Womanpuncher69

5y

he killed his wife and was unfit to trial due to insanity it doesn't dismiss his philosophical work well maybe the insanity plead a bit, but I know people like Paul Cockshott hate hearing about him due to that

americana

5y

No, and it’s because Afghanistan is a non industrialized, rural, feudal state

Capitalism must develop there first before class divisions that create socialism can exist. The King of Afghanistan (Zahir Shah) was in the process of this before being couped by the progressive Daoud Khan with help from the moderate socialist Parchami party, who were opposed by the hardline Khalqi party. The Khalqi believed that a radical movement into agrarian socialism with the help of the USSR was the way forward.

The Parcham were a bunch of bourgeois college kids from the capital city who understood that their country was not a unified or even interconnected one yet, but understood that capitalism had to be developed before socialism could be introduced, which is why they helped support and move Daoud Khan into power.

It’s ironic because Daoud Khan actually tried to undermine the Parchami’s (and the Soviet Union’s) power once he was in office while trying to modernize the country. Simultaneously, his attempts to modernize the country ended up being marginal and he was growing increasingly unpopular.

This lead to the Saur Revolution of 1978 where the Parcham reunited with the Khalqi to depose Daoud Khan, then once the Revolution was complete, the Khalqi began purging Parcham under Nur Mohammad Taraki before he was toppled and replaced by the Hafizullah Amin Administration (Amin was Tarakis right hand man and would assassinate him in 1979 due to a number of controversies).

After Amin’s entrance to office, popularity would continue to crumble and the Parchami would return to power with soviet backing.

The 1970’s was an extremely confusing time for Afghanistan. Everything from Daoud Khans deposing occurred in maybe a year and a half

krishna bound

5y

don't usually post in this thread because i dont self-identify this way, but that wasn't fully what I said. I was more saying two things; firstly in regards to Lehman Bros, the issue wasn't the handling of the crash, but rather the fact Lehman Bros as a concept shouldn't have existed to begin with - people were saying it should have been nationalized, but nationalizing Lehman is like saying (comparatively) "let's nationalize fentanyl dealing" as if the issue was the organization of the operation instead of the operation itself.
What I said about FM&FM was that it was turned into a GSE, which is nationalization to some degree but in the worst way possible. I've put screenshots of the comments below for those interested.

deadacc

5y

ive always wondered under what ideological basis you identify as ?

ARCADE GOON

5y

Althusser has a few interesting concepts

One is his concept of ideology which i don't necessarily agree with. One is his concept of reproduction. He says that capitalism must reproduce itself, this happens through wages being high enough to sustain the population. I also think this is wrong bc mature capitalist economies for the most part have sinking birthrates. But he argues the entire state apparatus is formed to reproduce the status quo, which makes sense somewhere.

The most interesting part for me is that he says Marx still has a few idealist views bc he held onto Hegel. He criticizes Marx here and there for that. For example he says the idea to start Das Kapital with the commodity form is a result of Hegelian brainworms and that it actually harms the book because the first 100 pages are so abstract. He also criticizes historical materialism for having a grand narrative and says this is also not materialist to think that way, he says history has a lot of randomness and chance to it

His interpretation of Marxism is orthodox, no BS, no idealism, really scientific (thats why a lot of radlibs hate him) but I would only read him after Capital.

He has an interesting essay on Lenin's philosophy too but it only makes sense if you've read Lenin's essays on it. Lenin's works on materialism make more sense when you know that in that time there were people seriously doubting about the existence of atoms/nature of atoms

So I say hold out on reading Althusser until you read the primary sources, Kapital and/or Lenin's philosophical writings

deadacc

5y

ive always wondered under what ideological basis you identify as ?

Scratchin Mamba

5y

Baathism

Womanpuncher69

5y

he killed his wife and was unfit to trial due to insanity it doesn't dismiss his philosophical work well maybe the insanity plead a bit, but I know people like Paul Cockshott hate hearing about him due to that

Pexlivaniz

5y

Imagine Cockshott being a judge of morality

space0cadet

5y

https://benjaminnorton.substack.com/p/in-cointelpro-fbi-used-anarchism

americana

5y

It’s just so much easier to infiltrate and obfuscate anarchist groups because of their total lack of vetting processes and centralized organization and I have no clue why people like @sniper would rather pursue conscious purity rather than actually building an effective fighting force against capital-imperialism

Womanpuncher69

5y

I mean western ML groups vetting is incredibly terrible as well, for the Canadian communist Party all u gotta do is pledge to the program then ur in its a total joke

americana

5y

I actually found a GREAT party with a nice vetting process that my friend recommended me the day I joined PCUSA. They require you to do like a year of Marxism classes and volunteering for their front organization before you can enter their actual communist group

I signed up this morning but I don’t begin for a week or so

Womanpuncher69

5y

congrats joining them, now watch me get my sectarian on and s*** on PCUSA nah im joking, irl organising is always good, way better than being terminally online even if u hold the correct lines.

americana

5y

Factual

PSL and PCUSA are filled with amazing and productive people it’s just that they’re not gonna go anywhere without a massive level of infiltration considering their criteria of entry

Hopefully as my party grows they’ll be able to take in the disillusioned from those parties and momentum can continue

space0cadet

5y

Last party someone i know joined was FRSO and it was just a book club
they did like, protests and speeches and s*** but its like ?????
nothing connected to the people

americana

5y

It’s just so much easier to infiltrate and obfuscate anarchist groups because of their total lack of vetting processes and centralized organization and I have no clue why people like @sniper would rather pursue conscious purity rather than actually building an effective fighting force against capital-imperialism

space0cadet

5y

Last party someone i know joined was FRSO and it was just a book club
they did like, protests and speeches and s*** but its like ?????
nothing connected to the people

americana

5y

Factual

PSL and PCUSA are filled with amazing and productive people it’s just that they’re not gonna go anywhere without a massive level of infiltration considering their criteria of entry

Hopefully as my party grows they’ll be able to take in the disillusioned from those parties and momentum can continue

sniper

5y

also the substack article isn't really a damnation of anarchism that Ben Norton thinks it is, because they were f***ing with everyone on the left at that time

you could call out MLism and the derivatives like Maoism as COINTELPRO too, as the feds also built up front orgs and made newspapers and all that