[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.15591246 [View]
File: 38 KB, 480x631, 67km2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15591246

was Marx an analytic philosopher? where do I start with analytical Marxism?

>> No.15431226 [View]
File: 38 KB, 480x631, 67km2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15431226

what's the correct Marxist view of the incel problem? it bothers me that lefty journos, chapofags and all assorted progressives have so many shitty takes on this issue. if you read any of their articles regarding the problem, they're full of empty platitudes like
>dude it doesn't matter if you're a 40 year old virgin, you HAVE to respect the sanctity of woman's body!
>just have sex incels, worked for me lmao
>no one has the right to love and intimacy, kys incel
all those talking points are completely alien to Marxist doctrine, according to Marxism if the material reality (men's need for love and sex) comes in conflict with ideological forms (women's right to their bodies) then it's generally material reality that emerges victorious and not the other way around. in a similar way, if the idea of private property comes in conflict with the material reality of relative impoverishment of the proletariat, prolonged recessions and economic polarization then it's the idea that's supposed to yield to matter. I don't think those empty talking points will do the trick because ultimately they achieve nothing and the material reality of increasing percentage of adult virgins remains. if you want to overthrow private property because you think it's not conducive to the fullest satisfaction of human needs then why would you not think the same about woman's right to her body when this right is at this point clearly impossible to reconcile with the satisfying life of men?

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]