User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/900 - Revision history

Reversedragon: Study populations within their own history

2026-04-23T01:40:06Z

Study populations within their own history

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:40, 23 April 2026
Line 353:		Line 353:

	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1330">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1330">??
	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_exstruct" data-qid~~="13,31~~" value~~="1331~~" data-dimension="S2">~~[[Ontology:Q1331\|Study populations within their own history]] / Populations must be studied relative to their own traditions / cultural relativism proposition		{{li\|I=S2/HAS\|Q=13,31\|Q2=1331}}[[Ontology:Q1331\|Study populations within their own history]] / Populations must be studied relative to their own traditions / cultural relativism proposition / ([[User:RD/9k/Q1331\|9k]])
	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_exstruct" data-qid~~="13,32~~" value~~="1332~~" data-dimension="S2">~~Study populations that {{em\|will}} exist within their own history		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=13,32\|Q2=1332}}Study populations that {{em\|will}} exist within their own history / ([[User:RD/9k/Q1331\|9k]])
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1333">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1333">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1334">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1334">??

Reversedragon: Class is a single substrate

2026-04-21T00:45:34Z

Class is a single substrate

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:45, 21 April 2026
Line 420:		Line 420:
	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,80\|Q2=1480}}The class structure of the United States is monistic / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]]) -> see below propositions for what this means.		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,80\|Q2=1480}}The class structure of the United States is monistic / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]]) -> see below propositions for what this means.
	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,81\|Q2=1481}}Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process (are one continuous thing; meta-Marxism) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,81\|Q2=1481}}Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process (are one continuous thing; meta-Marxism) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]])
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="1482~~">??~~		{{li\|start=y\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,82\|Q2=1482}}Class is a single substrate / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]])
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??

	{{li\|I=S1/MX\|Q=14,84\|Q2=1484}}chunk competition (motif; meta-Marxism) / all-directional contradiction between individuals / chunk competition across the spatial slot hierarchy / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,84\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S1/MX\|Q=14,84\|Q2=1484}}chunk competition (motif; meta-Marxism) / all-directional contradiction between individuals / chunk competition across the spatial slot hierarchy / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,84\|9k]])

Reversedragon: The class structure of the United States is monistic

2026-04-21T00:35:20Z

The class structure of the United States is monistic

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:35, 21 April 2026
Line 418:		Line 418:
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1470">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1470">??

	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="1480">??		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,80\|Q2=1480}}The class structure of the United States is monistic / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]]) -> see below propositions for what this means.
	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,81\|Q2=1481}}Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process ~~/ Social darwinism and class society~~ are one continuous thing ~~without a sharp boundary for where each of them begins and ends~~ -> this is related to but not the same as the hypothesis that once societies become capitalist all classes or class territories are all just different 'windings' of a single monistic substance. that one is the 'noun', ~~this one is the 'verb'.~~		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,81\|Q2=1481}}Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process (are one continuous thing; meta-Marxism) / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q14,80\|9k]])
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1482">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1482">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??

Reversedragon: Social darwinism and class society are one continuous thing without a sharp boundary for where each of them begins and ends

2026-04-20T22:27:10Z

Social darwinism and class society are one continuous thing without a sharp boundary for where each of them begins and ends

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 20 April 2026
Line 419:		Line 419:

	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1480">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1480">??
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="1481">??		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=14,81\|Q2=1481}}Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process / Social darwinism and class society are one continuous thing without a sharp boundary for where each of them begins and ends -> this is related to but not the same as the hypothesis that once societies become capitalist all classes or class territories are all just different 'windings' of a single monistic substance. that one is the 'noun', this one is the 'verb'.
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1482">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1482">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1483">??

Reversedragon: a day when someone owned Texas

2026-04-19T03:02:56Z

a day when someone owned Texas

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:02, 19 April 2026
Line 664:		Line 664:
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1854" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1854" data-dimension="S">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1855" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1855" data-dimension="S">??
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="1856~~" data~~-~~dimension=~~"S">??
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="1857~~" data-dimension="S">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=18,56\|Q2=1856}}a day when someone owned Texas / a day when someone owned Kansas / a day when someone owned Virginia / a day when Alaska was a commodity -> trying to explain socialist transition to people is like trying to explain dimensions to each other in Flatland. but I feel like one of the easiest ways to start is to try to make people familiar with the concept that republics weren't always republics "governed by the people" and they were once free-floating commodities just like businesses are. Texas isn't any specific person's property now; it isn't conflated with any specific individual that {{em\|is}} Texas. at one time it was. can you imagine living back then? what if you were advocating for that?
			{{li\|I=Z1/PT\|Q=18,57\|Q2=1857}}Alaska purchase (1867)
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="1858" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="1858" data-dimension="S">??

