Tumgik
#marxist theory
silverity · 9 months
Note
You can't call yourself a Marxist and be ideologically opposed to trans people, those are incompatible modes of thought.
gender identity theory is incompatible with the Marxist scientific method.
believing your thoughts determine your reality is a product of subjective idealism. Marxism is not idealism but dialectical materialism, there is an objective reality and objective material conditions from which human consciousness stems. we exist as material, physical beings rather than immaterial conscious spirits. subjective consciousness is subordinate to and dependent upon the material world.
the correct Marxist position is not "i feel i'm a woman therefore i am a woman" but "i am objectively female, and this makes me a woman".
697 notes · View notes
misespinas · 1 year
Text
“The most oppressed man finds a being to oppress, his wife: she is the proletarian of the proletarian.”
Flora Tristan, “The Emancipation of Woman, or the Testament of the Pariah” (1843)
2K notes · View notes
bilbobagginsomebabez · 7 months
Text
i think more people should ask themselves if they're being a leftist or if they're propagating white supremacist culture with a leftist filter applied.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
picking a political ideology isn't like picking a team in a sport or searching for one true answer. you're asking questions about what types of organization in what contexts accomplish our goals, and more than that, you should be asking yourself how to build or encourage those things right now. (in the immediate future, this is feeding people, housing people, and getting them medical care. lots of different ways to do this respectfully and with autonomy)
if you're a staunch communist/socialist/anarchist or any further hyperspecific derivative and you're absolutely convinced that Your Plan is the ONLY path forward, that sounds a lot like paternalism and only one right way.
next time you feel the need to do a leftist infighting, why don't we do a leftist action against white supremacy instead:
-accept that there are many ways to get to the same goal
-work on developing the ability to notice when people do things differently and how those different ways might improve your approach
highly encourage everyone to read the full essay
327 notes · View notes
disabilityrightss · 9 months
Text
No, the disabled man who wants prostitution to be legal so he can have "sex" is not on the side of actually struggling disabled folks who barely pay their bills. He has choosen the sides of the oppressor and is a class traitor.
168 notes · View notes
ptrcbtmn · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
Lenin as a sangled picrew
105 notes · View notes
racefortheironthrone · 4 months
Note
Do you think that fascism arises from economic crises?
It's a bit more complicated than a unicausal explanation, but I would argue that they are a necessary but not sufficient factor.
Tumblr media
There is an old phrase on the Left that "anti-semitism is the socialism of fools;" which sometimes results in a kind of vulgar Marxist variety of conspiracy theory in which all forms of hatred and bigotry are the result of malign forces in the ruling class trying to distract and divide and inclulcate false consciousness among the masses.
According to this train of thought, all forms of discrimination and oppression are the result of capitalism, and once the Revolution comes, then racism and sexism and homophobia, etc. will all come tumbling down and we will all live in unity and equality and harmony. I think this particular school of thought is badly misguided and has been responsible for quite a bit of the Left's historical weaknesses and blindspots.
However, I think there is something to the idea of the original saying, in that I think a lot of the impetus for reactionary movements comes from an inchoate feeling that something is wrong with society and culture, that is turned into not just incorrect but malicious explanations of what the problems are and what the causes of those problems are, in order to radicalize people into joining hateful movements. It's not that different from how ideological frameworks function normally in a Geertzian sense, just done for darker and more violent purposes.
Here's where I think the economy comes in. It is true that there are always going to be some people with extreme reactionary beliefs, but how welcoming society is to their recruitment and other activities does I think depend on how many people are feeling desperate and let down by traditional sources of authority and willing to give "alternative" voices a hearing. Often but not always, the state and direction of the economy has a lot to do with this feeling of desperation - it's not an accident that in recent decades, we've seen the flourishing of reactionary politics following major recessions or in places that have been on the economic decline.
Again, this isn't a 1:1 thing, nor are a lot of the converts among the poorest and most desperate in society, but I do think that general impressions about the state of the economy are a major component of the motivating sense of desperation, alienation, and a breakdown of trust in institutions.
