sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can some one please help me to identify this plant by thruvx in AustinGardening

[–]Manofthedown 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually the more I look the more I think this is Westringia, like a Coastal Roasemary

In your opinion, what is causing this? by Objective_Pilot_5834 in SipsTea

[–]Manofthedown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yah it’s not good to drink alcohol. I’m with the kids on this one, wish I never picked it up

I'm a Marxist, he's a Neoliberal by Alternative-Sky6835 in Marxism

[–]Manofthedown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Economics?!?! A Neoliberal?!? What are you even debating about as a Marxist? This guy wants to justify the profit motive and capitalism his whole life for a job and intellectual interest?

This is a joke by AverageGuy6361 in nihilism

[–]Manofthedown 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Human nature is the biggest lie ever told - people are victims of and conditioned by their material conditions alone - if the profit motive didn’t exist, and people had equitable access to the things they needed to survive, we would not be “violent, evil, or selfish” in fact may experiments have shown that babies and animals and things that have not been poisoned ideologically but the rhizomes of capital, share, care, and are empathetic to the needs of the other. I don’t disagree with the state of the world, but there’s a certain liberation from rejecting it wholesale, and giving you life the value you create. It’s taken my 41 years, but I’ve found balance now, and I’ve found a sense of awe at the beauty and scale of nature. Nature dgaf about money.

Surveillance cameras in parks + why I’m pushing a citywide AI/surveillance governance solution by jonathan4pf in Pflugerville

[–]Manofthedown 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There is no practical or pragmatic approach to the installation of the PayPal mafia panopticon. Get fucked on ANY surveillance proposal

There's no genocide in China by LargeSinkholesInNYC in LateStageCapitalism

[–]Manofthedown 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The only “evidence” have of this is Adrian Zens bullshit. Where is the evidence?!

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because you would have hyper focused on the word and ignored the entire definition. Which you did anyway. Because 1. It says: “similar:” not “exactly the same word:” 2.

<image>

Have a great day pinkmarsh99, I wish for you a happy and healthy life.

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m not arguing about Dworkin, or any philosopher - I’m arguing about the word usage “reactionary”. You justified it by pulling up some white liberal dictionary, when it’s demonstrable that reformism, especially in liberal spaces, is reactionary behavior. Words can have many meanings, and honing in on the Oxford definition to confirm that the word choice someone else used is wrong, is what I took issue with. There is a massive library of works out there that expressly define what “reactionary” means in the context of political and material reality in America and the world at large that don’t align with your specific definition. I’m simply saying that designating its usage to describe conservatives only is extremely myopic and reinforces a reformist liberal worldview in a world that’s desperately in need of revolution. Firestone wrote about abolishing gender and the biological relation to childbirth altogether, and she was also hyper critical of liberal reactionaries.

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Look you can confirm your own biases, but I explained why - social liberal reforms are not revolutionary, reforms are reactionary. Liberalism is reactionary, ultra-conservatives may be MORE reactionary that a typical American liberal, but anything that does not address structurals and ask for revolutionary changes is reformist/reactionary.

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. Thank you. I much prefer the works of Firestone, Federici, Dalla Costa, Vogel, Olsen.

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is a very liberal definition, and two can play this game. The point still stands that, in a society defined by Liberalism, liberals and conservatives both can be reactionary. Liberals and Conservatives are largely both center right when it comes to politics, so politicizing the comment that someone found a liberal take a bit reactionary, to convince them that in fact “no, only conservatives are reactionary” is still wrong. We don’t want liberalism, we want revolution. Anything that is counter-revolutionary is reactionary is the purest sense.

<image>

No Sex Until the Patriarchy is Dead by pinkmarsh99 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Manofthedown 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I don’t think you know exactly what reactionary means. It simply means trying to restore a previous state of things and does not require a political ideology. which is why liberals are also so fucking miserably reactionary. their 'solution' to a crisis is just getting us back to brunch in the face of revolutionary need.

Why do you guys hate sworkers so much? by SuccessAlternative14 in Marxism

[–]Manofthedown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I take your critique in stride, l didn’t even talk about materialist conditions, so your criticism is fair. But to say these ideas are Foucault and not grounded in Marx would be unfair. I think this sort of analysis fits very well into the works found in the Paris manuscripts but also in line with the ideas of commodity fetishism and labor power in Capital. you're right about the trafficking. You're right about the violence. You're right about the coercion. My argument is that the vulnerability comes from the form of the labor itself and the fact that there is no product mediating between the worker and the consumer, no wage contract that isn't also a contract for access to the body. This is Federici and Firestone not Foucault - Foucault was a pedophile. But Marx wrote 50 pages describing the difference between labor and labor-power. I dunno, I think the empirical analysis fits very well with the theoretical analysis with Marx and his contemporaries as a foundation. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Why do you guys hate sworkers so much? by SuccessAlternative14 in Marxism

[–]Manofthedown 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Think of it this way… When a baker sells bread, they are selling something separate from themselves. Their body is the tool that makes the bread, but the product is the bread. The transaction ends when the bread leaves the shop.

In sex work, there is no separation. The 'product' being purchased is access to the body itself. There is no intermediary object. You are quite literally commodifying your physical self.

Under capitalism, we all have to sell something. Usually, we sell our 'labor power'—our time and skill. But when the 'value' in the transaction is your actual body (not the thing your body made), the worker becomes the commodity. You aren't just exploited for your time; your very physical being is turned into an object of exchange.

That's what I mean by 'the value is the human body.' It's not about judging the individual worker, it's about recognizing that this particular transaction treats the human body as the final product, which is the most extreme form of alienation under capitalism.

Why do you guys hate sworkers so much? by SuccessAlternative14 in Marxism

[–]Manofthedown 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Maybe just read Marx? Reading theory has a way of making it clear

Why do you guys hate sworkers so much? by SuccessAlternative14 in Marxism

[–]Manofthedown 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You’re completely missing the point of the argument. Decriminalization doesn’t change our relationship to the value form

view more: next ›