Jump to content

Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q45,00: Difference between revisions

From LithoGraphica
← Older edit
Reversedragon (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats, Conference pass, Interface administrators, Arts-aligned editors, Crimson-aligned editors, Violet-aligned editors, Administrators
18,964 edits
m label: Meta-Marxism is impossible
Reversedragon (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats, Conference pass, Interface administrators, Arts-aligned editors, Crimson-aligned editors, Violet-aligned editors, Administrators
18,964 edits
m Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism / formatting
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Meta-Marxism is impossible|E=Q45,00|User=RD|Contents=y}}
{{NextNineThousand|PPPA=Meta-Marxism is impossible|E=Q45,00|User=RD|Contents=y}}
== Main entry ==
== Main entry ==
{{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-DFy}}"><!-- inactive: {{int:hue-ixn-classname-ML}} -->
{{Hue|style=HueCSS|ff1=DFy}}<!-- inactive: ML -->


{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=45,00|Q2=4500}}Meta-Marxism is an impossibility (Trotskyism) / Meta-Marxism is impossible; is not possible
{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=45,00|Q2=4500}}Meta-Marxism is an impossibility (Trotskyism) / Meta-Marxism is impossible; is not possible


</li></ol>
{{endHue}}


== Related ==
== Main claims ==
<ol class="hue clean  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-DFy}}">
{{Hue|ff1=DFy}}


{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=45,00|Q2=4500}}Meta-Marxism is an impossibility  ->  the bot always tries to argue this one if you ask it. I don't need to elaborate there, because by now I'm sure the actual historical Marxist sources say similar things. in Trotsky's time definitely, but supposedly, even Marx said this in his own "prototype", the Grundrisse.
{{li|start=y|I=S2/IV|Q=45,00|Q2=4500}}Meta-Marxism is an impossibility  ->  the bot always tries to argue this one if you ask it. I don't need to elaborate there, because by now I'm sure the actual historical Marxist sources say similar things. in Trotsky's time definitely, but supposedly, even Marx said this in his own "prototype", the Grundrisse.
Line 16: Line 16:
I want to entertain the path of just going full orange on this wiki and only keeping the violet swatch in limited cases as a pure formality ... but I can't prove that I wouldn't just be choosing that out of opportunism and a lack of commitment. so, ironically, I have to keep my alignment to meta-Marxism and the concept of meta-Marxist theory until the day I can prove I'm a {{caps|Real}} Trotskyist. and I genuinely don't know if I can ever make it there. putting aside the wrong propositions that are jokes, it seems like I never stop making stupid mistakes.
I want to entertain the path of just going full orange on this wiki and only keeping the violet swatch in limited cases as a pure formality ... but I can't prove that I wouldn't just be choosing that out of opportunism and a lack of commitment. so, ironically, I have to keep my alignment to meta-Marxism and the concept of meta-Marxist theory until the day I can prove I'm a {{caps|Real}} Trotskyist. and I genuinely don't know if I can ever make it there. putting aside the wrong propositions that are jokes, it seems like I never stop making stupid mistakes.


</li></ol>
{{endHue}}
 
== Related ==
{{Hue|ff1=DFy}}
 
{{li|start=y|I=S2/MX/IV|tradition=MX onto MX, IV onto MX|Q=44,93|Q2=4493}}Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism <!-- {{9k|RD|Q44,93}} -->
 
{{endHue}}


== {{int:hue-prototype-trads-topics-or-genres}} ==
== {{int:hue-prototype-trads-topics-or-genres}} ==
<ol class="hue clean terse  {{int:hue-ixn-classname-DFy}}">
{{Hue|ff1=DFy}}
{{li|start=y
{{li |start=y
    |I=Z1/IV|Q=41,04|Q2=4104}}{{TTS|IV|Fourth}} / Trotskyism
    |I=Z1/IV|Q=41,04|Q2=4104}}{{TTS|IV|Fourth}} / Trotskyism
{{li|I=S1/MX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / violet Materialism
{{li |I=S1/MX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / violet Materialism
{{li|I=S1/MX/DX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / meta-Materialism
{{li |I=S1/MX/DX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / meta-Materialism
{{li|I=S1/MX/DX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q92|meta-Marxism]]
{{li |I=S1/MX/DX|Q=92|Q2=92}}{{TTS|MX|M.X.}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q92|meta-Marxism]]
{{li|I=Z0/ML|Q=90|Q2=90}}{{TTS|MX ∘ ML|M.X. through M-L|title=MX thru ML}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q90|apparent forms of Marxism]]
{{li |I=Z0/ML|Q=90|Q2=90}}{{TTS|MX ∘ ML|M.X. through M-L|title=MX thru ML}} / [[EC:9k/RD/Q90|apparent forms of Marxism]]
</li></ol>
{{endHue}}


