mambabasa

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] mambabasa 3 points 8 months ago

Well, the thing about Mao allying with the national bourgeoisie is that it's historically-specific to the material conditions of interwar and WW2 China. China was literally fighting against literal genocide and extermination. Like Rojava, sometimes we do have to bite the bullet to fight against our own extermination. What becomes problematic about Maoism's consistent insistence in working with the national bourgeoisie today (as in Nepal and the Philippines) is that they're not fighting against extermination, only merely despotism and Western imperialism. Even if we accept the thesis that the national bourgeoisie exist (which I have reservations against as I think the bourgeoisie has fully internationalized), the national bourgeoisie have no real material interests in fighting despotism as long as their business interests continue. Besides, imperialism today is nothing like what the Chinese national bourgeoisie experienced in China where their property and persons were plundered and executed. Rather, the national bourgeoisie no longer exist as "national" due to the truly international nature of their class and imperialism to them is merely cosmopolitanism.

I think what's useful about Maoism isn't their sketchy stuff about sketchy alliances, but rather how they are able to mobilize large sections of society for self-activity as best exemplified in the Cultural Revolution. People autonomously acted on their own initiative to expand their own degrees of freedom. With Maoism outside China, this happened as well with the Black Panther Party during their decentralized period before they imploded due to authoritarianism. We saw similar in Nepal and the Philippines. Sure, the Communist Party eventually co-opt these autonomous movements (called fellow travelers) into their apparatus, but that they existed autonomously and independently is something. That's quite valuable for any anarchist project.

[–] mambabasa 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Well, there's quite a lot in the Marxist tradition that I think is valuable. For starters, Marx and Engels themselves are still pretty insightful. The Paris Commune forced Marx to reconsider a lot of his previous statism culminating in Civil War in France which describes how a dictatorship of the proletariat could look like, i.e. something radically different and bottom-up from what the later Bolshevik state apparatus eventually looked like. Critic of the Gotha Program is also highly crucial as it develops Marx's conceptions of what lower and higher phase communism could look like, implying that even lower phase communism is already stateless. Engels also has some later revisions like in one place he says that the communist demand for centralization became untenable when it came to light that decentral polities represented working class interests over the central polity. Of interest is also Bakunin's parallel discussions on the Paris Commune and his own critiques of the Gotha Program.

Second International Marxism can also be of interest, but the general perspective towards national chauvinism and revisionism largely weakens the enterprise of Second International Marxism. The strongest currents in the Second International were its left wing led by the likes of Lenin, Kautsky, Luxemburg, and Pannekoek. If you can move past some of the weaker works on the state, there's a lot of value there. Even reading the works on the state, like Lenin's State and Revolution and Kautsky's work on the state can help you develop your own perspective on why you disagree on their positions.

The collapse of the Second International due to national chauvinism in the First World War led to the systematization of new tendencies, namely Bolshevism and Comintern Marxism. This is really where Lenin, Kautsky, Luxemburg, Pannekoek, Bukharin, and now also Bordiga and Gramsci shine. Various debates in the Comintern developed new lines of development on the questions of participation in trade unions, in parties and parliaments, and in questions about valorization and commodity production. Even reading Stalin and Trostky is of interest so you can understand their position and figure out on why they think that and whether you disagree with them.

Bolshevism was largely liquidated by Stalin in favor of a new systematization in what is now known as Marxism-Leninism. Generally, I find very little value in Marxism-Leninism as it was merely the justification for the unconditional defense of the regime in the Soviet Union, Trotskyism has some interesting critiques of the bureaucracy, but largely Trotsky would have been just as brutal a strongman as Stalin, given Trotsky's earlier reputation in Kronstadt.

Left communism is of more interest to me. The Dutch-German left communism, also known as council communism, developed a libertarian communist perspective while keeping within a Marxist tradition. The Italian left communist tradition (often erroneously known as "Bordigism" after Bordiga) is also of interest in their critiques of capitalism in Russia and of liberal democracy. I'll leave it up to you to figure out what you think of their perspective on organic centralism, vanguardism, and the proletarian semi-state.

