Reports coming in that Juan Guaido is declaring himself the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

Revolutionary optimism. Realistically, does falling to despair hurt or help revolutionary cause? Historically, doomerism has been a tool of the bourgeoisie to suppress activism. Why agitate for the climate if we can only mitigate the coming impact, not prevent it? Why fight for socialism if it will result in imperialist aggression? There’s a very deliberate movement to suppress revolutionary fervor on the left, longing for the old USSR instead of looking to the future, etc, and the counter is revolutionary optimism.

What we are seeing right now is the undeniable advancement of the socialist cause worldwide, alongside the downfall of imperialism. The PRC is successfully charting a new course, and the global south is breaking free of the shackles placed on it by the west. Every day, there’s new scientific advancement, new revolutionary advances, all if you seek it out. The western media has to run on doomscrolling and only showing you the worst.

Don’t be unrealistic, of course, temper expectations and be resolutely optimistic.

It’s pretty liberal, the first game portrays a Mexican revolution as “evil dictator vs evil opportinist swindling the public,” but nevertheless the games are fun and you get to be a cowboy. Given that Stalin was genuinely a fan of westerns, it would make sense that he’d like RDR, even if there’s a good amount of liberalism.

Great, thanks for your feedback!

o7

Haven’t really used Reddit in a few years, been only on Lemmy.

Yep! It’s easy to get an inflated ego, but that’s not particularly useful, nor materially backed-up. We just have, in general, become more forced by our material conditions into adopting the proletarian stance.

That tension between proletarianization and the dreams of being one of the “greats” is the basis of the modern desparation of the artisinal worker. I do think that in socialism, at least higher stages of socislism, artists would return to being “happy” as a subsection of the proletariat. George Lucas expressed jealousy over soviet filmmakers and their freedom from the profit motive, after all.

In modern, capitalist society, there are proletarianized writers, ie contracted writers paid piece-wages or even hourly wages, and there are the petite-bourgeois writers that generally work with a publisher, or even self-publish. These do near identical labor, but the class character is different, and it manifests in the ability for the rare petite-bourgeois writer to pull a J. K. Rowling and strike it big, to use an example.

The artisan that owns their own labor and means of production holds a precarious position, the vast majority are being proletarianized or live worse lives than the higher paid proletarian occupations. However, their class character often gives them a highly individualist outlook, believing themselves deserving of a privledged position in society next to the big names like Stephen King.

The median artist doesn’t live such a life, they struggle to live off of their skills and are forced into proletarian occupations. This tension and desparation is the basis of reaction for the artisan. It isn’t a moral judgement, artists aren’t the enemy. This is just the naked consequence of art as a commodity, and artistry typically taking a high amount of training but a low price amount of outlay in materials and tools compared to other fields to produce art.

It’s not really about intelligence, or lack thereof. People typically license themselves to believe whatever benefits them is good. We all do it, we aren’t enlightened or immune for being communists. I recommend reading Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing” if you haven’t already.

Artisans that own their own means of production and produce at their own behest, but must perform this labor themselves, are petite-bourgeoisie. They are not bourgeoisie proper, but they live by their own labor and means of production. They are constantly at risk of proletarianization, because they generally can’t compete with the bourgeoisie proper, but they as a class are generally more assured than the proletariat. Obviously edge-cases exist, but as a class this is generally true.

This petite-bourgeois relation is why as a profession it is more common to become mega-wealthy than, say, the upper-paid skilled proletarians like doctors or engineers, even if those skilled proletarians have it better on average. Sanderson, George R. R. Martin, J. K. Rowling, etc. all made their vast wealth from royalties, because they own the IP they created. It isn’t a proletarian wage that they recieve, they have a different class character than proletarians.

Now, the merits/demerits of AI is a different question, but if your only objection is to the correct identification of artisans as petite-bourgeoisie then that should settle that critique.

You too comrade!

Helps me get access to more theory, the screen is similar to paper so less eye fatigue, and I don’t get intimidated by the size of bigger books.

Thanks so much! Do you have anything you would suggest for the economics section instead? Was it at least helpful?

I use a kobo! Sideloaded with KoReader.

In what way? In general, cooperative ownership is “nicer” than capitalist ownership, but is incompatible with more developed stages of socialism, where production and distribution is collectivized. In general, I’m more supportive of public education, especially in socialism.

eReaders have been massive for me. Much better at reading for extended periods.

Hope everyone can keep up with the goals you’ve set out for yourselves, has a pleasant week, and stays safe in these troubled times.

As always, communism will win.

The phone notes are a necessary evil, haha. Can’t read my own handwriting. I don’t think you should just copy my style, find what works best for you! Anything to keep you more engaged with the text.