Revolutionary Utiopian bullshit. [Archive]

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 02:56

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 03:12

Bumping for ya bastads,

so you can bow before da mastah

of common sense

ÑóẊîöŉ

16th December 2012, 03:13

According to people here, if we lived in a revolutionary society the killer would have brought up to never consider this action.

Which people? What makes you think they represent a majority on the board?

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 03:20

Which people? What makes you think they represent a majority on the board?

This asshole:
I hate that RevLeft users of all people are posting the Corporate propaganda garbage. It's quite clear why individuals go on shooting sprees. Obviously, they lack fundamental human values of compassion and concern for their fellow human beings. Shootings will stop when humans are socialized, brought up by the collective, integrated into and given a responsible place in human society. -Workers-control-over- Prod

And that's just an extreme example. Many here think that revolution will equal paradise. To them bullying, incest and jaywalking will all be solved by collectives and leftist education. Which is fucking stupid.

ÑóẊîöŉ

16th December 2012, 03:22

This asshole:
I hate that RevLeft users of all people are posting the Corporate propaganda garbage. It's quite clear why individuals go on shooting sprees. Obviously, they lack fundamental human values of compassion and concern for their fellow human beings. Shootings will stop when humans are socialized, brought up by the collective, integrated into and given a responsible place in human society. -Workers-control-over- Prod

And that's just an extreme example. Many here think that revolution will equal paradise. To them bullying, incest and jaywalking will all be solved by collectives and leftist education. Which is fucking stupid.

OK, I remember reading that post and rolling my eyes. Nobody has thanked that post, so what makes you think it is at all representative?

Red Enemy

16th December 2012, 03:28

You people here at revleft just love to criticize "utopians" and "romantics" who dare question your "scientific" and objective forms of revolution.I'm new, but I would assume that the scientific socialists of this website do have a theoretical opposition to the utopian socialists.

According to you, if revolution succeeds all the worlds problems should just melt away. Not in my opinion, no. If we are talkin early on in the revolution, we look at the possibility of civil war! If we are talking the final, end result (communism), There will still be murders, violence, fights, drug addiction, and so on and so on.

Someone here even the gall to state that the media's portrayal of the recent massacre was "bourgeois" and bullshit due to it not telling the truth that the material conditions caused the killer's actions.Well yes, it's quite possible that the material conditions of the educational system, capitalist American society and it's glorification of violence, the lack of avaliable treatment for mental disorders, all could have played a part in this.

According to people here, if we lived in a revolutionary society the killer would have brought up to never consider this action. Not necessarily, but the treatment for mental disorders would be avaliable and top notch, and those other things which affect the mind (especially of someone with an illness) - bourgeois culture, American glorification of violence, etc. would not have been a potential factor.

How fucking stupid can you be? Madmen killing people is caused by more than the capitalist system. Mental illness and deranged individuals are not constricted to any political system and some simply have no reasoning behind their actions.If you see above.

Heaven on Earth will not occur just because we've entered a post scarcity world system. I don't think many people agree that it would.

Unless you drug the populace into serenity and do monthly neural scans on your citizens, there will always be at least some form of conflict and occasional tragedy.Sure, but it will be significantly reduced.

Anything else is the true definition of Utopian and therefore batshit crazy. Mmkay.

Thank you, good day and fuck off if you disagree with me.Ok.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 03:32

That just the extreme of the zeitgeist around here. Alot of people here are really not that realistic about post revolutionary society. If i was restricted over bullshit, i would have hoped that dumbassery would qualify for kicks as well;)

Comrade Samuel

16th December 2012, 03:32

Bumping for ya bastads,

so you can bow before da mastah

of common sense

Desperate for attention much?

Pretty much everything you say in your fist post is invalid for a number of reasons: we all have varying views on post-revolutionary life, the fact that almost all people who commit mass murder usually give plenty of warning before they do it but thanks to the pathetic excuse for a health care system in the United States most of the mentally ill go untreated (by this I mean capitalism indirectly plays a part in causing such atrocities) and also that you cant be barred from all meaningful conversation on Revleft because it is next to non-existent.

If you hate the place so much, nobody will stop you from leaving but I do suggest you don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 03:40

How fucking stupid can you be? Madmen killing people is caused by more than the capitalist system. Mental illness and deranged individuals are not constricted to any political system and some simply have no reasoning behind their actions.

