LithoGraphica - Recent changes [en]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19

Reversedragon — Sat, 25 Apr 2026 06:08:32 GMT

commentary entry - note to me: look over for motifs and then retire it like on other pages

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:08, 25 April 2026
Line 74:		Line 74:
	* DX / Deng Xiaoping Thought		* DX / Deng Xiaoping Thought
	* ML onto DX		* ML onto DX

			== Subpages ==
			* [[EC:9k/RD/Q19,19/comm\|Q19,19/comm]] - temporarily included below
			=== "comm" ===
			{{Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19/comm}}

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19/comm

Reversedragon — Sat, 25 Apr 2026 06:05:44 GMT

archive commentary scrap; created today

New page

notes on text after text was mentioned by A Certain Program.  (this entry contains no generated text, not even summaries of it)

------

<pre>* presented Lenin's assessment of the RSFR from 1918
* if the proletariat and the poor peasants display sufficient class-consciousness / convince the majority of people its program and tactics are correct
* ok, that's a contradiction. the first sentence suggests the peasants and proletariat understand their own conditions from within them, the second suggests the party is feeding a model of their conditions to them. this is a material contradiction because both things can be happening. but you aren't persuading me that Lenin wasn't a "Stalinist" with this text
* build a state and suppress the resistance - he said some of the resistance wanted to start wars again so yeah, that's pretty important.
* restore productive forces; create structure, accounting, and labor discipline
* "arguing at mass meetings about the conditions of work with the task of unquestioningly obeying the will of the Soviet leader, of the dictator, during the work"
* get rid of all the bourgeoisie including the kulaks - he's about to do the stuff that made overseas people really mad
* raising the productivity of labour on a national scale - I note a hidden theme in here, which is taking all the competing chunks of the country and unifying them into one thing. it's no secret in other texts like _State and Revolution_ or Marx's writings, but here it isn't emphasized
* "a victorious army that has captured, say, a half or two-thirds of the enemy's territory and is compelled to halt"
* that is a very evocative metaphor. it draws attention to how all States begin as Social-Philosophical Systems that have to secure a particular territory. you'd better hope the SPS is defined by being the proletariat or at the very least is a solid, fighting ally to all Third-World countries.
* connect this to TC8 and the actual struggle over terrain
* "specialists" resisted through sabotage and an attack on the bourgeoisie with power was necessary to take away their power
* in about a year they begin a "ruthless crusade against the violators of this control"
* to rebuild the productive forces from nothing, gain the experts' support with high salaries - enable "careerism" only temporarily
* Lenin basically says this is a blue method and the red or orange method includes giving the average workers and experts the same _maximum_ salary. presumably you'll like, raise the low salaries and lower the high ones and end up somewhere in the middle. but as far as I can see this would only become stable when industries stabilize more and there is _less need_ for expert roles versus average workers. you're in effect trying to gradually abolish the experts.
* throw off the "idlers, parasites and embezzlers" of state funds and common capital to replace their services of creating 'scientific organization' with control from below - next.
* this feels like it never fully happened. it also feels like Trotskyists would be rather horrible at making it happen because the prime group of people to become Trotskyist theorists or organizers is exactly this class of people
* _one year_. one year to get rid of the Careerists whose very job is to creatively destroy parts of society and open up unnecessary contradictions.
* the small kulaks who are like, the scalpers of 1918, have caused a lot of trouble capturing things like grain and disrupting the economy, but apparently the thing to do about them is proceed on tightening up everything else and improving the state businesses so they can almost be ignored. but it sounds like 1919 is going to be quite a year. the big kulaks, these people, and the experts. they have to get rid of all three in approximately that order and they have only a year or two to do it
* introduce compulsory labor starting at the rich, make them contribute data on what they are buying. get everybody else into compulsory labor system next.
* create branches of the People's Bank and make it easy to make deposits or withdrawals
* defeat the incursion of foreign businesses by building up the state businesses and holding down a state monopoly (economic institution) on foreign trade
* make consumer co-ops a new basis for society - "communes or villages, or blocks of houses, etc."
* if the mono-structure of consumer co-ops was healthy there would basically be one consumer co-op connected to the soviets that orders food for the town, not a bunch of them
* after the internal war and its period of violence are over, catch the saboteurs in the factories, railroads, etc, and bring them to court
</pre>

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19

Reversedragon — Sat, 25 Apr 2026 01:46:28 GMT

No bureaucracy in the soviets, soviets in the commissariats

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 {{li|I=S2/DX/ML|Q=618}}Call using bourgeoisie a retreat / To conceal from the people the fact that recruiting bourgeois experts ("[[E:Careerist layer (meta-Marxism)|Careerists]]") with high salaries is a retreat from the standards of proletarian movements would be sinking to the level of bourgeois politicians and deceiving the people (Lenin 1918)  ->  wow, Lenin stirred up some absolute {{em|dirt}} on Deng Xiaoping Thought. I feel like Deng Xiaoping states conceal the significance of this kind of thing all the time. you'd think they'd be willing to say the word "retreat" rather than go on about the "socialist market economy" if they knew what they were talking about.
 </li></ol>
 == Related ==<!--
 <ol class="hue clean">
-</li></ol>-->
+</li></ol>
 -->
 <!--
 == Wavebuilder combinations ==

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q38,84

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 23:09:56 GMT

words: state, control

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:09, 24 April 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	* atheist / atheism		* atheist / atheism
	* nonbeliever / nonbelief		* nonbeliever / nonbelief
	* bourgeoisie		* undialectical
			** when used to imply: bourgeois, decadent.
			** many people have traumatic associations between this word and people flat-out being bigots, and so will never take this word seriously. you pretty much have to actually get through a revolution {{em\|before}} you can start saying "undialectical".
			* state
			** when used to imply: control.
			* control
			** when used to imply: state.
			* bourgeoisie / bourgeois
			** when used to imply: decadent.
			** when not used to imply: individuals conflated with a business territory.
			* decadent
			* Global North
			* Global South

	=== Words this list does not include ===		=== Words this list does not include ===

			* dialectical / dialectic
	* gay		* gay
	* lesbian		* lesbian
Line 29:		Line 42:
	* transgender		* transgender
	* imperialism		* imperialism
			* First World
			* Second World
			* Third World

	<!--		<!--

Template:IS2/MX/W/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 22:40:56 GMT

reuse strawberry swatch

New page

#redirect[[Template:IS2/W/class]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:51:39 GMT

Call using bourgeoisie a retreat

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:51, 24 April 2026
Line 10:		Line 10:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618}}When a soviet socialist republic is sandwiched between competing empires, it's time to rebuild (Lenin 1918) ~~[https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]~~		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618}}When a soviet socialist republic is sandwiched between competing empires, it's time to rebuild (Lenin 1918)

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618}}The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure ("raising the productivity of labor on the national scale", creating nation-wide "accounting"; Lenin 1918) [~~https~~:~~//www~~.~~marxists~~.~~org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03~~.~~htm]~~		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618}}The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure ("raising the productivity of labor on the national scale", creating nation-wide "accounting"; Lenin 1918)

			{{li\|I=S2/DX/ML\|Q=618}}Call using bourgeoisie a retreat / To conceal from the people the fact that recruiting bourgeois experts ("[[E:Careerist layer (meta-Marxism)\|Careerists]]") with high salaries is a retreat from the standards of proletarian movements would be sinking to the level of bourgeois politicians and deceiving the people (Lenin 1918) -> wow, Lenin stirred up some absolute {{em\|dirt}} on Deng Xiaoping Thought. I feel like Deng Xiaoping states conceal the significance of this kind of thing all the time. you'd think they'd be willing to say the word "retreat" rather than go on about the "socialist market economy" if they knew what they were talking about.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 32:		Line 34:
	{{HueNumber\|Q4911\|ML / Vladimir Lenin}}		{{HueNumber\|Q4911\|ML / Vladimir Lenin}}
	</ol>		</ol>
	~~<!--~~ * ~~(none) -->~~		* DX / Deng Xiaoping Thought
			* ML onto DX

Template:IS2/DX/ML/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:45:16 GMT

reuse crimson swatch

New page

#redirect[[Template:IS2/ML/class]]

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:18:01 GMT

The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:18, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<h2 id="section-proposed4"><span class="mw-headline">Unsorted Items (page 4)</span> {{editsection\|User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4}}</h2>		<h2 id="section-proposed4"><span class="mw-headline">Unsorted Items (page 4)</span> {{editsection\|User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4}}</h2>
	<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean reset">		<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean reset">

	~~{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618}}When a soviet socialist republic is sandwiched between competing empires, it's time to rebuild (Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]~~

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618}}The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure ("raising the productivity of labor on the national scale", creating nation-wide "accounting"; Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

	{{li\|I=S1/IV\|Q=618\|rem=ai.wsws.org}}SEP's analysis of "Stalinism" -> that's... its own specific thing? okay.		{{li\|I=S1/IV\|Q=618\|rem=ai.wsws.org}}SEP's analysis of "Stalinism" -> that's... its own specific thing? okay.

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/900

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:17:33 GMT

The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:17, 24 April 2026
Line 732:		Line 732:
	</li><li data-qid="19,17" value="1917" class="field_ML" data-dimension="Z">Russian Revolution		</li><li data-qid="19,17" value="1917" class="field_ML" data-dimension="Z">Russian Revolution
	</li><li class="" data-qid="19,18" value="1918" data-dimension="Z">German revolution of 1918		</li><li class="" data-qid="19,18" value="1918" data-dimension="Z">German revolution of 1918
	</li~~><li class~~=~~"number-empty" data-qid~~="19,19~~" value~~="1919~~" data-dimension="Z">??~~		{{li\|I=Z1/ML\|Q=19,19\|Q2=1919}}{{article\|The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government}} (Lenin 1918) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q19,19\|9k]])

	</li><li data-qid="19,20" value="1920" class="field_ML" data-dimension="Z"><cite>[[Ontology:Q1920\|The State and Revolution]]</cite> (Lenin 1918/1920) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,85\|9k]])		</li><li data-qid="19,20" value="1920" class="field_ML" data-dimension="Z"><cite>[[Ontology:Q1920\|The State and Revolution]]</cite> (Lenin 1918/1920) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q28,85\|9k]])
	</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="19,21" value="1921" data-dimension="Z"><cite>Terrorism and Communism</cite> (Trotsky 1920)		</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-qid="19,21" value="1921" data-dimension="Z"><cite>Terrorism and Communism</cite> (Trotsky 1920)

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q1919

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:15:49 GMT

Reversedragon moved page Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q1919 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,19 Moving numbered Item to TTS-pronounceable title

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Immediate tasks of Russian republic|User=RD|E=Q19,19|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=Z1/ML|Q=19,19|Q2=1919|rem=16k words}}{{article|The Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government}} (Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

</li></ol>

== Motifs or claims ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}When a soviet socialist republic is sandwiched between competing empires, it's time to rebuild (Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=ML, IV|Q=618}}The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure ("raising the productivity of labor on the national scale", creating nation-wide "accounting"; Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

</li></ol>
== Related ==


== Ideology codes ==
<ol class="hue clean compound">
{{HueNumber|Q83|ML / dialectical materialism}}
{{HueNumber|Q4911|ML / Vladimir Lenin}}
</ol>


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q1919

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:15:36 GMT

copy markup from 9k/Q19,10

New page

User:RD/9k/Q19,10

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:09:35 GMT

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q19,10 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q19,10 Moving 9k pages to Ontology talk for search purposes

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Anarchism or Socialism?|User=RD|E=Q19,10|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=Z1/ML|Q=19,10|Q2=1910|rem=20k words}}{{book|Anarchism or Socialism?}} (Stalin 1906) [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm]

</li></ol>

== Motifs or claims ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}anarchism or socialism (motif) / anarchism versus socialism; anarchism versus dialectical materialism (motif) / "On Authority" (generic; Engels) / "Anarchism or Socialism?" (generic; Stalin)

</li></ol>

=== From populism ===
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=F2/PT|Q=618}}A bunch of Narodniks will win because they are many and they are poor -> they didn't win, did they?

