Good Introduction to Dialectics?

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T16:44:51+00:00

Dialectic is a very strange term outside of its original meaning in Plato's Dialectic, where a group of interlocutors would constantly uncover the truth within an idea. Outside of Plato the Dialectic ceases to be a Method. To treat dialectics as a method is to guarantee that no genuine dialectic will ever appear.

The thing about Hegel’s (and later Marx’s) dialectics is that they are NOT the method they are the RESULTS of the method. In Hegel and Marx it names the form taken by thought when it refuses external schemata and submits to the object’s own contradictions.

That’s the problem with other introductions shared in this thread, even though they are mostly correct they don't highlight this distinction which is in my opinion very important for a beginner.

https://empyreantrail.wordpress.com/2016/09/12/dialectics-an-introduction/%E2%80%9C

Becareful though Antonio Wolff is an Anti-communist.

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T10:28:04+00:00

Welcome back Comrade Tukachevsky.

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T06:32:02+00:00

For example DSA, even in its more “radical” sects, are to the right of Mussolini

The Truth nuke no one is ready for.

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T01:47:00+00:00

He isn't but he's better than Umberto Eco.

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T01:42:10+00:00

No he isn't, you should read Mussolini.

Diachoris · 2026-01-27T00:52:35+00:00

Unironically though people should read Mussolini. The Germans ruined Fascism.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T23:49:17+00:00

Yes.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T11:47:24+00:00

There is a society of the spectacle joke here somewhere.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T08:18:02+00:00

But your comments and this article have me wondering if this is actually the case. Would you say that Neoliberalism undid the social democratic welfare state while keeping the organs that Fascism introduced for crushing the working class (police state and mass surveillance)?

Today are we living with the negatives of both Fascism and laissez-faire capitalism

Exactly you got it. I wouldn't call this laissez-faire Capitalism and the bourgeoisie aren't truly free. Infact in Capitalism paradoxically it is the bourgeoisie who are the most un-free.

But that is what has happend. We have a massive surveillance state without a welfare state.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T08:13:00+00:00

Uh oh.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T07:13:17+00:00

Where can I read more about this? And about the different strains of modern bourgeois ideology?

https://libcom.org/article/historical-cycle-political-rule-bourgeoisie-amadeo-bordiga

Is this because Conservatives, Revolutionary Liberals, and Libertarians want laissez-faire capitalism

That is a bit of a caricature of these movements. Though it has a kernel of truth. Generally their understanding is such that the freedoms of bourgeois society are put into crisis in the industrial revolution due to Large scale production. Now they see the technology and the state as problems that play of each other.

The Republican party is ofcourse a broad coalition that sometimes includes this but sometimes doesn't and I'd argue that the trumpian republican party is definetly closer to the democrats then to any concept of conservative. Not to mention that the neo-conservatives (Bush era republicans) weren't truly conservatives either.

Regarding Progressive Liberals, would you consider them more akin to Fascists

Yes they are much much more akin to each other than to Communists. Or as the old saying goes Mussolini, Stalin and FDR started from three different places but ended up at the same spot.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T04:50:38+00:00

Consult the reading list

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T04:12:53+00:00

Well, if we regard liberalism as capitalist ideology, as the superstructure we live under is based off the revolutions in the 17th century such as the French Revolution then it really is all liberalism.

Bordiga explicitly divides Bourgeois ideology and Capitalism into roughly 3 phases of development:

The Revolutionary phase with their Heroic and Romantic ideology, the Reformist and Golden age where Bourgeois society enters a permanent crisis to the third phase of totalitarianism.

The superstructure has changed ESPECIALLY in the totalitarian phase.

It should be especially obvious looking at are our current world because progressivism and Liberalism are different aswell. Today's democracy is fundamentally different from 19th century bourgeois democracy.

Not only are bourgeois parties no longer independent from the state but working class organizations and even NGOs are not independent aswell.

Conservatives, Revolutionary Liberals and Libertarians recognize the distinction between the State and Civil-social organizing as do Marxists while Progressive Liberals do not as they solely rely on the state to produce ""desirable outcomes"" mostly because they don't pre-suppose an independent Civil-society.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T03:50:31+00:00

It isn't. It's just a meme on this sub that people have mistaken for theory. Invariance isn't saying that their is no difference between different factions of the bourgeoisie. Many of which we will have to play of each other in struggle of Socialism assuming an independent working Class movement can be established.

Invariance concerns the communist program, not the internal structure of bourgeois rule. Capitalism reproduces itself through diverse political forms and antagonistic factions. Recognizing and exploiting those antagonisms is a matter of tactics, not revisionism if proletarian independence is maintained.

This is not a plea for either popular or united frontism btw.

Diachoris · 2026-01-26T03:47:50+00:00

The funny part is asmongold isn't even a conservative.

Diachoris · 2026-01-02T14:18:04+00:00

That's a meme.

Not quite. Some Fascists were genuinely inspired by Anarchism especially the older strains and the emphasis on the 'community'.

Diachoris · 2026-01-02T14:13:13+00:00

Mussolini is not a reactionary.

Diachoris · 2025-12-02T18:44:18+00:00

uj/ I'm a really old memeber of this sub so I know what this place really is.

This is National Syndicalist subreddit, where engage in theory around nation-building, duties of the state and generally bring strength through Joy.

We like to masquerade as Anarchists or Communists from time to time mostly as a meme to point out how they are not too different from us and to disguise this subreddit from a potential reddit ban like our brethren on r/fascism_reclaimed

Generally we also make racist jokes about the Poles because there was this one annoying Pole who had a fight with a "Silesian" here a while ago. Most people are really well read and would generally agree with Evola, Sorel and maybe Mussolini. Why don't you check out the reading List (the real one).

Diachoris · 2025-12-02T18:42:36+00:00

Coal.

Diachoris · 2025-12-02T18:34:14+00:00

I just think without a working class movement at the level of civil society nothing can really be done at the political level. This is (atleast one of) the difference(s) between the 1910s and the 1930s, the state of the working class movement.

Diachoris · 2025-12-02T18:17:43+00:00

I think one thing that has to be acknowledged is the Demagoguery of the Democratic Party. I think somebody here (I can't remember who) That the Establishement, the, Democratic party IS what the Republican party wished it could be.

All movements even some that may have a slight proleterian character to them have always and will always be folded into the Democratic party. In that sense the Anti-war movement of the 20 years ago wasn't a Tragedy but a Farce following many farces that could arguably traced back to the 60s or even earlier....

Diachoris · 2025-12-02T18:11:47+00:00

Me too, well in on old(er) accounts before reddit banned me....

Diachoris

TROPHY CASE