Personally I think it’s silly as hell. Qualia is obviously a biological component of experience… Not some weird thing that science will never be able to put in to words.
I’ve been listening to a lot of psychology podcasts lately and for some reason people seem obsessed with the idea despite you needing to make the same logical leaps to believe it as any sort of mysticism… Maybe I am just tripping idk
I read theory dawg… just not all of capital cuz its long :X
I’ve read plenty of Lenin, Marx, Baudrillard, Debord, Leslie Feinberg, etc… I am not post marxist… I am simply post-Marx since he was 200 years ago. He wasn’t wrong, he simply just didn’t predict the completely corrupting nature of capitalism as emergence is basically unpredictable…
Marx is great at diagnosing the problem with Capitalism during industrialization. He was incapable of predicting the “Spectacle” as Guy Debord puts it as it emerged from modern media.
Dont discount modern thinkers! They love Marx. They utilize Marx to help us identify the contradictions of today because Labor Theory of Value doesn’t apply to the average worker who has literally zero tangible labor output.
Disregarding EITHER is dogmatic and ANTI Marxist in principle!
Lol He literally does describe the corrupting nature though! In the work that you said you read!
“All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.” - The Communist Manifesto
I don’t disregard modern authors, but they are often just describing aspects of what Marx was able to coalese into a fairly comprehensive whole. I have read all of them as well. I don’t reject their conclusions, but if you think that the ‘average worker’ has zero tangible labor output, you are being very myopically first world to the international economic system.
Please don’t throw around words like ‘dogmatic’ if you haven’t actually read all of the supposed ‘dogma’.
Thats fine, maybe modern authors put Marx into Modern English. What you wrote does not really seem to encapsulate the full message found within the Society of the Spectacle. The idea of alienation from the idea of labor itself. Yes the we rest on the laurels of the entire “third world” that actually produces what we consume, but white collar workers in the first world are literally alienated from doing productive labor to begin with. Its a complete non starter. We humans yearn to labor, and we Westerners are prevented from laboring toward anything productive.
There are plenty of factory jobs in the U.S.
They suck, are mostly second and third shift, and do not pay very well, but they do exist. I know because I have worked them most of my life. Labouring towards anything productive is not possible under capitalism, as you will always be laboring to buy porky another yacht.
The Society of Spectacle goes into the modern formulation of Marx’s principles of alienation, and what those dissolving ties look like, as we literally dissolve our ties with reality itself in order to propagate capitalist accumulation.
I dont even know what we are arguing about man. I am probably one of the most dogmatic marxists you can find, I just dont think dogmatism is virtuous so I try to avoid it in my arguments. I love hexbear, nowhere else on the internet would I have this conversation and it reminds me of my demsucc days lol
I am arguing that you need to finish reading Capital lol and not just vibe it out, because the principles that exist within it are still incredibly relevant to the modern economic formation. That’s it.
I think the end result is the same if I end up just telling everyone to read Capital anyways.
I think it is hypocritical to tell someone to read something you haven’t read yourself imo, but this conversation has started circling and I’m not a strict Maoist so you do you I guess.
I read Capital (in laymen form) when i was in my teens and have internalized it into my later years. Sure I could’ve internalized it better, but “look toward some form capital” as some form of disbelief has worked for me for many years.
Googling “If Marx was correct about LTV then what prevents marketing people from getting paid” is basically Vol 2. I don’t need to have read all several volumes of Capital, for the some reason. Marx didnt have Marx when he was writing capital: for the human condition, Capital is blatantly correct. At least to myself that is true.
I concede I am too far drunk to elaborate though
BECAUSE OF CAPTALISM
gottem