</li></ol>

=== From anarchism ===
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=F2/A|tradition=A onto AS, A onto PT, IK onto PT|Q=618}}Monarchists can never know science / People with reactionary worldviews can never know the path to anything correct / Hegel was a monarchist so he never could have said anything correct (Cherkezishvili, Kropotkin) -> when you write it out they sound a lot like Habermas with his concept that emancipation is a truth value, or Kant who sort of did the same thing but didn't formalize it as much

{{li|I=S1/A|Q=618}}immutable justice (Proudhon)

</li></ol>

=== On science ===
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=S1/STM|tradition=STM|Q=618}}Neo-Lamarckism (discarded theory) [https://banotes.org/biological-anthropology/evolution-neo-lamarckism-inherited-acquired-traits/#what-is-neo-lamarckism]

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=STM, ML|Q=618}}Pascal contributed to science (dialectical materialism) / Pascal, Leibnitz, Mayer, and Helmholtz were not revolutionaries but they still contributed to science -> see, this is a perfectly reasonable thing to say but it's a very crimson position today. Trotskyists might give it to you too. but everyone else from charcoal anarchists to blue anarchists to Liberal-republicans and Christian or conspiracy-theorist Tories just about utterly hates science because of how it isn't fundamentally based in Lived Experience and seeing reality specifically as a bunch of Lived Experiences stitching together rather than a single material realm which is perceived by different Lived Experiences. Liberal-republicanism seems to have really warped people's method of perceiving the world to where they want to understand reality itself as "democratic" instead of scientific — complete with the dubious "features" of arbitrarily dividing people up whenever they're unified on reality in order to supposedly give people Freedom to think, and thoroughly beating them up for having the wrong conclusion after you prohibited everybody from having the same one. Habermas in particular wanted to introduce a whole new form of logic in which 'emancipation' was going to be a truth value and two people coming to consensus on something being it was going to be the standard for judging whether all statements were true or false. being me and loving absurd hypotheticals, I can't say that's a terrible idea you can't even think of, because out of context the concept is at least rather funny to say out loud; the only thing I don't like was that the proposal was totally serious. this is the environment you're going to be in arguing science to people. a bunch of people who supposedly think that two people coming to consensus on "whether a statement is Emancipation" and yet if you ask them to have that dialogue with a handful of Cubans and come to Emancipation on that subject they just Won't; they're basically liars.

</li></ol>

=== From dialectical materialism / Marxism ===
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=26,92|Q2=2692}}Marx going meta / ([[User:RD/9k/Q26,92|9k]]) -> Stalin says that Marxists 'do not simply wave anarchism away' but try to do class analysis to determine what anarchism is made of and how it will develop. if done well at a level that's good enough to be predictive this is a violet statement.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}Liberal-republicanism is divisible into different trends corresponding to different strata of the bourgeoisie

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}"Socialism" is divided into reformism, anarchism, and Marxism -> all right, but which one is Deng Xiaoping Thought? it didn't reform capitalism, it flat-out birthed it out of nothing specifically to put a border around the country. that's very unusual and I'm not sure it fits into any of these three. 
I think... he's defining it to be reformism? he says if you're utopian and a republican or utopian and trying to build transition to Bolshevism inside a republic of capitalists you're a reformist. but the third thing he says is that class collaboration is a hallmark of reformism. and that's like, the only thing that China didn't fall into because whatever the party-nation is it has actually subdued capitalism and become capable of regulating it sometimes. {{em|some}} class is struggling against the capitalists and leaping its State over them despite there still being a lot of them, and the only question is which class this is. 
mainstream Marxism-Leninism and meta-Marxism have some points where what they say is just exactly the same, notably that Liberal capitalism is a blue [[E:Social-Philosophical System (meta-Marxism)|SPS]] with chiefly big or small bourgeoisie forming a State that leaps over the rest of the area, and that Bolshevism is a crimson SPS which is closely aligned with the proletariat and leaps its state over the bourgeoisie inasmuch as they still exist until their class territories are abolished; the bourgeois class territories are these little free-floating corporate territories but the proletarian class territory looks a little more like the whole country put together and not divided any more. what confuses me is who exactly is leaping over China, Cuba, North Korea, or Vietnam to create Deng Xiaoping Thought. [[E:Careerist layer (meta-Marxism)|Careerists]]??

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=33,90|Q2=3390}}Anarchists are material enemies of Marxism (Stalin) / Anarchism is something to overthrow

{{li|I=F2/ML|Q=618}}Marxism already is meta-Leninism / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,29|9k]]) -> Stalin says dialectical materialism 'is not only the theory of socialism'. by socialism he almost certainly means the realization of Bolshevism, because that's what they did post-1910, and he brings up the dictatorship-of-the-proletariat multiple times, suggesting this is the only real way forward. but you can already see the contradiction here. he says dialectical materialism isn't only a theory of how to realize Bolshevism, but he dismantles any possibility of realizing anarchism (at length, granted. not saying he did a bad job) and gives what sounds like a dismissal of Deng Xiaoping Thought being socialism, as well as strongly implying that {{em|if you aren't realizing Bolshevism}} you aren't a revolutionary. doesn't that mean dialectical materialism {{em|is}} only the theory of socialism? he seems to be saying that you're only allowed to realize mainstream Marxism-Leninism or you're a risk to the Soviet Union, possibly but not certainly an enemy. 
I'm not really trying to defend early Trotskyism here because in practice they did nothing but crush socialism, but as for anarchism and [[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought|Deng Xiaoping Thought]], those are basically the only progressive movements still alive today. one of them trying to act like reformism is the best thing since sliced bread and everything gets better as long as everybody does it, one of them becoming the only form of workers' state that survives for a whole century and the only real way to have a Second World that chains multiple countries together like you really need if you want to defend an era of socialism. the power of First World countries to all chain together and crush a specific country was greatly underestimated, and these [[E:Deng Xiaoping Thought|strawberry]] compromises basically became mandatory just to try to buy enough time to chain countries together without getting pulverized first. it's like.... they thought the proletariat exists but in reality you have to successfully join populations together {{em|as nationalities}} before you have a proletariat and don't have to rely on hiding a herd of cats behind the bourgeoisie. or something. 
it's false when Marx says it because he couldn't predict Trotskyism and it's false when Stalin says it because he couldn't predict Deng Xiaoping Thought. but both of these Marxisms exist and attempt to organize workers or integrated Third World populations. you need [[E:meta-Marxism|violet Marxism]] to properly understand that multiple countable instances of Marxism with different inner workings exist and they develop in different ways but you still need them to work together because them getting divided from each other while groups of Liberal-republican countries or mountains of capital can still unite is fatal.

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=618|h4 = Regard life as it actually is }} / We must regard life as it actually is (dialectical materialism) / The life of a population is a series of material objects growing, dying, joining, splitting, and rearranging, and we must understand its development in terms of the way it actually functions or the way that interactions between currently apparent objects or processes create new kinds of objects or processes (existential materialism, meta-Marxism)

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=29,68|Q2=2968|h4 = The existiest will win }} / That which is born and grows is invincible; that which is aging and crumbling suffers defeat (Stalin) / When all are Subjects, the existiest will rule ({{TTS|tts=meta-Marxism onto Existentialism|MX onto ES}}) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q29,68|9k]])

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=ML, A|Q=618}}Quantity stacks into quality / Minor quantitative changes stack up into major qualitative changes / Evolution pre-configures revolution -> I think this is one of the concepts that anarchists really abuse, because every time they do some small act of "direct action" they totally think they're doing that

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}Orbitals illustrate quantity-to-quality (dialectical materialism) / Electron quantum numbers stacking up into new periods illustrate quantity into quality

{{li|I=S2/ML|tradition=ML onto A|Q=618}}The claim of immutable justice shows that Proudhonism is based on metaphysics (1906) -> honestly. that's pretty sound

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}The positive trend we must defend / Every phenomenon of life has two trends: a positive and a negative; the first we must defend, the second we must reject (Stalin) / Because things are in motion and change at all times, Marxist allies must defend [[E:constructive process (meta-Marxism)|constructive processes]] and reject [[E:destructive process (meta-Marxism)|destructive processes]]

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}At some point in their development, the growth of chunks of workers will begin to overcome the tendency of business territories to accumulate earnings onto capitalists instead of give back to either build public facilities or reproduce the population -> truth value: true in Russian Empire, not true in the United States. 
why this isn't true in the United States is.... complicated. you almost need to model every scale of the society to see what's going on. we seem to get a new pattern where people continue to reproduce but they don't actually go into industry and as for industry {{em|creating}} proletarians it seems to like to throw them out and kick them over to different corporations. society fills up with all the products it could want whereas the stated purpose of hiring people is to invent more kinds of products; businesses periodically discontinue a bunch of products just to be able to invent more products and get more money, but it doesn't really help much. owners just get to push people out whenever they like and there's no serious moment of people really functioning as "overflowing productive forces". they just sort of go start a teeny tiny business and enter into these gigantic "hyper-malls" in hopes of scraping off a teeny tiny bit of income, where all of society judges the hell out of them relative to each other to determine how much they get to keep earning. if they fail at that they pretty much get kicked out of the population and into another population, usually in the form of moving out of their house and having to get rid of belongings and move to the first town that has an opening. that notion of "an opening" is really curious because it's like the number of [[E:receiving node (meta-Marxism)|receiving nodes]] that hire people is never much bigger than the number of [[E:granting node (meta-Marxism)|granting nodes]] that get hired. the individual people or households are playing a bigger role somehow, and it's not just the relatively large business territories overflowing with workers versus the owners. I don't really know what Marx says would even happen to this. I don't really see a single particular notion of productive forces here. the closest thing I can point out that looks like that is entire Third-World countries in Deng Xiaoping Thought. which can't overcome capitalists because this single gigantic sea of capitalists from 25 countries at once will hit one country and try to starve and dissolve its whole populace and strip them of their ethnic group if they even try, they just barely get allowed to have a nationality and ethnic group if they surround their country with export-selling capitalists for protection.

{{li|I=S2/ML|Q=618}}[[E:Material System of Bolshevism (meta-Marxism)|Bolshevism]] will not burst from capitalism until a particular minimum proportion of chunks of workers are present in the country / Peasants will not burst from a feudal order until workers or at least the bourgeoisie are present / No social order is overthrown before all the productive forces for which there is room in it have developed (Marx, {{cite|A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy}}) -> on my first reading of this sentence I thought it was a statement about quantity that as you got more chunks of workers it would become harder to maintain feudalism, but now I'm wondering if this is a statement about simply having all classes present and specifically having the newest class that's possible. now I'm not actually sure.

</li></ol>

== Subjective themes ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|I=S2/MX|tradition=MX onto LR|Q=618}}Liberal-republicanism believes it has bested or "hacked" the dialectical method by taking generalizable things like class territories stacking up into Social-Philosophical Systems of particular colors, and replacing them with totally unique non-generalizable objects like specific individual corporations, specific industries, or specific individual countries or ethnic groups that are to destroy and replace each other over and over -> the big question is, why??

{{li|I=S2/HM/ES|tradition=MX onto HM|Q=618}}{{em|Actually}}, scientists only ever came to consensuses on facts because they joined together around each other's Lived Experiences (derived critical-theory proposition) -> predicting a Habermas follower's response to Stalin's text.

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=618}}Immutable justice cannot exist if the borders of Palestine or Israel and the living conditions of the people inside can change -> you have to make things super duper topical for U.S. people to get them 
immutable justice (Proudhon) + Q19,77 Israel-Palestine conflict = this.

{{li|I=S2/MX|Q=618}}It is undialectical to claim that Marxism will simply be created and keep existing and developing all the way to the end for the indefinite future rather than there being a possibility it will be entirely dismantled and replaced with a different group of people -> this scares me because it makes it so easy for Identitarian fascists to show up and argue that North Koreans are inherently bad as an ethnic group or something and that's why their country will be dissolved and replaced. and yet, from historical evidence it seems to be materially true. dialectical materialism is accurate and yet it has such scary conclusions. it doesn't seem to favor Communism anywhere near as much as people thought it did in 1900. it seems that so far the single most successful type of civilization is the one that links together with a bunch of others and is as brutal and inhumane as possible to anybody that challenges their material power. like, as far as I can tell the only reason Hitler didn't succeed in conquering the world is that the Axis powers didn't stay together and there was only one Nazi Germany instead of 20.

{{li|I=S2/IV|Q=618}}Deng Xiaoping Thought will successfully transition to Bolshevism through a revolution -> you'd definitely think this if you read too much early Marxism from before about 1940.