Honest question to you, what do you think causes 'mental illness' and what would you define as being mentally ill? Just so you know, its psychoanalytic consensus that almost all 'mental illness' is largely the product of social dynamics and not some mystical 'biological condition' (save for some rare forms of brain damage, mental retardation and some viruses). One could argue the degree of psychological neurosis is not bound to capitalism per se but to class society and civilization in general (a view shared to a certain extend by Freud).

It seems utopian, or more likely plain bullshit, to me to claim that people are 'just mentally ill', dropping out of nowhere like some idealist manifestation that acts without reason. Its a convenient way to frame your question as it makes you seem on the side of 'common sense', but it really avoids addressing the issue.

I'd recommend reading "Civilization and its discontents" by Freud, excerpts from Capitalism & Schizophrenia by Deleuze & Guattari, "Madness & Civilization" by Michel Foucault and this review of The theory of Bloom (http://theanvilreview.org/print/the_theory_of_bloom/) by Tiqqun for some insights on the social dynamics behind such apparently inexplicable events such as these.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 04:06

Honest question to you, what do you think causes 'mental illness' and what would you define as being mentally ill? Just so you know, its psychoanalytic consensus that almost all 'mental illness' is largely the product of social dynamics and not some mystical 'biological condition' (save for some rare forms of brain damage, mental retardation and some viruses). One could argue the degree of psychological neurosis is not bound to capitalism per se but to class society and civilization in general (a view shared to a certain extend by Freud).

It seems utopian, or more likely plain bullshit, to me to claim that people are 'just mentally ill', dropping out of nowhere like some idealist manifestation that acts without reason. Its a convenient way to frame your question as it makes you seem on the side of 'common sense', but it really avoids addressing the issue.

I'd recommend reading "Civilization and its discontents" by Freud, excerpts from Capitalism & Schizophrenia by Deleuze & Guattari, "Madness & Civilization" by Michel Foucault and this review of The theory of Bloom (http://theanvilreview.org/print/the_theory_of_bloom/) by Tiqqun for some insights on the social dynamics behind such apparently inexplicable events such as these.
It is true that many mental illnesses are caused by certain experiences and social conditions. But would all negative experiences/triggers be ended by collectivization? And there are conditions that can arrise abruptly. Have you ever had the desire to jump from a high place, even though you knew it would cause death? A small minority of people have the urge to do harm (Avanti included). Unless mental evaluations will be as frequent as doctor checkups in a post revolutionary society, these problem cases could only be discovered when it is too late due to parents of all types willingness to avoid having their child labelled as mentally disturbed.

Ostrinski

16th December 2012, 04:09

Isn't schizophrenia a biological phenomenon?

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 04:18

It is true that many mental illnesses are caused by certain experiences and social conditions. But would all negative experiences/triggers be ended by collectivization?

No, but that's not what is proposed. The abolishment of class society entails more (and possibly different things) than 'collectivization'. Communism is the complete destruction of all existing social relations and their replacement by communal ones, the re-establishment of the human community. Such a situation would change our daily lives and ways of interacting in such a radical fashion that what is commonly experienced as 'mental illness' (regardless of the fact that much of what is labeled as such is simply the logic of domination pathologizing deviant behavior, I suggest reading Foucault for more on that) would be almost eradicated. Sure, someone might still lose his marbles due to Syphilis, but the fallout of such a thing would be very different in a radically different society.

Have you ever had the desire to jump from a high place, even though you knew it would cause death?

This has nothing to do with mental illness. It's what Soren Kierkegaard referred to as existential Angst, the realization that it is us and us alone that make (though not shape) the decisions of our lives and that it is we who bear the consequences. This pure, raw potential is embodied in the 'JUMP!' injunction which paralyzes at the same time.

A small minority of people have the urge to do harm (Avanti included).

How so? Why is this the case? You are simply making statements and passing them off as common sense. Its not only radical theory that disagrees with you, but also mainstream psychoanalytic consensus.

Unless mental evaluations will be as frequent as doctor checkups in a post revolutionary society, these problem cases could only be discovered when it is too late due to parents of all types willingness to avoid having their child labelled as mentally disturbed.

