this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8206 readers
381 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Respectfully, Capital is probably the absolute worst starting point for socialist theory.
Something like the Manifesto, The State and Revolution, or even Blackshirts and Reds would be much better starting points IMO
I used to say the same thing, now i just point people to Graeber or Zinn and let them radicalize on their own, if they identify as liberal and want reading recommendations. Debt: The First 5000 Years did more to push me leftward than State and Revolution. I assume this would be true for most people who aren't familiar with the context of the soviet revolution.
Capital is a great starting point if the person is a big NERD
Totally with you on that. The Capital is a "colossal" starting point. And lot's and lot's of theory has been written since 1894.
On the other hand, Blackshirts and Reds is an awesome place to start. is an eye opener for libs who want to read. At least in my experience.
Daddy Lenin too. In my case, I started with "Imperialism..." at the University and it was the kicker to my freefall into becoming a .
The critique of the gotha program is very short and makes some good points about materialism.
Am I an anrchiddie if I say the conquest of bread is a good starting point?
I'm ML and haven't read Kropotkin, but i think his idea of mutual aid as a part of evolution is really valuabe, since social darwinism has so poisoned lib thought especially in the US that most USians don't differentiate between Darwin's actual scientific theory and social Darwinism, to the point of believing "survival of the fittest" is a Darwin quote.
The book to go for then would be "Mutual Aid: A Factor in Human Evolution", right? As far as I know, Conquest is mainly a utopian socialist thought experiment about how production (using technology and figures of his time) could easily provide for everyone with much less work. I think it's valuable, just has different subject matter.
Yeah that's the one i was thinking about. Thanks.
It honestly really irritates me how influential social darwinism has been in the US and i really wanted to rant about it lol
Yes. I'm not sectarian to anarchists in general, but conquest of bread is basically a fantasy novel taking itself seriously. It isnt grounded in any research. If you like the ideas presented in conquest of bread, that's fine, but it doesn't actually go into how those ideas can be achieved, outside of mostly "people will just spontaneously do it"
CoB is based on economic research, not magic, but absolutely is utopian in basically eliding the problem of "how would this ever be established?"
My partner double checked a bunch of the numbers he cited and he plays very loosey goosey with it.