We know that the agrarian revolution established the need for order, male dominance, traditionalism and organized religion. You marxists want to remove that. So how is that possible, without removing 99% of the worlds population including every single farmer and returning to the Stone Age? How is Communism not literally diabolical?
/pol/ has a question
hey guys, i'm illiterate and a retarded person asking loaded questions, take me serious for a moment ok?
how about no and stay in your shithole where you can get your education from memes and desinfographs?
He sort of right, male dominance over the family and abolition of mothers right did happen in the agrarian era.
by going forwards instead of backwards.
You mean into worldwide genocide? That’s forwards?
agrarian revolution established the need for order, male dominance
You marxists want to remove that.
It's not Marxists that want to "remove it", it's more just the inevitable flow of history.
So how is that possible
without removing 99% of the worlds population including every single farmer and returning to the Stone Age?
This is just an absurd leap of logic.
How do you expect to make a peanut butter sandwich without fucking your dog?
This is just emotional moralism.
greetings. I'll try and answer your question. For starters, on religion, Marx argues more complex and alienated forms of religion evolved with more complex and alienated forms of From Marx (Capital, volume 1):
The religious world is but the reflex of the real world. And for a society based upon the production of commodities, in which the producers in general enter into social relations with one another by treating their products as commodities and values, whereby they reduce their individual private labour to the standard of homogeneous human labour – for such a society, Christianity with its cultus of abstract man, more especially in its bourgeois developments, Protestantism, Deism, &c., is the most fitting form of religion. In the ancient Asiatic and other ancient modes of production, we find that the conversion of products into commodities, and therefore the conversion of men into producers of commodities, holds a subordinate place, which, however, increases in importance as the primitive communities approach nearer and nearer to their dissolution. Trading nations, properly so called, exist in the ancient world only in its interstices, like the gods of Epicurus in the Intermundia, or like Jews in the pores of Polish society. Those ancient social organisms of production are, as compared with bourgeois society, extremely simple and transparent. But they are founded either on the immature development of man individually, who has not yet severed the umbilical cord that unites him with his fellowmen in a primitive tribal community, or upon direct relations of subjection. They can arise and exist only when the development of the productive power of labour has not risen beyond a low stage, and when, therefore, the social relations within the sphere of material life, between man and man, and between man and Nature, are correspondingly narrow. This narrowness is reflected in the ancient worship of Nature, and in the other elements of the popular religions. The religious reflex of the real world can, in any case, only then finally vanish, when the practical relations of everyday life offer to man none but perfectly intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellowmen and to Nature.
Engels argued something similar with regards to patriarchy in "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State".
So how is that possible, without removing 99% of the worlds population including every single farmer and returning to the Stone Age? How is Communism not literally diabolical?
seems to imply you think agriculture is impossible without "order, male dominance, traditionalism and organized religion.". Agriculture requires us to plant seeds in the ground, water them, and expose them to sunlight. There is absolutely no relation between the science and requirements of agriculture and believing in a certain religion, male domination of society, etc. While in many historical cultures, religion did indeed play a large role in agriculture (as well as hierarchy, as it is argued by some anthropologists that kingdoms evolved out of the need to centrally plan monocrop-agriculture) today, we realize that crop yields have much less to do with dancing to the rain gods, than with using proper farming techniques
Sounds much like a non-argument from someone who craves control. Give me your plan how your society will live without these.
Without what? Farms?
Its a logical fallacy to think that just because agriculture came about at the same time as patriarchy, organized religion, and hierarchical forms of social organization, that agriculture literally REQUIRES those things. Agriculture is a science based on empirical discovery and application, saying all possible future forms of agriculture requires patriarchal/religious traditionalism is the same as arguing that since fire was discovered at the dawn of hunter-gatherer period of human history, OBVIOUSLY any future civilization which uses fire must also believe in animist/pantheist beliefs of ancient hunter gatherers.
Male, rich, and religious dominance sounds like a direct product of agricultural society to me. Really I want to know how you want to go PAST that. Like something big must happen for that.
Have you ever heard of modern industrial society. How exactly are you defining agricultural society.
No, the agricultural revolution removed those beliefs, but is the industrial revolution as big?