40 notes · View notes
eggcolomba · 6 months
Text
From the outset of the latest Israel-Palestine conflict, the capitalist media in Britain and USA has acted as an obedient mouthpiece for the establishment, echoing their imperialist propaganda. We need to build a voice for the exploited and oppressed.
75 notes · View notes
feministdragon · 3 months
Text
Women and the Subversion of the Community, by Maria-Rosa Dalla Costa
This is the first essay (downloadable pdf) to point out that housework done by women is actually invisible unpaid work that is necessary for the economy.
As anyone who comes home from their job and has no energy to feed themselves and clean the house knows, people who work outside the house really need a 'wife'.
Capitalism says that women's unpaid labor should be paid in 'love', because if capitalism actually had to pay for women's work, labor costs---already the highest portion of a business' costs---would skyrocket and cut into profits, and as we know, Number Must Go Up. Paying for women's labor would slow down that Up way too much. So capitalism and culture collaborate in making everyone think of women's work as a labor of love, not something to be paid for.
Marxism says that women have to be 'emancipated' from the labor of the home to be free to enter the world of paid labor, but now we understand that the 'superwoman' model is also not sustainable. Women can't be caretakers of the home and also breadwinners in the market, we're just too tired.
Tictoc says we should just give up and go back to being housewives, but that's not going to solve anything.
The real solution is to reinvent our economic system.
Which is radical, I know. But we're at an impasse, and trying to solve large problems. Large problems require large solutions.
Marxism is not radical enough, because it does not include the economic value of the unpaid labor of women, the care work that is the foundation of not only our economy, but our life as human beings on this planet.
We need an economy that supports the life of human beings, not human beings that slave to support the life of the economy.
...
I have to stop here but if you're interested in following this i'm going to keep posting under #feministdragon reinventing our economy
34 notes · View notes
lilithism1848 · 3 months
Text
Tumblr media
43 notes · View notes
blackberryjambaby · 2 years
Text
video essays i adore (and you should watch)
when hollywood speaks chinese, i cringe
salvador dali's 'the persistence of memory': great art explained
nighthawks by edward hopper: great art explained
the baghdad battery? archeologist reacts! (reaction to & correction of awful archaeology ep 6: the baghdad battery)
remembering with a twist - a jojo rabbit & the book thief video essay
why is cottagecore so gay?
bo burnham's inside and "white liberal performative art"
overanalysing barbie movies with queer marxist theory
how white supremacists hide in plain sight
the constructive narrative of kitchen nightmares
life and death in medieval london with dr eleanor janega
the counteract: why the one direction fandom is predominantly queer
in search of a flat earth
the true horror of midsommar (feat. jack saint)
the rise and fall of abby lee miller part one (part two isn't up yet)
elvis (2022) and the mediocrity of bipocs
454 notes · View notes
almostdisappointing · 10 months
Text
https://transreads.org/
Here's a link to free resources relating to the trans community from children's stories to social science research. Support them and the original authors wherever possible but more importantly never feel guilty about accessing knowledge regardless of your economic situation.
Here's a particular favourite of mine:
Even if you're not interested there's a chance someone who follows you does so please reblog to spread the knowledge
66 notes · View notes
randytheberserker · 9 months
Text
Capitalism be like:
Tumblr media
57 notes · View notes
comradeowl · 1 year
Photo
Tumblr media
Howard: Should war come, Mr. Stalin, where is it most likely to break out? Where are the war clouds the most menacing, in the East or in the West?
Stalin: In my opinion there are two seats of war danger. The first is in the Far East, in the zone of Japan. I have in mind the numerous statements made by Japanese military men containing threats against other powers. The second seat is in the zone of Germany. It is hard to say which is the most menacing, but both exist and are active. Compared with these two principal seats of war danger, the Italian-Abyssinian war is an episode. At present, the Far Eastern seat of danger reveals the greatest activity. However, the centre of this danger may shift to Europe. This is indicated, for example, by the interview which Herr Hitler recently gave to a French newspaper. In this interview Hitler seems to have tried to say peaceful things, but he sprinkled his “peacefulness” so plentifully with threats against both France and the Soviet Union that nothing remained of his “peacefulness.” You see, even when Herr Hitler wants to speak of peace he cannot avoid uttering threats. This is symptomatic.