{{li|I=S2/MW|Q=618}}Mark propositions with country or region if there is any chance the truth value will change within the area of other countries or regions; if a geographic region has not been specified on a proposition which should apply to a geographic area, do not assume the proposition or truth value is final (with state; with local-state; with county; with city; project policy)
{{li|I=S2/MW|Q=618}}Mark propositions with historical period if there is any chance the truth value will have changed in a matter of years; if a time period has not been specified on a proposition which should apply to a particular time period, do not assume the proposition or truth value is final

{{li|I=S2/MW|Q=618}}Names associated with Nazi Germany or the Axis Powers do not have to be censored on Ontology and prototype pages -> "Hitler" is okay on Item pages as long as it's not a joke.

</li></ol>
== Related ==

== Wavebuilder combinations ==

<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
{{WaveBuild| {{E:Q618/PT|Israel-Palestine conflict}} | {{E:Q618/A|immutable justice}} | Immutable justice cannot exist if the borders of Palestine or Israel and the living conditions of the people inside can change }} 
</dl>

== Ideology codes ==

<ol class="hue clean compound">
{{HueNumber|Q83|ML / dialectical materialism}}
</ol>

* PT / monarchism
* AS / Hegel
* AS / Hegelianism
* LR / Liberal-republicanism
* IK / Kantianism
* STM / scientific method
* STM / evolutionary biology
* ML / Stalin
* A / anarchism
* A / Proudhon
* A / Kropotkin
* HM / critical theory
* MX / meta-Marxism
* IK onto PT
* A onto AS
* A onto PT
* MX onto LR
* MX onto HM

[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 21:06:57 GMT

The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:06, 24 April 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<h2 id="section-proposed4"><span class="mw-headline">Unsorted Items (page 4)</span> {{editsection\|User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4}}</h2>		<h2 id="section-proposed4"><span class="mw-headline">Unsorted Items (page 4)</span> {{editsection\|User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-4}}</h2>
	<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean reset">		<noinclude>{{HueCSS}}</noinclude><ol class="hue clean reset">

			{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618}}When a soviet socialist republic is sandwiched between competing empires, it's time to rebuild (Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

			{{li\|I=S2/ML\|tradition=ML, IV\|Q=618}}The fight against the kulaks ends in creating the Bolshevik mono-structure ("raising the productivity of labor on the national scale", creating nation-wide "accounting"; Lenin 1918) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/mar/x03.htm]

			{{li\|I=S1/IV\|Q=618\|rem=ai.wsws.org}}SEP's analysis of "Stalinism" -> that's... its own specific thing? okay.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES/MX\|Q=618}}If the value of money is culturally fabricated ("made up"), but anarchism can realize itself through a sea of individuals spontaneously deciding to create a different kind of society, then anarchism is a cultural fabrication and everybody is free to spontaneously decide not to follow anarchism and follow whatever ostensibly more oppressive system they want to (meta-Marxism onto post-structuralism)		{{li\|I=S2/ES/MX\|Q=618}}If the value of money is culturally fabricated ("made up"), but anarchism can realize itself through a sea of individuals spontaneously deciding to create a different kind of society, then anarchism is a cultural fabrication and everybody is free to spontaneously decide not to follow anarchism and follow whatever ostensibly more oppressive system they want to (meta-Marxism onto post-structuralism)

Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)/ja

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:32:55 GMT

Reversedragon changed the language of Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)/ja from English (en) [default] to 日本語 (ja)

Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)/ja

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:29:40 GMT

(en) internationalization experiment

New page

{{Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)}}
[[Category:Item disambiguation pages (ja)]] [[Category:Text pages containing experiments]]

Category:Item disambiguation pages (ja)

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:28:37 GMT

Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:26:18 GMT

forgot to use sense JS

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:26, 24 April 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:

	{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean compound">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean compound">
	{{HueNumber\|Q41,03}} <!-- en: Stalin's Marxism -->		{{HueNumber\|Q41,03/JS}} <!-- en: Stalin's Marxism -->
	{{HueNumber\|Q618/IV\|Q=4001\|Stalinism (corruption) - Q4001}}		{{HueNumber\|Q618/IV\|Q=4001\|Stalinism (corruption) - Q4001}}
	</ol>		</ol>

	[[Category:Item disambiguation pages]]		[[Category:Item disambiguation pages]]

Template:IS1/IV

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:25:29 GMT

update formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:25, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{IS1\|class={{{class\|field_trotsky}}}\| tradition2 = ~~Trotskyism~~ \| tradition = IV \| tts = Fourth \|Q={{{Q\|}}}}}</onlyinclude></includeonly>		<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{IS1\|class={{{class\|field_trotsky}}}\| tradition2 = {{int:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv/{{{lang\|en}}}}} \| tradition = {{{trad\|IV}}} \| tts = {{{tradTTS\|Fourth}}} \| trad-E = {{{trad-E\|}}} \|lang={{{lang\|en}}}\|Q={{{Q\|}}}\|QTTS={{{tts\|}}}\|sense={{{sense\|}}}\|tag={{{tag\|}}}}}</onlyinclude></includeonly><!-- tradition2 = Trotskyism -->
	{{HueSwatchPreview\|I=S1/IV\|dl = motif or theme coded as S Item}}		{{HueSwatchPreview\|I=S1/IV\|dl = motif or theme coded as S Item}}

Line 12:		Line 12:
	* [[Template:IS1\|IS1]]		* [[Template:IS1\|IS1]]
	* [[Template:IS1/IV/class\|IS1/IV/class]] - HTML/CSS swatch coding		* [[Template:IS1/IV/class\|IS1/IV/class]] - HTML/CSS swatch coding
			* [[MediaWiki:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv]] / [[MediaWiki:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv/en\|en]]


	[[Category:I-Templates for philosophy tag IV]] [[Category:I-Templates for dimension S]] <!-- duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|IS1/IV]] -->		[[Category:I-Templates for philosophy tag IV]] [[Category:I-Templates for dimension S]] <!-- duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|IS1/IV]] -->

Category:Stalinism (disambiguation)

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:22:18 GMT

Trotskyist articles reminded me this was necessary; note - weird bug in HueNumber / Q618, Q should be passed through them but it isn't

New page

This is an ambiguous term. "Stalinism" can refer to:

{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean compound">
{{HueNumber|Q41,03}} 
{{HueNumber|Q618/IV|Q=4001|Stalinism (corruption) - Q4001}}
</ol>

[[Category:Item disambiguation pages]]

Ontology:Q618/IV

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:20:00 GMT

update formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{~~Ontology~~:Q618~~\|class=field_trotsky~~\|Q={{{Q\|618}}}\|li={{{li\|}}}\|dimension={{{dimension\|S}}}\|{{{1\|orange Item}}}\|IV}} [[Category:Text pages containing proposed Items]]</onlyinclude></includeonly>{{HueNumberPreview\|E=Q618/IV\|dl=y}}		<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{E:Q618\|Q={{{Q\|618}}}
			\|I={{{I\|S1/IV}}}\|dimension={{{dimension\|S}}}\|class=field_trotsky
			\|{{{1\|orange Item}}}
			\|IV}} [[Category:Text pages containing proposed Items]]</onlyinclude></includeonly>
			{{HueNumberPreview\|E=Q618/IV\|dl=y}}

	[[Category:B-Templates for semantically categorizing Items]] [[Category:Hue-format fake Entity labels]] <!-- copy from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|Q618/IV]] --> {{ArticleTitle\|NoContents=y}}		[[Category:B-Templates for semantically categorizing Items]] [[Category:Hue-format fake Entity labels]] <!-- copy from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|Q618/IV]] --> {{ArticleTitle\|NoContents=y}}

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessMainstreamMarxistLanguage

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 04:00:57 GMT

Reversedragon moved page Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessMainstreamMarxistLanguage to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q38,84 Moving 9k pages to Ontology talk for search purposes

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=useless words in Marxism-Leninism|User=RD|E=Q618|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX/ML|Q=618|Q2=618}}useless words in mainstream Marxism-Leninism / words mainstream Marxist-Leninists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by the proletariat or non-owners / useless mainstream-Marxist language [http://glench.com/tmnt/#Useless_mainstream-Marxist_Language] -> this is less of a problem here than it can be in Western-Marxism, but there are still quite a few "gotchas" that can cause problems when almost literally everybody you talk to on the ground is some kind of anarchist.

</li></ol>

== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX|Q=38,82|Q2=3882}}[[Ontology:Q3882|dreadfully unclear word]] (meta-Marxism) / ambiguous word or phrase / term useless for communication / term with different interpretations in every philosophy, ideology, and belief system

{{li|I=S1/MX/W|Q=38,83|Q2=3883}}useless words in Western-Marxism / words Western-Marxists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by meta-Marxism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage|9k]])

</li></ol>

== Word list ==

* atheist / atheism
* nonbeliever / nonbelief
* bourgeoisie

=== Words this list does not include ===

* gay
* lesbian
* bisexual
* transgender
* imperialism


== Ideologies or fields ==


* (none)


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessMainstreamMarxistLanguage

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 04:00:28 GMT

copy markup from Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage

New page

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3885

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:59:49 GMT

copy markup from 9k/Q38,83

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=useless words in anarchism|User=RD|E=Q38,85|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX/A|Q=38,85|Q2=3885}}useless words in anarchism / words anarchists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by meta-Marxism -> there are... so many of these it's hard to even begin.

</li></ol>

== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX|Q=38,82|Q2=3882}}[[Ontology:Q3882|dreadfully unclear word]] (meta-Marxism) / ambiguous word or phrase / term useless for communication / term with different interpretations in every philosophy, ideology, and belief system -> I don't think "useless Western-Marxist language" qualifies as this. it's not 'dreadfully unclear' to other ideologies, it's just... wrong models describing the wrong things, which I am very tired of.

</li></ol>

== Word list ==

* hierarchy / hierarchical
* domination / dominating / dominated
* social construct
* liberation
* emancipation
** when used to imply: hierarchy, domination.
* freedom
** when used to imply: hierarchy, domination.
*

=== Words this list does not include ===


== Ideologies or fields ==


* A / anarchism
* HM / critical theory


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]

Template:IS1/MX/A/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:57:44 GMT

reuse charcoal swatch

New page

#redirect[[Template:IS1/A/class]]

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-3

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:56:36 GMT

small-scale internationalism

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:56, 24 April 2026
Line 1,495:		Line 1,495:
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto HM, MX onto IK" value="618" data-dimension="S2">If something in a secondhand reading, retelling, summary, or analysis of a work of fiction {{em\|feels}} controlling to a commenter, then it actually is immoral (feels like domination; feels bigoted; critical theory adjacent proposition; Kantian ethics adjacent proposition) / If Mr. J posts a fan theory that unintentionally sets a story up to be coded as an incestuous relationship, but one thread commenter out of 200 feels unsafe or like the retold narrative is setting up Loci of Hierarchical Control and Domination, this one person's action is immoral with respect to all of society or all human beings / If Ms. Y posts an analysis of a narrative that claims it contains a metaphor for rape and 20 thread commenters out of 200 feel unsafe at the concept of the metaphor meaning that, regardless of whether the analysis is accurate to the influences of the work, Ms. Y's action is immoral with respect to all of society or all human beings -> internet posts really shed light on how Kantian ethics just fundamentally doesn't make a lot of sense. so you created a society with a social contract. where does "society" actually begin and end? what people does it actually control? what people is it obligated to listen to and take orders from? how is it not [[E:separable multiplicity\|countably plural]]? how is it not the case that "society" in a Kantian framework is just a bunch of little clustered islands that arbitrarily agree on the same morality and formed through the people that can tolerate those particular rules staying there and people that hate those rules and like other rules going elsewhere to their own [[E:Social-Graph System (meta-Marxism)\|rules]] [[E:Social-Philosophical System (meta-Marxism)\|island]]?<br/>		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto HM, MX onto IK" value="618" data-dimension="S2">If something in a secondhand reading, retelling, summary, or analysis of a work of fiction {{em\|feels}} controlling to a commenter, then it actually is immoral (feels like domination; feels bigoted; critical theory adjacent proposition; Kantian ethics adjacent proposition) / If Mr. J posts a fan theory that unintentionally sets a story up to be coded as an incestuous relationship, but one thread commenter out of 200 feels unsafe or like the retold narrative is setting up Loci of Hierarchical Control and Domination, this one person's action is immoral with respect to all of society or all human beings / If Ms. Y posts an analysis of a narrative that claims it contains a metaphor for rape and 20 thread commenters out of 200 feel unsafe at the concept of the metaphor meaning that, regardless of whether the analysis is accurate to the influences of the work, Ms. Y's action is immoral with respect to all of society or all human beings -> internet posts really shed light on how Kantian ethics just fundamentally doesn't make a lot of sense. so you created a society with a social contract. where does "society" actually begin and end? what people does it actually control? what people is it obligated to listen to and take orders from? how is it not [[E:separable multiplicity\|countably plural]]? how is it not the case that "society" in a Kantian framework is just a bunch of little clustered islands that arbitrarily agree on the same morality and formed through the people that can tolerate those particular rules staying there and people that hate those rules and like other rules going elsewhere to their own [[E:Social-Graph System (meta-Marxism)\|rules]] [[E:Social-Philosophical System (meta-Marxism)\|island]]?<br/>
	Kant has this notion that reason is just this one thing and being moral and being rational aren't different even though his notion of morality seems to be intuitive rather than logical and clashes against what I would think reason is, and I am always at such a loss for how Kant thought that the concept of falling back to whatever is morally intuitive would ever unite people into a single society rather than multiple societies.		Kant has this notion that reason is just this one thing and being moral and being rational aren't different even though his notion of morality seems to be intuitive rather than logical and clashes against what I would think reason is, and I am always at such a loss for how Kant thought that the concept of falling back to whatever is morally intuitive would ever unite people into a single society rather than multiple societies.