So these 'mental illnesses' are intrinsic, genetic properties? Quite the 19th century pseudoscience, what's next, skull measurements? Besides, the effects and manifestations of those conditions which are obviously problematic (because most of what is considered 'mental illness' is the result of neurosis arising from a separated society that tears its subjects apart internally) are affected by the society they occur within. Its not as if pathologies follow a set path, not even among different individuals within the same societal configuration, let alone when social relations and individual interactions differ to such a radical extent.

Rusty Shackleford

16th December 2012, 04:20

Revolution is not a magic bullet. Its not a panacea. Its not a cure-all. Its not instant.

Treating the term as some sort of sacred chant is fucking terrible.

Hearing "The Revolution" has a tendency to make me cringe or at least die a little inside.

All it does is create a basis for a better society. (Read: not perfect, nothing is perfect)

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 04:23

Isn't schizophrenia a biological phenomenon?

No. As with most complex pathologies, there are genetic factors which put people at a larger risk, but they're not a singular 'cause'. The most important factors are environmental and societal, ie. the fact that an urban existence, social isolation, unemployment, poor housing conditions, discrimination and ostracism, etc. correlate strongly and positively with schizophrenia which, if anything, could be almost typified as the social condition capital forces most of society in, producing subjects that have to take on a whole array of roles and masks alien to themselves and their desires.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 04:40

No. As with most complex pathologies, there are genetic factors which put people at a larger risk, but they're not a singular 'cause'. The most important factors are environmental and societal, ie. the fact that an urban existence, social isolation, unemployment, poor housing conditions, discrimination and ostracism, etc. correlate strongly and positively with schizophrenia which, if anything, could be almost typified as the social condition capital forces most of society in, producing subjects that have to take on a whole array of roles and masks alien to themselves and their desires.

Bullshit. What you just said is pseudoscience. Neurological imbalances and mis wiring are more important than societal causes in people with schizophrenia.

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 05:02

Bullshit. What you just said is pseudoscience. Neurological imbalances and mis wiring are more important than societal causes in people with schizophrenia.

I don't get the feeling you're genuinely interested in debating the topic, nor in backing up your views. If that's the case, just say so.

First of all, someone who uses the term 'mis wiring' (sic) when it comes to neurology might reconsider throwing around the word pseudoscientific.

Secondly, what you say is not supported by mainstream psychoanalytic or neuroscientific consensus, even if those were pillars of truth that couldn't be doubted. I provided you with the names of some reading material but you couldn't be arsed to even go over it briefly before doing a drive-by comment, apparently. If you're so certain about your case that its "neurological imbalances and mis wiring", could you care to back that up with facts? And while you're at it, could you perhaps be bothered to explain how the neurochemical makeup of our brain (in neurotransmitter levels) is somehow a static 'biological' thing not affected by our daily interactions? I can imagine you'll have a hard time there as neurotransmitters function precisely in response to that, interaction with the world around us. Our neurochemical makeup (and 'imbalances') are the result of our conditions (as much as this is the case with all life). Humans aren't some black box who are set in stone by genetics at birth, with everything happening inside being 'black magic' that is somehow disconnected from the most fundamental aspect of the human condition: that we inhibit a world around us in which we function and which in turn affects us.

Thirdly, could you care to provide an explanation for the fact why 'mental illness' is virtually non-existent in primitive societies (as supported by anthropological evidence) or why there has been a rise in the dominance of mental illness correlating with the intensification of regimes of productivism, control and domination, making a sharp upward turn from the '50s onward? I suppose those are to do with 'wiring' as well no?

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

16th December 2012, 05:03

Avanti and now this troll will get banned? Oh joy, Christmas must truly be here!

But in an attempt to give this post content. I'll just contend that

A) No one wants to hear a mad man raving about his utopia. There are a million Utopian Schemes out there and hardly any of them are relevant in the real world

B) Have you ever read any Historical Materialist looks at history before? I mean, seriously, read "On the Origins of Family, Property, and the State". So many bourgeois assumptions that are used against us dissolve into air when combated with facts. That's the whole point, once we fall for their logic we lapse into Utopianism simply by divorcing material reality from "that which could be".

Ostrinski

16th December 2012, 05:04

No. As with most complex pathologies, there are genetic factors which put people at a larger risk, but they're not a singular 'cause'. The most important factors are environmental and societal, ie. the fact that an urban existence, social isolation, unemployment, poor housing conditions, discrimination and ostracism, etc. correlate strongly and positively with schizophrenia which, if anything, could be almost typified as the social condition capital forces most of society in, producing subjects that have to take on a whole array of roles and masks alien to themselves and their desires.I will try to check out the works you recommended on the subject.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 05:13

First of all, someone who uses the term 'mis wiring' (sic) when it comes to neurology might reconsider throwing around the word pseudoscientific.

