studying w/o books

[CELMX]

I understand that most revolutionaries these days must be very good at self-education.
however...i suck ass at that.

You see, I try borrowing numorous books, but I'm such a slow reader (and bad reader) that I don't get anything out of reading Lenin, Marx, Engels, wtv. (lol the anarchist authors are much easier to read than these guys)

anyways, i'm not much of a visual learner, and more of an auditory, and learn best with a socratic teaching method. However, whenever I discuss something with my history teacher, he ends EVERYTHING with "and, remember, this is all utopian, and never works in real life" and goes on a tangent about how marxism is shit. :cursing: He gives good information, but this just fucking pisses me off.

Any suggestions of ways to study leftism OTHER than reading books? (which fails for me) I mean, revleft is fine, but I definitely need more sources than a fucking forum.

[Manifesto]

Talk to the people that you borrow the books from? If they are the ones with those books they should know things, right?

[bailey_187]

You can listen to lectures/talks both in real life or online

You can dowload Bob Avakian's talks here
http://rwor.org/avakian/Avakian-audio.html
You could also listen and watch Avakians Revolution Talk here:
http://revolutiontalk.net/films/

I know Avakian gets a lot of critcism, but these talks are good


You can also download talks and lectures here:
http://www.resistancemp3.org.uk/


There are also presentations and videos by Marxist influenced African nationalist group Uhuru here:
http://uhurunews.com/video

If you want to learn Economics this guy has lots of videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/brendanmcooney

I dont know what its like where you live, but if there are any socialist groups in your area(if even you disagree with them) go to any events, public meetings etc they hold.

[CELMX]

Manifesto: err...librarians??!

[bailey_187]

This sample of a DVD lecture by Rick Wolff called "Capitalism hits the fan" is good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8ZH1ejtIFo

I think the whole DVD is for sale on Amazon (they dont sell it for UK region DVD players so i cant get).

It might be good for and seems easy to understand.

[Manifesto]

Manifesto: err...librarians??!
Oh sorry lol. I usually do not hear people say "borrow" when they check out books and I am used to libraries sucking and not having anything other than biographies.

[black_tambourine]

Listen to/watch David Harvey's lectures on Capital:

http://davidharvey.org/

Ritalin might also help.

[Искра]

The best way to learn something is to join some organisation. When you join organisation you meet people who have similar ideas as you and you can learn from somebody.

[Drace]

Michael Parenti and Noam Chomsky are famous lecturers and both good leftists as well.
You can find a lot of their lectures on Youtube.

I personally favor Parenti's style.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZTrY3TQpzw&feature=related


"and, remember, this is all utopian, and never works in real life" and goes on a tangent about how marxism is shit. http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/cursing.gif He gives good information, but this just fucking pisses me off.Ask him what he thinks Marxism is, his probably way off. Karl Marx was a philosopher and he spent much of his life to this. He wrote books and books on the subject and on his theories. Tell him to go read Marx before saying such stupid shit. He probably only heard one or two things about communism. He has no right to say Marx's work is shit.

And you really shouldn't get mad if he has points that you cant answer. Follow reason not faith. Just educate yourself better for next time.

[New Tet]

I understand that most revolutionaries these days must be very good at self-education.
however...i suck ass at that.

You see, I try borrowing numorous books, but I'm such a slow reader (and bad reader) that I don't get anything out of reading Lenin, Marx, Engels, wtv. (lol the anarchist authors are much easier to read than these guys)

anyways, i'm not much of a visual learner, and more of an auditory, and learn best with a socratic teaching method. However, whenever I discuss something with my history teacher, he ends EVERYTHING with "and, remember, this is all utopian, and never works in real life" and goes on a tangent about how marxism is shit. :cursing: He gives good information, but this just fucking pisses me off.

Any suggestions of ways to study leftism OTHER than reading books? (which fails for me) I mean, revleft is fine, but I definitely need more sources than a fucking forum.


"There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits." --K. Marx
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p2.htm

IOW, the work is cut out for you if you want to be an effective revolutionary. Before you "teach yourself" anything about Marxism, try to learn or "teach yourself" to read well.

If the problem is a form of dyslexia then I recommend while you seek professional help you borrow from your local library audio books about other important subjects like general science, biology, history, the humanities in general, etc. Maybe listening to the Odyssey by Homer, for example, on CD will encourage to find a primer level book that will help you put it all in context. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfJ7GmTV26g

[CELMX]

New Tet: sometimes (wait, no, all the time) you can be a huge asshole

Everyone else: thank you very much!:) Yeah, and to Jurko, good idea, i really need to get myself in some organizations...haha, other than FNB ;)

[New Tet]

New Tet: sometimes (wait, no, all the time) you can be a huge asshole

Everyone else: thank you very much!:) Yeah, and to Jurko, good idea, i really need to get myself in some organizations...haha, other than FNB ;)

How is that an appropriate answer if I just got done giving you some useful advice?