	~~</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S">small-scale internationalism~~

	</li><li class="field_nations" data-tradition="LR" value="618" data-dimension="S">CIA-funded union {{YouTube\|6E89qUXTX-k}} -> the United States has a very big problem with hegemony politics and Tories carrying out hegemony politics. what many people don't acknowledge is the real mechanism is that there is a mountain of capital because the United States is a First World country, and that mountain of capital comes down on anything the United States wants to quietly influence. usually hidden all the way over in other countries, but sometimes inside the United States. capital often doesn't confront workers directly, it does this horrifying thing of hollowing out people's allies and turning them into puppets that can't be ignored but can't be trusted. on the big scale and on the small scale it's hegemony politics with a mountain of capital on top of one side.<br/>		</li><li class="field_nations" data-tradition="LR" value="618" data-dimension="S">CIA-funded union {{YouTube\|6E89qUXTX-k}} -> the United States has a very big problem with hegemony politics and Tories carrying out hegemony politics. what many people don't acknowledge is the real mechanism is that there is a mountain of capital because the United States is a First World country, and that mountain of capital comes down on anything the United States wants to quietly influence. usually hidden all the way over in other countries, but sometimes inside the United States. capital often doesn't confront workers directly, it does this horrifying thing of hollowing out people's allies and turning them into puppets that can't be ignored but can't be trusted. on the big scale and on the small scale it's hegemony politics with a mountain of capital on top of one side.<br/>

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:55:38 GMT

small-scale internationalism

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:55, 24 April 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/A\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=33,74\|Q2=3374\|h4 = united nonviolence of special oppressions }} -> the motif that a country is composed of "[[E:White supremacy movements\|superior people]]" (social construct, bad) and a ton of endless categories of people who fail to function as perfectly as society's most elite people for some highly specific reason, that if you have any trouble getting into society there must be some highly specific reason you are specially oppressed which requires you to find other people who are specially oppressed exactly the same way and for all the highly specific groups to convince each other at length not to hurt {{em\|each other}} and oppress each other. I am so tired of this, specifically because of that last thing. it's clear that over time our basic assumptions about capitalism and Liberal-republicanism have simply ceased to be true, and the way the whole thing operates is a bit different from the way people think. it seems less that people inherently want to accept each other because they're different and more like there are many separate subpopulations of people shoving each other around all trying to fit onto an island too small to fit all of them.

	{{li\|I=S1/A\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>		{{li\|I=S1/DG/A\|tradition=DG\|Q=30,73\|Q2=3073\|h4 = united states of states of states }} / China full of Chinas full of Chinas / USSR of SSRs of SSRs / tribe of tribes of tribes -> the motif that a country is always just a voluntary link between demographics. that the United States is composed of Black women and White women spontaneously opting to be the same country, or Black women and White women opting to be women that then together with Black men opt to be the United States. etc.<br/>
	this motif is neutral. I am not trying to say it's bad or impossible to use well, although I would say it confuses and baffles me how intuitive this concept always is to everyone else for reasons I do not understand. or more specifically, how intuitive it is precisely to everyone who is oppressed while being completely unintuitive to a single individual with the power of oppression and as far as I can tell mostly ineffective on them. the sheer ineffectiveness of it on everyone I have ever known personally makes it greatly unintuitive to me, yet to everyone else there's almost no other way to think, and this always leaves me confused.<br />		this motif is neutral. I am not trying to say it's bad or impossible to use well, although I would say it confuses and baffles me how intuitive this concept always is to everyone else for reasons I do not understand. or more specifically, how intuitive it is precisely to everyone who is oppressed while being completely unintuitive to a single individual with the power of oppression and as far as I can tell mostly ineffective on them. the sheer ineffectiveness of it on everyone I have ever known personally makes it greatly unintuitive to me, yet to everyone else there's almost no other way to think, and this always leaves me confused.<br />
	I do have some days where I can almost understand it, specifically in cases like the USSR being made up of 14 republics, or a cluster of Iroquois tribes binding together into one big tribe. to me this motif makes lots of sense as a way to understand societies and history when you strain it through Communism or some very crimson-tinted general-sense historical materialism, but it doesn't make a lot of sense as anarchism, exactly the way everyone actually looks at it. so then I end up sitting around confused going, I'm supposed to understand the USSR as being effective specifically because it was made up of 14 nationalities that came together, but how is that even possible when it needed the Material System of Bolshevism to unite them? does this mean that when Trotsky attacked the Soviet Union he went against <em>anarchism</em> and the <em>charcoal-tinted workers' state process</em>? funny enough, that would actually make sense. but it's totally not the way anybody ever sees it in the United States. you don't see United States people going around saying "Trotsky brought down the USSR and that's why you have to vote Democrat, you don't want to become East Germany and let the Great Wall of Biden fall down only to let West Germany start hating and oppressing all people named Kevin". it'd certainly make internally-coherent sense [[:Category:Deng Xiaoping Thought ontology\|in its own way]], and yet nobody ever says it because everybody is committed to anarchism being the enemy of Communism but not the enemy of the United States government. doesn't that make anarchism literally "Western", full of prejudice in favor of "The West", and unable to do what "Settlers" claims? anarchism always completely twists my brain in knots because I always end up actually thinking about it and it never makes sense.		I do have some days where I can almost understand it, specifically in cases like the USSR being made up of 14 republics, or a cluster of Iroquois tribes binding together into one big tribe. to me this motif makes lots of sense as a way to understand societies and history when you strain it through Communism or some very crimson-tinted general-sense historical materialism, but it doesn't make a lot of sense as anarchism, exactly the way everyone actually looks at it. so then I end up sitting around confused going, I'm supposed to understand the USSR as being effective specifically because it was made up of 14 nationalities that came together, but how is that even possible when it needed the Material System of Bolshevism to unite them? does this mean that when Trotsky attacked the Soviet Union he went against <em>anarchism</em> and the <em>charcoal-tinted workers' state process</em>? funny enough, that would actually make sense. but it's totally not the way anybody ever sees it in the United States. you don't see United States people going around saying "Trotsky brought down the USSR and that's why you have to vote Democrat, you don't want to become East Germany and let the Great Wall of Biden fall down only to let West Germany start hating and oppressing all people named Kevin". it'd certainly make internally-coherent sense [[:Category:Deng Xiaoping Thought ontology\|in its own way]], and yet nobody ever says it because everybody is committed to anarchism being the enemy of Communism but not the enemy of the United States government. doesn't that make anarchism literally "Western", full of prejudice in favor of "The West", and unable to do what "[[E:read Settlers\|Settlers]]" claims? anarchism always completely twists my brain in knots because I always end up actually thinking about it and it never makes sense.

			{{li\|I=S1/DG/MX\|tradition=DG\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4 = small-scale internationalism }} / molecular internationalism; molecular scale internationalism (meta-Marxism) -> the motif of a country which has been sharded into a ridiculous number of "nationalities" that all function like tiny countries of 1,000 or fewer people, but where that huge number of tiny nationalities has actually started functioning together again.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Template:IS1/DG/A/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:51:20 GMT

reuse charcoal swatch

New page

#redirect[[Template:IS1/A/class]]

Template:IS1/DG/MX/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:50:18 GMT

reuse violet swatch

New page

#redirect[[Template:IS1/MX/class]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:44:55 GMT

Anarchism actually seeks molecularization / hierarchy

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:44, 24 April 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	this becomes super clear [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-FirstAnarchistManifesto\|when you read Bellegarrigue]] — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms, but the core ""class analysis"" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.		this becomes super clear [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-FirstAnarchistManifesto\|when you read Bellegarrigue]] — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms, but the core ""class analysis"" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}~~Anarchism actually seeks molecularization~~ / ~~Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model~~ of ~~all social interactions / Despite all~~ the ~~Idealist nonsense coming out~~ of a ~~lot~~ of ~~anarchist writers~~, the ~~ultimate goal of anarchism~~ is to ~~become aware~~ of ~~all~~ the ~~small-scale interactions~~ that ~~occur between individuals~~ or ~~small groups~~ of people ~~and over time through some kind~~ of ~~gradual transition process put societies~~ in ~~control~~ of ~~all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]])~~		<li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Social sanctioning is caused by hierarchies {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> {{em\|no.}} it's pretty {{censor\|damn}} often caused by Communities.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, Zv" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Giving orders is having illegitimate authority {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} / It is illegitimate authority to divide society into order givers and order takers -> god if this isn't one of the [[E:Zinovievism (meta-Marxism)\|orangest]] things I've ever heard. not one of anarchism's highest moments in my mind.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Being an authority is good, having authority is bad {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> when I read this I automatically assumed the anarchist would call the opposite of the two things bad. being an authority is bad because class territory owners and bigots clinging to positions and generalized dictators etc, having authority is okay because anarchism has to enforce its structure and Ideals somehow. and I was like, oh, wow, maybe anarchism actually makes sense and I'm being too harsh on it. and then, like it always does, it pulled a left turn and ceased making sense, and I was genuinely baffled. though unsurprised, because what came next was very familiar to the kinds of nonsense I'd already heard.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, ML" value="618" data-dimension="S">dividing society into order givers and order takers {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} / The ideas of the ruling class become the ruling ideas of the age (Marx) -> this is a legitimate description of society in the end, but anarchists always seem to get the causality behind it wildly wrong.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="F2">There is a difference between expertise and irrational authority, and anarchists are able to make this distinction and honor legitimate authority {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> there really isn't though, as far as anarchist movements are concerned. Stalin had "socially acknowledged expertise". but anarchists didn't like him. and the whole reason capitalism is a problem is that many or all of the people who "irrationally" dominate people first get into positions of power because they do have legitimate expertise in something that other people don't have; capitalism comes to exist because expertise becomes a matter of quantity rather than quality and the "expertiest" people within the few areas that capitalism actually values come to define what facts everyone is allowed to acknowledge as real and to "own" everyone else. in practice anarchists don't actually like experts being in charge if they violate other conditions that are much more important to anarchists than this distinction without a difference.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 70:		Line 78:

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.