Reversedragon: Why is Trotsky not on lists of famous traitors?

2026-04-05T05:21:46Z

Why is Trotsky not on lists of famous traitors?

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:21, 5 April 2026
Line 200:		Line 200:
	</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="1102" data-dimension="S">		</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="1102" data-dimension="S">
	</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="1103" data-dimension="S">		</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="1103" data-dimension="S">
	</li><li class="~~field_fantasy~~" value="1104" data-dimension="S">
			</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="MX, MX onto ML, MX onto Zv" data-qid="11,04" value="1104" data-dimension="M3">Why is Trotsky not on lists of famous traitors? / Why is Stalin not on lists of the most famous traitors? -> it's really weird. Trotsky frequently makes it onto lists of most famous assassinations, but nobody actually talks about the internal conflict between the central party and the Trotskyites long enough to conclude that the assassination was a {{em\|betrayal}} of one of the sides against the other. while you'd totally get the impression Trotsky was betrayed if you'd been reading his own accounts of Stalin's government and the Russian revolution? I wouldn't be so surprised if the list of most famous traitors had suddenly included Stalin or an ally of Stalin's government — I'd just go, "yeah, okay, that figures, that fits into the typical narratives". but they never put {{em\|either of them}} on the list. it's hard to say it's because people have agendas, because nobody cares one way or the other which side won with all the "famous traitors" they list from centuries and centuries ago. it's also not like the lists are using a formal definition of treason, because they contain people that turned against mafias; at that point you might as well put Nikolai Bukharin on the list for turning away from the Trotskyite conspiracy and confessing. like, Trotsky is ridiculously well known as about argument number two [[E:Bolshevism is over\|Communism is bad]]. even if it's rare for people to start talking about him in other contexts he is about as significant to world history as any oddly-specific scientist or inventor we put in textbooks, all just because he wrote some dubious books about how he didn't understand mainstream Marxism-Leninism and then got assassinated, catapulting him into one of the "greatest" philosophers of right-Liberal [[E:philosophy of science (economics)\|philosophy-of-economics]]. (Trotskyists will hate this observation but it's true.) I don't understand the methodology these lists are using at all.

	{{li\|I=S1/Zv\|Q=11,05\|Q2=1105}}abandoning a country (parting from; deserting; betraying) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q11,05\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S1/Zv\|Q=11,05\|Q2=1105}}abandoning a country (parting from; deserting; betraying) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q11,05\|9k]])

Reversedragon: deviation from Leninism

2026-04-03T08:23:34Z

deviation from Leninism

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:23, 3 April 2026
Line 1,094:		Line 1,094:
	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" data-qid="21,82" value="2182" data-dimension="S2">The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was an unacceptable class society (2003) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,82\|9k]])		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" data-qid="21,82" value="2182" data-dimension="S2">The Communist Party of the Soviet Union was an unacceptable class society (2003) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,82\|9k]])

	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="2183~~" data~~-~~dimension~~=~~"S">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/W\|Q=21,83\|Q2=2183}}deviation from Leninism / error away from (mainstream Marxism-)Leninism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q21,83\|9k]])
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="2184~~" data-dimension="S">??~~		{{li\|I=S1/W\|tradition=ML onto W\|Q=21,84\|Q2=2184}}opportunism / chasing quick superficial successes instead of looking for solid grounding in the advanced workers; what is immediately advantageous for one's own interest instead of operating on the overall body of workers / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q21,83\|9k]])

	</li><li class="number_empty" value="2185" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="2185" data-dimension="S">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="2186" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="2186" data-dimension="S">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="2187" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="2187" data-dimension="S">??
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~="2188~~" data-dimension="S">??~~
			{{li\|I=S0/A\|tradition=ML onto A\|Q=21,88\|Q2=2188}}tailism / ([[EC:9k/RD/Q21,83\|9k]])

	</li><li class="number_empty" value="2189" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="2189" data-dimension="S">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="2190" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="2190" data-dimension="S">??

