this post was submitted on 29 May 2025
65 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

23022 readers
188 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Been seeing more and more evidence that mass literacy is both massively diminished compared to the 20th century and accelerating in its decline across the world, especially in relatively highly educated countries. This problem is obviously much more severe amongst the working class than others, as historically tends to be the case.

If we want the masses to get to grips with a communist understanding of the world, which requires a lot of reading and discussion of text, surely this is an issue we need to grapple with. Current political education initiatives usually bring together smaller, highly-literate (typically university educated) groups of people, which tend to remain insular and rarely seem to engage with the broader working class. I am convinced that a significant barrier to mass political education is that so many "literate" people are unable to read a simple paragraph.

How do we rectify this situation? It seems historically unique because in the past, illiterate people had no illusions about the fact that they couldn't read and were enthusiastic about learning (at least, in general). Nowadays, I can imagine that most people would not view their literacy as something that needs to be improved, and many will even react with hostility to such a suggestion.

What's the correct approach? Do we need to emphasise the practical rewards that those who engage with theoretical texts benefit from? Take a direct approach and offer reading comprehension sessions? Interested to hear what others think.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PKMKII@hexbear.net 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Whenever this gets brought up, I think of the Bill Haywood quote, “I've never read Marx's Capital, but I've got the marks of capital all over my body.” Yeah, if you start in with bolts of linen to coats and exchange value versus use value, someone whose reading comprehension is at an 8th grade level is just gonna tune out. Praxis needs to be presented in a way that’s applicable to people’s everyday lives. Which honestly, isn’t hard because socialist political economy is fundamentally about how everyday people get a raw deal. You show them they’re getting a raw deal, then show they can get something better, simple as that.

Like, if you wanted to impress upon someone the benefits of a car, you wouldn’t start by discussing the physics equations used in determining the force generated by internal combustion or drawing a diagram to explain a differential. You would start with, it’ll get you from here to there fast and comfortably. Likewise, it’s better to start with “Doesn’t it suck that your boss pushes you around? Well that wouldn’t be an issue if you and your coworkers picked the boss instead of some corporate suits that never see your office” than starting with a discussion of Hegelian materialism versus idealism.

[–] plinky@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

which is why people should jettison jargon whenever they explain something. communist ideas are explainable in different frameworks to 10 year old (even with those stupid cows), drunk 45 yeard old mechanics or nuclear engineers. they can think either "it wont work" or "i'm fine, thanks" or whatever, but communication is not the problem, upside is the problem (in imperial core at least, in global south - downside is the problem)