			{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism actually seeks molecularization }} / Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model of all social interactions / Despite all the Idealist nonsense coming out of a lot of anarchist writers, the ultimate goal of anarchism is to become aware of all the small-scale interactions that occur between individuals or small groups of people and over time through some kind of gradual transition process put societies in control of all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]]) -><br/>
			this is one of the most good-faith interpretations I can pull out of anarchism, out of all the {{censor\|crap}} they say. anarchists really want to believe that history doesn't exist, that all historical periods are arbitrary, and that nothing in particular makes historical periods transition into other historical periods. ok.... but what if that {{em\|wasn't}} a terrible theory and it {{em\|did}} make sense? one of the possible outcomes if you take anarchism seriously is that anarchists have described a process of how individuals assemble from very fine-grained scales into larger historical periods, and how each collection of individual behaviors creates a historical period of a different "color". with one minimum change to anarchism, the recognition that different historical periods containing different repeated behaviors-of-individuals summing up to a particular color can actually transition into periods of other particular colors only from certain colors, you end up with a theory that actually isn't so bad. you've basically replaced the concept of [[E:sublation\|sublation]] with a more "timeless" theory that looks more like applied chemistry and recording or memorizing particular kinds of reactions that bridge particular kinds of molecules. but, again, that genuinely might be enough to carry an individual nation-wide movement in a particular country if somebody could only figure out the right transition from what to what. I genuinely believe you could teach anarchists [[E:meta-Marxism (applied)\|meta-Marxism]] if they were smart enough and they weren't so stubborn. like there is only so much of a difference between what Stalin said right before he died and the CPSU per-se was defeated, and what anarchists want to do. Stalin wanted to create a systematic study of how the small-scale elements of society transitioned into other small-scale elements; anarchists want to be in control of society's small-scale interactions. that's like, almost the same thing. if we could all just pry anarchists away from the concepts of Idealism and utterly mystifying the word "community" to create a strictly Materialist anarchism we'd be set

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

User:NickelBank/AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:41:19 GMT

remove motif commentary; it has been moved to Q3300 "anarchism"

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:41, 24 April 2026
Line 23:		Line 23:
	<ol class="hue clean reset">		<ol class="hue clean reset">

	<li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Social sanctioning is caused by hierarchies [~~https~~://~~theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5~~] ~~-> {{em\|no.}} it's pretty {{censor\|damn}} often caused by Communities.~~		<li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Social sanctioning is caused by hierarchies<ref name="stands"/> / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, Zv" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Giving orders is having illegitimate authority ~~[https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5]~~ / It is illegitimate authority to divide society into order givers and order takers -> ~~god if this isn't one of the~~ [[E:~~Zinovievism (meta-Marxism)~~\|~~orangest~~]] ~~things I've ever heard. not one of anarchism's highest moments in my mind.~~		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, Zv" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Giving orders is having illegitimate authority / It is illegitimate authority to divide society into order givers and order takers<ref name="stands"/> / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Being an authority is good, having authority is bad [~~https~~://~~theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5~~] -> when I read this I automatically assumed the anarchist would call the opposite of the two things bad. being an authority is bad because class territory owners and bigots clinging to positions and generalized dictators etc, having authority is okay because anarchism has to enforce its structure and Ideals somehow. and I was like, oh, wow, maybe anarchism actually makes sense and I'm being too harsh on it. and then, like it always does, it pulled a left turn and ceased making sense, and I was genuinely baffled. though unsurprised, because what came next was very familiar to the kinds of nonsense I'd already heard.		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Being an authority is good, having authority is bad<ref name="stands"/> / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, ML" value="618" data-dimension="S">dividing society into order givers and order takers (anarchism) ~~[https:~~/~~/theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5]~~ / The ideas of the ruling class become the ruling ideas of the age (Marx) ~~-> this is a legitimate description of society in the end, but anarchists always seem to get the causality behind it wildly wrong.~~		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, ML" value="618" data-dimension="S">dividing society into order givers and order takers (anarchism)<ref name="stands"/> / The ideas of the ruling class become the ruling ideas of the age (Marx) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="F2">There is a difference between expertise and irrational authority, and anarchists are able to make this distinction and honor legitimate authority ~~-> there really isn't though, as far as anarchist movements are concerned. Stalin had~~ "~~socially acknowledged expertise~~". but anarchists didn't like him. and the whole reason capitalism is a problem is that many or all of the people who "irrationally" dominate people first get into positions of power because they do have legitimate expertise in something that other people don't have; capitalism comes to exist because expertise becomes a matter of quantity rather than quality and the "expertiest" people within the few areas that capitalism actually values come to define what facts everyone is allowed to acknowledge as real and to "own" everyone else. in practice anarchists don't actually like experts being in charge if they violate other conditions that are much more important to anarchists than this distinction without a difference.		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="F2">There is a difference between expertise and irrational authority, and anarchists are able to make this distinction and honor legitimate authority<ref name="stands"/> / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Anarchism means abolishing domination / Anarchism is partly defined by the concept of abolishing domination ~~[https:~~/~~/theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5]~~ / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/A\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Anarchism means abolishing domination / Anarchism is partly defined by the concept of abolishing domination<ref name="stands"/> / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q3300\|9k]])

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 45:		Line 45:
	duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNNN\|other nickel]]		duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNNN\|other nickel]]
	-->		-->

			== Section links ==
			<references>
			<ref name="stands">"What Anarchism Really Stands For" [section]. [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morpheus-basic-principles-of-anarchism#toc5]</ref>
			</references>

Ontology:Q19,92

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:23:39 GMT

alias: meta-Marxism (applied)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:23, 24 April 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:
	{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}		{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\|lang=en\| {{E:Q19,92\|C=Q}} \| {{E:Q19,92/MD}} }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\|lang=en\| {{E:Q19,92\|C=Q}} \| {{E:Q19,92/MD}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| [[E:Molecular Marxism\|Molecular Marxism]] (hypothetical category of named Marxisms) \| MDem (named Marxism) \| any particular named Marxism which has been molecularized, becoming a molecular theory of society }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| [[E:Molecular Marxism\|Molecular Marxism]] (hypothetical category of named Marxisms) \| MDem (named Marxism) \| any particular named Marxism which has been molecularized, becoming a molecular theory of society \| {{a\|E=meta-Marxism (applied)}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P42 \| {{E:Q19,92/SN}} }} <!-- en: 1992 as undefeatable -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P42 \| {{E:Q19,92/SN}} }} <!-- en: 1992 as undefeatable -->
	{{HueRoster\|P=Item philosophy tag\| <code>MX</code> }}		{{HueRoster\|P=Item philosophy tag\| <code>MX</code> }}

Ontology:Meta-Marxism (applied)

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:22:16 GMT

semantic alias reflecting that descriptions of Molecular Marxisms are explanations of meta-Marxism

New page

#redirect[[Ontology:Q19,92]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:06:49 GMT

integrate points from subpage "hierarchy"

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:06, 24 April 2026
Line 22:		Line 22:
	this motif is neutral. I am not trying to say it's bad or impossible to use well, although I would say it confuses and baffles me how intuitive this concept always is to everyone else for reasons I do not understand. or more specifically, how intuitive it is precisely to everyone who is oppressed while being completely unintuitive to a single individual with the power of oppression and as far as I can tell mostly ineffective on them. the sheer ineffectiveness of it on everyone I have ever known personally makes it greatly unintuitive to me, yet to everyone else there's almost no other way to think, and this always leaves me confused.<br />		this motif is neutral. I am not trying to say it's bad or impossible to use well, although I would say it confuses and baffles me how intuitive this concept always is to everyone else for reasons I do not understand. or more specifically, how intuitive it is precisely to everyone who is oppressed while being completely unintuitive to a single individual with the power of oppression and as far as I can tell mostly ineffective on them. the sheer ineffectiveness of it on everyone I have ever known personally makes it greatly unintuitive to me, yet to everyone else there's almost no other way to think, and this always leaves me confused.<br />
	I do have some days where I can almost understand it, specifically in cases like the USSR being made up of 14 republics, or a cluster of Iroquois tribes binding together into one big tribe. to me this motif makes lots of sense as a way to understand societies and history when you strain it through Communism or some very crimson-tinted general-sense historical materialism, but it doesn't make a lot of sense as anarchism, exactly the way everyone actually looks at it. so then I end up sitting around confused going, I'm supposed to understand the USSR as being effective specifically because it was made up of 14 nationalities that came together, but how is that even possible when it needed the Material System of Bolshevism to unite them? does this mean that when Trotsky attacked the Soviet Union he went against <em>anarchism</em> and the <em>charcoal-tinted workers' state process</em>? funny enough, that would actually make sense. but it's totally not the way anybody ever sees it in the United States. you don't see United States people going around saying "Trotsky brought down the USSR and that's why you have to vote Democrat, you don't want to become East Germany and let the Great Wall of Biden fall down only to let West Germany start hating and oppressing all people named Kevin". it'd certainly make internally-coherent sense [[:Category:Deng Xiaoping Thought ontology\|in its own way]], and yet nobody ever says it because everybody is committed to anarchism being the enemy of Communism but not the enemy of the United States government. doesn't that make anarchism literally "Western", full of prejudice in favor of "The West", and unable to do what "Settlers" claims? anarchism always completely twists my brain in knots because I always end up actually thinking about it and it never makes sense.		I do have some days where I can almost understand it, specifically in cases like the USSR being made up of 14 republics, or a cluster of Iroquois tribes binding together into one big tribe. to me this motif makes lots of sense as a way to understand societies and history when you strain it through Communism or some very crimson-tinted general-sense historical materialism, but it doesn't make a lot of sense as anarchism, exactly the way everyone actually looks at it. so then I end up sitting around confused going, I'm supposed to understand the USSR as being effective specifically because it was made up of 14 nationalities that came together, but how is that even possible when it needed the Material System of Bolshevism to unite them? does this mean that when Trotsky attacked the Soviet Union he went against <em>anarchism</em> and the <em>charcoal-tinted workers' state process</em>? funny enough, that would actually make sense. but it's totally not the way anybody ever sees it in the United States. you don't see United States people going around saying "Trotsky brought down the USSR and that's why you have to vote Democrat, you don't want to become East Germany and let the Great Wall of Biden fall down only to let West Germany start hating and oppressing all people named Kevin". it'd certainly make internally-coherent sense [[:Category:Deng Xiaoping Thought ontology\|in its own way]], and yet nobody ever says it because everybody is committed to anarchism being the enemy of Communism but not the enemy of the United States government. doesn't that make anarchism literally "Western", full of prejudice in favor of "The West", and unable to do what "Settlers" claims? anarchism always completely twists my brain in knots because I always end up actually thinking about it and it never makes sense.

			</li></ol>

			== Hierarchy ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4 = "Hierarchy" is class society }} -> Anarchists use the concept of "hierarchy" as an attempt to model class society; "domination" is a slightly different way to refer to the same overall concept of Hierarchy or class society, but is almost the same thing -><br/>
			if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. they're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. but they specifically think class society exists because people give orders to other people.<br/>
			it's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. in feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. they think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.<br/>
			this becomes super clear [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-FirstAnarchistManifesto\|when you read Bellegarrigue]] — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms, but the core ""class analysis"" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}Anarchism actually seeks molecularization / Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model of all social interactions / Despite all the Idealist nonsense coming out of a lot of anarchist writers, the ultimate goal of anarchism is to become aware of all the small-scale interactions that occur between individuals or small groups of people and over time through some kind of gradual transition process put societies in control of all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]])

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 82:		Line 94:

	== Ideology codes ==		== Ideology codes ==

	* (none)		* (none)

	== Subpages ==		== Subpages ==
			* <s>[[Special:PermanentLink/41628\|hierarchy]]</s> - attempt to explain the significance of "hierarchy" in anarchism [integrated]
	* [[EC:9k/~~RD/Q3300~~/hierarchy]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300/hierarchy

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:05:52 GMT

retire this scrap as it's been integrated into its main 9k page

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{BopCSS}}<div class="bop top"><h3><time datetime="2026-03-30T22:23:18Z">3-30</time></h3>~~		#redirect[[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3300]]
	~~"I don't get what the deal with hierarchy is"<br/>~~
	So, if you collect enough anarchist statements and texts together, you find this: anarchists are using "hierarchy" or "domination" as a definition of class society. They're fundamentally talking about class society, and they don't care about 'hierarchies' in other contexts. But they specifically think {{em\|class society}} exists because people give orders to other people.