Reversedragon: Who are the least advanced workers?

2026-04-03T08:04:19Z

Who are the least advanced workers?

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:04, 3 April 2026
Line 1,067:		Line 1,067:

	</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-remark="culprit, not discoverer of culprit" data-qid="21,66" value="2166" data-dimension="S2">A problem shovel will burst a workers' state / A subpopulation generating the wrong theory will burst a workers' state / A subpopulation generating the wrong theory, perhaps because old classes have linked together, or perhaps because people have formed into the wrong structures, will burst a workers' state -> the corollary to classic statements by Marx that nobody really thought through enough prior to 1937.		</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-remark="culprit, not discoverer of culprit" data-qid="21,66" value="2166" data-dimension="S2">A problem shovel will burst a workers' state / A subpopulation generating the wrong theory will burst a workers' state / A subpopulation generating the wrong theory, perhaps because old classes have linked together, or perhaps because people have formed into the wrong structures, will burst a workers' state -> the corollary to classic statements by Marx that nobody really thought through enough prior to 1937.
	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="21,67" value="2167" data-dimension="S2">Not all problem shovels are top hats / Not every kind of subpopulation which generates wrong theory does so <em>because</em> it is a cluster of individual bourgeoisie -> you have to look at this one closely before it makes any sense and doesn't look like garbage. the key is that when classes cause trouble, you need more than classes to do it. Existentialism is more than capitalism, it's the substitution of a few huge corporations with a lot of workers all inside one country for a gigantic formation of millions and millions of petty bourgeoisie across the world all forming one object. Existentialism is a new and rather terrifying kind of object. similarly all kinds of different objects can disrupt the formation of mainstream Marxism-Leninism. detached islands of workers that only consist of workers could pose a problem, especially if there are 5 workers each surrounded by 50 petty bourgeoisie like some kind of minesweeper board. [[E:Zinovievism\|a confused Leninist theorist and a hundred peasants]] could form a problem structure, which poses unique problems to everyone because its behavior is not the same as 100 peasants alone. twenty petty bourgeoisie at a time could become convinced they're Leninist theorists although they're not actually forming an overall national movement. you could run into a weird situation where discourse is taking the form of blue, brown, and red petty bourgeoisie on individualized YouTube channels fighting each other over viewers. there are so many more new <em>specific~~</em>~~ structures we know about now, positive ones and negative ones. it really does come to look like a weird form of chemistry where atoms are trying to form a polymer but some chunks of some sizes or shapes react better and some react worse.		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-qid="21,67" value="2167" data-dimension="S2">Not all problem shovels are top hats / Not every kind of subpopulation which generates wrong theory does so <em>because</em> it is a cluster of individual bourgeoisie -> you have to look at this one closely before it makes any sense and doesn't look like garbage. the key is that when classes cause trouble, you need more than classes to do it. Existentialism is more than capitalism, it's the substitution of a few huge corporations with a lot of workers all inside one country for a gigantic formation of millions and millions of petty bourgeoisie across the world all forming one object. Existentialism is a new and rather terrifying kind of object. similarly all kinds of different objects can disrupt the formation of mainstream Marxism-Leninism. detached islands of workers that only consist of workers could pose a problem, especially if there are 5 workers each surrounded by 50 petty bourgeoisie like some kind of minesweeper board. [[E:Zinovievism\|a confused Leninist theorist and a hundred peasants]] could form a problem structure, which poses unique problems to everyone because its behavior is not the same as 100 peasants alone. twenty petty bourgeoisie at a time could become convinced they're Leninist theorists although they're not actually forming an overall national movement. you could run into a weird situation where discourse is taking the form of blue, brown, and red petty bourgeoisie on individualized YouTube channels fighting each other over viewers. there are so many more new {{em\|specific}} structures we know about now, positive ones and negative ones. it really does come to look like a weird form of chemistry where atoms are trying to form a polymer but some chunks of some sizes or shapes react better and some react worse.