[CELMX]

How is that an appropriate answer if I just got done giving you some useful advice?

yes, saying that i'm dyslexic, need help, and extremely stupid is helpful (>.>)
oh, and also, that section about odyssey, very very relevant :rolleyes:

[StoneFrog]

I have dyslexia, i use to find it really hard to read and such, but now i can read writings by marx and such. I thank the internet + spell check on forums, actually helped A LOT! I think lack of people i know that are leftists, i was forced to read, its the only real way for me to learn. If you know people who share the same ideas or belong to an organization its much easier, you can talk to them. With Marx i think the best way is take it in small chunks, read a bit then just take a break and let your brain go over what you read. I do that with most things i read mainly cos if i don't its becomes one big mess in my head.

OT: why did they make dyslexia such a hard word to spell?

[New Tet]

yes, saying that i'm dyslexic, need help, and extremely stupid is helpful (>.>)

Where did I say that you were dyslexic and where that you were "extremely stupid"?


oh, and also, that section about odyssey, very very relevant

Now I'm going to be a real asshole by being brutally honest: What I posted was relevant in the context of what I was saying: Audio books and videos can help you if reading is a great difficulty.

It appears, though, that what you are is not dyslexic but mentally lazy. Too lazy, in fact, to want to improve your reading and tackle the hard work required to learn about Marxism specifically and socialism in general.

Oh, and BTW, the reason you find "anarchist authors" easier to read than Marx, etc., is because the ones you must have read aim to treat you like a dumb ass, someone unwilling to make any real effort to acquire a sound education. Stop looking for a shortcut to edifying knowledge, it don't exist.

[RHIZOMES]

I have a similar problem with books. I like reading a lot of short theoretical articles and lectures on the internet to compensate for that. And this site helps nicely, a lot of my current views I gained by osmosis from this site, however the bullshit (which revleft has a lot of) was easier to spot since I saw real-life practice as well.

That's the story to my self-education.

[redarmyleader]

First let me say the tired-out line (yet true) that reading is fundamental. There is no way that the proletariat and specially oppressed can with without its vanguard having an ever-expanding and deeper understanding of Marxism. Without theoretical understanding of Marxism there is no way to make out what your real experiences in struggle mean, nor can you ensure that your activities lead to the working class to take power in its own name. Unfortunately comrades, there is no shortcut to being a revolutionary (its a lot of work that ain't always fun).

Remember that when your reading Marxism your not in class. There is no time limit. If you read slow, that is okay. Take it step by step. Oh, and do not feel obliged to read a book front to back. When reading a new book I look at the index and see what chapter I would be most interested in. I really appreciated remark by with no. mute. I have a number of people in my organization you have learning disabilities (dyslexia, ADD) but have been able to grasp Marxism. Of course, they have an organization that take their political education seriously and put both action and theory at the top of the list.

Organization for revolutionaries are essential. That is if they are the right type.

And not to be rude or sound sectarian, but I highly recommend anyone to NOT listen to Bob Avakian speak. It is the most nonsense in the world. I listened to it and could not believe he was actually serious. And Noam Chomsky is a bore. Everytime I hear him I am made to remember that he is a professor, and like all good ones really knows how to put you to sleep. Though he is not worse than Avakian, who clearly lacks any really intellectual understanding of anything, unless by intellectual you mean whatever you can pull out of your ass.

Oh, and I wish to ask new tet to stop being an asshole please. It is really not helpful to people who are asking for help.

[New Tet]

First let me say the tired-out line (yet true) that reading is fundamental. There is no way that the proletariat and specially oppressed can with without its vanguard having an ever-expanding and deeper understanding of Marxism. Without theoretical understanding of Marxism there is no way to make out what your real experiences in struggle mean, nor can you ensure that your activities lead to the working class to take power in its own name. Unfortunately comrades, there is no shortcut to being a revolutionary (its a lot of work that ain't always fun).

Remember that when your reading Marxism your not in class. There is no time limit. If you read slow, that is okay. Take it step by step. Oh, and do not feel obliged to read a book front to back. When reading a new book I look at the index and see what chapter I would be most interested in. I really appreciated remark by with no. mute. I have a number of people in my organization you have learning disabilities (dyslexia, ADD) but have been able to grasp Marxism. Of course, they have an organization that take their political education seriously and put both action and theory at the top of the list.

