/anarchopac/

What did he mean by this?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=kMmTzVJcPVE&lc=z120tl5rfoy3hvttm23azrrwbqbzzdp2x.1490116382252831
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I thought the "web of interacting factors" framing was a left modification of Foucault's competition between power-knowledges.

He's going to make a video on base/superstructure. Why do you care what some youtuber thinks? Read something from picrelated if you want to learn about Anarchism or one of Marx's works for Marxism.

anarchopac is a pretentious fuck. The voice he uses in his videos isn't even what he sounds like (watch the debate he did with the ML) but an imitation of Chomsky's inflections.

The natural end result of anarchists' focus on "authority" an abstract concept that undermines class consciousness. They will be diverted in any useless direction once they lose sight of reality.

Yes, it is only anarchists who can disregard class.

agreed there are idpol marxists (mainly first world maoists/teenage traps with mental issues)

I don't understand how the second is an ML communist. Structuralism was anti-Marxist in orientation.

Because MLs are anti-Marxist.

...

From your own cited page there. I meant structuralism per se as it was promoted and funded by capitalists as a bulwark against Marxism. I didn't mean everything that was influenced by it or marginally affiliated with it in some form.

It means when you take something like Marx, and simplify it down as far as you can for a mass audience like this new trend I'm seeing with simple Marxists, you're likely to end up with a lot of blind spots and misinterpretations.

Someone needs to read Althusser…

I couldn't take him seriously any more, after he de facto dismissed materialism, and the fact that you don't really brother about gender and pronouns if you're hungry, by saying [0]:

[0] youtube.com/watch?v=kMmTzVJcPVE&lc=z120tl5rfoy3hvttm23azrrwbqbzzdp2x.1490116382252831

Can you explain?

You mean to say that your vulgar-marxist conception of "class conciousness" (not actually a marxian concept iirc) held as a fixed idea undermines the critique of authority?

Structuralism abstracted all structures arbitrarily, i.e. as separate from the Marxist base-superstructure model, so any single structure chosen and analyzed could become a theoretical structure from which the subject could be mechanically (to some degree) derived. Capitalism was merely one structure among many others.

You can still see a variation of this argument in postmodernism due to poststructuralism's influence, although it's in a modified form (as, for poststructuralists, the structure is itself an utterly arbitrary and abstract sign; the historical evolution of the structure's interpretations is what becomes important in their case, as well as the competition between interpretive schemas, e.g. Foucault's power-knowledge).

Althusserian Marxism has some structuralist influences but it is not structuralism.

That most retards here still believe that the base-superstructure only works in one direction.

How is superstructural equality of women and black people supposed to affect the base.
It only serves as an argument to keep the base intact, because "See? The superstructure is fine!"

How about you wait for him to make the video before we speculate about what he meant blindly?

Link?

This

"What did X mean by this?" is a meme…