Some Trotskyists had libertarian flavors even while hating anarchism, like Draper. Post-Trotskyism like Dunayevskaya's Marxism-Humanism and C. L. R. James's work has libertarian undertones, especially with their critique of state capitalism in the Soviet Union and forwarding new articulations of humanism and socialist democracy. Posadism is a bit of a bastard child of Trotskyism, due to the whole UFOlogy, nuclear war accelerationism, and dolphin stuff, but Posadas still developed interesting work in technology and socialist-futurism. Another post-Trotskyist was Guérin who wanted to synthesize Marxism and anarchism and develop libertarian socialism. Bookchin could probably also be considered a post-Trotskyist as he did carry over his Trotskyist predispositions on the bureaucracy in his anarchist period. There are probably a lot of other Trotskyist tendencies that are worth looking at, but these are at the top of my head.

Western Marxism also has quite a number of interesting figures. Lukács looked into reification. I have been meaning to engage with his work more, but haven't yet, but his work will be important for working on reification and class consciousness. Lefebvre is also particularly interesting because he developed a "right to the city," arguing that just like workers make value, citizens make the city in their everyday actions, and that just as workers are entitled to the full value of their work, citizens have right to the city and all that entails.

While I am dismissive of Marxism-Leninism, I have a more positive opinion on Maoism. Mao himself synthesized Marxism with Eastern philosophies, particularly so with his notion of dualism in contradictions. While Mao was a supporter of Stalin, his critiques of the Soviet Union has some value. Mao is interesting because he truly believed in an almost anarchistic faith of empowering the people to emancipate themselves. Maoist China was capable of truly historic levels of mobilizations that was unprecedented before it and no mobilization after him can compare to the truly massive scale of social mobilization. His greatest mobilization was the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, partly a scheme to get rid of his rivals in the Party and also an authentic desire to empower and mobilize society. Mao is also contradictory, as he suppressed the most radical wings of the Cultural Revolution and put his own project down the path of capitalist restoration.

The most important Maoists outside of China were I think the Black Panther Party. Ideologues of the Black Panther Party fused Marxism and Maoism with the Black radical tradition to create a specific ideological program in the imperial core. Unfortunately, the Black Panther Party was beset with authoritarianism and misogyny, which brought its ruin. Black anarchism and Black anarchic radicalism (BAR) were developed in both to reclaim and defend the radical heritage of the Black Panther Party while rejecting the authoritarianism and misogyny.

There are, of course, other Maoists like those in the Philippines, Nepal, India, and perhaps the eradicated Indonesian PKI (which took points from MLMZT instead of Maoism), but generally I find their theories to be quite vulgar. However, they're clearly doing something right as all were able to mobilize significant portions of society for a protracted people's war. There are some Maoist thinkers that I respect, like Moufawad-Paul, Deng-Yuan, Pao-yu whose writing are all intellectually stimulating even if one disagrees with it. Unlike many Maoists I've met, they are not intellectually dishonest. Other Maoist parties have also develop criticisms of the People's Republic of China and other so-called socialist states, calling them social imperialist and/or revisionist, which are useful I think. I would not suggest Sison as I feel his writing is highly dishonest and vulgar.

For the de-Stalinized Marxism-Leninism, you could look into Lagman whose critique of Sison brings Philippine Marxism-Leninism back to Marxist and Leninist fundamentals and reworks the Rejectionist tradition back into the Marxist fold. While his Counter-Theses are in English, unfortunately his Theses are in Tagalog, so his reconstructive program for Marxism-Leninism has yet to be translated. Davis is also interesting because her de-Stalinization brought her to develop abolition democracy as a framework. It is still Marxist to an extent, but less explicitly so.

[–] mambabasa 5 points 8 months ago
[–] mambabasa 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] mambabasa 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Praying for a free Palestine in our lifetime.

[–] mambabasa 3 points 8 months ago

Good to know then.

