Research:MDem/4.4r/7420 classless - Revision history

Reversedragon: Reversedragon moved page Philosophical Research:Molecular Democracy/4.4r/7420 classless to Philosophical Research:MDem/4.4r/7420 classless: Abbreviating long subpage to shorter path

2025-09-23T09:55:22Z

Reversedragon moved page Philosophical Research:Molecular Democracy/4.4r/7420 classless to Philosophical Research:MDem/4.4r/7420 classless: Abbreviating long subpage to shorter path

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:55, 23 September 2025
(No difference)

Reversedragon: anarchology

2025-09-23T09:54:52Z

anarchology

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:54, 23 September 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div class="bop~~" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-~~top~~: 0.9em;~~">		{{BopCSS}}
	<h3 ~~style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"~~><time datetime="2024-05-09T10:33:10Z">24-5</time></h3>		<div class="bop top date">
	<div ~~style~~="~~white-space: pre~~-~~wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;~~">quite honestly		<h3><time datetime="2024-05-09T10:33:10Z">24-5</time></h3>
			<div class="bop-text">quite honestly
	mdem is scientific Existentialism-Structuralism		mdem is scientific Existentialism-Structuralism

	the thing is if we abolish classes there is a ton more history to go through which will all happen without classes		the thing is if we abolish classes there is a ton more history to go through which will all happen without classes
	in lack of classes all that history will be about structures and arrangements.		in lack of classes all that history will be about structures and arrangements.
	the existence of Trotskyism proves this - two potential classless societies in bitter rivalry because the ~~particle theories~~ that order the structures in the society are still different		the existence of Trotskyism proves this — two potential classless societies in bitter rivalry because the inner Bauplans that order the structures in the society are still different
	meta-Marxism can guide us through the conflict or cooperation between different named Marxisms but after that it will guide us through the new epoch of "structural" struggle where different arrangements of arrangements of arrangements of people are the primary differences that anybody argues over in parties or international conferences		meta-Marxism can guide us through the conflict or cooperation between different named Marxisms but after that it will guide us through the new epoch of "structural" struggle where different arrangements of arrangements of arrangements of people are the primary differences that anybody argues over in parties or international conferences

Line 21:		Line 22:
	</div></div>		</div></div>

	<div class="bop~~" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;~~">		<div class="bop">
	<h3 ~~style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"~~><time datetime="2024-05-14T03:19:07Z">24-5</time></h3>		<h3><time datetime="2024-05-14T03:19:07Z">24-5</time></h3>
	<div ~~style~~="~~white~~-~~space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;~~">part of the reason people are so confused and led astray by Liberalism is while Liberalism says a republic is a mosaic of structures and institutions it is separately true that a republic <strong class="upper" style="font-weight: normal; text-transform: uppercase;">is</strong> a mosaic of structures and institutions, although not necessarily in the sense Liberalism says		<div class="bop-text">part of the reason people are so confused and led astray by Liberalism is while Liberalism says a republic is a mosaic of structures and institutions it is separately true that a republic <strong class="upper" style="font-weight: normal; text-transform: uppercase;">is</strong> a mosaic of structures and institutions, although not necessarily in the sense Liberalism says
	the fact that a classless society <em class="slash">would</em> be nothing more than a series of seemingly arbitrary structures is easily confused with the Liberal concept of gradual change within an existing order and the creation of structures around pre-designed principles. if the meta-Marxism of the future is all about rearranging structures, then why is Liberal reformism through means like constitutional amendments insufficient?		the fact that a classless society <em class="slash">would</em> be nothing more than a series of seemingly arbitrary structures is easily confused with the Liberal concept of gradual change within an existing order and the creation of structures around pre-designed principles. if the meta-Marxism of the future is all about rearranging structures, then why is Liberal reformism through means like constitutional amendments insufficient?

