Please share 🙏

Im safe but man it was awful to see happen irl

Somebody i think i know got dragged out by a special police unit

Rly was hard to see that girl cry as well ngl

Dis shyt relevant

Depression and Parenti name a better scratchen combo

new passive voice dropped

castro and basketball

law enforcement worker is crazy lol

are those the revolutionary subject Marx was talking about

According to DSA, yes

“Our Party’s Urgent Tasks: On The Necessity of a Revolutionary United Front Between Law Enforcement Workers and German BIPOCs Once Again”

We need a cultural revolution on wimpy protests that stay on the sidewalk and don't step into the street

Walking in a classroom that has students blood on the walls after cops cracked down on a protest always felt different

if it was legal to be gay in qatar then instead of the current thinkpieces on qatar being a desolate hellhole devoid of human rights you just know we'd see editorials on why they're actually the model economy

crazy that marx explicitly criticized utilitarianism only for like tons of leftists a century and a half later to just become ethical utilitarians. you hate to see it

@Scratchin_Bandit u ok?

Hurt and mad abt it but ima use my position to at least do smth

All deez student assistant jobs means i got the ear of a lot of senior staff employees ear so ima make use of that

In honor of the revisionist Jiang dying, here is one of the saddest documents you will ever read:

bannedthought.net/China/Maoism/OldCCPMemberResigns-2001.pdf

Damn

Your boy sheds a thug tear every time he reads that

“Unlike previously oppressed classes, the proletariat, heavily concentrated in urban areas, seemed capable of an unparalleled level of political development. It would not only rebel against its oppressors as had slaves and serfs but would create an egalitarian, nonexploitative social order as never before seen in history. In his day Marx saw an alternative system emerging in the clubs, mutual aid societies, political organizations, and newspapers of a rapidly growing British working class. For the first time, history would be made by the masses in a conscious way, a class for itself. Sporadic rebellion would be replaced by class-conscious revolution. Instead of burning down the manor, the workers would expropriate it and put it to use for the collective benefit of the common people, the ones who built it in the first place.”

I understand the general gist of what Parenti is saying but the line “history would be made by the masses in a conscious way, a class for itself”

Why exactly is the proletariat Marx talks about different from previous oppressed classes in the sense don’t they all have some collective sense of consciousness to even make the decision to revolt in the first place? Like ignoring the fact that past societies weren’t as developed for people to organize thru press, mutual aid, etc. Or is that more the point he is trying to make

the part on “history would be made by the masses in a conscious way, a class for itself”

A class for itself recognizes is the working class recognizing that as a class they’ll always be opposed to the bourgeoisie, that there’s a contradiction between the two that can only end with the proletariat coming to victory and imposing what that class desires

As opposed to a class in itself where people will recognize grievances against the bourgeoisie but that’s where it ends, you can see this in like hustler culture where people recognize their being exploited but rather band together as a class to oppose it they rather become the exploiter. a side tangent i love how hustler culture masks their financial irresponsibility as them being financial responsible by investing money into like cyprto for example but 70% they’re just wasting their money s*** like weed lol

Okay thank you, also I’ve noticed that Marx talks about urban industrial centers being the center of protelariat revolution but then the little I’ve read about Maoism and how the emphasis was placed on specifically the peasants rather than workers. I know technically the former can be considered part of the latter but why was there the distinction between peasants and proletariat between Marx and Maoism.

Also there seemed to be disagreement over which was supposed to play a more pivotal role in revolution?

I know Marx later on his life actually started getting interested in a revolution happening in Russia. The Peasants role in Maoism is inherited from Leninism. The idea is an alliance between the Proles and peasants lead by the proles. In Russia you had feudal exploitation in the countryside and capitalist exploitation in the cities, Petrograd during the early 1900s had the largest factories in the world despite how behind Russia was. The two classes unite in an alliance to end their exploitation by the Capitalist and Landlords thats where the peasants role comes to play. In China during the early part of CPC life they tried the "traditonal" marxist attempt of having the proles do city uprisings but these keep ended up getting crushed, which lead to the development of surround the city by the countryside by Mao due to the success of guerilla warfare compared to the uprisings.

The peasants played a role in China and Russia due to their still being large feudal exploitation and colonial in the case of China which made a the peasants a revolutionary subject in the same vein of bourgeois where the bourgeois allied with the peasants cause they shared the same goal of ending feudal relations, but lead by the bourgeois, and in Russia and China lead by the prole

I wouldn't say theres a distinction between peasants and proles between Marxism and Maoism, more so Maoism develops on how the Proles and Peasants can work together.