[–] mambabasa 0 points 8 months ago

My opposition to nuclear isn't merely because it is dirty, deadly, and costly but also because it relies on a specific technology of power to implement, a specific technology of power that has always been highly authoritarian. As part of the green movement of my country, we also push for denuclearization precisely because the 300mW nuclear power plant was built without democratic oversight. (Imagine risking non-zero chance of meltdown for a measly 300 mW!) Democratic movements are more likely to oppose nuclear energy, so it's no wonder countries who are poor in democracy like China, USA, Russia, and France build and maintain nuclear power plants despite the public opposition.

Not only that, but nuclear power fuels the valorization process under the capitalist mode of production. Even if the whole world shifts to nuclear energy, the same technology of power that constructed the nuclear power plants would also go about oppressing people.

Nuclear energy can only operate under a specifically authoritarian technology of power. A free society—whether that be anarchist, communist, or radically democratic—simply cannot use the violence needed to construct a nuclear power plant.

But you probably don't care about that. For you, this technology of power is probably a desideratum as long as you get your damn iPhones and airconditioning.

[–] mambabasa 3 points 8 months ago

Haven't read those but I greatly enjoyed his four books, the Mars Trilogy and the additional Martian short story collection. Quite a bit of Mars Trilogy was inspired by the political philosophy of Murray Bookchin, now appreciated for anticipating a lot of the political philosophy behind solarpunk and degrowth.

[–] mambabasa 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Pro-nuke energy is getting more and more indefensible after each disaster. May I remind you that literally nobody knows how to deal with long term storage of nuclear waste. No, dumping them in bunkers is not a long-term solution and never was sustainable.

New developments in nuclear technology like with small modular reactors would produce more nuclear waste than conventional reactors. Not to mention that there isn't enough uranium in the entire Earth for the whole world to shift to nuclear. It's dangerous, expensive, and its waste is also dangerous and expensive.

 

For the ISE blog: Mason Herson-Hord explains the unfolding genocide against Palestinians in Gaza through the history of Israel's radical right's ascension to power. "Over the course of these decades, there was a resulting shift in Israeli political consciousness where the historical necessity of the Nakba for the creation of the Jewish state transitioned from a truth to be masked or denied to one to be embraced and carried forward into Israel’s expansionist future."

I am hesitant to suggest a “descent into fascism” narrative about Israel. The State of Israel has always been fascistic in relation to its Palestinian subjects. In the entirety of Israel’s modern history, there were only a scarce few months where at least hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were not living under its martial law and military dictatorship: between the end of apartheid military rule over the subject class of Palestinians remaining after the Nakba in what became Israel (1949-1966) and the capture of the other Palestinian territories and the creation of the Israeli Military Governorate (1967 onwards).32 These systems of Israeli military rule over Palestinians can only be adequately described as totalitarian: through 1994, they entailed complete bans on any Palestinian political activity or freedom of expression; incarceration (often without trial or even charges) at rates far exceeding anything seen in Soviet gulags or the American prison-industrial complex; and state control over all areas of life through checkpoints, secret police, kangaroo courts, torture, and surveillance.33 Taken together with the racial ideology of the state, it is difficult to draw clear boundaries between the Israeli occupation regime and other fascist states historically.

That being said, a qualitative shift in Israeli civil society and political life has nevertheless been underway, as the fascism that characterizes the occupation has metastasized within the body politic on the other side of the Green Line. A campaign is being waged to eliminate checks on the government’s power, criminalize dissent, and strip so-called “enemies of the state” of civil and political rights. Netanyahu has led this effort with increasingly dark and fascistic language, moving the needle towards dictatorship ever further. In 2018, for example, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that “In the Middle East, and in many parts of the world, there is a simple truth: There is no place for the weak. The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history while the strong, for good or for ill, survive. The strong are respected, and alliances are made with the strong, and in the end peace is made with the strong.”

The evidence at this point is, in my view, unmistakable: Israel is a fascist society, in the classical sense. It is not merely governed by populist right-wing would-be authoritarians, or fond of dog whistle racism, or other qualities characterizing the right-wing nationalist resurgence internationally that is often loosely given the label “fascist.” It is the real deal. Fascism in Israel has a mass character—there are violent street movements attacking enemies of the state while carrying out the settler project of ethnic cleansing block by block with the state’s simultaneous approval and (im)plausible deniability. And the end goal of this fascism is the expulsion of all Palestinians, killing all who refuse to leave, and the violent suppression of all democratic elements of Israeli society who would object to this.