Line 32:		Line 33:
	</div></div>		</div></div>

	<div class="bop~~" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;~~">		<div class="bop">
	<h3 ~~style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"~~><time datetime="2024-06-28T01:34:05Z">24-6</time></h3>		<h3><time datetime="2024-06-28T01:34:05Z">24-6</time></h3>
	<div ~~style~~="~~white~~-~~space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;~~">there is a significant possibility that Marxism and the absence of Marxism are both transitioning toward the same thing with different methods		<div class="bop-text">there is a significant possibility that Marxism and the absence of Marxism are both transitioning toward the same thing with different methods
	everyone in the United States wants to believe that if we avoid Marxism the inner goals or results of Marxism will never happen, but there is a lot of evidence that at least these particular beliefs have been wrong		everyone in the United States wants to believe that if we avoid Marxism the inner goals or results of Marxism will never happen, but there is a lot of evidence that at least these particular beliefs have been wrong

	it does look a whole lot like if you avoid Stalin ~~Thought~~ and centralized control, what you get is not the absence of the issues that come up in Stalin ~~Thought~~, but instead those same issues coming up in a disorganized anarchic way and getting solved through disorganized anarchic solutions.		it does look a whole lot like if you avoid Stalin's Marxism and centralized control, what you get is not the absence of the issues that come up in Stalin's Marxism, but instead those same issues coming up in a disorganized anarchic way and getting solved through disorganized anarchic solutions.
	<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of economic planning, corporations and creators all individually end up collecting data on everyone around them and solving math problems to try to snap the economy together and ensure their business survives.		<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of economic planning, corporations and creators all individually end up collecting data on everyone around them and solving math problems to try to snap the economy together and ensure their business survives.
	<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of censorship, graphs or individuals will censor and police each other horizontally until people are hiding from each other to avoid horizontal attacks.		<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of censorship, graphs or individuals will censor and police each other horizontally until people are hiding from each other to avoid horizontal attacks.
Line 43:		Line 44:
	</div></div>		</div></div>

	<div class="bop~~-foot~~" ~~style~~="~~margin~~-~~top~~: ~~3em; padding-top~~: ~~1.2em; border~~-~~top: 1px solid var(~~--~~border~~-~~color~~-~~base~~,~~#a2a9b1~~);">		<div class="bop">
			<h3><time datetime="2025-09-23T09:32:25Z">25-9</time></h3>
			<div class="bop-text">after confusedly fumbling around with long paragraphs in place of single terms for literal years, "Red Existentialism-Structuralism" now finally has a proper name:
			The Study of Anarchies, likely to be termed anarchiology or anarchology

			this may become the new name for "regular" Existentialist-Structuralist periods as well.
			no more fumbling around with the confusing and opaque "Existentialist-Structuralist" descriptor any more that was supposed to abbreviate the concept of "miscellaneous spatially unique groups of things that all constantly change on the ground and define themselves in relation to each other and are at various times forced to serve the purpose of unifying individuals into larger groups just because it is claimed that groups inherently belong together by virtue of being groups".
			all of this would simply be called red anarchology, blue anarchology, or charcoal anarchology.

			my meaning in this 4.4 scrap was that blue and charcoal anarchology had to go while red anarchology could safely be absorbed into Marxism to eliminate the need for anarchism into the age of classless societies when anarchies (stationary combinations of heterogeneous elements) would become more common than class divisions or class-territories proper or in some cases empires proper.
			</div></div>

			<div class="bop-foot">

	[*ESf] "With the keen edge of a knife" [foreword]. Žižek, S. In _The excessive subject: A new theory of social change_. Rothenberg, M. A. (2010). Polity Press. <isbnsearch.org/isbn/9780745648248> <wikidata.org/wiki/Q127386633>		[*ESf] "With the keen edge of a knife" [foreword]. Žižek, S. In _The excessive subject: A new theory of social change_. Rothenberg, M. A. (2010). Polity Press. <isbnsearch.org/isbn/9780745648248> <wikidata.org/wiki/Q127386633>

