deadacc

4y

https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-cia-reads-french-theory-on-the-intellectual-labor-of-dismantling-the-cultural-left/

the CIA actually reads f***ing Lacan and Foucalt lmfao

also this definitely valorized the fact to me that post-left intellectuals are an organized op to make marxism seem contentious on falsified grounds

also this bit "The vocationalization of higher education is another tool used for this end since it aims at transforming people into techno-scientific cogs in the capitalist apparatus rather than autonomous citizens with reliable tools for social critique. The theory mandarins of the CIA therefore praise the efforts on the part of the French government to “push students into business and technical courses.” They also point to the contributions made by major publishing houses like Grasset, the mass media and the vogue of American culture in pushing forward their post-socialist and anti-egalitarian platform."

has interesting extrapolations if you consider the position of intellectuals in modern american society

fun guy

4y

hot take: theres no reason to read Foucalt as a communist

f*** that guy fr

deadacc

4y

literally pushed by the CIA around the world to create division lmfao

"The CIA’s reading of French theory should give us pause, then, to reconsider the radical chic veneer that has accompanied much of its Anglophone reception. According to a stagist conception of progressive history (which is usually blind to its implicit teleology), the work of figures like Foucault, Derrida and other cutting-edge French theorists is often intuitively affiliated with a form of profound and sophisticated critique that presumably far surpasses anything found in the socialist, Marxist or anarchist traditions. It is certainly true and merits emphasis that the Anglophone reception of French theory, as John McCumber has aptly pointed out, had important political implications as a pole of resistance to the false political neutrality, the safe technicalities of logic and language, or the direct ideological conformism operative in the McCarthy-supported traditions of Anglo-American philosophy. However, the theoretical practices of figures who turned their back on what Cornelius Castoriadis called the tradition of radical critique—meaning anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist resistance—surely contributed to the ideological drift away from transformative politics. According to the spy agency itself, post-Marxist French theory directly contributed to the CIA’s cultural program of coaxing the left toward the right, while discrediting anti-imperialism and anti-capitalism, thereby creating an intellectual environment in which their imperial projects could be pursued unhindered by serious critical scrutiny from the intelligentsia."

Scratchin Mamba

4y

Every time somebody dies i'm utterly disgusted by the fact that Henry Kissinger outlived that person

deadacc

4y

https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-cia-reads-french-theory-on-the-intellectual-labor-of-dismantling-the-cultural-left/

the CIA actually reads f***ing Lacan and Foucalt lmfao

also this definitely valorized the fact to me that post-left intellectuals are an organized op to make marxism seem contentious on falsified grounds

also this bit "The vocationalization of higher education is another tool used for this end since it aims at transforming people into techno-scientific cogs in the capitalist apparatus rather than autonomous citizens with reliable tools for social critique. The theory mandarins of the CIA therefore praise the efforts on the part of the French government to “push students into business and technical courses.” They also point to the contributions made by major publishing houses like Grasset, the mass media and the vogue of American culture in pushing forward their post-socialist and anti-egalitarian platform."

has interesting extrapolations if you consider the position of intellectuals in modern american society

SEGA GOON

4y

@Womanpuncher69 - you asked me a while back but I didn't have access to KTT on my laptop

The faction ban was a civil-war method of keeping discipline. It is foolish to use it for a normal party in the west in the year 2022. A lot of the splits in communist parties happen because a faction ban is in place. Factions can relieve pressure inside the party. If they are banned, there is no place for dissent and the only logical conclusion is to leave the party or found a new one whenever a major argument arises.

That being said, factions aren't ideal of course, since they show disunity and can lead to clique-thinking and clientele-politics. I think a soft faction ban is enough - there should be no formal factions, but informal factions will always appear in any given group of a certain size because not everyone will have the same opinion. At the same time, people with similar interests and opinions within a group will find together and work together.

One argument is that formal factions are better against secrecy than informal factions are, but IMO the social unity of the party is a huge asset that should be preserved. The risk of formal factions leading into hardened battle lines among members is too high.

The real importance of democratic centralism isn't the faction ban, but the discipline behind democratic centralism: Diversity in discussion, unity in action.

Marxists of the Second International had full freedom of speech and publishing to have political debates openly in publications like 'Die Neue Zeit (New Times), not internal charades to be shepherded by party full-timers. As a result, the depth of Marxist intellectual debate was far richer during this time than any other time in history. Lenin proudly displayed a complete set of Die Neue Zeit" behind his desk in his office. Engels counter-posed the political unity and vibrant debate of the German SPD with the political disarray and theoretical orthodoxy of British Marxist sects, like the Social Democratic Federation: "a society that is Marxist in principle, but anti-Marxist in practice", with "a Marxist program, but the tactics of an exclusive sect".