10
submitted 1 year ago by mambabasa to c/abolition
 

Prison industrial complex abolition is “a political vision with the goal of eliminating imprisonment, policing, and surveillance and creating lasting alternatives to punishment and imprisonment." — Critical Resistance

Abolition requires us examine and do away with the ways in which all systems and institutions replicate methods of surveillance and punishment as a means of social control. Resources in this section cover fundamental concepts of abolition and histories of what it looks like in practice.

 

Najwan Darwish: Who Remembers the Armenians?

I remember them
and I ride the nightmare bus with them
each night
and my coffee, this morning
I'm drinking it with them

You, murderer ―
Who remembers you?

Sophia Armen: Who Remembers the Palestinians? (after Najwan Darwish)

We do
and I ride the bus to the Nakba protest with them
each day
and my soorj, this morning
We are drinking it with them

You, genocider—
Who remembers you?
 

Philosophers like Murray Bookchin argued that the natural world tends towards greater and greater diversity. Now scientists in collaboration with philosophers argue that this tendency to complexify could constitute a natural law of the universe.

Significance The universe is replete with complex evolving systems, but the existing macroscopic physical laws do not seem to adequately describe these systems. Recognizing that the identification of conceptual equivalencies among disparate phenomena were foundational to developing previous laws of nature, we approach a potential “missing law” by looking for equivalencies among evolving systems. We suggest that all evolving systems—including but not limited to life—are composed of diverse components that can combine into configurational states that are then selected for or against based on function. We then identify the fundamental sources of selection—static persistence, dynamic persistence, and novelty generation—and propose a time-asymmetric law that states that the functional information of a system will increase over time when subjected to selection for function(s).

Abstract Physical laws—such as the laws of motion, gravity, electromagnetism, and thermodynamics—codify the general behavior of varied macroscopic natural systems across space and time. We propose that an additional, hitherto-unarticulated law is required to characterize familiar macroscopic phenomena of our complex, evolving universe. An important feature of the classical laws of physics is the conceptual equivalence of specific characteristics shared by an extensive, seemingly diverse body of natural phenomena. Identifying potential equivalencies among disparate phenomena—for example, falling apples and orbiting moons or hot objects and compressed springs—has been instrumental in advancing the scientific understanding of our world through the articulation of laws of nature. A pervasive wonder of the natural world is the evolution of varied systems, including stars, minerals, atmospheres, and life. These evolving systems appear to be conceptually equivalent in that they display three notable attributes: 1) They form from numerous components that have the potential to adopt combinatorially vast numbers of different configurations; 2) processes exist that generate numerous different configurations; and 3) configurations are preferentially selected based on function. We identify universal concepts of selection—static persistence, dynamic persistence, and novelty generation—that underpin function and drive systems to evolve through the exchange of information between the environment and the system. Accordingly, we propose a “law of increasing functional information”: The functional information of a system will increase (i.e., the system will evolve) if many different configurations of the system undergo selection for one or more functions.

 

A team of physicists, astrobiologists, and philosophers developed a thesis that they hope to be accepted as a new fundamental law of the universe, the "law of increasing functional information." Many of us familiar with Murray Bookchin's work on social ecological philosophy already know that nature does tend towards increasing variety and diversity. Wong et al. argue that this law of increasing functional information applies to not only the metabolic processes on Earth, but to phenomena all over the universe, a whole universe-wide drama of evolutionary selection of functions that evolve to develop more and more functions and therefore information.

I think it might be interesting for integrating this theory into social ecology and find out what dialogue could emerge from it.

Significance The universe is replete with complex evolving systems, but the existing macroscopic physical laws do not seem to adequately describe these systems. Recognizing that the identification of conceptual equivalencies among disparate phenomena were foundational to developing previous laws of nature, we approach a potential “missing law” by looking for equivalencies among evolving systems. We suggest that all evolving systems—including but not limited to life—are composed of diverse components that can combine into configurational states that are then selected for or against based on function. We then identify the fundamental sources of selection—static persistence, dynamic persistence, and novelty generation—and propose a time-asymmetric law that states that the functional information of a system will increase over time when subjected to selection for function(s).