	<dl class="bop-meta~~" style="margin-top: 1em; font-family: monospace;~~">		<dl class="bop-meta">
	{{BopFwd\|Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/4.4r/3010 responsible\|v4.4 scraps/ Bolshevism is being responsible for one's survival}}		{{BopFwd\|Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/4.4r/3010 responsible\|v4.4 scraps/ Bolshevism is being responsible for one's survival}}
	{{BopComment\| newer entry on "structures replacing capitalists"}}		{{BopComment\| newer entry on "structures replacing capitalists"}}
Line 57:		Line 70:
	{{BopCommentTitle\|v4.4 scraps/ if meta-Marxism is scientific Existentialism, then so be it}}		{{BopCommentTitle\|v4.4 scraps/ if meta-Marxism is scientific Existentialism, then so be it}}
	</dl></div><!--		</dl></div><!--
	-->[[Category:MDem v4.4 entries]] ~~__NOTOC__~~		-->[[Category:MDem v4.4 entries]] {{ArticleTitle\|NoContents=y}}

Reversedragon: terminology; formatting

2025-03-17T04:08:45Z

terminology; formatting

Reversedragon: link label

2025-03-17T03:56:22Z

link label

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:56, 17 March 2025
Line 49:		Line 49:
	<dl class="bop-meta" style="margin-top: 1em; font-family: monospace;">		<dl class="bop-meta" style="margin-top: 1em; font-family: monospace;">
	{{BopFwd\|Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/4.4r/3010 responsible\|v4.4 scraps/ Bolshevism is being responsible for one's survival}}		{{BopFwd\|Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/4.4r/3010 responsible\|v4.4 scraps/ Bolshevism is being responsible for one's survival}}
			{{BopComment\| newer entry on "structures replacing capitalists"}}
	<!-- ; {{BopComment}} -->		<!-- ; {{BopComment}} -->
	{{BopCreated\|2024-05-09T10:33:10Z}}		{{BopCreated\|2024-05-09T10:33:10Z}}

Reversedragon: archive scrap as is; cr. 2024-05-09T10:33:10Z

2025-03-17T03:48:20Z

archive scrap as is; cr. 2024-05-09T10:33:10Z

New page

<div class="bop" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;">
<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-09T10:33:10Z">24-5</time></h3>
<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">quite honestly
mdem is scientific Structuralism [= Existentialist-Structuralist tradition, Existentialism]

the thing is if we abolish classes there is a ton more history to go through which will all happen without classes
in lack of classes all that history will be about structures and arrangements.
the existence of Trotskyism proves this - two potential classless societies in bitter rivalry because the particle theories that order the structures in the society are still different
meta-Marxism can guide us through the conflict or cooperation between different named Marxisms but after that it will guide us through the new epoch of "structural" struggle where different arrangements of arrangements of arrangements of people are the primary differences that anybody argues over in parties or international conferences

the Structuralist tradition currently believes that it is impossible to create a scientific study of the historical development of structures and arrangements such that it ever becomes possible to predict any of them [*ESf]
but this is patently false
the Marxist tradition up to now has shown it is possible, but it simply has not thoroughly considered the concept of a historical materialism without any ruling classes

because of this discrepancy it's a bit like we have to torch Structuralism even though it has found the basis for the next great theory of society
postmodernism has corrupted it so badly nobody can see how valuable it should be

we should have seen this coming when we live our lives in republics where even though there are a lot of capitalists most social structures are not owned and a lot of the content of the US constitution is about designing and arranging them
mayors. governors. presidents. ministries. court circuits. parliaments directly in place of the role of kings to unify territories. state businesses in the role of passing different people through a consistent social institution. structures overseeing the interconnection of state businesses.
the future of republics is the maintenance of all these structures and the science of arranging some of the more fluctuating structures into the best arrangements — usually businesses, but potentially also such things as the groups of voters that we see on US voting district maps and currently agonize about whether to homogenize into competition or segregate by ideology
</div></div>

