u/entre_prey_manuer8

.

God is the best dad.
The best dad makes the perfect child.
My dad made me, and I’m perfect.
My dad is the best dad.
My dad is god.

Philosophical TLDR: my dad is better than your dad.

Suppose you got your feces on your chest. Would
You just wipe it away with toilet paper? Surely not, you would at least use water, if not soap!

So, when you get feces in your bum, why don’t you use water to clean it?

If this is sensible. You should use a bidet to clean yourself.

Note: a philosopher I met showed his worth when he replied, “this is an argument to take a shower. I’d shower after getting poop on my chest.”

Anyone else note as honed philosophers that psychology is 150 years old, has had no paradigm shifts — unlike thousands-of-years-old physics — and so really should not be talked about as though it were in the same ballpark or even universe as mature science?

To think otherwise is bad philosophy!

Marx and Engels talk about how bourgeois history involves an exclusive focus on particular personalities and their decisions, locating the source of historical change in bourgeois figures. Marxist history involves looking at the masses involved in labor relations and the changes in productive technology, locating these as the sources of historical change (both epochs and major events within those epochs).

Why do we Marxists and/or communists still focus on personalities the way the bourgeoisie do? For example, discussing the successes or failures of political leaders like Mao, Stalin, Ho Chi Minh, etc? instead of constantly emphasizing the centrality, fundamentality, or deepest importance of the material conditions and masses for historical change and events?

I'm open to being corrected on this too.

WEIRD stands for white, educated, industralized, rich, and democratic.

Over 50% of the American population has a literacy level below a 6th grade level, which is functionally illiterate in my opinion (independent engagement with history, science, and philosophy, which permeate reddit, is not possible). I don't know the data, but the rest probably have about a 12th grade reading and writing level I would guess, and in this way we are weird, even if not white or rich, and for that reason we also have been exposed to dizzying amounts of carefully crafted and highly financed public relations' campaigns and propaganda.

I wish for reddit commenters to keep this communication context in mind when we have the rare and mediated occasions, that would be considered highly fortuitous in real life, with felllow literate commenters, even when there is dark disagreement among our highly propagandized literate public.

Happy redditing!

Just another way to glorify the 10 humans of 8,000,000,000 that own 50% of planet earth’s landmass.

I realized that a major sticking point for communist countries is they don’t do any national targeted advertising barraging their citizens with attention-hikacking BS 24/7 outside of work. Dear lord I want a world without advertising.

I saw someone with the username Leninade in StarCraft 2. Comrade had a pic of Lenin next to it.

Some communists posted this.

https://preview.redd.it/qb08iym8yefh1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=5dc79373656cdabf591fc9e9d97f7a6cc678c352

I became able to make guesses on unanswered questions about politics and economics which 90% of the time turned out to be correct, demonstrating to me that there was indeed massive intentional repression of Marxism and communism, and that understanding these things made a lot of the world come into focus (although it is a dark picture that emerges).

Did this happen with you too? I'd love to hear your stories about when indoctination fell apart and the superstructure's contours became clear.

...The Soviet Union

https://preview.redd.it/cvtj3y6em6fh1.png?width=268&format=png&auto=webp&s=88ab7d9623c1d8db1ded75dafdc1bd46b120aa5a

What do you think about socialists promoting that we share the means of production (First), and not that we seize them from the bourgeoisie? Is this possible or can you tell me how the contradiction between these classes doesn't allow for this in theory, and why?

I think talk of nations as the agents of international power activity is a dark hangover at this point from the 20th century World Wars, where business was tethered more concretely to nation-states' through the war efforts mass mobilization (through drafting too) that led business to take more concrete sides and choose homelands. During the world war it made sense to say "the USA" landed in Europe because the masses and business based in the US were coordinated in the war effort.

But it makes sense to switch to talking of the agents of power as international corporations (e.g Black Rock) the way we used to -- and mistakenly still do -- talk of nation-states, though, after the cold war, which also would have been more accurately described not as the USA vs. the USSR, but as the Rockefellers', Carnegies, and Morgans etc. vs the USSR, using the American state for it's ends.

I think communists really should consider moving away from talking of nation-states as the agents of power, as it also ineluctably sounds like an indictment of the masses who compose it.

Mine would be the Soviet Union hands down.

r/suddenlycommunism

I am definitely an adult, but I don't mind.