RedMarx

A Forum
It is currently Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:33 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]



Welcome


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Reflecting on the decline of RedMarx and other stuff.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:48 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:17 am
Posts: 883
Has thanked: 726 time
Have thanks: 844 time
ScientificSocialist wrote:
I think nine's analysis has some pretty damn good merit to it. This place wasn't exactly started with any coherrent purpose in mind other than "yeah communism guys!".

Nine's 'analysis' (or lack of it) is mostly the assertion that Karl Marx is basically indistinguishable from any other person or writer - or at least what distinguishes him is disliked - and therefore the defining trait of his writings is that he's old. This is highly problematic. In any case, if spheres of human activity were to exist outside of what was covered by Marxism, in a substantial sense and hence allowing for arbitrariness, that would seem to indicate a flaw with Marxism. Of course, Marx's historical theory of progression and wide-ranging changes in production and how it occurs on a social level are nonetheless quite solid, and as such it seems weird to treat Marxism as not applying to certain things because it is arbitrarily marked as a 'respectable' thing and other activities as not so, when obviously any activity and conflict was in engagement with the predominant society of the time.

Generally speaking, people who don't like taking explicit issue with Marx's views, and might pretend allegiance to him, but are never inspired by this allegiance into any practical defence or enthusiasm about things he might have written putting forwards such views are suspect, and probably not that concerned about communism generally. People often seemed to use 'Karl Marx' as a random authority that they thought could make them look good, rather than actually bothering with them in any detail, which is strange because people couldn't really pretend to 'know' or 'be above' Karl Marx and his discussion without any reading or theoretical engagement, without seemingly pretending that when they weren't posting they were actually Karl Marx, which was in their case quite unfounded. Such things were ultimately more amicable when done by one 'Lucien Sanial,' rather than such people.

XientificSocialist wrote:
However, I also think that the material conditions of the real world in large part dictate the struggle as broletariat and others have said, in which case the historical moment of the great recession and consequences such as the recall in wisconsin, arab spring, 15m march in Spain, etc, offered a pretty large boost in activity in general.

It's fairly doubtful that most of that activity would generate traffic to RedMarx, and in any case RedMarx is connected to the more fundamental dynamics behind them, so any relation between them would have to have begun from RedMarx as the active factor, when it was significant. In that sense, that the fundamental social dynamic (and recall that communism is related to the fundamental movement of society regardless of the seeming smaller issues) moved on from RedMarx and such - and chatter generally - despite their being explicitly communist and so on would seem to indicate a more substantial development of it in the terms which were formulated here.

XientificSocialist wrote:
Then again I would hope that people are too busy with these discussions taking place in real life where it actually matters, but for those of us where the struggle is not here we are on the internet.

If the discussions 'in real life' - which are still mere talk, just usually worse - were enjoyed, or other existential realisations of communism, they would also take place on the internet in a more lasting and focussed medium, and others with similar beliefs would be sought out regardless of if they're in the same city and possibly Trot Party. RedMarx and so on would not have been abandoned for the same of merely 'discussions' elsewhere, which in any case usually denotes reformist discussion rather than socialistic ones, or discussion where reformists and so on are permitted and encouraged.

Of course, a good De Leonite tries to avoid conversing with a reformist, unless the end-result of that is the reformist's electrocution and extinction.

_________________
"The thing [calculus] has taken such a hold of me that it not only goes round my head all day, but last week in a dream I gave a chap my shirt-buttons to differentiate, and he ran off with them."

- Friedrich Engels.

Vocatus atque non vocatus Deus aderit.

2x Security Reasons. DANGER DANGER.

Was an Admin when RM was important. Was since confused with Negative Creep for being active.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Reflecting on the decline of RedMarx and other stuff.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:34 am 
Offline
Comrade

Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:41 pm
Posts: 72
Has thanked: 18 time
Have thanks: 1 time
Perhaps analysis was the wrong wordchoice, but rather her assertion that this is a small forum with little to differentiate it from other more highly populated forums with marxist discussion going on. Thus it could be a matter of size combined with the deflation of general class struggle/activity that Broletariat talks about.

[quote="ZeroNowhere"]If the discussions 'in real life' - which are still mere talk, just usually worse


By saying that I was trying to imply that hopefully these conversations would be happening in a context where people are actively engaged in struggle such that they actually matter in the real world in the conquest for working class power. Not just the theoretical *** rags of internet debate.

Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Reflecting on the decline of RedMarx and other stuff.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 5:18 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:17 am
Posts: 883
Has thanked: 726 time
Have thanks: 844 time
Theoretical *** rags sound quite nifty - presumably quite different from used *** rags, which I have little experience with, and you could see some sort of spin-off of Macbeth using such to good effect -, unfortunately they would generally be unused if not for non-theoretical thought, however, of whatever kind. In any case, though, thought is an important part of the human being, and there's perhaps no need to be so vulgar about it unless you dislike the person generally, in which case this will hold regardless, and it's perhaps better not to pretend that you merely take issue with their means of expressing it. Obviously, any discussion of 'communism' was theoretical, unless you were to hold that Cuba and such were socialist - and they were still marginal and irrelevant in their field -, and any substantial discussion involved principles or was abstract, such that you just seem to be referring to discussions that only concerned such 'struggles' and did not depart from it or from capitalism, as anything else would involve distance from such as well, but in any case it seems evident that people will not discuss something when they hold that such discussion is itself irrelevant, and what they would likely be doing instead is in more conventional English parlance masturbation or worse. (Obviously any such discussions would themselves just be a pale repetition on their part - as it were - of discussions the rest of us had on RedMarx, and as such they could have saved on the bother. It stands to reason that communists were so far in advance of the 'real world.' Obviously, the actual dichotomy here would be between theoretical discussion, which is communist, and necessary if communists were to assert that they did in fact exist and were independent, and 'struggles,' which were reformist, and if communist discussion were to occur it would not be confined to such media. Theoretical discussion, of course, stands in no necessary opposition to theoretical discussion, but if you have a problem with paper and similar forms, you should perhaps take it up with a piece of paper, perhaps by depositing unseemly substances or such, which I'm sure it would not appreciate in your case, perhaps Kantianly.)

In any case, though, for reasons mentioned in previous posts along with new ones ('theoretical *** rugs'? Really? Are you 'curious' about whether Cuba is socialist, or just going to randomly go around being a **** to everyone who might answer your 'questions'?), and because none of this seems to have much significance to what was being said, I don't see much need to go further past this post.

Edit: Of course, the category of socialists who were inspired by discussion of socialism and enthusiasm about it not to engage in practical action was always a chimera, unless we were being accused of secretly being actual reactionaries, although of course we would probably be correct then as well and it's fortunate that we were not such reactionaries, if they were discussing it often, then the only issue would seem to be a disaffection with the 'struggles,' entryism, and the reformist organisations, or in brief communist sentiment among them. To make a division between communists based merely on reformist organisations, primarily, was merely to promote these reformist organisations in lieu of communism. As such, such sentiment would in no wise follow into passive preference for reformist organisations, but if it were to move elsewhere would have to do so in a more notable manner. Compared to the reformist movement, of course, communists were beyond reproach, if they were such. Of course, they were always distanced from such things, and hence would have to discuss things elsewhere, but as the question was merely one of reformist organisations and so on not satisfying them, this would be a theoretical question, and if they were not impressed by such and were actively realising this, then in all likelihood they were instead spurred by such discussion to other such activity of a more socialist nature, rather than engaging in incoherent struggles with no particular end-result, which would not usually inspire enthusiasm apart from in certain contexts such as office suites or cubicles. In any case the problem would end up in a theoretical difference, and a perhaps marginal one. People may be led astray by reformist organisations, and hence for instance have mis-aimed at Fidel Castro, but not of course by communism, unless your problem was with communism - and I suppose that supporters of (Raúl) Castroite Cuba may have had such problems.

_________________
"The thing [calculus] has taken such a hold of me that it not only goes round my head all day, but last week in a dream I gave a chap my shirt-buttons to differentiate, and he ran off with them."

- Friedrich Engels.

Vocatus atque non vocatus Deus aderit.

2x Security Reasons. DANGER DANGER.

Was an Admin when RM was important. Was since confused with Negative Creep for being active.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Donate Now
Donate Now



Hosted by © 2017 FreeForums.org | Create a free forum | Powered by phpBB
About FreeForums | Legal | Advertise Here | Investors | Contact FreeForums.org
Report Violation

Design By Poker Bandits  

suspicion-preferred