Thirdly, could you care to provide an explanation for the fact why 'mental illness' is virtually non-existent in primitive societies (as supported by anthropological evidence) or why there has been a rise in the dominance of mental illness correlating with the intensification of regimes of productivism, control and domination, making a sharp upward turn from the '50s onward? I suppose those are to do with 'wiring' as well no?

Miswiring is an expression

B) Primitive societies lacked documented mental illness's because the afflicted were believed to be possessed by the spirits of their ancestors, the mountain god, or demons. How did you miss that.

I will attempt a reading of your experts but if they turn out to be using the same technique as Christians proving Jesus through the bible i will be wanting compensation for my wasted time.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 05:16

I'm new, but I would assume that the scientific socialists of this website do have a theoretical opposition to the utopian socialists.

Not in my opinion, no. If we are talkin early on in the revolution, we look at the possibility of civil war! If we are talking the final, end result (communism), There will still be murders, violence, fights, drug addiction, and so on and so on.

Well yes, it's quite possible that the material conditions of the educational system, capitalist American society and it's glorification of violence, the lack of avaliable treatment for mental disorders, all could have played a part in this.

Not necessarily, but the treatment for mental disorders would be avaliable and top notch, and those other things which affect the mind (especially of someone with an illness) - bourgeois culture, American glorification of violence, etc. would not have been a potential factor.

If you see above.

I don't think many people agree that it would.

Sure, but it will be significantly reduced.

Mmkay.

Ok.

Thank you for replying to my rage with calm. Peace out

prolcon

16th December 2012, 05:28

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

16th December 2012, 05:34

I'm going to make myself some more enemies and say I can understand your concerns about utopianism on this site. I've encountered a lot of it, myself. Personally, I feel like people tend to shut down discussion. This is a strategy of "winning" a debate, rather than participating in dialectic. And that creates a lot of problems. We can cry all we like about disunity among the left, but God help you if you criticize tendency-baiting on this site, particularly if it's against Leninists. The most common way to shut down discussion is to accuse another of religiosity or idealism in beliefs. Interesting that I should say that responding to a post discussing utopianism.

Despite my disdain for the OP, I have to agree with this to an extend. Although my only trouble with him is the sexist/ableist horse shit he spews every other minute.

There definitely needs to be a discussion over the way debates are held on this site. Personally I think we need stricter moderation to prevent people from using "Stalinism" as an automatic debate winner when it isn't relevant to the subject at hand. Likewise, we need some rules against the more extreme forms of sectarianism and we need to encourage self-criticism. Additionally, we need to seriously consider regulating people from making baseless claims without factual evidence to support them.

But OP, if you feel that I am to hard on you, than fuck you. As a transwoman I do not give a shit about your feelings because of the horseshit that you spew, so likewise I'm just going to bash you as much as I like because it makes me feel warm and tingly inside.

The Garbage Disposal Unit

16th December 2012, 05:58

Alternatively, everybody needs to start accusing everybody of Stalinism to the degree that "Stalinist" becomes like a colloquial greeting. "Hey Stalinist! I haven't seen you at Food Not Bombs in a while!"

Further, everyone should get way better at lateral thinking, and wit. If we're going to talk about capitalism and mental illness, we need to talk about ennui. If we want a world without school shootings, we need a world without Mondays (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr3E6mNRxHU) (best cover, right?).

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 06:06

Despite my disdain for the OP, I have to agree with this to an extend. Although my only trouble with him is the sexist/ableist horse shit he spews every other minute.

There definitely needs to be a discussion over the way debates are held on this site. Personally I think we need stricter moderation to prevent people from using "Stalinism" as an automatic debate winner when it isn't relevant to the subject at hand. Likewise, we need some rules against the more extreme forms of sectarianism and we need to encourage self-criticism. Additionally, we need to seriously consider regulating people from making baseless claims without factual evidence to support them.

But OP, if you feel that I am to hard on you, than fuck you. As a transwoman I do not give a shit about your feelings because of the horseshit that you spew, so likewise I'm just going to bash you as much as I like because it makes me feel warm and tingly inside.

