Marx analyzed historical development going back as far as the 13th century, and Marxists have continued to analyze modern capitalism using Marx’s theories.
Marx analyzed the industrialized part of Western Europe and how industrialization evolved. He couldn’t possibly have a wider perspective than his geography and history provided. Marx couldn’t really have foreseen how land use and agriculture may evolve into an industry. Marxists today, blinded by their religious faith, still refuse to explain agriculture as an industry, a capitalist industry. Marx couldn’t possibly have seen how this dictatorship of the “partisan class owners of production” would transform a society of primitive capitalism into a full blown capitalist prison. We can’t blame Marx for what Marxists did. Continue reading “How has Marxism failed without Marx being wrong”→
Nishnaabeg scholar Leanne Betasamosake Simpson explains why “green growth” isn’t enough to save the planet. by Malcolm Harris
The most common introductory example we use when we teach kids about interdependent ecosystems is insects. They may seem gross and small compared to the charismatic megafauna, we say, but insects play all sorts of important roles: pollinating plants, breaking down organic matter, feeding bigger animals. Without insects the whole web would collapse. I don’t think many of us who have given this lesson actually contemplated the mass death of the world’s insects as a possibility, imminent or otherwise. We should have. Continue reading “Indigenous Knowledge Has Been Warning Us About Climate Change for Centuries”→
Social democracy is dead and has been dead for years. It died back with when the state could dictate and manage its own contained economy. The evolution of the state has no control of the economy, it is in an impossible foreign debt situation, and can take away anything a social-democracy ever established (to maintain social order), on the excuse it is trying to avoid bankruptcy. The evolution of the state has it borrowing from the future (of endless economic development) to keep the wealthy happier today, and the poor more desperate as time passes. It is borrowing from a future that does not exist, from an earth and an ecosystem that has been depleted and is dying. Social democracy was a temporary solution to prevent “state capitalism” (only true anti-communists would call that communism) from expanding to more countries. Continue reading “On the illusion of social democracy”→
If you are anything like me, you look at the references of a document before you read it. You know what to avoid, you know what to expect, and you know what the bounds, of what you are about to read, are. Possibly this helps for understanding something better and not having to read it a second time. So, this may be the first thing you are reading.
We are trained formally to think categorically and like to deal with things based on the little cabinets and closets they belong to. If I wanted to pretend this belongs to the Marxist cabinet, or the Libertarian closet, or the Anarchist drawer, or the Libertarian Communalist sub-cabinet, Continue reading “References”→
1st draft, as all current documents, are just quick drafts of the future state of this site/blog/book/forum…!
So to avoid beating around the bush, the question is: “Ok, we have reached the status of a classless society, but not too many can survive in the planet as it has been desertified. At least in the surface of water and land there are no adequate organic living organisms to sustain human life. Does class matter?”
The angry mob response from Marxists, “it is up to that working class to solve the problem then, the problem now is that we live in a class dominated society, and this is a priority for us and not the environment” just doesn’t cut it anymore. It is pure and simple logic that if we massively die worldwide of famine and disease, class liberation will not matter to anyone because there is nobody left. Continue reading “Class, power, and the environment”→
Recently with a friend and comrade, due to adverse personal and social circumstances, a discussion was centralized around the issue of “relationships”. Coincidentally a work related contact jumped from discussing technical matters to relationships based on trust and respect for others. The summary of those discussions came to be that relationships, true meaningful relationships, have either solid foundations in sharing the most important values and principles, or are loosely founded in conflicting values and principles, thus are sort lived and superficial. It may be a relationship based on family ties, an erotic relationship, an occupational, a friendship, or one in political struggle, but to be a truly significant relationship, values and principles must be shared. In other words, all relationships are political in nature. Political in a more general sense but also a more specific as a definition. Political as in discussing matters we have in common and try to influence others on how we deal with what we have in common. Continue reading “What must come first and above it all”→
Inequality, being under protection by the state – the system of enforcing inequality – has had a severe impact on the mental state of women, and men for that matter. Isolated from the decision making process and being forced to serve men in their lives, fathers, husbands, brothers, teachers, bosses, women grow up with an inferiority complex that they can hardly escape to begin to struggle for equality. For many women, still today, their own inferiority against men is internalized. They have learned to be in this position and it is not always needed for men to force them in this position. In many ways women reproduce patriarchy and inequality. So what does this mean in reference to children? What does that mean for a patriarchal society really, made of grown up children?