I was debating using the word at all, I just wanted to point out how I interpreted the message. The only reason I dared use it, is that you picked up this thread in a gentler tone (which just confirmed that you are not pushing agenda).
As I mentioned to our colleague in this thread, I do want to dip my toes in the basics of dialectic materialism, so excuse me if all of this has been discussed to the bone. I understand how we are (also) products of our surrounding, and matter can shape mind. My main argument here is that we also shape matter. So the direction goes both ways. If I am not convinced of my truth, I shall be swayed, thus I have to make sure that when I speak, I speak the truth to the best of my knowledge. If I have hangups, I might push for something faulty. Something that based on my perspective should be a natural part of life, a given, but is actually just a neurosis. So you are definitely picking up the vibes that I see the solution at home.
Anyhow, thank you for getting back to me. I’d love to discuss the topic further, but maybe I’m not ready for a proper debate of (or devil’s advocating against) communism.
The concept of matter shaping ideas that then reshape matter into reshaping ideas in endless spirals is Dialectical Materialism, actually. I’m not denying that ideas are important, but they are not primary.
For what it’s worth, I do have an “agenda,” I’m a Communist. I want Communism, and I want to create more Communists, that’s why I made that reading list. Communism isn’t an intellectual fascination, but an ideology surrounding working class liberation.
If you want to dip your toes, Principles of Communism is a great start, maybe try reading section 1 of my reading list and watching the Parenti Lecture as well if you want to see Communism in context.
I was debating using the word at all, I just wanted to point out how I interpreted the message. The only reason I dared use it, is that you picked up this thread in a gentler tone (which just confirmed that you are not pushing agenda).
As I mentioned to our colleague in this thread, I do want to dip my toes in the basics of dialectic materialism, so excuse me if all of this has been discussed to the bone. I understand how we are (also) products of our surrounding, and matter can shape mind. My main argument here is that we also shape matter. So the direction goes both ways. If I am not convinced of my truth, I shall be swayed, thus I have to make sure that when I speak, I speak the truth to the best of my knowledge. If I have hangups, I might push for something faulty. Something that based on my perspective should be a natural part of life, a given, but is actually just a neurosis. So you are definitely picking up the vibes that I see the solution at home.
Anyhow, thank you for getting back to me. I’d love to discuss the topic further, but maybe I’m not ready for a proper debate of (or devil’s advocating against) communism.
The concept of matter shaping ideas that then reshape matter into reshaping ideas in endless spirals is Dialectical Materialism, actually. I’m not denying that ideas are important, but they are not primary.
For what it’s worth, I do have an “agenda,” I’m a Communist. I want Communism, and I want to create more Communists, that’s why I made that reading list. Communism isn’t an intellectual fascination, but an ideology surrounding working class liberation.
If you want to dip your toes, Principles of Communism is a great start, maybe try reading section 1 of my reading list and watching the Parenti Lecture as well if you want to see Communism in context.