<div class="bop" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;">
<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-14T03:19:07Z">24-5</time></h3>
<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">part of the reason people are so confused and led astray by Liberalism is while Liberalism says a republic is a mosaic of structures and institutions it is separately true that a republic IS a mosaic of structures and institutions, although not necessarily in the sense Liberalism says
the fact that a classless society /would/ be nothing more than a series of seemingly arbitrary structures is easily confused with the Liberal concept of gradual change within an existing order and the creation of structures around pre-designed principles. if the meta-Marxism of the future is all about rearranging structures, then why is Liberal reformism through means like constitutional amendments insufficient?

other philosophies like critical race theory have put up a better effort than center-Liberalism at trying to forge a shortcut from the age of republics to the age of structural science. critical race theory asks us to examine the real-world results of Liberal policies in creating useful structures or procedures which improve the republic, instead of trusting that voters are necessarily able to predict the consequences of what they voted or demonstrated for. it is nearly willing to accept that the conflict between voters of what policies they believe they want and the underlying science of what is actually the best way to construct society are not the same thing.

however, there are reasons this shortcut is dangerous and will not succeed.
Liberalism ignores the natural tendency for voters to splinter into separate Social-Philosophical-Material Systems as soon as they begin gravitating to truly different sets of social structures. the existence of Menshevism can be enough to splinter capitalists into their own cultural island which instead of making compromises begins behaving like a sovereign nation threatened by challenges to its sovereignty. and when a nation is split into separate nations competing for material resources and power it is in no position to create a scientific study of the best and worst ways to structure a republic. people do not exist within the same set of understandings and agreements. the country simply has not passed into the unified classless period of its history, and faces all the challenges of the previous period instead.
</div></div>

<div class="bop" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;">
<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-06-28T01:34:05Z">24-6</time></h3>
<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">there is a significant possibility that Marxism and the absence of Marxism are both transitioning toward the same thing with different methods
everyone in the United States wants to believe that if we avoid Marxism the inner goals or results of Marxism will never happen, but there is a lot of evidence that at least these particular beliefs have been wrong

it does look a whole lot like if you avoid Stalin Thought and centralized control, what you get is not the absence of the issues that come up in Stalin Thought, but instead those same issues coming up in a disorganized anarchic way and getting solved through disorganized anarchic solutions.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of economic planning, corporations and creators all individually end up collecting data on everyone around them and solving math problems to try to snap the economy together and ensure their business survives.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> if you try to get out of censorship, graphs or individuals will censor and police each other horizontally until people are hiding from each other to avoid horizontal attacks.
the issues we all believed were invented by Stalin Thought were not anomalies or defects, but actually problems characteristic of society itself that needed to be solved, and that we would never have the choice not to solve.
</div></div>

<div class="bop-foot" style="margin-top: 3em; padding-top: 1.2em; border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1);">

[*ESf] "With the keen edge of a knife" [foreword]. Žižek, S. In _The excessive subject: A new theory of social change_. Rothenberg, M. A. (2010). Polity Press. <isbnsearch.org/isbn/9780745648248> <wikidata.org/wiki/Q127386633>

<dl class="bop-meta" style="margin-top: 1em; font-family: monospace;">
{{BopFwd|Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/4.4r/3010 responsible|v4.4 scraps/ Bolshevism is being responsible for one's survival}}

{{BopCreated|2024-05-09T10:33:10Z}}
{{BopHandle|classless}}
{{BopHandle|v4-4_2999_classless}}
{{BopHandle|v4-4_7420_classless}}
{{BopCommentTitle|v4.4 scraps/ if meta-Marxism is scientific Existentialism, then so be it}}
</dl></div>[[Category:MDem v4.4 entries]] __NOTOC__