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value="2168">??~~		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=21,68\|Q2=2168}}The least advanced workers are the workers that join onto a {{caps\|Wasp}} Swarm to crush the proletarian movement -> I don't think this is a new insight. I think the major difference is that Lenin didn't use offbeat terms like '{{caps\|Wasp}} Swarm', but apart from that there are probably some existing quotes on this
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"number_empty" value~~=~~"2169"~~>??

	</li><li ~~class~~=~~"field_ML" data-qid~~="21,70~~" value~~="2170~~" data-dimension="S">~~advanced worker -> I have been revisiting [[Term:advanced workers\|what this means]], for somewhat silly reasons of wondering what is the most appropriate term in other languages and what puns can be made on the word. in the process you invariably dig through some of the most essential stuff for explaining Marxism, and some of the most-high quality sources. in some ways, this is a critically important concept. so it's time to code it.		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=21,69\|Q2=2169}}Who are the least advanced workers? -> case of: guitar-string question.
			{{li\|I=S1/ML\|Q=21,70\|Q2=2170}}advanced worker -> I have been revisiting [[Term:advanced workers\|what this means]], for somewhat silly reasons of wondering what is the most appropriate term in other languages and what puns can be made on the word. in the process you invariably dig through some of the most essential stuff for explaining Marxism, and some of the most-high quality sources. in some ways, this is a critically important concept. so it's time to code it.

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_anarchy" data-qid~~="21,71~~" value~~="2171~~" data-dimension="F2">~~Lenin said workers never become class-conscious / Lenin said that workers in trade unions only get to trade union consciousness, therefore within the historical process of a Leninist movement and transition into the beginning of Bolshevism workers never extract themselves from rule by the bourgeoisie / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,71\|9k]])		{{li\|I=F2/A\|Q=21,71\|Q2=2171}}Lenin said workers never become class-conscious / Lenin said that workers in trade unions only get to trade union consciousness, therefore within the historical process of a Leninist movement and transition into the beginning of Bolshevism workers never extract themselves from rule by the bourgeoisie / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,71\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="21,72" value="2172" data-dimension="Z"><cite class="article">Advanced workers and backward opportunists</cite> [https://research.moraleconomy.au/index.php?title=Term:Advanced_workers]		</li><li class="field_ML" data-qid="21,72" value="2172" data-dimension="Z"><cite class="article">Advanced workers and backward opportunists</cite> [https://research.moraleconomy.au/index.php?title=Term:Advanced_workers]
Line 1,082:		Line 1,082:
	</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="MX onto A, MX onto ML" data-qid="21,75" value="2175" data-dimension="S2">Class consciousness includes identifying the overall structure of a national population (of a country; meta-Marxism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,71\|9k]])		</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="MX onto A, MX onto ML" data-qid="21,75" value="2175" data-dimension="S2">Class consciousness includes identifying the overall structure of a national population (of a country; meta-Marxism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,71\|9k]])

	</~~li><li class~~=~~"field_ML" value~~="2176~~" data~~-~~dimension="S"~~>??		{{li\|I=S1/ML\|Q=21,76\|Q2=2176\|rem=freedom}}put an end to the Third Period (Lenin) {{YouTube\|x8UirV4JcLc}} -> that is such a powerful thing to say inside such an obscure wording. gosh people like JMP, some of the better theorists in Canada, will flail at the weird divisions brought by 'movementism', and yet Lenin knew exactly what to do: put an end to the Third Period.
	</~~li><li class~~=~~"field_ML" value~~="2177~~" data~~-~~dimension="S">??~~
			{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=21,77\|Q2=2177}}In order to understand what is tailism you should look ahead to the goal of a nation-wide movement and the day all Communist allies that supported the movement are proletarianized [https://socialistvoice.ie/2020/02/combating-tailism-and-economism/]

	</li><li class="field_ML" value="2178" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="field_ML" value="2178" data-dimension="S">??
	</li><li class="field_ML" value="2179" data-dimension="S">??		</li><li class="field_ML" value="2179" data-dimension="S">??