Abstract Physical laws—such as the laws of motion, gravity, electromagnetism, and thermodynamics—codify the general behavior of varied macroscopic natural systems across space and time. We propose that an additional, hitherto-unarticulated law is required to characterize familiar macroscopic phenomena of our complex, evolving universe. An important feature of the classical laws of physics is the conceptual equivalence of specific characteristics shared by an extensive, seemingly diverse body of natural phenomena. Identifying potential equivalencies among disparate phenomena—for example, falling apples and orbiting moons or hot objects and compressed springs—has been instrumental in advancing the scientific understanding of our world through the articulation of laws of nature. A pervasive wonder of the natural world is the evolution of varied systems, including stars, minerals, atmospheres, and life. These evolving systems appear to be conceptually equivalent in that they display three notable attributes: 1) They form from numerous components that have the potential to adopt combinatorially vast numbers of different configurations; 2) processes exist that generate numerous different configurations; and 3) configurations are preferentially selected based on function. We identify universal concepts of selection—static persistence, dynamic persistence, and novelty generation—that underpin function and drive systems to evolve through the exchange of information between the environment and the system. Accordingly, we propose a “law of increasing functional information”: The functional information of a system will increase (i.e., the system will evolve) if many different configurations of the system undergo selection for one or more functions.

0
Free Palestine! (slrpnk.net)
submitted 1 year ago by mambabasa to c/anarchism
 
 

Vietnam 2021, the mood in the air seems to be that of optimism. The government's relentless pursuit of a Zero-COVID strategy has won them widespread approval both domestically and internationally. The economy managed to squeeze out positive growth whereas many of its neighbours suffered a decline from the pandemic. Yet underneath all this bravado, one could sense that something is amiss. There's this nagging feeling that no one seems to be able to put a finger on. Almost as if, there is a spectre haunting Vietnam, the spectre of communism — the true kind without any bells and whistles.

As Emma Goldman astutely observed, there was no communism in the USSR. The same can be said of present-day Vietnam. The party in power — the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) — has long strayed from the path to communism.

Before the current party leader assumes his third term (2020–2025), he formulated an ambitious road map, in which by 2045 Vietnam would become a “developed” country, on par with Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. To us radicals, this is a betrayal to the working class, indigenous people, and marginalised groups who sacrificed so much for Vietnam's revolution. But as Marxist-Leninists with bright eyes and adamant conviction would tell you, that's all part of the plan™ and 2045 will be the long-awaited year when Vietnam finally advances to a classless, moneyless, and stateless, country.​​​​​​​

However, a closer look at Vietnam's society today would show that the plan is but an illusion, and the promises are mere justification for the ruling class and capitalist class to continue sucking the life out of Vietnam for a while longer. The difference between what the party elites preach and what they allow to happen in reality is that between day and night.

 
153
Who would have guessed... (media.kbin.social)
submitted 1 year ago by mambabasa to c/antiwork
 

One of the many stereotypes included in the generally negative – occasionally Romantic – representations and discourses that have burdened the Romani people is the alleged existence of a natural link between the ‘Gypsy’ way of life and anarchism. This article studies the extent of an actual historical relationship between anarchism as a political worldview and the ‘Gypsy’-Roma ethnic status beyond reductionist stereotypes. It investigates, on the one hand, the agency of Romani subjects in the labour movement and anarchism by means of a case study of Spain in the interwar years, and, on the other, it examines the cases of a number of European emigrants who chose to closely link anarchism as a political option to a Romani identity in their struggle against capitalism and fascism. Both sets of case studies are used to reflect on the political nature of racial-ethnic identity constructions, to question the dilemmas of cultural appropriation and to propose a dense analysis that reveals the historicity of identities of this type.

28
Stop blaming (i.imgur.com)
submitted 1 year ago by mambabasa to c/antiwork
 
18
immigrants (i.ibb.co)
submitted 1 year ago by mambabasa to c/antiwork
 
view more: ‹ prev next ›