Organization for revolutionaries are essential. That is if they are the right type.

And not to be rude or sound sectarian, but I highly recommend anyone to NOT listen to Bob Avakian speak. It is the most nonsense in the world. I listened to it and could not believe he was actually serious. And Noam Chomsky is a bore. Everytime I hear him I am made to remember that he is a professor, and like all good ones really knows how to put you to sleep. Though he is not worse than Avakian, who clearly lacks any really intellectual understanding of anything, unless by intellectual you mean whatever you can pull out of your ass.

Oh, and I wish to ask new tet to stop being an asshole please. It is really not helpful to people who are asking for help.

What's with all this gratuitous insult? The only "assholes" I see here are those who want instant solutions to their ignorance and those who defend them.

Also, if ever you can get over your sectarian prejudice against critics of Leninism, such as Chomsky, you'll be able to see their enormous political wisdom.

[redarmyleader]

What's with all this gratuitous insult? The only "assholes" I see here are those who want instant solutions to their ignorance and those who defend them.

Also, if ever you can get over your sectarian prejudice against critics of Leninism, such as Chomsky, you'll be able to see their enormous political wisdom.

If you read the different post you see people dealing with the issue of reading and the necessity of challenging oneself in a way more effective way than the way you approached it. It is very clear that you see yourself above the people talking about their struggles to read. Anyone who sees themselves as a leader must know that they are no better than the people who they lead and who they call comrades. Capitalism teaches us on a daily basis to doubt ourselves and our capabilities, and we ought not to assist capitalism in this endeavor.

And I find Chomsky boring because of the fact that HE DOES NOT possess enormous political wisdom. Is he on the right side on most issues? Yes. Does he have any conception of how to build a mass movement of the workers and specially oppressed powerful enough and political clear enough to take power? No! Tell me, what is his positive program? What political wisdom does he have to offer? And I am not being sarcastic with my questions, but look forward to your response.

On a different note: bailey 187, what things do you find valuable in Avakian's talks? I think my disapproval of Avakian should have been expressed in more mature, serious way. Like new tet I can be an ass, but I try to recognize it and apologize for it.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

The best way to learn something is to join some organisation. When you join organisation you meet people who have similar ideas as you and you can learn from somebody.
I'd be a bit suspicious of this advice...it's much better to develop your ideas somewhat first, and then join a group that suits them, than to jump into the first authoritarian sect that comes your way, and then spend the next five years only reading Avakian (or whoever) because all your comrades say he's the best.

The other things I'd recommend are Marxists.org and libcom.org. Both have a fucking amazing amount of information, and some short texts that you might find useful. For instance, check their factsheets (http://libcom.org/thought/factsheets) here, or if you're arguing with your history teacher you might want to look at their history section (http://libcom.org/history), showing how our ideas have actually worked in the Ukraine (http://libcom.org/history/1917-1921-the-ukrainian-makhnovist-movement) and Spain (http://libcom.org/history/1936-1939-the-spanish-civil-war-and-revolution).

[RadioRaheem84]

CELMX, don't be discouraged. I studied Econ, sociology, poli. sci. in depth in college and the first Marxist book I picked up went WAY over my head. You're going to be learning a lot of new material that goes against nearly everything you've been taught about society. If you're new to Leftism, like me, you will a load of presuppositions still in your mind that keep you from understanding people like Marx, Chomsky, etc. This is the major thing. Once you let go of most of those presumptions you will find what they have to say so simple that you wonder how you missed them in the first place.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

The other thing that might be useful is that any organisation worth their salt should be publishing short, accessible pamphlets setting out the basics of their ideas. Obviously, you should read these with a critical eye - they'll be published with an aim to explaining the ideas that that particular organisation thinks are good, not those of the entire revolutionary left - but they're a decent starting point.

[New Tet]

If you read the different post you see people dealing with the issue of reading and the necessity of challenging oneself in a way more effective way than the way you approached it. It is very clear that you see yourself above the people talking about their struggles to read. Anyone who sees themselves as a leader must know that they are no better than the people who they lead and who they call comrades. Capitalism teaches us on a daily basis to doubt ourselves and our capabilities, and we ought not to assist capitalism in this endeavor.

And I find Chomsky boring because of the fact that HE DOES NOT possess enormous political wisdom. Is he on the right side on most issues? Yes. Does he have any conception of how to build a mass movement of the workers and specially oppressed powerful enough and political clear enough to take power? No! Tell me, what is his positive program? What political wisdom does he have to offer? And I am not being sarcastic with my questions, but look forward to your response.

