I like to think of it less as “heres a bunch of stuff, everything is stuff God literally did” and a bit more like “here is a bunch of stories, some more allegorical, some based on real events, where we try to explain what human life, the world, and divinity is”
LLMs are deliberately trained to make some obvious mistakes, so that you feel smart when you spot them, and think that they are accurate enough to use because “you spot the mistakes”.
There are plenty of political battles which can and should be fought, but opposing new means of production in principle outside of the specific impacts is fundamentally reactionary
Hi comerades. Finished Capital Vol II this weekend. Gonna take a short break before the next one.
Remember, we are on the side of the working peoples true interests, and the development of the productive forces. Therefore, we as a movement have a historic advantage, even when times get tough or when nothing seems to get anywhere, because through hardship lies victory, and even still waters can be stirred. Keep up the good work comerades!
Fuck it, give me the estrogen goa’uld
I can’t give you adviae related to mental health conditions or anything, but here are aome thoughts on anger in general.
Anger is an energetic feeling. What you need is an outlet for that anger, you need to do something. Because the source of your anger is political, it can be a great source of energy to do political work (done in a measured manner) like organizing, agitating, or reading tough-to-read theory. A healthy amount of exercise is also a great outlet and will objectively make you a more capable revolutionary because it imprives your health, energy, and mood.
Anger, like many emotions, can be a component of ruminating thoughts. You also need an outlet for those thoughts. That can be something like political writing related to an issue or other agitprop, journaling for yourself, art, or venting and dark humor with a comerade. However, if you are still stuck no matter what and feel like the thought isn’t progressing, don’t feed it by giving it undue attention.
I’ve really been getting into painting this year. I feel like it’s a great way to work through emotions. Hopefully I can find a way to use it for politics and just so share, maybe by making agitprop. I was thinking of making a zine about a “socialist version” of the city I live in with some tongue in cheek visuals and at least somewhat more serious city planning/slice of life stuff
Three reasons:
Childcare costs is very expensive now and also largely individualized
The actual way we raise children is very individualized and intensive putting a massive burden on parents
The future is very uncertain. Before, people had to worry about war and exploitation, now we have that and WMDs, climate change, fascism, and whatever other technological horrors we manage to create
Whenever I am uncertain about something regarding my political work, I try to think about Combat Liberalism by Mao, Mao’s principle of no right to speech without investigation, and the principles of unity, crit/self-crit, and democratic centralism. I find it often clears it up for me whether I should forge on ahead or change course and backtrack.
Best of luck, comerade!
Lenin walks around the world. Frontiers cannot bar him. Neither barracks nor barricades impede. Nor does barbed wire scar him.
Lenin walks around the world. Black, brown, and white receive him. Language is no barrier. The strangest tongues believe him.
Lenin walks around the world. The sun sets like a scar. Between the darkness and the dawn There rises a red star.
Tell me more about your joke reference to the Eliza chatbot.
You are welcome! If you think that people in your area will just dismiss it because of the section, you could rephrase it to be softer. Just cutting the use of “gods” in the paragraph and leaving it implicit could maybe make some people more receptive? Otherwise highlighting that you can use diamat as a method of analysis without accepting diamat fully as a worldview could maybe help?
Agree! My biggest weakness as a writer is that I write too complex sentences and paragraphs. It is a difficult balance though with pamphlets, because it needs to be readable, short, and precise and correct. This one is additionally about philosophy, which often has dense concepts and writing. But readability is definetly still an area of improvement!
I think Legos or other building-block toys could be a great example. Quantity into quality, existing as an relation between component parts, phenomena (a thing) vs essence (a bunch of blocks that are connected), change as you build more or modify … the actual contradiction part I guess is not so clear, but there are a lot of other aspects that you could try to explain with. I mean I guess you could say that Legos are a contradiction between their ability to connect and their innate existance as separate parts but I don’t think that makes sense to a 9 year old lol
Thats a tough one! I’d suggest focusing on opposites, which are very intuitive, and how things keep changing, with plenty of examples. Maybe an example about what a thing is internally determines what it can do, with a common toy or something as an example. And then explaining that this can be used to find out all sorts of stuff about the world!
Good suggestion! As for the target audience I guess it would be anyone vaguely socialist that might need an intro or some encouragement to read. I don’t think it’ll convince any libs, but maybe it could encourage socdems to read more theory
I’ve been working on this pamphlet for the last couple weeks
I also got an e-ink reader and I love it so far. So much easier than dragging around a big book. I also find it comfortable to hold, so I can change seating positions more when I read. Reading PDFs or long webpages on a computer has always been a bit exhausting for me so it’s nice to get it on another type of display
What’s next, the moon?
If they include supporting any political views favored by any of the big parties in China as grounds for denaturalisation and deportation, doesn’t it mean they could just do that to basically anyone? It’s gotta be hard to not agree with one of them on something?
(I’m sure that’s the point ofc. To just have legal grounds to throw any political opponent into a concentration camp pending “deportation”)
Bourgeois economics be like: imagine u had a goose who laid golden eggs and then you kept stealing the eggs lmao