D-day is June 6th 1944, its true the Americans were giving defense to the British, shooting at subs, protecting British ships etc., but that’s not really “entering the war” with the intention of defeating the Nazis so much as protecting an ally.

Well, the US stayed out of the conflict until after the Battle of Stalingrad. The US was hoping the Nazis would destroy the USSR, which it looked like they might, but once the Russians started pushing back west the US realized they couldn’t allow Russia to win the war. So they teamed up with the UK, invaded France and cleaned up the western front and told their people that it was actually the US/UK that won the war when the most sacrifices were made, and the actual turning point was achieved by the USSR.

Consequently fascism wasn’t completely eradicated, it was absorbed into the western consensus as the virulent anticommunism of the Nazis was quite valuable. Several high ranking Nazi generals were recruited to form NATO, and rocket scientists were also brought into the fold. The vast majority of companies, and their executives who cooperated with and were fervent enablers of the Nazis, received no punishment at all; as punishing business dealings with the Nazis would implicate american businesses such as IBM whose second largest customer was Nazi Germany (the first being the USA). The few executives tried at Nuremburg received diminished sentences.

Learning about WWII doesn’t teach you how the most progressive, industrialized society in the world at the time, and possibly ever, became fascist. For that you need to learn about WWI, the failed Spartacist uprising from 1917-1923, and the following period where the Nazis rose to power and the last remnants of the USPD and KPD were destroyed.

So unless your uncle is a fan of Rosa Luxemburg, he’s probably clueless

You see real democracy is when you subvert the will of the people and call it “checks and balances”.

Roko’s basilisk is gonna have a field day with this one

Its glorious to see Bibi fly all the way here for the dems to turn him into a basket for Kamala to dunk on.

I looked it up, it appears in a lot of places though its origin is unknown. So you picked it up from somewhere. Definitely not your fault for mangling what is obviously a distorted Friere quote, though it remains mangled and now a part of public consciousness. I still have the same reservations about it and I wish you would consider reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed rather than dismiss what I’m saying and probably keep repeating this. But you’re right, it was a waste of time.

Just because you don’t know where it comes from doesnt mean it isn’t connected

Imma take issue with this.

You’ve rephrased, and essentially reformulated Paolo Friere’s famous and enlightening quote, “Equality feels like oppression to the oppressor.” Does having privilege make one an oppressor? In some cases, it most certainly does but I would disagree that coming from privilege makes one an oppressor: history is full of examples of people from the oppressive ruling classes risking or sacrificing everything to fight against oppression and restore equality. I am privileged but equality would not feel like oppression to me; or if it did I would have to self criticize harshly since I spend so much of my time and energy fighting against oppression and for equality. And this is what your rephrasing has done, it has eliminated the class aspect from Friere’s formulation; furthermore it isn’t connected to anything. So when you say this in isolation you create a privileged other. Friere on the other hand was fully aware of the dialectic between the oppressed and their oppressors, and scientifically worked out his thesis: through dehumanization of the oppressed, the oppressors lost their own humanity. While oppression had to be fought, first the oppressed had to restore their own humanity by restoring their own subjectivity. Once they had liberated their minds, and in fact through this process they would become organized in such a way to organize their bodies as well. This is the perceived nadir of the oppressors, the equality that feels like oppression. However, in its final stage this equality restores the humanity of the oppressor, in fact it is the ontological mission of the oppressed to restore the humanity of the oppressors. this final synthesis of the dialectic is not inevitable however, and the whole enterprise is based on education. “When education is not liberating,” he said, “it is the dream of the oppressed to become the oppressor.”

I don’t know what that deleted comment was, probably some hateful bs, but was your comment intended to educate, and set others on the path of education?

Its not a bad thing

The point of the meme isn’t about whether you personally would want to sleep with someone who is trans, and whether that makes you a good person or not, its about how the first, second, and last thing a lot of people think about wrt trans people is whether they are fuckable or not. Its not good to objectify people, if you do it is transphobic/sexist/racist/whatever dehumanizing. But if you see trans people as people, and respect their gender, their right to express themselves openly even if you aren’t sexually attracted to them, then this meme will never be a problem for you. And if you feel personally attacked by this meme, try and figure out why, because it’s probably not about you. Don’t be a creep isn’t that complicated, folks

Yeah I read WL&C after a failed attempt at reading Capital (I had never read much Marx other than the manifesto at that point) and realized I needed to understand his economics first, as I felt completely out of my depth. Turns out reading Capital v1, the first few chapters are just like that! But I’m glad I read WL&C, like you said its short and gave me something to chew on for a year or so before diving back into the big book.

I edited my comment above about CotGP. All solid recommendations, for exactly the reasons you state.

People should read Value Price and Profit because Marx proved that inflation is just companies raising prices, thoroughly debunks all the lies about causes of inflation that economists have been using to protect profits since before even his time.

All solid suggestions.

Wrt critique of the Gotha programme, it’s interesting to me that Marx was such a critic of Lassalle, so much so that Engels actually apologized for Marx’s harsh criticisms of the social democrat. Marx had called Lassalle a would be petty dictator or something like that. Except he was right, Lassalle was secretly plotting with von Bismarck on a plan to unify Germany under a bourgeois led social democracy, which von Bismarck could later seize absolute control over. Marx didn’t know about this conspiracy, he just reasoned it out.

I’m not a fan of Stalin, but his interview with H.G. Wells is hilarious.

deleted by creator

What have you read of Engels? Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is one of my favorites. Other than some of his letters, forewords, and some essays, I’ve been really wanting to read The Conditions of the Working Class in England, since it’s referenced in Capital; and I think I have something else saved by him on my Kobo, can’t think of it ATM. I think Engels is really easy to grasp; Marx is a phenomenal writer but unless you’re in the mood to read about 1. Economics 2. Dense academic history or 3. A blistering criticism of some “Young Hegelian” scholar like Feuerbach or Bruno Bauer its hard to find something of his to just easy-read. The Manifesto is pretty accessible but it was mostly written by Engels, the two men were really one author most of the time, and I’ve read the manifesto several times and while its good its not my favorite work.

Sorry for coming off confrontational, but you picked two very good and influential thinkers to target. You could have said “don’t just read Malcolm Gladwell and Sam Harris” or “Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro,” who are all hacks, but very popular authors; whereas Marx and Engels have fallen out of fashion. It’s conspicuous, is all.

Geez the downvote brigade is out in full force

How does one make a point using an example they know nothing about? To be clear, I agree with you, but as someone who has read a fair amount of M&E and know a ton of people who have read M&E, they are among the top 1% of readers in terms of sheer volume, but also curiosity and intellectual honesty.

Combined with the fact that the vast majority of Marx and Engels was social science, not ideological polemic, I get the impression that you are giving advice that you haven’t actually taken. Which would be fine, we are all contradictory beings to some extent. But it does beg the question.

And if you had read them, then I would want to know your insights on what you had read

Have you read Marx or Engels? What have you read?

The commons

Cronenberg be cronenbergin