Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q43,50 - Revision history

Reversedragon: Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership

2026-08-13T12:33:41Z

Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:33, 13 August 2026
Line 48:		Line 48:
	is this violet? it strikes me as something I'd say only after I figured out that I didn't have a coherent 'narrative' of Trotskyism myself. I think this one is orange.		is this violet? it strikes me as something I'd say only after I figured out that I didn't have a coherent 'narrative' of Trotskyism myself. I think this one is orange.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership		{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership -> this phrase Trotskyists say has become a funny 'brain meme' to me that I've started throwing into Items ironically. [[EC:9k/RDIntoInsanity\|not in the old way]] I'd do that kind of thing though where I am trying to say anything bad about Trotskyists. it's just a matter of, why are we still talking about this? doesn't this phrase literally define itself as something that should have been solved a long time ago? there's a certain irony in there. so, yeah. wildly overusing the phrase 'crisis of revolutionary leadership' is my new joke. I think it fits here, because it's like, 2/3 of the world is totally trying to deny Marxism and basically refusing to understand the world at all. that's a very severe "crisis of Leninism", when you don't even have any. and the other 1/3 or so of people on earth is trying to some extent to understand reality and understand Marxism, but nobody really gets it, so nobody is ready to lead the world to better understandings and unify people around them toward some kind of {{em\|big}} movement that could carry international permanent revolution. Liberal-republicanism and Trotskyism are each having their own 'crisis of Trotskyism' and that's kind of all postmodernism really is. it's just a bizarre interregnum until everybody settles onto a new meta-Marxism that makes the postmodern period look utterly silly.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Media representation unravels postmodernism / Media Representation for minority demographics is mutually exclusive with postmodernism -> I'll say it again. you cannot both believe that a narrative story can teach people not to be prejudiced against Black people or trans people or Black trans women, and that nobody can enforce narratives onto people. read that again. postmodernism is 100% a license to be racist. quite literally. no exaggeration. and Media Representation is not. only one of those can win.		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Media representation unravels postmodernism / Media Representation for minority demographics is mutually exclusive with postmodernism -> I'll say it again. you cannot both believe that a narrative story can teach people not to be prejudiced against Black people or trans people or Black trans women, and that nobody can enforce narratives onto people. read that again. postmodernism is 100% a license to be racist. quite literally. no exaggeration. and Media Representation is not. only one of those can win.

Reversedragon: a more democratic distribution of property

2026-08-13T12:11:29Z

a more democratic distribution of property

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:11, 13 August 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=43,50\|Q2=4350\|h4-rem=}}If the Soviet bureaucracy has destroyed state capitalism, then ordinary capitalism will get rid of the bureaucracy [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> ...this is Menshevism, isn't it? it's in a different form than you usually see it. but it's this weird confidence in Liberal-republicanism to transform society in any way somebody wants. aggressive Menshevism.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=43,50\|Q2=4350\|h4-rem=}}If the Soviet bureaucracy has destroyed state capitalism, then ordinary capitalism will get rid of the bureaucracy [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> ...this is Menshevism, isn't it? it's in a different form than you usually see it. but it's this weird confidence in Liberal-republicanism to transform society in any way somebody wants. aggressive Menshevism.

			{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}a more democratic distribution of property [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> no. that is a totally wrong use of the word "democracy" and is not how anything works. even Yanis Varoufakis knows this isn't how anything works, because he admits that distribution of property is totally arbitrary and isn't even "fair".

	{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]		{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]

Reversedragon: The proletariat can only exist world historically / Trotsky was Not a communist

2026-08-13T12:05:55Z

The proletariat can only exist world historically / Trotsky was Not a communist

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:05, 13 August 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:

	{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]		{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]

			{{li\|I=F2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Trotsky was {{caps\|Not}} a communist [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> god I thought I was joking when I summarized people's views as this. seems like there really were articles people wrote that sounded very close to this.

