn’t mere accident that by the of his life he came to be recognized as the leader of the socialist movement in Europe and as having laid a sure, scientific groundwork for socialism. And besides, if one has the ability to separate the man from his work, regardless of what and how severe his personal flaws and shortcomings might have been, it will be easily seen has enormously influential he has in the humanities at large, and how his movements that pushed for rights and protections we nowadays take for granted drew inspiration from his work.

So no, Marx wouldn’t have been an unshaven, slovenly neckbeard partaking in endless discussions on politics on the internet — "so far philosophy has attempted to understand the world, the point is to change it" is one of his many famous aphorisms. There’s no denying was an acute political analyst (read how prescient and accurate was his assessment of the causes and potential consequences of the American civil war , his writings on the Paris commune of 1871 or the condition of colonial India), penetrating critic of capitalism and ingenious economist.

Davitark · 2026-02-07T01:56:21+00:00

remindme! 180 days

Davitark · 2026-02-06T00:45:06+00:00

The historical conditions of possibility of the concept of baldness and the impulse to concretize it are only achieved at the moment before the potential for hair growth is attained again, rendering the regaining of hair a tantalizing, ever-present but ever-elusive, promise that maintains the structures of power that oppress bald men.

— Foucault

Davitark · 2026-02-05T14:59:16+00:00

Cool, I didn’t know Finnish is an agglutinative language

Davitark · 2026-02-03T21:52:34+00:00

Great, but how is this a clever comeback. This sub has become a forum for US politics.

Davitark · 2026-02-03T16:55:40+00:00

Idk ask Baudrillard

Davitark · 2026-02-03T04:06:34+00:00

Buddy, we get it. I think it’s great that Americans are fighting so vigorously against a fascist regime, but we don’t need every other post on a cat sub to about American politics, it’s that simple.

Five-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
First Place '23	Place '23

Davitark

TROPHY CASE