== Wavebuilder combinations ==
== {{int:hue-wavebuilder-plies}} ==
<dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
{{WL|ff1=DFy}}


{{WaveBuild| {{E:Q618/MX|??}} | -- | -- }}  <!-- en: Along With, Produces  ??  ?? -->
{{WaveBuild| {{E:Q618/MX|Faulty progressivisms produce irony}} | ?? | {{E:Q618/IV|Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism}} }}  <!-- en: Along With, Produces  ??  ?? -->


{{WaveBuild| {{E:Q618/IV|??}} | -- | -- }}  <!-- en: Along With, Produces  ??  ?? -->
{{WaveBuild| {{E:Q618/IV|??}} | -- | -- }}  <!-- en: Along With, Produces  ??  ?? -->


</dl>
{{endWL}}
<!--
<!--
== Subpages or related scraps ==
== Subpages or related scraps ==

Latest revision as of 05:35, 4 November 2026

Main entry

  1. Meta-Marxism is an impossibility (Trotskyism) / Meta-Marxism is impossible; is not possible

Main claims

  1. Meta-Marxism is an impossibility -> the bot always tries to argue this one if you ask it. I don't need to elaborate there, because by now I'm sure the actual historical Marxist sources say similar things. in Trotsky's time definitely, but supposedly, even Marx said this in his own "prototype", the Grundrisse.
  2. Meta-Marxism doesn't reach classes / Meta-Marxism is not capable of calculating the results of class conflicts if it is a different vantage point from Trotskyism / (9k) ->
    in some ways, there is already an argument for this. [on the prototype page for Q42,08 "Q42-08"] I set down a "meta-Marxist analysis" that is questionable. I come back and mark that as an error. I decide that in order to mark it as an error I will mark it as the error of a specific tendency (Dengism), because that is the apparent form of Marxism I had tentatively decided to defend. so, the question comes up: is the violet swatch just an excuse to wildly oscillate between different kinds of errors from Materialism that are all aligned with some particular internal structure with a class character? I definitely did not beat the accusation on that page.
    I want to entertain the path of just going full orange on this wiki and only keeping the violet swatch in limited cases as a pure formality ... but I can't prove that I wouldn't just be choosing that out of opportunism and a lack of commitment. so, ironically, I have to keep my alignment to meta-Marxism and the concept of meta-Marxist theory until the day I can prove I'm a Real Trotskyist. and I genuinely don't know if I can ever make it there. putting aside the wrong propositions that are jokes, it seems like I never stop making stupid mistakes.

Related

  1. Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism

Ideologies, topics, or genres

  1. pronounced Fourth / Trotskyism
  2. pronounced M.X. / violet Materialism
  3. pronounced M.X. / meta-Materialism
  4. pronounced M.X. / meta-Marxism
  5. pronounced M.X. through M-L / apparent forms of Marxism

Wavebuilder combinations

pronounced P: pronounced Wave-builder: forms result [Item]
pronounced 618. (S)pronounced (Fourth) (S): IV /Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism (pronounced proposed / IV)1-1-1
along with [Item]
Faulty progressivisms produce irony (pronounced proposed / MX)1-1-1
forming from [Item]
Faulty progressivisms produce irony (pronounced proposed / MX)1-1-1
 ??
pronounced 618. (S)pronounced (Fourth) (S): IV /Practicing meta-Marxism wrong would lead to Liberal-republicanism (pronounced proposed / IV)1-1-1
pronounced P: pronounced Wave-builder: forms result [Item]
--
along with [Item]
pronounced 618. (S)pronounced (Fourth) (S): IV /?? (pronounced proposed / IV)1-1-1
forming from [Item]
pronounced 618. (S)pronounced (Fourth) (S): IV /?? (pronounced proposed / IV)1-1-1
--
--
Retrieved from "https://research.moraleconomy.au/index.php?title=Ontology_talk:9k/RD/Q45,00&oldid=47172"