	</li></ol>		</li></ol>
Line 19:		Line 21:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=49,93\|Q2=4993\|h4-rem=}}[[E:Q49,93\|Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not]] -> I'm half convinced that every time somebody implies this (and isn't from China, Cuba, or Vietnam) that it's literally just a way to sneak in Existentialism and deceive people into believing all the things smaller than Liberalism and capitalism that ultimately reconstruct capitalism. half the time I laugh at this one and half the time I get angry, because it tends to trap people in this loop of insisting that if you don't believe Marxism can be used to purge people of all incorrect beliefs and create a perfect society full of nice people <em>before~~</em>~~ getting rid of capitalism you're racist, while due to the actual [[E:structural racism\|material definition]] of capitalism, if they believe it it makes them absolutely, absolutely incapable of stopping people from becoming racist, digging them deeper and deeper into this hole they can never get out of.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=49,93\|Q2=4993\|h4-rem=}}[[E:Q49,93\|Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not]] -> I'm half convinced that every time somebody implies this (and isn't from China, Cuba, or Vietnam) that it's literally just a way to sneak in Existentialism and deceive people into believing all the things smaller than Liberalism and capitalism that ultimately reconstruct capitalism. half the time I laugh at this one and half the time I get angry, because it tends to trap people in this loop of insisting that if you don't believe Marxism can be used to purge people of all incorrect beliefs and create a perfect society full of nice people {{em\|before}} getting rid of capitalism you're racist, while due to the actual [[E:structural racism\|material definition]] of capitalism, if they believe it it makes them absolutely, absolutely incapable of stopping people from becoming racist, digging them deeper and deeper into this hole they can never get out of.

			{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Unpredictable equals undetermined / A proper economic theory must respect the idea that the rules of the undetermined are themselves undetermined (Yanis Varoufakis) / Scientific knowledge of the workings of the capitalist economy and the development of a practice based on that knowledge are impossible (WSWS onto Varoufakis) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] / ({{9k\|RD/Q1980}}) -> ... on the bright side, if this is true, a proper theory of economics has to just accept that Communist revolution happened in another country purely because you couldn't control it. most of what happens in a Communist revolution isn't engineered by Stalin or Mao, so it's undetermined, right? and that means you can't place rules on whether it will happen or not. I bet you love that outcome.

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Marx did not regulate other Marxists / Marx showed no concern that his disciples, people with a better grasp of these powerful ideas than the average worker, might use the power bestowed upon them via Marx's own ideas (sic; methods, frameworks, models) in order to abuse other comrades, to build their own power base to gain positions of influence (Yanis Varoufakis) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -><br/>		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Marx did not regulate other Marxists / Marx showed no concern that his disciples, people with a better grasp of these powerful ideas than the average worker, might use the power bestowed upon them via Marx's own ideas (sic; methods, frameworks, models) in order to abuse other comrades, to build their own power base to gain positions of influence (Yanis Varoufakis) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -><br/>
Line 39:		Line 43:
	{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=18,87\|Q2=1887\|h4= The Confederacy contained class rule }} / There was an initial class rule inside the Confederate States of America / ({{9k\|RD/Q1920}}) -> in the North / the "Union" there is an initial class rule of capitalists, which isn't complete but is forming. in the South / Confederacy there is an initial class rule of plantation owners. ... the initial class rule inside each of them is basically the same thing. ... when the U.S. Civil War happens, if the North takes over, the status of the United States as filled with initial class rule doesn't go away. it changes from one kind of initial class rule into another kind of initial class rule, but in a way, it's still there. ... I have overcomplicated this at times. ...		{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=18,87\|Q2=1887\|h4= The Confederacy contained class rule }} / There was an initial class rule inside the Confederate States of America / ({{9k\|RD/Q1920}}) -> in the North / the "Union" there is an initial class rule of capitalists, which isn't complete but is forming. in the South / Confederacy there is an initial class rule of plantation owners. ... the initial class rule inside each of them is basically the same thing. ... when the U.S. Civil War happens, if the North takes over, the status of the United States as filled with initial class rule doesn't go away. it changes from one kind of initial class rule into another kind of initial class rule, but in a way, it's still there. ... I have overcomplicated this at times. ...