1. Go fuck yourself you idiot.

2. You've been complaining since day one about me over every little thing. Yes it is true that i use ***** alot due to it being constantly used where i live. Yes the word has some negative connotations. But so does moron, punk and bastard and I don't see you crying to the heavens every time someone uses those words.

3. How am i ableist?

4. I pissed off the douche which is the reason for my restriction. I've explained my error a 1000 times and the poor way i expressed myself on the women in the US army thing but i still will not get clemency.

5. I'm just going to go out and say it. Your kind of nitpicking over every detail (Mulan saved the Emperor? REACTIONARY!) will get you nowhere. In a real situation nobody will care what you think because besides complaints you have nothing original to say.

prolcon

16th December 2012, 06:16

I'm starting to see why this motherfucker got restricted.

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

16th December 2012, 06:17

1. Go fuck yourself you idiot.

2. You've been complaining since day one about me over every little thing. Yes it is true that i use ***** alot due to it being constantly used where i live. Yes the word has some negative connotations. But so does moron, punk and bastard and I don't see you crying to the heavens every time someone uses those words.

3. How am i ableist?

4. I pissed off the douche which is the reason for my restriction. I've explained my error a 1000 times and the poor way i expressed myself on the women in the US army thing but i still will not get clemency.

5. I'm just going to go out and say it. Your kind of nitpicking over every detail (Mulan saved the Emperor? REACTIONARY!) will get you nowhere. In a real situation nobody will care what you think because besides complaints you have nothing original to say.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTxJp6qW-90qjH_t5YvNSqTrKP-qBvC54xnVe3BlKFiTlQvLs__

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 06:22

I'm starting to see why this motherfucker got restricted.

Just because you use big words when you insult someone doesn't mean you're not insulting them. If we're going to ban *****, i demand we ban all other words that had past negative meanings. And someone here literally just made a joke about 20 dead kids and nobody gives a shit. What the hell is wrong with this site?

The Garbage Disposal Unit

16th December 2012, 06:28

Just because you use big words when you insult someone doesn't mean you're not insulting them. If we're going to ban *****, i demand we ban all other words that had past negative meanings. And someone here literally just made a joke about 20 dead kids and nobody gives a shit. What the hell is wrong with this site?

Hey! Not true!
I made a joke about capitalism; ipso facto, a joke about millions of dead children.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 06:30

Hey! Not true!
I made a joke about capitalism; ipso facto, a joke about millions of dead children.

It's still a joke about dead children. Again, WTF?

freehobo

16th December 2012, 06:30

Yes, don't you know, first there was classless nomadic noble savages, then there was capitalism and human evil, and in the future the state will wither away, and we will be classless humanists again. It's the blueprint of history, haven't you read Marx??

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 06:34

I also demand we ban labeling entire communities as reactionary. Just because someones cuban american doesn't mean that they will always back capitalism (in the same way that not all exiles of the spanish civil war were lefty demonstrators.)

Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores

16th December 2012, 06:37

Soooooooooooo you're not Anarchocommunal?

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 06:39

Soooooooooooo you're not Anarchocommunal?

Dude i'm gonna be staight up with you and admit that i just thought the name was cool. I'm a syncreticleftist (and i hope that name isn't already a label for something)
and

Zealot

16th December 2012, 06:46

umadbro? Everything in your OP was a complete strawman. Try again! No one on this site believes anything you just said.

roy

16th December 2012, 06:54

If we're going to ban *****, i demand we ban all other words that had past negative meanings.

just for the sake of clarification, words like '*****' and 'fag' are banned because they are discriminatory, or at least the very least have discriminatory roots, whereas words like 'fucker' are ok because they're all-inclusive.

btw if anyone said all Cuban-americans are reactionary theyd be restricted for racism

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 07:28

just for the sake of clarification, words like '*****' and 'fag' are banned because they are discriminatory, or at least the very least have discriminatory roots, whereas words like 'fucker' are ok because they're all-inclusive.

btw if anyone said all Cuban-americans are reactionary theyd be restricted for racism

Punk (the "woman" in a prison rape dynamic, moron (old way of classifying mental handicaps) and bastard (child born out of wedlock and thus considered not legitimate) are all allowed here for some reason. And more than once i've heard of exile communities being lumped into organisms that share the exact same beliefs as the rest of the community.