[...]


The topic at hand is this 14 year-old's inability to respond to his middle school teacher's "Oh, so what!"

He recognizes he's uninformed about socialism when he argues about it at school but suspects his naysayers are just as ignorant and possibly wrong where he, intuitively, is right.

Where does he learn the facts that back up his astute hunch, in books?

"Too hard", he thinks, his reading skills are not yet up to the standards required to assimilate what he wants to learn. He recognizes this! Kudos.

"A short cut", he wonders. Does it exist?

**************

In light of that summary, my intervention was correct, I think.

Now, about Chomsky:

You're right. Beyond general prescriptions (such as I myself witnessed from a personal letter he condescended to write to me) Chomsky offers very little in the way of specific organizational strategies to unite our proletarian forces to overthrow capitalism. If you get down to it, neither did Marx, and yet most of us practically worship his memory and his writings.

I'm not going to try to explain why this is beyond expressing the suspicion that he, Chomsky, considers himself unqualified to draw up socialist programs.

Outside of that objection, I see Chomsky as an intelligent, courageous and formidable ally to the working class.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

[Drace]

And I find Chomsky boring because of the fact that HE DOES NOT possess enormous political wisdom. Is he on the right side on most issues? Yes. Does he have any conception of how to build a mass movement of the workers and specially oppressed powerful enough and political clear enough to take power? No! Tell me, what is his positive program? What political wisdom does he have to offer? And I am not being sarcastic with my questions, but look forward to your response.

What?!?
What is he "right" on in his issues?
He criticizes capitalism, the current War in Iraq and Afghanistan, Zionism, the US Empire, consumerism, mass media.
His an anarchist as well.

Chomsky is perhaps the most influential intellectual in the modern world.
How can you say he has little political knowledge. Have you listened to his interviews, lectures and read his books?

He has a ton of books and articles.

[mikelepore]

"There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits." --K. Marx
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/p2.htm


Marx adduded to the words that Euclid said to Ptolemy: "There is no royal road to geometry."

[mikelepore]

I don't know if the SLP national office would appreciate this, but I OCR'd their 1960s-era publication "The Science of Socialism: A Home Study Course." The party withdrew it from publication, apparently because it was judged to contain theoretical defects. However, they didn't replace it with an improved edition, so I think it's still useful. It's a mini-course in Marxism, which the SLP believes to consists of three main units: the materialist conception of history, Marxian economics and the class struggle. Of course, these ideas are all presented from the SLP's De Leonist perspective, so much of the political left would choke on some of the statements given there. Anyway, with the caveat that the decision to withdraw the document means that there may besome content that no longer represents the SLP's views, I would still recommend that students of socialism read it.

http://www.deleonism.org/ss.htm

[RadioRaheem84]

Also, if I may add, I really hate writing this but if you're a newbie I would stick to American writers first. I am sorry to say but European writers can come off a bit wonkish and their stuff is chock full of data, statistics, and charts. There is nothing wrong with that at all, especially if you're advanced in that particular field, but I prefer American writers that effectively communicate in a language that doesn't sound technocratic. That's just my opinion. I mean it seems like most of the assignments I received in college from professors of stuff by europeans were so difficult to comprehend at first, and it sounded like they desperately wanted their work to look as scientific as possible. Chomsky aluded to this in Understanding Power, that some European intellectuals try hard to make their works hard for the average person to understand so that they can sort of be a special class. I can agree with that assertion to an extent. American writers tend to talk in a language that anyone can understand. Yet, I would eventually move on to European or Asian writers or more heavy stuff because American writers can soften someone up and there is a whole practical, technical aspect you'll miss. My two cents.:)

[redarmyleader]

Now, about Chomsky:

You're right. Beyond general prescriptions (such as I myself witnessed from a personal letter he condescended to write to me) Chomsky offers very little in the way of specific organizational strategies to unite our proletarian forces to overthrow capitalism. If you get down to it, neither did Marx, and yet most of us practically worship his memory and his writings.

I'm not going to try to explain why this is beyond expressing the suspicion that he, Chomsky, considers himself unqualified to draw up socialist programs.

Outside of that objection, I see Chomsky as an intelligent, courageous and formidable ally to the working class.