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is the status of Liberal-republicans not having a coherent narrative of Communist parties as much as it is the other way around, or more so		{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is the status of Liberal-republicans not having a coherent narrative of Communist parties as much as it is the other way around, or more so -> this came up while writing "[[Research:MDem/5.4r/0999 north-letter\|north-letter]]". I think it's very relevant here.<br/>
			is this violet? it strikes me as something I'd say only after I figured out that I didn't have a coherent 'narrative' of Trotskyism myself. I think this one is orange.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership		{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership

			{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Media representation unravels postmodernism / Media Representation for minority demographics is mutually exclusive with postmodernism -> I'll say it again. you cannot both believe that a narrative story can teach people not to be prejudiced against Black people or trans people or Black trans women, and that nobody can enforce narratives onto people. read that again. postmodernism is 100% a license to be racist. quite literally. no exaggeration. and Media Representation is not. only one of those can win.

			{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}No peace without narratives / There is no peace without narratives / There is no pacifism without narratives -> a claim that postmodernism is fundamentally violent and genocidal and it cannot be otherwise.<br/>
			Nature is unkind + Unpredictable equals undetermined = No peace without narratives.

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}The revolutionary party can lead the proletariat out of crises of capitalism and spontaneous action to the overthrow of capitalism [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html]

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Regenerating the soviets is only possible based on the nationalized property relations created at the beginning of socialism (Trotsky) [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> okay. I was so confused about this because I halfway thought he was saying you had to create soviets to create the nationalized property relations in the first place, and so I was confused where the soviets were coming from, but this makes a lot more sense. taking out bourgeois class rule is hard because everything is connected but when it goes you have the state businesses and the soviets.

			</li></ol>

			== Working class is international ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}The proletariat can only exist world historically / The proletariat can thus only exist world historically, just as communism, its activity, can only have a 'world-historical' existence (Marx, The German Ideology) / Marx believed in international permanent revolution (sense) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] <!-- [German Ideology, pp.46, 48] --> -> what does this mean?<br/>
			now, on one hand, when it comes to Lenin and Stalin and Trotsky it always helps to take what they say really literally using the concrete conditions of the Soviet Union as your guide to what is literal. but... I'm not sure if this is being taken literally in the right way or not.

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

Reversedragon: Postmodernism is the shovel dream of capitalist competition

2026-08-13T11:33:34Z

Postmodernism is the shovel dream of capitalist competition

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:33, 13 August 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Varoufakis is counter-revolutionary / Yanis Varoufakis is against proletarian revolution [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -> it's kind of funny that I don't even need to quote anyone else and I can just quote him verbatim if I found the right quote		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Varoufakis is counter-revolutionary / Yanis Varoufakis is against proletarian revolution [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -> it's kind of funny that I don't even need to quote anyone else and I can just quote him verbatim if I found the right quote

			</li></ol>

			== Marxism is over ==
			<ol class="hue clean">

			{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is the shovel dream of capitalist competition [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -> I bet I've already recorded this one, but hey, it's important

			{{li\|I=S2/IV\|Q=18,87\|Q2=1887\|h4= The Confederacy contained class rule }} / There was an initial class rule inside the Confederate States of America / ({{9k\|RD/Q1920}}) -> in the North / the "Union" there is an initial class rule of capitalists, which isn't complete but is forming. in the South / Confederacy there is an initial class rule of plantation owners. ... the initial class rule inside each of them is basically the same thing. ... when the U.S. Civil War happens, if the North takes over, the status of the United States as filled with initial class rule doesn't go away. it changes from one kind of initial class rule into another kind of initial class rule, but in a way, it's still there. ... I have overcomplicated this at times. ...

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is the status of Liberal-republicans not having a coherent narrative of Communist parties as much as it is the other way around, or more so

			{{li\|I=S2/MX/IV\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Postmodernism is nothing more than a crisis of revolutionary leadership

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

Reversedragon: Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not

2026-08-13T11:25:24Z

Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 13 August 2026
Line 19:		Line 19:
	<ol class="hue clean">		<ol class="hue clean">