Prior to 1921, Lenin was definitely not "considered an outsider" to Marxist orthodoxy - in fact, forcefully arguing his orthodoxy was key to Lenin's influential power. In his own words, Lenin was "aggressively unoriginal". Lenin's writings can be divided into two periods: first, constantly citing Kautsky as an appeal to an authority of orthodox Marxism, and second, constantly denouncing Kautsky for reneging on orthodox Marxist beliefs which still hold true today.

Surprisingly to some, even Stalin upheld an orthodox Marxist program, referring to Kautsky as "an outstanding theoretician of Social-Democracy" and supporting the orthodox Marxist conception of a socialist party as the "union (merger) of the working-class movement with socialism".

What changed in 1921? A popular slogan of Orthodox Marxist organization was that a socialist party is "a revolutionary party, not a revolution-making party". A better translation of "revolution-making party" would be an insurrectionist party, of the Blanquist model denounced by Marx and Engels. An insurrectionist party is a conspiratorial organization with military-like discipline to give the leadership power to plan mass actions.

The Bolshevik party, all the way up to 1917, maintained an open, democratic structure instead - in fact, when plotting the October Insurrection, the date for the uprising was leaked to the bourgeois press days in advance. In 1921, however, frustrated by the failure of socialist revolutions in the west, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and others supported measures to transform the mass Communist parties into exactly this kind of insurrectionist party to better lead the revolutionary situations to come:

The Communist Party must be built on the basis of an iron proletarian centralism. To lead the working class successfully in the long and hard civil wars that have broken out, the Communist Party must create an iron military order in ts own ranks.

This decision to impose "iron military order" to prepare for insurrection could have been justified in the conditions of 1921, with massive 100,000 member plus Communist parties and mass social unrest. Today however, this party model is the core reason for the massive medley of "Leninist" sects that have doomed socialist politics to irrelevance for more than half a century. Despite each sect claiming to uphold the one true "orthodox" interpretation of Marxist thought, the much prophesied dialectical transformation from irrelevance into its opposite has not occurred for a single one of them.

The most valuable lesson - let theoretical debates on the history of the USSR, philosophy, economics and the like take place in open publications, and instead of forming sects based on the "correct opinion on Trotsky or Stalin", organize mass Communist parties based on common action, concrete proposals on how to change the world.

A question that arises: When there is diversity in discussion and unity in action, when will the next discussion arise after an action has been comittted? Presumably, this must occur only when the situation changes - but when is the threshold for a qualitative change in a situation met? If it's a situation you want to urgently discuss again, probably sooner rather than later. This is something where the party members must show a lot of nuance and humility, otherwise the entire principle of democratic centralism falls apart.

deadacc

4y

https://thephilosophicalsalon.com/the-cia-reads-french-theory-on-the-intellectual-labor-of-dismantling-the-cultural-left/

the CIA actually reads f***ing Lacan and Foucalt lmfao

also this definitely valorized the fact to me that post-left intellectuals are an organized op to make marxism seem contentious on falsified grounds

also this bit "The vocationalization of higher education is another tool used for this end since it aims at transforming people into techno-scientific cogs in the capitalist apparatus rather than autonomous citizens with reliable tools for social critique. The theory mandarins of the CIA therefore praise the efforts on the part of the French government to “push students into business and technical courses.” They also point to the contributions made by major publishing houses like Grasset, the mass media and the vogue of American culture in pushing forward their post-socialist and anti-egalitarian platform."

has interesting extrapolations if you consider the position of intellectuals in modern american society

space0cadet

4y

Just got hit with the
"You drink starbucks? Do you have an iPhone?"
"I was homeless, no one cared about when I was homeless, why should I care about the homeless right now?"

Love arguing with random f***ers cause my name is 'Communism' on csgo or whatever game im playing

Lein

4y

What is the solution to worldwide population decline? This question has been bugging since it's come out that Japan shrunk by over half a million people in the last year. Poor countries, rich countries, liberal countries, conservative countries, all declining. It seems problematic to have a mostly old/aging population imo, but what do yall think

Scratchin Mamba

4y

But this isn't happening in all countries at all tho, the global world population is still very much increasing

The answer to that question however is unironically for them mfs to get some b****es, but fr tho alienation and its impact on people's social life is on another level in countries like japan, there's not any quick solution i'm afraid

Lein

4y

I should've clarified I mean that population growth is declining everywhere