My only reply to you is what you said about Marx is not true. Read Engels' History of the Communist League. There you will find that Marx and Engels were not just lectures, but actually participated in the class struggle, building organization and putting for a real political program. Look at the history of the Chartist movement in Britain and Marx and Engels participation in that. Look at Marx's Critique of the Gotha Program. And look at the last section of the Communist Manifesto. Besides, Marxism of our day have the experience of Lenin and Trotsky to offer to question of strategy and organization. Of course there is no blue book on revolution. But its the Marxist method and our understanding of it and willingness of carrying it out that will enable to confront the task we face.

And Drace, look at my post again. I admitted that Chomsky is on the right side of history a great majority of the time. Unfortunately, it is not enough to be on the right side, but help your side obtain power.

[MarxSchmarx]

My only reply to you is what you said about Marx is not true. Read Engels' History of the Communist League. There you will find that Marx and Engels were not just lectures, but actually participated in the class struggle, building organization and putting for a real political program. Look at the history of the Chartist movement in Britain and Marx and Engels participation in that. Look at Marx's Critique of the Gotha Program. And look at the last section of the Communist Manifesto... But its the Marxist method and our understanding of it and willingness of carrying it out that will enable to confront the task we face.

This is very true. In fact Marx spent considerable time publishing pamphlets for industrial workers that were not as "in-depth" as many of his more famous writings. It is somewhat indicative of the movement's failures that the less accessible magnum opai get so much more attention than the difficult attempts at popularization both Marx and Engels attempted.

[punisa]

watch videos :)
Youtube kinda sucks, but you'll find hours and hours on Google video.

[The Idler]

CPGB podcasts (http://cpgb.podbean.com)

[Thunder]

I've become friends with a few college professors. They might not be Marxists themselves (one is a non-revolutionary socialist, though, with sympathies for Marx), but they do have a lot of info. I'm lucky. I know one of them through a film club at the local college (that is open to the public) and the other two from church. (Before anyone accuses me of Christianity, it is at a Unitarian Universalist church [I'm not a UU though.])

[RadioRaheem84]

OP:
http://www.monthlyreview.org/

Read the articles.

Also there is a guy on youtube with some wicked videos. great stuff...

Brenden McCooney, I believe. Google, Kaptalism 101. It's a word press blog. Excellent stuff.

[mikelepore]

Chomsky offers very little in the way of specific organizational strategies to unite our proletarian forces to overthrow capitalism. If you get down to it, neither did Marx, and yet most of us practically worship his memory and his writings.


My only reply to you is what you said about Marx is not true. Read Engels' History of the Communist League. There you will find that Marx and Engels were not just lectures, but actually participated in the class struggle, building organization and putting for a real political program. Look at the history of the Chartist movement in Britain and Marx and Engels participation in that. Look at Marx's Critique of the Gotha Program. And look at the last section of the Communist Manifesto.

I'm afraid it's true. Marx did not develop any useful "organizational strategies" to overthrow capitalism. The International over which Marx presided admitted members ranging from pacifists to supporters of violence, and ranging from reformers to single-objective revolutionaries. There were a vague ideas about cooperating with trade unions and using the political process, but nothing spcific enough to call a strategy. You cited _Critique of the Gotha Programme_ -- I don't see there any strategy at all for overthrowing capitalism -- where do you see it? You cited the Communist Manifesto, but the so-called "revolutionary" suggestions that Marx and Engels provided there in 1848 they retracted in 1872, and admitted that if they could do it over again that section would be written "very differently" -- and for good reason -- they now realized that nationalizing the banks, etc., has nothing to do with a strategy to make the workers the managers of the means of production.

[The Essence Of Flame Is The Essence Of Change]

New Tet you are an asshole and I remember that from the first day I joined this site.You really can't see someone asking a question without bashing him or showing off your excellent little self can you?

Oh, and
Oh, and BTW, the reason you find "anarchist authors" easier to read than Marx, etc., is because the ones you must have read aim to treat you like a dumb ass, someone unwilling to make any real effort to acquire a sound education. Stop looking for a shortcut to edifying knowledge, it don't exist. No, dickhead, it's because they are meant to be written in simple language so everyone can understand them instead of being a conversation topic for a bunch of elitist morons.

To the OP: My suggestion is discussions.Try and find any leftists, of all varieties and speak with them.I don't know where you live but if it is a city, you will propably have some part which is a bit more left-wing or at least has some left wing bookstores.Spending some time there discussing with the people will help you and you will propably be suggested good introductory books.Be sure however to criticise yourself whatever you hear and not take it as granted.If you ask a leninist and an anarchist the same thing you will get two different answers.And as you propably know from this site there are maaaaaaany kind of different tendencies in the left;)