	It's really frustrating because in a way, it's sort of referring to something that's true. In feudal orders, and in capitalism, you have these chunks of people that do a task (manor, factory, etc) and then there's this one person or tiny group that is conflated with the whole group and gets to take credit for what it does. Anarchists think that exists just because humanity socially constructed the concept of owning individuals giving people orders, and thereby constructed governments. They think that a person giving orders is the nucleus of a government, and people giving orders and creating governments is what divides societies into warring states periods, hostile kingdoms, pointless Liberal-republican party fights, and capitalism.<br/>
	This becomes super clear when you read Bellegarrigue — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms but the core """class analysis""" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.
	~~</div>~~


	[[~~Category~~:~~Next nine thousand (~~RD)]] ~~<!-- page ends here.~~
	~~search-friendly numbers: Q4104~~
	~~-->~~

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/3000

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 03:03:21 GMT

useless Western-Marxist language

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:03, 24 April 2026
Line 1,222:		Line 1,222:
	--></li><li data-qid="38,82" value="3882" data-remark="The Lady or the Tiger" class="field_mdem" data-dimension="S">[[Ontology:Q3882\|dreadfully unclear word]] (meta-Marxism) / ambiguous word or phrase / term useless for communication / term with different interpretations in every philosophy, ideology, and belief system -> earlier today this started as a half-joke labeled "words RD hates", but the rules are that you're supposed to be able to cite some kind of work or in-draft manual, so I settled for this being some heading in a hypothetical meta-Marxist manual about word usage. ironically enough, this Item itself is <i>highly</i> useful for defining our policy on Lexemes. Lexeme - instance of - dreadfully unclear word		--></li><li data-qid="38,82" value="3882" data-remark="The Lady or the Tiger" class="field_mdem" data-dimension="S">[[Ontology:Q3882\|dreadfully unclear word]] (meta-Marxism) / ambiguous word or phrase / term useless for communication / term with different interpretations in every philosophy, ideology, and belief system -> earlier today this started as a half-joke labeled "words RD hates", but the rules are that you're supposed to be able to cite some kind of work or in-draft manual, so I settled for this being some heading in a hypothetical meta-Marxist manual about word usage. ironically enough, this Item itself is <i>highly</i> useful for defining our policy on Lexemes. Lexeme - instance of - dreadfully unclear word

	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="3883~~">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/MX/W \|Q=38,83\|Q2=3883}}useless words in Western-Marxism / useless Western-Marxist language / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q38,83\|9k]])
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="3884~~">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/MX/ML\|Q=38,84\|Q2=3884}}useless words in mainstream Marxism-Leninism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q38,84\|9k]])
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="3885~~">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/MX/A \|Q=38,85\|Q2=3885}}useless words in anarchism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q38,85\|9k]])
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="3886">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="3886">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="3887">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="3887">??

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q38,83

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 02:46:03 GMT

number

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:46, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=useless words in Western-Marxism\|User=RD\|E=~~Q618~~\|Contents=y}}		{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=useless words in Western-Marxism\|User=RD\|E=Q38,83\|Contents=y}}
	== Main entry ==		== Main entry ==
	{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/MX/W\|Q=~~618~~\|Q2=~~618~~}}useless words in Western-Marxism / words Western-Marxists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by meta-Marxism / useless Western-Marxist language [http://glench.com/tmnt/#Useless_Western-Marxist_Language] -> although this is theoretically a subjective concept, there {{em\|are}} objective criteria that can be used to define it to where a lot of people would look at it and go, "yeah, actually, these particular words embody the problems with Western-Marxism, and here are some more". so I feel like this meets the minimum criteria to be a motif.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S1/MX/W\|Q=38,83\|Q2=3883}}useless words in Western-Marxism / words Western-Marxists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by meta-Marxism / useless Western-Marxist language [http://glench.com/tmnt/#Useless_Western-Marxist_Language] -> although this is theoretically a subjective concept, there {{em\|are}} objective criteria that can be used to define it to where a lot of people would look at it and go, "yeah, actually, these particular words embody the problems with Western-Marxism, and here are some more". so I feel like this meets the minimum criteria to be a motif.
	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Line 36:		Line 36:
	** when not used to imply: physical class structures, country characteristics involving different sets of classes.		** when not used to imply: physical class structures, country characteristics involving different sets of classes.
	* elites / elite		* elites / elite
			* inequality / unequal
			** when used to imply: prejudices, attitudes, greed.
			* empathy / unempathetic
			** when used to imply: prejudices, attitudes, greed.
	* Western / Westernized / The West		* Western / Westernized / The West
	** when used to imply: prejudices, attitudes, bias, not being a Buddhist, not being a tribal population, not being an anarchist.		** when used to imply: prejudices, attitudes, bias, not being a Buddhist, not being a tribal population, not being an anarchist.
Line 74:		Line 78:

	== Full title for bookmarks (optional) ==		== Full title for bookmarks (optional) ==
	<pre>[9k] asdfsdfsdf - ~~Q618~~ - next nine thousand</pre>		<pre>[9k] asdfsdfsdf - Q38,83 - next nine thousand</pre>

	-->		-->
	[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming		[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
	redirects: [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage]]		redirects: [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage]] [[Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3883]]
	duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|~~Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage~~]] -->		duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|9k/Q38,83]] -->

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q3883

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 02:41:02 GMT

comma

New page

#redirect[[Ontology_talk:9k/RD/Q38,83]]

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 02:40:09 GMT

Reversedragon moved page Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q618-UselessWesternMarxistLanguage to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q38,83 Entity number or thesis portal structure was not final

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=useless words in Western-Marxism|User=RD|E=Q618|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX/W|Q=618|Q2=618}}useless words in Western-Marxism / words Western-Marxists shouldn't appeal to in order to be taken seriously by meta-Marxism / useless Western-Marxist language [http://glench.com/tmnt/#Useless_Western-Marxist_Language] -> although this is theoretically a subjective concept, there {{em|are}} objective criteria that can be used to define it to where a lot of people would look at it and go, "yeah, actually, these particular words embody the problems with Western-Marxism, and here are some more". so I feel like this meets the minimum criteria to be a motif.
</li></ol>

== Related ==
<ol class="hue clean">

{{li|start=y|I=S1/MX|Q=38,82|Q2=3882}}[[Ontology:Q3882|dreadfully unclear word]] (meta-Marxism) / ambiguous word or phrase / term useless for communication / term with different interpretations in every philosophy, ideology, and belief system -> I don't think "useless Western-Marxist language" qualifies as this. it's not 'dreadfully unclear' to other ideologies, it's just... wrong models describing the wrong things, which I am very tired of.

</li></ol>

== Word list ==

* culture / cultural / "[[E:The Culture (motif)|the culture]]"
** when used to imply: attitudes, prejudices.
** not applicable when used to imply: population.
* ideas / idea
* ideals
* mentality
* customs / custom / customary
* attitudes / attitude
* prejudices / prejudice
* bias / biases
* stereotypes / stereotype
* media / medium
* educate / education
** when used to imply: prejudices, bias, stereotypes.
** when not used to imply: science, Materialism, anthropology, phenomenological non-binary logic, historical materialism, meta-Marxism.
* entitled / entitlement
* greed / greedy
* privilege / privileged — this one is borderline. if it's being used to imply "prejudices" or "attitudes" or any such word on this list then it belongs here.
** when used to imply: culture, attitudes, prejudices, stereotypes.
** when not used to imply: physical class structures, country characteristics involving different sets of classes.
* elites / elite
* Western / Westernized / The West
** when used to imply: prejudices, attitudes, bias, not being a Buddhist, not being a tribal population, not being an anarchist.
** when not used to imply: name of Western-Marxism.
* suffering / suffer
** when used to imply: [[E:secular animism|secular animism]], [[E:Rhizome (schizoanalysis)|Rhizome]], every class of people except billionaires being "workers".
** when not used to imply: structural racism, Third World exploitation, international wars.

=== Words this list does not include ===

* anticommunist / anticommunism
* classes / class
* racism / racist
* representation
* First World
* Second World
* Third World


== Ideologies or fields ==


* W / Western Marxism
* W / Fisherism


[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]]

User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/3000

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 02:01:50 GMT

Transgender issues are not tertiary

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:01, 24 April 2026
Line 1,295:		Line 1,295:
	{{li\|I=S1/Fy\|class=field_fantasy field_LGBT\|Q=39,70\|Q2=3970}}male rivalries and gay subtext (fiction) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q31,30\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S1/Fy\|class=field_fantasy field_LGBT\|Q=39,70\|Q2=3970}}male rivalries and gay subtext (fiction) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q31,30\|9k]])

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=ML, IV, MX~~\|class=field_IV field_LGBT~~\|Q=39,71\|Q2=3971}}Transgender issues are not tertiary / Transgender issues are not "tertiary cultural issues" -> because of the contributions of "Jake" and whatseirname at Left Voice to the peripheries of Marxist theory it might be just fine to mark this part of mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism as well as violet Marxism. it's still pretty widely believed in places like China and Iraq that they are tertiary, but I think this is in error. this discrepancy in what people think is true about the whole world within different countries is part of the entire reason there's a need for violet Marxism.		{{li\|I=S2/IV/LGBT\|tradition=ML, IV, MX\|Q=39,71\|Q2=3971}}Transgender issues are not tertiary / Transgender issues are not "tertiary cultural issues" / ([[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="39,72" value="3972" data-dimension="S">there are only two genders... ~~-> motif or internet meme of starting a sentence with this and finishing it with something that absolutely should not be the answer and is hard not to crack up laughing at.<br~~ />		</li><li class="field_exstruct field_LGBT" data-qid="39,72" value="3972" data-dimension="S">there are only two genders... / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q51,30\|9k]])
	~~example A~~: ~~two ordinary restroom doors and a mysterious door in the middle labeled "there are two genders: male, female~~, ~~and maintenance closet"<br />~~
	~~example B: two photos of a terribly cluttered desk and a perfectly clean desk labeled "there are only two genders"~~

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="39,73" value="3973" data-dimension="S2">Reactionaries are just like Voldemort / Center-Liberals are just like Harry Potter fighting the death eaters -> this old trope becomes so bizarre when you realize how much transphobia and destructive nationalism comes from buying a Harry Potter book. comparing Harry Potter to the real world is like death eaters versus death eaters. the really terrible thing about this proposition? you'd have to prove center-Liberals have more principles than the Harry Potter series to prove the analogy is not accurate, and I'm not sure that's actually possible. the most accurate assessment might actually be that transphobes versus nazis is about where <em>actual</em> United States elections are, and the comparison is right for entirely the wrong reasons.		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="39,73" value="3973" data-dimension="S2">Reactionaries are just like Voldemort / Center-Liberals are just like Harry Potter fighting the death eaters -> this old trope becomes so bizarre when you realize how much transphobia and destructive nationalism comes from buying a Harry Potter book. comparing Harry Potter to the real world is like death eaters versus death eaters. the really terrible thing about this proposition? you'd have to prove center-Liberals have more principles than the Harry Potter series to prove the analogy is not accurate, and I'm not sure that's actually possible. the most accurate assessment might actually be that transphobes versus nazis is about where <em>actual</em> United States elections are, and the comparison is right for entirely the wrong reasons.

User:RD/9k/Q51,30

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 02:00:58 GMT

Reversedragon moved page User:RD/9k/Q51,30 to Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q51,30 Moving 9k pages to Ontology talk for search purposes

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:00, 24 April 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=root word mirage\|User=RD\|E=Q51,30\|Contents=y}}		{{NextNineThousand\|PPPA=root word mirage\|User=RD\|E=Q51,30\|Contents=y}}
	== Main entry ==		== Main entry ==
	~~<noinclude>~~{{HueCSS}}~~</noinclude>~~<ol class="hue clean">		{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">

	<li class="field_fantasy" data-tradition="HAS" data-qid="51,30" value="5130" data-dimension="S">root-word mirage / root word mirage (searchable) / name-element mirage / reading meaningful name elements out of the wrong names -> something of an arts trope. usually harmless. the only exception to that might be everyday instances of somebody reading a Chinese or Vietnamese name as "dung", etc. most of the time it's just funny, like Edward being a direction? gold. wondering if Oliver Wood is a beating stick? dark, but fine. turning the name Rowling into some dumb pun about rolling downhill and being unable to stop? perfect. I'd say that a name like "Darkstalker" doesn't fit into this motif because it's made of words that already have multiple meanings on their own. this motif is more like a frame shift mutation for words.		<li class="field_fantasy" data-tradition="HAS" data-qid="51,30" value="5130" data-dimension="S">root-word mirage / root word mirage (searchable) / name-element mirage / reading meaningful name elements out of the wrong names -> something of an arts trope. usually harmless. the only exception to that might be everyday instances of somebody reading a Chinese or Vietnamese name as "dung", etc. most of the time it's just funny, like Edward being a direction? gold. wondering if Oliver Wood is a beating stick? dark, but fine. turning the name Rowling into some dumb pun about rolling downhill and being unable to stop? perfect. I'd say that a name like "Darkstalker" doesn't fit into this motif because it's made of words that already have multiple meanings on their own. this motif is more like a frame shift mutation for words.
Line 8:		Line 8:

	== Sub-cases ==		== Sub-cases ==

	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

Line 16:		Line 15:
	arguments in favor: "hog" could be read as rightwards depending on the language. if that's true.... oh boy, it really doesn't look good for the meaning of the books does it? like, Hogwarts would be the same thing as the bad meaning of "redpilled".		arguments in favor: "hog" could be read as rightwards depending on the language. if that's true.... oh boy, it really doesn't look good for the meaning of the books does it? like, Hogwarts would be the same thing as the bad meaning of "redpilled".