Where does our food come from? same source as 4000 BC Sumer.
Yes… but society will be organized in a completely different way.
Clergy - doesn’t exist
So that’s basically it?
I mean as a Jew I don’t expect him to respect Christian Clergy but that’s just rude
Do you veiw society as one static unchanging entitity? We want to abolish private property and the division of labor, would that not make a difference?
Collective farms are far less efficient then capitalist farms. We'd need fully automated farming complexes to avoid typical communist starvation. Or, alternatively , modify the human body to be able to feed of either rocks or electricity.
Sounds like USSR is your future bro. I’m leaving the thread, my aunt made lunch have a good day everyone
They were necessary. The famrs had to be centralized so equipment and training needed for industrialzation could be given out.
same source as 4000 BC Sumer
have you ever been on a modern farm? it doesn't look like your fantasy book illustrations
the world has gone through a number of modes of production over the past 6000 years, in each the organisation of labour and how we meet societies needs has been different. The percentage of the population employed in agriculture is constantly falling as the amount of value added per worker increases with technological innovation, the number of agricultural workers has fallen by over 30% in just the last 30 years.
The only countries where the majority of the population still work in agriculture are Madagascar and Bhutan, the worldwide average being less than 14% and its only that high as industrial labour saving innovations haven't spread to most of the world yet.
Society is organised differently today since the conditions of our lives have been changed by our technological development, this will continue and the way we organise our labour to meet our needs will change accordingly.
What the fuck are you talking about, You need to provide at least some kind of reasoning as to why a worldwide genocide would stem from giving women rights and moving society forward
Because we don't live in an agrarian society anymore, and as such those things will change just like they did going from hunter gatherer societies to agrarian societies.
Collective farms are far less efficient then capitalist farms.
common misconception spread by ideological western propagandists. Collective farms had a substantially greater comparative output than private farms while also being less labour intensive (private farms in the USSR used 40% of agricultural labour while only producing 26% of all output).
Read Joseph Medley's paper on soviet agriculture.
if you haven't noticed, we don't live in an agrarian society anymore and most of the things you named have already been eroded centuries ago and are on the way out
you commit a honestly mind-boggling fallacy by implying that because certain forms of societal organization accompanied the agricultural revolution, they will always be necessary for agriculture
having patriarchal households with strict division of labor, praying to gods for rain, etc, hasn't been required to feed people for quite some time
so he read the first few paragraphs and then dropped the reading because that delusional faggot thinks he got it figured out
should i pat him on the shoulder for making an attempt at advanced faggotry?
Basically yes. We aren't even subject to Malthusian population dynamics anymore. Instead we regulate our population by just choosing not to have children.
Also, we've been on the moon. This is bigger than the agrarian revolution.
We were more rich and healthy before the so-called agrarian revolution.
We know that the agrarian revolution established the need for order, male dominance, traditionalism and organized religion
before agriculture there was no male dominance, traditionalism or organised religion
What the fuck are you talking about
You marxists want to remove that.
Before capitalism everyone lived in close knit communities, under capitalism all that shit you talk about collapsed and not before, retard.
So how is that possible, without removing 99% of the worlds population including every single farmer and returning to the Stone Age?
the population of Russia exploded after the revolution and the death rate plummeted. After the collapse of the Soviet Union the death rate skyrocketed and the birth rate dropped. On top of that, before the 1917 revolution the vast majority of the population could not read, very quickly the literacy rate reached the high 90's, something America did not achieve until much later. On top of that, it went from being MOSTLY FARMERS to LAUNCHING ROCKETS INTO SPACE in a matter of decades. So, the complete fucking opposite of all the bullshit you just spouted.
there won't be a choice. industrial civilization is coming to an end like it or not.
Child labor sounds like a direct product of agricultural society to me. Really I want to know how you want to go PAST that. Like something big must happen for that.
If you are not willing to change nothing will change that's a fact. You fail to see a different world because you acknowledge the present as the only possibilty. If you start really analyzing history you will find that ancient societies and ancient values are quite different from what we have today and to ancient people modern society would probably sound unreasonable.
This was a stupid thread
from someone who craves control
the need for order, male dominance, traditionalism and organized religion
I want to get off Mr. Caveman's wild ride.