thepeoplesinging

joined 2 months ago
[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you. I feel like I understand better now, especially with that first link. Haven't worked through all the sources in the second one yet.

 

When Russia invaded Ukraine a few years ago, I was very lib and mostly history-illiterate. I try to be more ML now, but I still don't know a lot about world history. I've heard people saying that, at the dissolution of the Soviet Union, NATO promised they would not move toward Russia, but have since continued to expand eastward. I understand this is threatening to Russia, and I understand why they would want to respond, I'm just not sure why Ukraine specifically was the response? I know we give critical support to Russia in its opposition to the imperial core, so is that the reason? I also know Ukraine is brimming with Nazis in their ranks, but is that alone a reason to invade them? Is my saying Russia invaded Ukraine a misunderstanding in itself? I'm not trying to challenge you guys, I sincerely don't know and want to understand.

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I would mostly agree. There are instances of class traitors among the bourgeoisie who have aided leftist causes. But perhaps there are other material forces at play for them too.

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 6 days ago (11 children)

I mean, there is some level of propaganda and manipulation. To there isn't at all sounds like it's just human nature that people come up with the most racist shit. But we believe that people can change if the material conditions change. If we can change the environment these people are in, they won't come up with such horrible stuff. Or at least, after a few generations they might not.

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have studied Japanese and have enough credit hours to minor in it, but I don't know much specialist language I know. I could try to work on learning more, if this is a longer-term process, but if you're looking to get this done quick, I probably can't learn in time.

I'm not really interested in having sex, but there are certainly other ways of having kids. I just also don't think I am (or likely ever will be) in a mentally stable enough position that I feel like I could care for a child. I can barely care for myself and require a good amount of support to do so. So no, kids are very likely not in my future.

Thank you, I think this makes sense.

 

I promise I'm not a wrecker, I just have trouble finding Marxist sources for these things that aren't big books on top of what I'm already reading. I think I understand that it says the exchange value of a product is proportionate to the labor time used to create it. Am I getting that correct? More labor-intensive commodities, or products requiring more specialized tools to make would cost more. And I know I've heard the criticism before. Heard it pretty much all my life. "Is a cookie still worth its labor if it's burnt? Is a pie worth the labor if it's a shit pie?" I have heard people say that Marx addresses such criticisms in Capital, but I haven't gotten around to those tomes yet. Could someone explain to me how they are addressed and maybe straighten out other things I may have gotten wrong?

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, stories that are meant to emulate the old romances would follow nobles simply because that's the medium. But I definitely agree that more stories set current day need working class (or just not owning class) protagonists. I think revolutionary stories in the style of epics would be amazing, but unfortunately I have met with difficulty writing such a thing.

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In school they taught us that the Soviet Union was buddies with Nazi Germany until the Nazis betrayed them partway through the war, at which point they reluctantly joined the Allies who reluctantly accepted them. I have seen on here and Hexbear that this is not an accurate history.

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 1 month ago

This made my heart drop. However marginalized or trod upon I may be, I am still part of the rich. I don't make my living just by owning things, so I got that going for me; but my whole lifestyle sits on the backs of those folks. I knew it was bad, but this picture was just a gut-punch. If these people need to march on us to be liberated, so may it be.

 

My parents had Copaganda The Show on in the room, and a Chinese character talked about how her parents were doctors during the cultural revolution, but were accused of using bourgeois science and were sentenced to reeducation. I don't know enough about the cultural revolution to know anything about that, so I googled. Naturally I found myself on Wikipedia (blech) where they talked about a variety of "bourgeois pseudoscience" ranging from phrenology and eugenics to psychology and sociology. These latter two were specific to the PRC. Of course I know better than to automatically believe NATOpedia, especially on topics like these, but I don't know any better places to look for accurate information, particularly in English. So I have a few questions.

  1. Where can I go to find these answers? I am aware of ProleWiki, but a lot of the pages I've seen have been more summary and less in-depth talks about these things.

  2. Is psychology and potentially psychiatry still considered bourgeois science? I have a variety of psychiatric disorders, and I would be upset if my communist utopia did not see fit to help me deal with them. I have heard of anti-psychiatry, and some random dude claiming it is popular on the left? Not jumping to believe them, but instead asking people who have a better chance of actually knowing.

  3. Is there any truth that the PRC did take these actions? Do they still? If I were to move to China, would I be unable to get psychiatric meds?

[–] thepeoplesinging@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ooh, eugenics is one of those things that get me so riled up. Usually people are better at decorating their words so they don't sound quite like this, but he's so mask-off. There's nothing I can really add because he said all the things wrong with his argument, just he and his people think those are positive qualities of it. "Lack higher reasoning and moral faculties" so this guy by contrast has high moral faculties? Maybe I'm just falling into the trap by getting worked up, but this guy is fucked.

It doesn't even need to be private, though. You could be public about your asexuality and people still shouldn't make a big deal about it. You aren't into sex? Cool, I don't like coffee.

view more: next ›