	<li class="~~field_fantasy~~" data-tradition="HAS" data-qid="51,30" value="5130" data-dimension="S">comrade page [https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special:Translations&message=Wikimedia%3ACopypatrol-talk] [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/comhr%C3%A1] [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/c%C3%B2mhradh] -> I was looking for an abbreviation for "Ontology talk". nothing was standing out at me until I saw the related Irish and Scottish words {{i\|lang=ga\|comhrá}} and {{i\|lang=gd\|còmhradh}} and started laughing. they do {{em\|not}} come from the same etymology as comrade. it's {{i\|lang=ga\|com}} (with/together) + {{i\|lang=ga\|hrá}} (speak), a lot like Latin words are formed, while "comrade" comes from room. I still can't help but find it funny that the word looks like that though. "EC" it is.		<li class="field_ML" data-tradition="HAS" data-qid="51,30" value="5130" data-dimension="S">comrade page [https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special:Translations&message=Wikimedia%3ACopypatrol-talk] [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/comhr%C3%A1] [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/c%C3%B2mhradh] -> I was looking for an abbreviation for "Ontology talk". nothing was standing out at me until I saw the related Irish and Scottish words {{i\|lang=ga\|comhrá}} and {{i\|lang=gd\|còmhradh}} and started laughing. they do {{em\|not}} come from the same etymology as comrade. it's {{i\|lang=ga\|com}} (with/together) + {{i\|lang=ga\|hrá}} (speak), a lot like Latin words are formed, while "comrade" comes from room. I still can't help but find it funny that the word looks like that though. "EC" it is.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

	== Related ==		== Related ==
			<ol class="hue clean field_LGBT">
	<ol class="hue clean">

	<li class="field_exstruct" data-remark="linguistics" data-qid="51,29" value="5129" data-dimension="S">let's eat grandpa / the first Undertale ever received / please workers only (sign installed in public place which appears to be an instruction to only obey workers) / Trotsky helped lay the foundations of the Third International galvanizing parties around the world / ([[User:RD/9k/Q51,29\|9k]])		<li class="field_exstruct" data-remark="linguistics" data-qid="51,29" value="5129" data-dimension="S">let's eat grandpa / the first Undertale ever received / please workers only (sign installed in public place which appears to be an instruction to only obey workers) / Trotsky helped lay the foundations of the Third International galvanizing parties around the world / ([[User:RD/9k/Q51,29\|9k]])
Line 28:		Line 26:
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES, Aa" data-remark="arguably a Lacanian sentence type by now." data-qid="31,72" value="3172" data-dimension="S">fruit flies like a banana / stroked his lover with the edge of a knife / cellar filled with wine and spirits, but not a bottle to be seen ({{book\|Dr. Faustroll\|}})		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES, Aa" data-remark="arguably a Lacanian sentence type by now." data-qid="31,72" value="3172" data-dimension="S">fruit flies like a banana / stroked his lover with the edge of a knife / cellar filled with wine and spirits, but not a bottle to be seen ({{book\|Dr. Faustroll\|}})

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="39,78" value="3978" data-dimension="S">assigned harpoon at birth (Ahab) / Land Gay Before Time / Lesbian Gay Pikachu Eevee / Lesbian Gay Bacon Lettuce Tomato (South Park) / Maoist who Loves Men (MLM) / mainstream men (MSM) / Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trotsky / <s>Liberal, Gay, Bisexual, Trotsky</s> / Communist Product Category; Communist Party of China codes (CPC codes) [https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/print/20040322/25640-what-is-inspiration.html] -> the motif of accidentally reading acronyms that have nothing to do with gender / LGBT+ as "definitely" being a strange new variation of an LGBT+ acronym. not to be confused with acrostics where a word is simply structuring an arbitrary set of words. this is when two actual acronyms collide and people start reading one of them as the other even if they aren't exactly the same		</li><li class="field_exstruct field_LGBT" data-qid="39,72" value="3972" data-dimension="S">there are only two genders... -> motif or internet meme of starting a sentence with this and finishing it with something that absolutely should not be the answer and is hard not to crack up laughing at.<br />
			example A: two ordinary restroom doors and a mysterious door in the middle labeled "there are two genders: male, female, and maintenance closet"<br />
			example B: two photos of a terribly cluttered desk and a perfectly clean desk labeled "there are only two genders"

			</li><li class="field_exstruct field_LGBT" data-qid="39,78" value="3978" data-dimension="S">assigned harpoon at birth (Ahab) / Land Gay Before Time / Lesbian Gay Pikachu Eevee / Lesbian Gay Bacon Lettuce Tomato (South Park) / Maoist who Loves Men (MLM) / mainstream men (MSM) / Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trotsky / <s>Liberal, Gay, Bisexual, Trotsky</s> / Communist Product Category; Communist Party of China codes (CPC codes) [https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/print/20040322/25640-what-is-inspiration.html] -> the motif of accidentally reading acronyms that have nothing to do with gender / LGBT+ as "definitely" being a strange new variation of an LGBT+ acronym. not to be confused with acrostics where a word is simply structuring an arbitrary set of words. this is when two actual acronyms collide and people start reading one of them as the other even if they aren't exactly the same

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-qid="39,78" value="3978" data-dimension="S">Lesbian Gay Bacon Tomato / Communist Product Category; Communist Party of China codes (CPC codes) [https://www.isko.org/cyclo/bisac] [https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/print/20040322/25640-what-is-inspiration.html] -> I was trying to read a page about the BISAC book code system and they never defined what "CPC codes" were so I was really really confused what that could possibly be. not to mention how surreal it was to see "evangelical Christians" using anything called "CPC codes", like they've gotta answer to the Communist International to keep from being revisionist or something, or China becoming this weird brake on what content can be put in Disney movies got way out of hand. my best {{em\|plausible}} guess was "Christian publisher codes". but it turned out to be "Christian product category".		</li><li class="field_exstruct field_LGBT" data-qid="39,78" value="3978" data-dimension="S">Lesbian Gay Bacon Tomato / Communist Product Category; Communist Party of China codes (CPC codes) [https://www.isko.org/cyclo/bisac] [https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/print/20040322/25640-what-is-inspiration.html] -> I was trying to read a page about the BISAC book code system and they never defined what "CPC codes" were so I was really really confused what that could possibly be. not to mention how surreal it was to see "evangelical Christians" using anything called "CPC codes", like they've gotta answer to the Communist International to keep from being revisionist or something, or China becoming this weird brake on what content can be put in Disney movies got way out of hand. my best {{em\|plausible}} guess was "Christian publisher codes". but it turned out to be "Christian product category".

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

Template:IS2/IV/LGBT/class

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:52:39 GMT

create template adding to orange swatch

New page

{{IS2/IV/class|field_LGBT {{{1|}}}}}
[[Category:I-Template classnames calling other classname template]]

User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:50:45 GMT

redirects

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:50, 24 April 2026
Line 41:		Line 41:
	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Israel-Palestine conflict\|Israel-Palestine]] is the only issue people actually organize over (circa 2022) -> on one hand this might be superficially true, it might well be what everyone is observing. on the other hand, this should not logically be true if "everyone is the proletariat" and only some tiny 5% of people are bourgeoisie. you'd think the proletariat would have more to demonstrate over!		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}[[E:Israel-Palestine conflict\|Israel-Palestine]] is the only issue people actually organize over (circa 2022) -> on one hand this might be superficially true, it might well be what everyone is observing. on the other hand, this should not logically be true if "everyone is the proletariat" and only some tiny 5% of people are bourgeoisie. you'd think the proletariat would have more to demonstrate over!

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|tradition=ML,IV\|Q=42,08\|Q2=4208}}I'm a Marxist-Leninist but China needs to be Zinovievized		{{li\|I=S1/ML\|tradition=ML,IV\|Q=42,08\|Q2=4208}}I'm a Marxist-Leninist but China needs to be Zinovievized

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Trotskyism in the historical Soviet Union is obviously incorrect because of {{em\|what classes}} it came from -> again, true in the Soviet Union, but not an easy thing to say in the United States because the whole 'Left' is going to be bourgeoisie if the whole country is; it's more possible Trotskyists are flat out your allies in that environment and you'll face huge consequences for treating them with prejudice as opposed to, say, genuinely exposing them as liars on history or proving that their model of Leninism is unworkable. I know how Trotskyists roll, they believe they're the only legitimate Communist party of the United States and every anticommunist faction also kind of believes it, to the comical result of the whole of anticommunism kind of being right sometimes about putting Trotsky on a pedestal when CPUSA and Gramscians and anarchists put out really terrible models of things and the Trotskyists put out analyses on race and gender etc that are actually not crazy. I think what I'm saying is that although Trotskyism is one of the worse versions of Marxism, anarchism and critical-theory are doing a phenomenal job at being {{em\|so}} wrong they make Trotskyism look good.		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=618\|Q2=618}}Trotskyism in the historical Soviet Union is obviously incorrect because of {{em\|what classes}} it came from -> again, true in the Soviet Union, but not an easy thing to say in the United States because the whole 'Left' is going to be bourgeoisie if the whole country is; it's more possible Trotskyists are flat out your allies in that environment and you'll face huge consequences for treating them with prejudice as opposed to, say, genuinely exposing them as liars on history or proving that their model of Leninism is unworkable. I know how Trotskyists roll, they believe they're the only legitimate Communist party of the United States and every anticommunist faction also kind of believes it, to the comical result of the whole of anticommunism kind of being right sometimes about putting Trotsky on a pedestal when CPUSA and Gramscians and anarchists put out really terrible models of things and the Trotskyists put out analyses on race and gender etc that are actually not crazy. I think what I'm saying is that although Trotskyism is one of the worse versions of Marxism, anarchism and critical-theory are doing a phenomenal job at being {{em\|so}} wrong they make Trotskyism look good.
Line 73:		Line 73:

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=21,44\|Q2=2144}}{{book\|Trotskyism: Counter-revolution in Disguise}} (Olgin 1935) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q21,44\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=21,44\|Q2=2144}}{{book\|Trotskyism: Counter-revolution in Disguise}} (Olgin 1935) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q21,44\|9k]])

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=36,74\|Q2=3674}}Defeat Stalin with gender identity / Gender identity is proletarian but it's Stalin that divides people / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q36,74\|9k]])

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 90:		Line 92:
	* ES / blue anarchism		* ES / blue anarchism
	* DG / schizoanalysis		* DG / schizoanalysis
			* W / Western Marxism
			* W / Gramscianism
			* Zv / orange anarchism

	== Subpages ==		== Subpages ==

	* [[Special:PermanentLink/42408\|AntiJakeTheory/method423]] - attempt to quickly summarize all of Jake's positions.		* <s>[[Special:PermanentLink/42408\|AntiJakeTheory/method423]]</s> - attempt to quickly summarize all of Jake's positions. [integrated]


	[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming		[[Category:Next nine thousand (RD)]] <!-- page ends here. TTS-unfriendly numbers incoming
	redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory]]		redirects: [[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory]]
			old subpages: [[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory/method423]]
	duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory]] -->		duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory]] -->

User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory/method423

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:39:50 GMT

retire this scrap as it's been integrated into its main 9k page

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:39, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~you know what<br/>~~		#redirect[[User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory]]
	~~one video topic that would actually help a lot of people in the United States would be a video tearing apart {{thingamabob\|~~[~~redacted]}}'s strategy for getting a Marxist movement. the more I've tried to compare it to real life events the more it has really felt off to me.<br~~/>
	~~this is the jist of what he says:<br~~/>
	~~(this is all from memory, so I could have missed some things, or I could be giving you a summary that's about a year or two out of date after he changed it)~~

