Paiva @cur-memini - Tumblr Blog

paiva ( ´,_ゝ`) • 21 • chilean • she • asexual •

#Pinned

hagiomoto

Your grifting and manipulative academic Marxism vs our honourable and pure substack Marxism

jittery-heart

imsobadatnicknames2

Of course no heuristic is universally true, but I think if you're an american who considers themselves "progressive" this is a rule of thumb you should probably be considering more often: If the conversation you're currently participating in is only able to happen because someone is going out of their way to speak *your* language, that's probably not the person who's most in need of informing themselves about the other's country in this conversation.

imsobadatnicknames2

It's just such a common pattern, how when you disagree with an american about something like e.g. the idea that it's unfair to hate members of the US military, the american will always walk into the conversation with the unshakable assumption that the only reason why you could possibly disagree with them is because *you* are not informed enough about *their* country, that you obviously are not aware of how bad veterans have it once they return home, or of the conditions of poverty and systemic inequality that might drive someone to see the military as their only chance for upward mobility, or of how aggressively military recruiters campaign, or how much propaganda they make, or how they take advantage of systemic inequality to recruit from disadvantaged populations, or a million other things which they will inherently assume you lack an understanding of and proceed to condescendingly explain to you.

All the while they refuse to entertain even for one second the possibility that it might be *them* who has something to learn about *your* country, that they might not be informed enough about the violence and terror the US military enacted upon your people, that *they* might lack some awareness or understanding of the cruelty and suffering that those poor, propagandized, systemically disenfranchised kids lied to by recruiters gladly participated in enacting which might drive even people who are fully aware of their conditions to still harbor resentment towards them. The possibility that the other person might have a better understanding of the conditions in their country than viceversa and still disagree with them will never even cross their mind.

First and last blowjob . just confirming my hypothesis (im asexual)

How can you say that walking arm in arm is too intimate after coming in my mouth 😭😭😭

fus-mar-hoz

a take I've seen multiple times (and I don't mean to vague but I wasn't able to find an example for this post) from communists here is that academics in particular are unable to produce worthwhile or marxist analyses. There is a double standard at play here in which certain professions and means of intellectual production are seen as irredeemably contaminated (the case of academia and adjacents), and everything else remains unscrutinized. Generally speaking academics are under the same essential ideo-economic pressures as any other profession; there is no line of work in which identifying as a communist and acting on explicit and uncompromising marxist terms will not receive punishment. Focusing on intellectual production, I'd even argue academics experience certain freedoms not available for other avenues, such as social media, where many attempt to contribute to x or y conversation (like I am) and the medium imposes constraints on form and content that are more actively hostile to sustained theoretical argument than anything academic publication requires, e.g. the demand for immediate legibility, for compression into whatever unit circulates, for the affective register that drives engagement. But some people act like academic production is uniquely precluded from value to the broad communist movement or even tainted.

If one could call it that, the marxist "canon" has been built upon, in significant proportion, bourgeois, flawed, and non-materialist sources. This is possible because capitalism as an object is internally heterogeneous and the possibility of its negation and overcoming only exists in the gaps between its parts; no matter how much the ideological and implicit mechanisms work to maintain itself, its inherent contradictions breed the subjective agents that will overthrow it. The philosophy of dialectical materialism argues that consciousness is a reflection of reality, which entails that there are kernels of truth and moments of useful argumentation in any given academic work, no matter the conditions of its production, as long as it has a basis in the observations of reality. Engels used Morgan, Lenin used Clausewitz, Gramsci used Machiavelli, etc. To deny, not even the usefulness, but the possibility itself of usefulness in academic production, effectively perpetuates an ignorance of the world and a negation of reality. It is analogous to the leftcom refusal to work within the worker's unions.