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Marx did not regulate other Marxists / Marx showed no concern that his disciples, people with a better grasp of these powerful ideas than the average worker, might use the power bestowed upon them via Marx's own ideas (sic; methods, frameworks, models) in order to abuse other comrades, to build their own power base to gain positions of influence (Yanis Varoufakis) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -><br/>		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=49,93\|Q2=4993\|h4-rem=}}[[E:Q49,93\|Leninism is over but "Marxism" is not]] -> I'm half convinced that every time somebody implies this (and isn't from China, Cuba, or Vietnam) that it's literally just a way to sneak in Existentialism and deceive people into believing all the things smaller than Liberalism and capitalism that ultimately reconstruct capitalism. half the time I laugh at this one and half the time I get angry, because it tends to trap people in this loop of insisting that if you don't believe Marxism can be used to purge people of all incorrect beliefs and create a perfect society full of nice people <em>before</em> getting rid of capitalism you're racist, while due to the actual [[E:structural racism\|material definition]] of capitalism, if they believe it it makes them absolutely, absolutely incapable of stopping people from becoming racist, digging them deeper and deeper into this hole they can never get out of.

			{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}Marx did not regulate other Marxists / Marx showed no concern that his disciples, people with a better grasp of these powerful ideas than the average worker, might use the power bestowed upon them via Marx's own ideas (sic; methods, frameworks, models) in order to abuse other comrades, to build their own power base to gain positions of influence (Yanis Varoufakis) [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/28/varo-f28.html] -><br/>
	okay, sure. but let's put this into perspective. are you saying Stalin "abused other comrades", that "Trotsky abused other comrades", both, or neither? there's a huge difference between all of those. if this statement is true how do you know {{em\|you}} aren't knowingly abusing other comrades?! you know about Marx's "ideas" but you're blatantly misusing them. so there's a decent argument that that in and of itself is abusing workers		okay, sure. but let's put this into perspective. are you saying Stalin "abused other comrades", that "Trotsky abused other comrades", both, or neither? there's a huge difference between all of those. if this statement is true how do you know {{em\|you}} aren't knowingly abusing other comrades?! you know about Marx's "ideas" but you're blatantly misusing them. so there's a decent argument that that in and of itself is abusing workers

Reversedragon: Yanis Varoufakis is a Menshevik

2026-08-13T11:22:43Z

Yanis Varoufakis is a Menshevik

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 {{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=43,50|Q2=4350|h4-rem=}}Trotskyism and postmodernism  ->  the ICFI has a lot to say about this... and so do I. this is going to be a long page.
 </li></ol>
@@ Line 22: / Line 45: @@
 {{li|start=y
      |I=Z1/LR|Q=618|Q2=618}}{{TTS|LR|L-R}} / Liberal-republicanism
 </li></ol>

Reversedragon: copy markup from Q43,50

2026-08-13T10:00:30Z

copy markup from Q43,50

New page

{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Trotskyism and postmodernism|User=RD|E=Q43,50|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">

{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=43,50|Q2=4350|h4-rem=}}Trotskyism and postmodernism -> the ICFI has a lot to say about this... and so do I. this is going to be a long page.

</li></ol>

== Related ==


== {{int:hue-prototype-trads-or-fields/en}} ==
<ol class="hue clean terse {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}}">
{{li|start=y
|I=Z1/LR|Q=618|Q2=618}}{{TTS|LR|L-R}} / Liberal-republicanism
</li></ol>


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

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:11, 13 August 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:

	{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=43,50\|Q2=4350\|h4-rem=}}If the Soviet bureaucracy has destroyed state capitalism, then ordinary capitalism will get rid of the bureaucracy [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> ...this is Menshevism, isn't it? it's in a different form than you usually see it. but it's this weird confidence in Liberal-republicanism to transform society in any way somebody wants. aggressive Menshevism.		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/LR\|Q=43,50\|Q2=4350\|h4-rem=}}If the Soviet bureaucracy has destroyed state capitalism, then ordinary capitalism will get rid of the bureaucracy [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> ...this is Menshevism, isn't it? it's in a different form than you usually see it. but it's this weird confidence in Liberal-republicanism to transform society in any way somebody wants. aggressive Menshevism.

			{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}a more democratic distribution of property [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html] -> no. that is a totally wrong use of the word "democracy" and is not how anything works. even Yanis Varoufakis knows this isn't how anything works, because he admits that distribution of property is totally arbitrary and isn't even "fair".

	{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]		{{li\|I=S1/LR\|Q=618\|Q2=618\|h4-rem=}}we were so full of hope; how long ago that already seems [https://www.wsws.org/en/special/library/fi-18-1/21.html]