Howard: What situation or condition, in your opinion, furnishes the chief war menace today?
Stalin: Capitalism.
Howard: In which specific manifestation of capitalism?
Stalin: Its imperialist, usurpatory manifestation.
You remember how the first World War arose. It arose out of the desire to re-divide the world. Today we have the same background. There are capitalist states which consider that they were cheated in the previous redistribution of spheres of influence, territories, sources of raw materials, markets, etc., and which would want another redivision that would be in their favour. Capitalism, in its imperialist phase, is a system which considers war to be a legitimate instrument for settling international disputes, a legal method in fact, if not in law.
Howard: May there not be an element of danger in the genuine fear existent in what you term “capitalistic countries,” of an intent on the part of the Soviet Union to force its political theories on other nations?
Stalin: There is no justification whatever for such fears. If you think that Soviet people want to change the face of surrounding states, and by forcible means at that, you are entirely mistaken. Of course, Soviet people would like to see the face of surrounding states changed, but that is the business of the surrounding states. I fail to see what danger the surrounding states can perceive in the ideas of the Soviet people if these states are really sitting firmly in the saddle.
Howard: Does this, your statement, mean that the Soviet Union has to any degree abandoned its plans and intentions for bringing about world revolution?
Stalin: We never had such plans and intentions.
Howard: You appreciate, no doubt, Mr. Stalin, that much of the world has long entertained a different impression.
Stalin: This is the product of a misunderstanding.
Howard: A tragic misunderstanding?
Stalin: No, a comical one. Or, perhaps, tragicomic.
You see, we Marxists believe that a revolution will also take place in other countries. But it will take place only when the revolutionaries in those countries think it possible, or necessary. The export of revolution is nonsense. Every country will make its own revolution if it wants to, and if it does not want to, there will be no revolution. For example, our country wanted to make a revolution and made it, and now we are building a new, classless society.
But to assert that we want to make a revolution in other countries, to interfere in their lives, means saying what is untrue, and what we have never advocated.
- Joseph Stalin, Interview with Roy Howard 1934, Excerpt from a much larger interview. 
Check out @rodericday on Twitter dot com for commentary, Marxist & other writings on Redsails.
https://redsails.org/stalin-and-howard/
310 notes · View notes
workersolidarity · 10 months
Text
As things become more tense between the US, Europe and NATO, and Russia and China, it is inescapable the modern United States is a Fascist Kleptocracy using Managed Democracy to create an illusion of legitimacy.
Though we may not have much strength now, Communist groups should plan for the possibility of War. And within that context, consider how we could step up to provide support for dissenting communities who don't wish to be drafted to their deaths.
By involving ourselves and earning our communities' trust through various underground programs, in such a time of crisis, we could rapidly grow our numbers and educate workers to Imperialist and Marxist theory.
From there we could organize Patriotic Resistance Groups to sabotage the Fascist war machine from within and weaken the state through demoralization.
The conditions for change are nowhere near ready for Socialism anywhere in the West. But if we are prepared to take action before a major crisis hits, we stand a chance of creating those conditions ourselves.
72 notes · View notes
ptrcbtmn · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
Labour theo(r)y of va(lue)
119 notes · View notes
r1c4rd4 · 7 months
Text
PEOPLE DONT REALISE THEY WANT COMMUNUSM (BARBIE REFERENCE)
In the movie the males took control over the goverment (which is in this case the working class) for their advantage, oppressing and controlling what the females wanted
basically in this example the capitalists are the males and the working class are the females.
IN THE REAL WORLD CAPITALISTS TOOK OVER THE WORKING CLASS FOR THEIR ADVANTAGE OPPRESSING AND CONTROLLING WHAT THE WORKING CLASS WANTS
In the barbie movie, the females realized they had all the power and that's how they freed Barbie-land
See???? In Marxist Ideology, its about the working class realizing they have all the power they should free themselves from the capit sts
32 notes · View notes