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 15:06

B) Primitive societies lacked documented mental illness's because the afflicted were believed to be possessed by the spirits of their ancestors, the mountain god, or demons. How did you miss that.

I missed that because 'possessions' as an explanation for mental illness are largely a phenomenon of antiquity and medieval times. Possession within primitive societies was largely the voluntary result of drug consumption or trance/seance-based 'communion with spirits'. I suggest reading 'The archeology of violence' by Pierre Clastres.

Sure, there's most likely a few cases of "mental illness" around in primitive societies but nowhere near the extent or with the same severe impact that they have (on both individual and society) in later class societies.

I will attempt a reading of your experts but if they turn out to be using the same technique as Christians proving Jesus through the bible i will be wanting compensation for my wasted time.

I have no idea what you're talking about and to be fairly honest I'm done here. You can choke on your wasted time 'cause I'm sure as hell ain't gonna spend it in a thread which is basically meaningless screaming around and one-liners like "BUT U R TEH CRAZY, IT IS TEH COMMON SENSE LOLZ!!". There's more productive debate on /b/.

Philosophos

16th December 2012, 15:22

@Anarchocommunaltoad
Crazy people existed, exist and will continue to exist. You can't do something to keep them in touch with their human side. Capitalism is not the only reason that these incidents of the insane people occured but it is the root of the problem.

Also whoever said that the problems of the worlds will melt away if we have communism is an idiot. We are not flawless and we are not the as smart as we should all be so fuck yeah we are going to have problems even in a socialistic society.

MEGAMANTROTSKY

16th December 2012, 16:14

Now that the mods found their excuse to kick me from all meaningful discussion on this site, i guess I don't need to care about keeping friends. Here's my question. You people here at revleft just love to criticize "utopians" and "romantics" who dare question your "scientific" and objective forms of revolution. According to you, if revolution succeeds all the worlds problems should just melt away.
I have encountered some posters on the site that are very antagonistic towards utopianism in all its forms. I remember at one time that Engels' essay on the subject was cited as his wholesale endorsement of the disdain of any post-revolutionary dreaming, whereas if you read the actual essay this is hardly the case. Engels wasn't dismissing utopianism as anti-scientific, he was critiquing the followers of whom he called the "great" utopians, which were Fourier, Saint-Simon and Owen. An essay I read (http://permanent-revolution.org/polemics/utopia_revolution.pdf) pointed out that even the title is mistranslated; the original is "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", when the German title "Die Entwicklung des Sozialismus von der Utopie zur Wissenschaft" should read "The Development of Socialism from Utopia to Science".

The attitude of the aforementioned posters seems to be based on a capitulation to positivism. To be blunt, an iron wall is placed between reason and passion, and their views become very similar to the ones held by the Second International after Engels. But as Hegel said in his "Philosophy of History",

We assert then that nothing has been accomplished without interest on the part of the actors; and - if interest be called passion, inasmuch as the whole individuality, to the neglect of all other actual or possible interests and claims, is devoted to an object with every fibre of volition, concentrating all its desires and powers upon it - we may affirm absolutely that nothing great in the World has been accomplished without passion.
I am simply baffled by the disdain toward utopianism exhibited by some, when the "science" they demand so much cannot necessarily occur without the "dream".

prolcon

16th December 2012, 17:13

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 17:25

You haven't, that's for sure.

The withering of the state into a leisure based robot economy does have its issues.

Ravachol

16th December 2012, 17:26

The withering of the state into a leisure based robot economy does have its issues.

Mostly because that's never going to happen.

Anarchocommunaltoad

16th December 2012, 17:37

Mostly because that's never going to happen.

I read the commie manifesto a while back and it said the withering of the state would lead to increased leisure and automization (although i could be mixing it up with that book where i guy goes into the future and finds a revolutionary or super social democraticUS (the book that also first said that black blocks were really tools of the cops)

helot

16th December 2012, 18:05

I read the commie manifesto a while back and it said the withering of the state would lead to increased leisure and automization (although i could be mixing it up with that book where i guy goes into the future and finds a revolutionary or super social democraticUS (the book that also first said that black blocks were really tools of the cops)

I personally don't think that in a post-rev society people would want everything automated. Even in capitalism people can find some enjoyment in work yet it is obvious that an individual would work less than now (due to the lack of unemployment) and that technology would be used in a different manner. Instead of technology being used to maximise profits and deskill the workforce it could be used to increase safety and enjoyment.