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:08, 17 March 2025
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-09T10:33:10Z">24-5</time></h3>		<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-09T10:33:10Z">24-5</time></h3>
	<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">quite honestly		<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">quite honestly
	mdem is scientific Structuralism ~~[= Existentialist-Structuralist tradition, Existentialism]~~		mdem is scientific Existentialism-Structuralism

	the thing is if we abolish classes there is a ton more history to go through which will all happen without classes		the thing is if we abolish classes there is a ton more history to go through which will all happen without classes
Line 9:		Line 9:
	meta-Marxism can guide us through the conflict or cooperation between different named Marxisms but after that it will guide us through the new epoch of "structural" struggle where different arrangements of arrangements of arrangements of people are the primary differences that anybody argues over in parties or international conferences		meta-Marxism can guide us through the conflict or cooperation between different named Marxisms but after that it will guide us through the new epoch of "structural" struggle where different arrangements of arrangements of arrangements of people are the primary differences that anybody argues over in parties or international conferences

	the Structuralist tradition currently believes that it is impossible to create a scientific study of the historical development of structures and arrangements such that it ever becomes possible to predict any of them [*ESf]		the Existentialist-Structuralist tradition currently believes that it is impossible to create a scientific study of the historical development of structures and arrangements such that it ever becomes possible to predict any of them [*ESf]
	but this is patently false		but this is patently false
	the Marxist tradition up to now has shown it is possible, but it simply has not thoroughly considered the concept of a historical materialism without any ruling classes		the Marxist tradition up to now has shown it is possible, but it simply has not thoroughly considered the concept of a historical materialism without any ruling classes

	because of this discrepancy it's a bit like we have to torch ~~Structuralism~~ even though it has found the basis for the next great theory of society		because of this discrepancy it's a bit like we have to torch Existentialism even though it has found the basis for the next great theory of society
	postmodernism has corrupted it so badly nobody can see how valuable it should be		postmodernism has corrupted it so badly nobody can see how valuable it should be

Line 23:		Line 23:
	<div class="bop" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;">		<div class="bop" style="border-top: 1px solid var(--border-color-base,#a2a9b1); padding-top: 0.9em;">
	<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-14T03:19:07Z">24-5</time></h3>		<h3 style="margin: 0 0 0.9em 0; padding-top: 0;"><time datetime="2024-05-14T03:19:07Z">24-5</time></h3>
	<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">part of the reason people are so confused and led astray by Liberalism is while Liberalism says a republic is a mosaic of structures and institutions it is separately true that a republic IS a mosaic of structures and institutions, although not necessarily in the sense Liberalism says		<div style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-family: inherit; background: inherit; border: none;">part of the reason people are so confused and led astray by Liberalism is while Liberalism says a republic is a mosaic of structures and institutions it is separately true that a republic <strong class="upper" style="font-weight: normal; text-transform: uppercase;">is</strong> a mosaic of structures and institutions, although not necessarily in the sense Liberalism says
	the fact that a classless society /would/ be nothing more than a series of seemingly arbitrary structures is easily confused with the Liberal concept of gradual change within an existing order and the creation of structures around pre-designed principles. if the meta-Marxism of the future is all about rearranging structures, then why is Liberal reformism through means like constitutional amendments insufficient?		the fact that a classless society <em class="slash">would</em> be nothing more than a series of seemingly arbitrary structures is easily confused with the Liberal concept of gradual change within an existing order and the creation of structures around pre-designed principles. if the meta-Marxism of the future is all about rearranging structures, then why is Liberal reformism through means like constitutional amendments insufficient?

	other philosophies like critical race theory have put up a better effort than center-Liberalism at trying to forge a shortcut from the age of republics to the age of structural science. critical race theory asks us to examine the real-world results of Liberal policies in creating useful structures or procedures which improve the republic, instead of trusting that voters are necessarily able to predict the consequences of what they voted or demonstrated for. it is nearly willing to accept that the conflict between voters of what policies they believe they want and the underlying science of what is actually the best way to construct society are not the same thing.		other philosophies like critical race theory have put up a better effort than center-Liberalism at trying to forge a shortcut from the age of republics to the age of structural science. critical race theory asks us to examine the real-world results of Liberal policies in creating useful structures or procedures which improve the republic, instead of trusting that voters are necessarily able to predict the consequences of what they voted or demonstrated for. it is nearly willing to accept that the conflict between voters of what policies they believe they want and the underlying science of what is actually the best way to construct society are not the same thing.