Reversedragon: country dividing into two competing populations; Apply Marx to country characteristic

2026-04-03T05:54:54Z

country dividing into two competing populations; Apply Marx to country characteristic

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:54, 3 April 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="911">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="911">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="912">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="912">??
	</li><li class="~~number_empty~~" value="913">??		</li><li class="field_nations" value="913" data-dimension="S">country dividing into two competing populations / country dividing into two or more warring states
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="914">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="914">??
	</li><li class="field_nations" data-remark="feudal order" value="915" data-dimension="Z0">noble coup -> "noble coup" is my colloquial term for a political phenomenon where some particular socially-linked graph of nobility and their allies plot to replace a particular royal family or top of a feudal order. I'm not totally sure what the standard word for this is. one thing I'm closer to sure about is that in the handful of these I've heard about it seems like the nobility easily get divided. it isn't easy for them to all join together and create a new state around the nobility compared to them splitting into competing factions of nobility which may all be tied to a particular religious sect. it's weird how the patterns of nobility have similarities to the patterns of capitalists, and this seems to be partially responsible for the similarities between Catholic and Protestant conflicts in England versus progressive and Protestant political subpopulations in the United States.		</li><li class="field_nations" data-remark="feudal order" value="915" data-dimension="Z0">noble coup -> "noble coup" is my colloquial term for a political phenomenon where some particular socially-linked graph of nobility and their allies plot to replace a particular royal family or top of a feudal order. I'm not totally sure what the standard word for this is. one thing I'm closer to sure about is that in the handful of these I've heard about it seems like the nobility easily get divided. it isn't easy for them to all join together and create a new state around the nobility compared to them splitting into competing factions of nobility which may all be tied to a particular religious sect. it's weird how the patterns of nobility have similarities to the patterns of capitalists, and this seems to be partially responsible for the similarities between Catholic and Protestant conflicts in England versus progressive and Protestant political subpopulations in the United States.
Line 1,025:		Line 1,025:
	</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="ML, DX" data-qid="21,43" value="2143" data-dimension="S2">Teaching Marxism in school is socialism {{YouTube\|mMubOw5H-yo}} / Teaching Marxism in school constitutes a part of socialist transition -> I think this is technically true. I question how much it accomplishes when it seems like the most important part of Marxism is analyzing the active arrangements and interactions of social graphs on the ground and tipping them over into the next arrangement correctly, going beyond the narrow description of "classes" to see the whole thing.		</li><li class="field_ML" data-tradition="ML, DX" data-qid="21,43" value="2143" data-dimension="S2">Teaching Marxism in school is socialism {{YouTube\|mMubOw5H-yo}} / Teaching Marxism in school constitutes a part of socialist transition -> I think this is technically true. I question how much it accomplishes when it seems like the most important part of Marxism is analyzing the active arrangements and interactions of social graphs on the ground and tipping them over into the next arrangement correctly, going beyond the narrow description of "classes" to see the whole thing.

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_ML" data-qid~~="21,44~~" value~~="2144~~" data-dimension="S2">~~<cite>Trotskyism: Counter-revolution in Disguise</cite> (Olgin 1935) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,44\|9k]]) ~~-> Soviet record of the history of Trotskyism up to the first attack. [[User:RD/9k/Q21,44\|[...]]]~~		{{li\|I=Z1/ML\|Q=21,44\|Q2=2144}}<cite>Trotskyism: Counter-revolution in Disguise</cite> (Olgin 1935) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,44\|9k]])

	</li~~><li class~~=~~"field_ML" data-qid~~="21,45~~" value~~="2145~~" data-dimension="S2">~~Trotskyism is the shovel dream of small owners / Trotskyism is the shovel dream of the petty bourgeosie (small owners; Artisan types; mainstream Marxism-Leninism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,44\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=21,45\|Q2=2145}}Trotskyism is the shovel dream of small owners / Trotskyism is the shovel dream of the petty bourgeosie (small owners; Artisan types; mainstream Marxism-Leninism) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,44\|9k]])

	</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-tradition="DX" data-qid="21,46" value="2146" data-dimension="S2">Community gardens are socialism {{YouTube\|mMubOw5H-yo}} / Community gardens constitute a part of socialist transition -> this claim comes from Vietnam. I think it's partly true. I'm doubtful on it being totally true, because on the surface it sounds a bit like "Free buses are socialism".		</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-tradition="DX" data-qid="21,46" value="2146" data-dimension="S2">Community gardens are socialism {{YouTube\|mMubOw5H-yo}} / Community gardens constitute a part of socialist transition -> this claim comes from Vietnam. I think it's partly true. I'm doubtful on it being totally true, because on the surface it sounds a bit like "Free buses are socialism".
Line 1,578:		Line 1,578:

	{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=28,45\|Q2=2845}}Productive forces birth sociophilosophies (Marx 1859) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,04\|9k]])		{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=28,45\|Q2=2845}}Productive forces birth sociophilosophies (Marx 1859) / ([[User:RD/9k/Q21,04\|9k]])
			{{li\|I=S2/ML\|Q=28,46\|Q2=2846}}Apply Marx to country characteristics / country characteristics (Lenin) / Marx's theory does not plan for specific country characteristics, but can be applied to them / Marx's theory provides only [[E:Marx going meta (early Marxism onto meta-Marxism)\|general guiding principles]], which are applied in England differently than in France, in France differently than in Germany, and in Germany differently than in Russia (Lenin) [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1899/articles/arg2op.htm]<br/>
			Apply Marx to country characteristics + Mark Fisher = revisionism as "country characteristics".

	~~</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2846" data-dimension="Z0">??~~
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2847" data-dimension="Z0">??		</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2847" data-dimension="Z0">??
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2848" data-dimension="Z0">??		</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2848" data-dimension="Z0">??

Reversedragon: guitar-string proposition

2026-04-01T02:01:30Z

guitar-string proposition

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:01, 1 April 2026
Line 35:		Line 35:
	</li><li value="925" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="Z">rift, split, separation, schism, expulsion, or fatal controversy / event of serious division between two sets of people / event of serious division between notable individual and group -> thanks Trotsky for showing me that expulsions and schisms are really just the same thing		</li><li value="925" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="Z">rift, split, separation, schism, expulsion, or fatal controversy / event of serious division between two sets of people / event of serious division between notable individual and group -> thanks Trotsky for showing me that expulsions and schisms are really just the same thing

	</li><li value="926" ~~class~~="~~number_empty~~">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="926" data-dimension="S0">??
	</li><li value="927" ~~class~~="~~number_empty~~">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="927" data-dimension="S0">??
	</li><li value="928" ~~class~~="~~number_empty~~">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="928" data-dimension="S0">??
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="929" data-dimension="S0">metaphysical thought experiment		</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="929" data-dimension="S0">metaphysical thought experiment
	</li><li value="930" class="field_geo" data-dimension="S0">Materialist thought experiment		</li><li value="930" class="field_geo" data-dimension="S0">Materialist thought experiment
Line 45:		Line 45:
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="934" data-dimension="S0">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="934" data-dimension="S0">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="935" data-dimension="S0">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="935" data-dimension="S0">??
			</li><li class="number_empty" value="936" data-dimension="S0">??
			</li><li class="number_empty" value="937" data-dimension="S0">??
			</li><li class="number_empty" value="938" data-dimension="S0">??

			{{li\|I=S0/MX\|Q=939\|Q2=939}}guitar-string proposition -> a guitar-string proposition is a proposition that is definitely not in tune but is easier to know the truth value of and learn from than a lot of propositions that sound closer to accurate. this specifically refers to a proposition that is likely false, not a proposition that is intentionally weird, although the two things can overlap.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" value="940" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q940\|jamming proposition or question]] / jamming antithesis		</li><li class="field_mdem" value="940" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q940\|jamming proposition or question]] / jamming antithesis
	</li><li class="field_mdem" value="941" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q941\|jamming proposition]] -> seems to be a major component of 'pataphysics, but also of meta-Marxism		</li><li class="field_mdem" value="941" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q941\|jamming proposition]] -> seems to be a major component of 'pataphysics, but also of meta-Marxism
	</li><li class="field_mdem" value="942" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q942\|jamming question]] -> it bothers me that most people don't think a question is a proposition. it makes the task of non-binary logic unnecessarily difficult.		</li><li class="field_mdem" value="942" data-dimension="S0">[[Ontology:Q942\|jamming question]] / guitar-string question -> it bothers me that most people don't think a question is a proposition. it makes the task of non-binary logic unnecessarily difficult.
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="943">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="943">??
	</li><li class="number_empty" value="944">??		</li><li class="number_empty" value="944">??