	* United States people need to form a "mass movement"
	* it's more important to get into organizations than for the organizations to be good, with some exceptions for organizations that are truly terrible
	* the United States is mostly composed of proletariat; people need to become conscious of being the proletariat
	** [as far as I can tell this is factually incorrect, it's almost the other way around where the country is mostly composed of bourgeoisie and non-proletarians]
	* minorities represent the interests of the proletarian masses
	** [this would be true {{em\|in the historical Soviet Union}}, or if Mao is talking about minority Chinese cultures and languages, but if nearly nobody is the proletariat then it can't be true]
	* the United States can bring together a competent left by campaigning for Social-Democracy
	** [I think there is a bit of evidence this is false, because all our "mass movements" we're supposed to enter are {{em\|anarchism}}, and everyone is currently complaining that Social-Democratic programs are actually much too little to become a suitable "high bar that won't be met". in terms of high bars that would push the country forward what everyone truly wants looks more like, fucking, putting Black people in charge of Louisiana and Alabama or 2 to 4 specific states administered as their own separate union-republic and driving out all White people who are determined to be racist cops (not the rest) from the union republic so only a party Black people initially created to run the union republic can appoint cops. or something. a Black union republic defined solely through lack of White supremacists. I'm spitballing. "abolish the police" has been a big talking point while "Medicare for all" has been too depressing for anyone to get behind in a world where there's nothing to unite people strongly enough to successfully defend social housing or trans health care or access to abortion. it'd take something a little crazy like re-~~dividing the United States to create a progressive nation to actually get people fired up.]~~
	* he talks about Israel as "the only issue anyone can participate in" but never stops to consider the concept of it being the single mass movement that is to unite everybody into a Left.
	** [as far as I can tell, people getting fired for speaking against Israel is just about the only thing there is that a wide swath of people all recognize as a threat to them, that could bring people together who weren't previously involved into a movement, and absolutely everyone could strike over.]
	* the Overton Window doesn't exist
	** [yes but no, it exists in that Hegelian processes kind of exist where ideas contained in groups of people defeat each other. and that's how Communism was so thoroughly destroyed, by brutally eradicating the people that supported it. important detail lost]
	* Trotskyism in the historical Soviet Union is obviously incorrect because of {{em\|what classes}} people were
	** [again, true in the Soviet Union, but not an easy thing to say in the United States because the whole 'Left' is going to be bourgeoisie if the whole country is; it's more possible Trotskyists are flat out your allies in that environment and you'll face huge consequences for treating them with prejudice as opposed to, say, genuinely exposing them as liars on history or proving that their model of Leninism is unworkable. I know how Trotskyists roll, they believe they're the only legitimate Communist party of the United States and every anticommunist faction also kind of believes it, to the comical result of the whole of anticommunism kind of being right sometimes when CPUSA and Gramscians and anarchists put out really terrible models of things and the Trotskyists put out analyses on race and gender etc that are actually not crazy. I think what I'm saying is that although Trotskyism is one of the worse versions of Marxism anarchism and critical-theory are doing a phenomenal job at being so wrong they make Trotskyism look good.]

	~~------~~

	there was a dumb comment on {{thingamabob\|[... irrelevant]}} which was like "Hasan" "Mamdani" "purity testing!!" that was trying to act like a lack of good options is truly the fault of people not "Just Getting Organized" with the DSAs and Mamdanis, and not the fault of imperialism actually destroying the good options everywhere actively<br/>
	~~... challenge {{thingamabob\|[redacted~~]~~}}'s strategy. because it's creating people like that.~~

User:RD/9k/Q618-AntiJakeTheory

Reversedragon — Fri, 24 Apr 2026 01:38:13 GMT

integrate points from subpage "method423"

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:25, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{IS1\|class={{{class\|field_trotsky}}}\| tradition2 = ~~Trotskyism~~ \| tradition = IV \| tts = Fourth \|Q={{{Q\|}}}}}</onlyinclude></includeonly>		<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{IS1\|class={{{class\|field_trotsky}}}\| tradition2 = {{int:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv/{{{lang\|en}}}}} \| tradition = {{{trad\|IV}}} \| tts = {{{tradTTS\|Fourth}}} \| trad-E = {{{trad-E\|}}} \|lang={{{lang\|en}}}\|Q={{{Q\|}}}\|QTTS={{{tts\|}}}\|sense={{{sense\|}}}\|tag={{{tag\|}}}}}</onlyinclude></includeonly><!-- tradition2 = Trotskyism -->
	{{HueSwatchPreview\|I=S1/IV\|dl = motif or theme coded as S Item}}		{{HueSwatchPreview\|I=S1/IV\|dl = motif or theme coded as S Item}}

Line 12:		Line 12:
	* [[Template:IS1\|IS1]]		* [[Template:IS1\|IS1]]
	* [[Template:IS1/IV/class\|IS1/IV/class]] - HTML/CSS swatch coding		* [[Template:IS1/IV/class\|IS1/IV/class]] - HTML/CSS swatch coding
			* [[MediaWiki:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv]] / [[MediaWiki:hue-tooltip-tradition-iv/en\|en]]


	[[Category:I-Templates for philosophy tag IV]] [[Category:I-Templates for dimension S]] <!-- duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|IS1/IV]] -->		[[Category:I-Templates for philosophy tag IV]] [[Category:I-Templates for dimension S]] <!-- duplication hint: copy markup from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|IS1/IV]] -->

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 24 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{~~Ontology~~:Q618~~\|class=field_trotsky~~\|Q={{{Q\|618}}}\|li={{{li\|}}}\|dimension={{{dimension\|S}}}\|{{{1\|orange Item}}}\|IV}} [[Category:Text pages containing proposed Items]]</onlyinclude></includeonly>{{HueNumberPreview\|E=Q618/IV\|dl=y}}		<includeonly><onlyinclude>{{E:Q618\|Q={{{Q\|618}}}
			\|I={{{I\|S1/IV}}}\|dimension={{{dimension\|S}}}\|class=field_trotsky
			\|{{{1\|orange Item}}}
			\|IV}} [[Category:Text pages containing proposed Items]]</onlyinclude></includeonly>
			{{HueNumberPreview\|E=Q618/IV\|dl=y}}

	[[Category:B-Templates for semantically categorizing Items]] [[Category:Hue-format fake Entity labels]] <!-- copy from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|Q618/IV]] --> {{ArticleTitle\|NoContents=y}}		[[Category:B-Templates for semantically categorizing Items]] [[Category:Hue-format fake Entity labels]] <!-- copy from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN\|Q618/IV]] --> {{ArticleTitle\|NoContents=y}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:44, 24 April 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	this becomes super clear [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-FirstAnarchistManifesto\|when you read Bellegarrigue]] — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms, but the core ""class analysis"" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.		this becomes super clear [[EC:9k/RD/Q618-FirstAnarchistManifesto\|when you read Bellegarrigue]] — his anarchism is rather crude and doesn't fully match a lot of modern social anarchisms, but the core ""class analysis"" framework used by many anarchists is clearly defined in there.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/A\|Q=618}}~~Anarchism actually seeks molecularization~~ / ~~Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model~~ of ~~all social interactions / Despite all~~ the ~~Idealist nonsense coming out~~ of a ~~lot~~ of ~~anarchist writers~~, the ~~ultimate goal of anarchism~~ is to ~~become aware~~ of ~~all~~ the ~~small-scale interactions~~ that ~~occur between individuals~~ or ~~small groups~~ of people ~~and over time through some kind~~ of ~~gradual transition process put societies~~ in ~~control~~ of ~~all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]])~~		<li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Social sanctioning is caused by hierarchies {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> {{em\|no.}} it's pretty {{censor\|damn}} often caused by Communities.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, Zv" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Giving orders is having illegitimate authority {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} / It is illegitimate authority to divide society into order givers and order takers -> god if this isn't one of the [[E:Zinovievism (meta-Marxism)\|orangest]] things I've ever heard. not one of anarchism's highest moments in my mind.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Being an authority is good, having authority is bad {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> when I read this I automatically assumed the anarchist would call the opposite of the two things bad. being an authority is bad because class territory owners and bigots clinging to positions and generalized dictators etc, having authority is okay because anarchism has to enforce its structure and Ideals somehow. and I was like, oh, wow, maybe anarchism actually makes sense and I'm being too harsh on it. and then, like it always does, it pulled a left turn and ceased making sense, and I was genuinely baffled. though unsurprised, because what came next was very familiar to the kinds of nonsense I'd already heard.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A, ML" value="618" data-dimension="S">dividing society into order givers and order takers {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} / The ideas of the ruling class become the ruling ideas of the age (Marx) -> this is a legitimate description of society in the end, but anarchists always seem to get the causality behind it wildly wrong.

			</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="F2">There is a difference between expertise and irrational authority, and anarchists are able to make this distinction and honor legitimate authority {{nickel\|AnarchistLibrary/PrinciplesOfAnarchism\|Basic Principles of Anarchism}} -> there really isn't though, as far as anarchist movements are concerned. Stalin had "socially acknowledged expertise". but anarchists didn't like him. and the whole reason capitalism is a problem is that many or all of the people who "irrationally" dominate people first get into positions of power because they do have legitimate expertise in something that other people don't have; capitalism comes to exist because expertise becomes a matter of quantity rather than quality and the "expertiest" people within the few areas that capitalism actually values come to define what facts everyone is allowed to acknowledge as real and to "own" everyone else. in practice anarchists don't actually like experts being in charge if they violate other conditions that are much more important to anarchists than this distinction without a difference.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 70:		Line 78:

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|class=field_exstruct field_LGBT\|Q=22,87\|Q2=2287\|h4 = Anarchism defines itself as Evil }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q22,87\|9k]]) -> this definition of anarchism applies to fields like non-normative queer theory.

			{{li\|I=S2/A/MX\|Q=618\|h4 = Anarchism actually seeks molecularization }} / Anarchism secretly aims for a molecularized model of all social interactions / Despite all the Idealist nonsense coming out of a lot of anarchist writers, the ultimate goal of anarchism is to become aware of all the small-scale interactions that occur between individuals or small groups of people and over time through some kind of gradual transition process put societies in control of all of those interactions through proportional levels of force or intervention / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q50,98\|9k]]) -><br/>
			this is one of the most good-faith interpretations I can pull out of anarchism, out of all the {{censor\|crap}} they say. anarchists really want to believe that history doesn't exist, that all historical periods are arbitrary, and that nothing in particular makes historical periods transition into other historical periods. ok.... but what if that {{em\|wasn't}} a terrible theory and it {{em\|did}} make sense? one of the possible outcomes if you take anarchism seriously is that anarchists have described a process of how individuals assemble from very fine-grained scales into larger historical periods, and how each collection of individual behaviors creates a historical period of a different "color". with one minimum change to anarchism, the recognition that different historical periods containing different repeated behaviors-of-individuals summing up to a particular color can actually transition into periods of other particular colors only from certain colors, you end up with a theory that actually isn't so bad. you've basically replaced the concept of [[E:sublation\|sublation]] with a more "timeless" theory that looks more like applied chemistry and recording or memorizing particular kinds of reactions that bridge particular kinds of molecules. but, again, that genuinely might be enough to carry an individual nation-wide movement in a particular country if somebody could only figure out the right transition from what to what. I genuinely believe you could teach anarchists [[E:meta-Marxism (applied)\|meta-Marxism]] if they were smart enough and they weren't so stubborn. like there is only so much of a difference between what Stalin said right before he died and the CPSU per-se was defeated, and what anarchists want to do. Stalin wanted to create a systematic study of how the small-scale elements of society transitioned into other small-scale elements; anarchists want to be in control of society's small-scale interactions. that's like, almost the same thing. if we could all just pry anarchists away from the concepts of Idealism and utterly mystifying the word "community" to create a strictly Materialist anarchism we'd be set

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:23, 24 April 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:
	{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}		{{HueClaim \|P=item type\| {{Template:S1}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\|lang=en\| {{E:Q19,92\|C=Q}} \| {{E:Q19,92/MD}} }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA/L\|lang=en\| {{E:Q19,92\|C=Q}} \| {{E:Q19,92/MD}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| [[E:Molecular Marxism\|Molecular Marxism]] (hypothetical category of named Marxisms) \| MDem (named Marxism) \| any particular named Marxism which has been molecularized, becoming a molecular theory of society }}		{{HueRoster\|EP=PPPA\|lang=en\| [[E:Molecular Marxism\|Molecular Marxism]] (hypothetical category of named Marxisms) \| MDem (named Marxism) \| any particular named Marxism which has been molecularized, becoming a molecular theory of society \| {{a\|E=meta-Marxism (applied)}} }}
	{{HueRoster\|EP=P42 \| {{E:Q19,92/SN}} }} <!-- en: 1992 as undefeatable -->		{{HueRoster\|EP=P42 \| {{E:Q19,92/SN}} }} <!-- en: 1992 as undefeatable -->
	{{HueRoster\|P=Item philosophy tag\| <code>MX</code> }}		{{HueRoster\|P=Item philosophy tag\| <code>MX</code> }}