Bordiga was just reifying the theory established by Marx

Then why read Bordiga at all? Why not just read Marx?


Bordiga was able to apply this understanding in an era of revolution and counterrevolution closer to our times, and thus was able to provide more additional insights that Marx could not seen materially in his own life.

Additionally, for why we still recommend Bordiga (and Marx) to this very day even as we sometimes emphasize reading something more contemporary, they had a very developed appreciation of the historical/theoretical revolutionary movement and a critique that has hardly been surpassed. Modern-day Marxists that are sufficient in both of these qualities include Slavoj Zizek and Rafiq.

bordiga said "you can't win elections, elections are a porky thing and completely bought" but people are still voting, why is this?

bump, first page has too many boring 5th column Holla Forums posters

read bordiga

Bumping good thread

Don't read Bordiga. Google Bookchin.

Don't summarize bordiga. Don't explain bookchin.


Because nobody reads Bordiga.

The whole point of the full idea about worker owner ship as I understand it, is that communism, abolition of the value form, as you say, will not come about through some grand revolution, there may be a grand revolution, but the revolution itself will only take it so far, just like other modes of production, it will exist alongside and within the outmoded modes for an extremely long time, modes of production are also never completely distinct in themselves, each has its own stages and progressions within that specific mode of production, for example the difference between capitalism now and capitalism in 1850 or feudalism as it stands today versus feudalism in 1500.
On top of this, total abolition of the value form requires a total system, that is one which dominates if not the whole globe than at least the most significant part of it, considering the demands of modern technology, minerals and such, really to be able to fully distribute goods you need to be in control of the entire thing. No matter what happens, in every eventuality, even after "conquering" this globe from capitalism which will in itself take an extremely long time, the development of the industrial forces in these areas will be an extremely long process.
In short, there will be a lower stage, perhaps (and most likely in my opinion) even a lower lower stage.
I am not saying that muh co-ops are socialism, but a co-operative economy is one in which the work force is more directly engaged with production, much more, they themselves oversee it even if market forces still control it. Further, they are the ones making the decisions which effect their relationship to it, through working standards and practices and so on.
Worker ownership therefore creates conditions by which class consciousness is "organically" imbued on the worker.
These conditions are not communism, but they are conditions from which communism in my opinion is more likely to emerge.
On top of this, when the ownership of the property is literally in their hands, they have much more power, should they have the inclination to Communism. Sure, they would still have the market, but the market can be more easily abolished when production is in the workers hands
It gets workers into the practice of managing themselves, which is necessary are we ever to achieve a stateless, classless society.
On top of that, radical reform agitates the populace and causes reaction, while we have absolutely zero chance of revolution in the west, we need to build reformist structures, if only to agitate with their existence. Agitate directly for revolution in any European country and you will be laughed at. You can't go zero-revolution.

As well as this,the material gain they will have from the private owner no longer existing is a short term benefit that sustain the revolution. Plus such a union could fund other types of agitation and education and organise organically

Leftcoms generally agree with you, OP. We think Marx is more important than anyone who came after him.

I've just finished capital volume 2 and I've allready read all the smaller phamplets (german ideology, communist manifesti etc) what should I read next?

Bordiga. :^)

And Engels and Lenin of course.

Read Bookdiga.

Google and read Borchindiga

volume 3, duh and then theories of surplus value

Why did you post this in every Bordiga thread?

Because there is 6 or more of them in the catalog. And nobody has replied to it

Because Bordiga helps us understand Marx.

You need to recognize that nearly all OTHER Marxists are tainted by the social democracy of Kautsy's second international. Bordiga's body of work is a useful tool to push against this.

Bordiga also does a great job identifying what elements of the Leninist canon are and are not compatible with Marxism.

But why settle for a second-rate theorist like Bordiga when you could read Korsch?

What's there to respond to? Your main criticism seems to be that Bordiga was a communization theorist but he wasn't.

Don't read bordiga, just read Marx. He completely misunderstands the arguments Marx uses to reach his conclusions while taking the conclusions as given, while at the same time taking all the things lenin did out of necessity as revolutionary goals and completely butchering the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat. And when you're done read Althusser


bumping for reply later


bordiga bump.