[ 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

View post   
File: 210 KB, 825x1257, 9781608464982-8d020f7efd52cda423bcb0807f852a3e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16620659 No.16620659 [Reply] [Original]

What do you do when a subject interests you theoretically but you cant hold your interest while reading it?
pic related

>> No.16620666

that the author fucking sucks

>> No.16620736

>>16620666
This.
Read a little bit of Trotsky. It was hogwash.
Try a different author, OP.

>> No.16620758

>>16620659
>>16620666
>>16620736
Apart from Lenin's attacks on the Bosheviks as a bourgeois party around 1915 this is the furthest "left" Lenin ever gets, particularly when discussing the capability of *any* proletarian to be a useful delegate. (vide: Ricky Muir, Motoring Enthusiasts Party Australia).

In every other instance Lenin tail ends the bourgeois state formation, and I do mean the bourgeois state formation, such as taking over the Czarist bureaucracy intact in 1917 instead of abolishing it and replacing it with a federation of urban workplace councils. The Geographic soviets were pseudo-parliaments, but government by bourgeois workers parties, such as the SRs, Mensheviks, and Bolsheviks.

Try Alexsander Berkman's ABC, or the KAPD archives / authors. Equivalent time period. Similar credentials. Actual working class supporting positions.

>> No.16620766

What are some good books to understand more about communism?

>> No.16620767

>>16620766
Do you mean soviet-style societies, or do you mean working class attempts to liberate themselves from the value form?

>> No.16620774

>>16620767
Both I guess. More of the latter, but most of my knowledge of the societies themselves come more from Cuban and South American guerilla fuckery.

>> No.16620796

>>16620758
I hear that Bolshevik means majority and Menshevik means minority (in politics) and that Lenin declared his minority the majority when there was a momentary rift between the actual majority.
Is this accurate?

>> No.16620797

>>16620774
Soviet Union:
Andrle
Fitzpatrick S
Simon Pirani

Yugoslavia:
Djilas

Hungary:
Bill Lomax

Actual communisation:
Bill Lomax 1956
1968 (Czechoslovakia) is even more difficult to find stuff on, but the film A Grin Without a Cat should help to orient you.

Personally I don't find discussions of communisation which fail to discuss concrete workplaces in the least useful,
M Dubofsky We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World is a good example in the US of a militant union standing for communisation and its practices.

Whatever you do don't bother reading about communist *parties* for the moment outside of the soviet union: they're largely irrelevant talk shops of the petits bourgeois. The only party whose documents are worth looking at are the KAPD, the real communist party in germany ~1915-1923, who were defeated in class war, and then set about an autopsy of why they failed.

>> No.16620803

>>16620736
>hogwash
what do you mean?

>> No.16620812

>>16620796
This is correct. At an early conference the faction who became the "Bolsheviks" had more delegates on the floor, even though they represented fewer party members.

But both the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks (who remained organised as the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party even though they had separate organisations) were miniscule pieces of shit mostly bourgeois, petits bourgeois and intelligentsia (government bureaucrat).

This is accurate. But then Lenin went and attacked Bolsheviks for Empiriocriticism, and other failings. Basically Lenin was on the outer until he returned in April. He then had to win continuous battles against non-revolutionary centrism inside the bolsheviks.

>> No.16620815

>>16620797
>Dubofsky We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World
Looks good. Thanks

>> No.16620818

>>16620797
Thank you. I'll write these down.

>> No.16620823

>>16620815
If you enjoy it, try Harry Braverman's deskilling hypothesis about peak-Fordism.

>> No.16620838
File: 315 KB, 1024x1024, 003763ae664b34d4ba74284a23ad37b565d15d41.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16620838

>>16620736
>>16620666
You deserve gulag

>> No.16620855

>>16620803
It was meandering hot air. I could blame the translation and the bland compilation, but I got zero out of it.

>>16620823
Assembly lines do deskill. Absolutely

>>16620838
But I know what they are

>> No.16620898
File: 128 KB, 1600x1200, 8a86b6ab8c0a611e28c201367c124f6d4a94a696.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16620898

>>16620855
Explain how we transition to socialism without a state again?

>> No.16620917

>>16620766
kolakowski

>> No.16620961

>>16620855
>Assembly lines do deskill. Absolutely
Braverman's argument goes further to the point that deskilling is the only way to increase the rate of profit in a locked system. What he didn't appreciate was post-Fordism and a new layer of capitalisation would use skill shake-ups temporarily.

>>16620917
Only good to 1950 pretty much. Somewhat tendentious (but note I'm not accusing his bias of corrupting his work). So if you need to deal with the new left, autonomia, anarchism, syndicalism, Zapatista, Kurds, post 1968 Maoism you're fucked.

>> No.16621040
File: 106 KB, 1064x789, 1BB9508F-36A3-404F-BE6E-492A53434E32.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16621040

>>16620898
Naw. This is a tankie thread. You explain how state centralized capitalism (vanguardism or whatever) transitions into socialism

>> No.16621076

>>16620898
You don't, socialism is Marxist. In anarchism, you move directly into communism without the transitional period of socialism.

>> No.16621101

>>16621040
Worker coops

>> No.16621109

>>16621101
Kronstadt. Then Ural-Siberian Method. Then 1953. Then 1956. Then 1956. Then 1968. Then Bosnia.

Nomenklatura have a bad history of eliminating any power held in workers coops.

>> No.16621124
File: 54 KB, 445x600, 5D037ED0-5875-4F55-865D-B7797503F196.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16621124

>>16621101
So that’s it?
No Cockshott currency?

>> No.16621139

>>16621124
Both

>> No.16621309

>>16620659
if you have to force yourself through state and revolution i wouldnt bother with lenins other work, his other shits way more boring

>> No.16621486

Just finish the goddamn book. The brain is a muscle. You need to flex it and work out. You’ll never get smarter by reading 10% of a book and quitting like a faggot middle schooler because it doesn’t read like Bukowski. Maybe this reading stuff isn’t for you

>> No.16621558

>>16621486
But when you force yourself through a book, you don't understand half of it, especially subjects such as this