Based professors thread

Had at least 2 trot lecturers/tutors at uni while studying political science. I think a sociology lecturer I had was a Marxist too.

Is your professor Alain Badiou?

Ins't it already? I thought it was the whole point of Marxism and sociology.

EXPLAIN THIS FUCKING THING TO ME
WHAT IS HUMAN NATURE SUPPOSEDLY LIKE?
WHY DOES IT SUPPOSEDLY CONTRADICT SOCIALISM?

Basically it goes

Socialist reject the concept of human nature because humans can only be studied in the context of their society. For example, I'm sure if you were to go back 1000's of years ago I'm sure you'd find someone who said "sacrificing people to the gods is our natural course, it's what the gods created us to do."

Most of mine seemed like liberals.
The exception was the occasional comments that makes me suspect that theyre only social liberals but economic marxists.

A giant abstraction.

It's how you dismiss an idea automatically without actually engaging with it. At least when people bring up 'communism wouldn't work because of lack of incentive' that's an actual idea being put forth that can be argued for or against. "Human nature" is the laziest cop out. It's not even an argument or quantifiable by any metric. You could apply it to anything.

Fucking middle class champagne socialists.
We had a teacher at our tradeschool teaching us how to make real molotov coctails and white phosphorus from old tv's and how to pirate satellite television without police catching you.

Wouldn't a better argument be:
"[Assuming] competitiveness is human nature and instinctual, why not provide incentive to make use of said instinct?"
like said
You could argue against the assumption (which I think is nigh-impossible to do), you could argue that competitiveness is not lost, or you could propose a secondary incentive system, revealing that you're not even a commie, but a [corporatist/fascist] who loves company scrip.

Did you just step out of a time portal from the 1960s when only middle class kids and the bright kids from the upper-crust of the working class went to college?

Also
Confirmed for being a British Trot from the 80s.

Blackflag poster genocide when?

Althusser was a kike pig

...

Danke, Herr Professor

I should visit him some time, I practically live next to my school.

Oh also

Holla Forums's go-to argument is "muh human nature."

It's a bad argument because clearly humans have a nature. The very fact we have thoughts like, "that person's acting weird" or "the way people acted in that movie was very realistic" proves that there are statistically significant trends to human behavior. When I hear someone say "human nature doesn't exist", my opinion of that person immediately drops because they clearly don't understand what is meant by a "nature" in that context.

If you want to respond to arguments based on human nature, you have to explain how they are wrong about what human nature actually is - not just deny it exists entirely. Capitalism and private property are extremely recent developments, and for almost all of human history tribes of humans have acted more like family, distributing resources based on need rather than ownership. Even some post-agricultural societies (eg. certain Native American ones) have had sharing economies rather than capitalistic ones.

Capitalism clearly isn't human nature, unlike, say, the desire to protect one's children.

Are you retarded?

Learn to read you fucking idiot. We cannot know what human nature is until we have studied humans in a controlled environment, which is impossible unless you do one of the taboo experiments.

You can't just use the behaviour of humans in another mode of production over another just because it fits your narrative. You can't just pick an arbitrary point in time and say "see this is human nature", thats exactly what those idiots say. For all we know the sharing culture in tribal times existed not because of "human nature" but because of natural cultural selection. If you have 100 tribes, half of them act like dicks to each other, the other half shares within their group, then the sharing group will survive harsh time and lose less member, they will be stronger and thus dominate the other groups, pushing out their shitty culture. Similarly, human nature may not be about killing or not killing either way, but cultures where killing of tribe members is normal have a selective disadvantage, so the cultures with a more unified culture prevail.

So basically that argument has nothing to do with ownership of MoP

Most people don't even know what MoP means.

kek'd

...

A reformed Eurocommunist post-Marxist New Leftist Frankfurt School professor and social democrat was teaching a class on Nikita Khrushchev, known revisionist.

"Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Leon Trotsky as the most class conscious revolutionary of all time and accept the Fourth International as the only legitimate representative of the interests of the workers of the world!"

At this moment a brave, revolutionary, unreformed Stalinist NKVD veteran who had an appreciation for socialist realist art and read a chapter of Capital every night before going to sleep stood up and waved the red flag.

"If Trotsky was so great, why wasn't the revolution permanent?"

The arrogant professor smirked quite bourgeoisly and smugly replied, "Because the Soviet Union was a deformed workers state, you idiot gerontocrat!"

"Wrong. Comrade Stalin purged Russia of the kulaks and all enemies of the workers. If your theory of revolution was correct, we would have achieved communism by now."

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of A People's History of the United States. He stormed out of the room crying those social-fascist crocodile tears. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Noam Chomsky, wished he had adopted the policies of the Third Period and become more than an infantile leftist bourgeois stooge. He wished so much that he had not betrayed the revolution, but he himself had sold it out!

The students applauded and all sang the State Anthem of the USSR and accepted Socialism in One Country as the best path forward for proletarian cause. An eagle named "Slavoj Zizek" flew into the room and perched atop a copy of "Pravda" and sniffed snot onto its print. The last sentence of the "The Communist Manifesto" was read several times, and Sergei Eisenstein himself showed up and demonstrated how to roll a baby down the Odessa steps.

The professor lost his tenure and was taken out back and shot the next day. He loved Big Brother.

The student's name? Lavrentiy Beria.

Don't lump us in with the anarchonihilists.

Frau Professorin, actually.

Leftist professors are very clearly not the majority, except maybe in a few disciplines like sociology and anthropology.

...

Ah Entschuldigung

they're right

Marx is pretty much the founder of modern sociology, so it makes sense

nice try but Zizek is totally against Stalinism.

...

Human nature isn't just "people always do this", it's a system of cause and effect. Statements about human nature must necessarily follow the form: "a person from [type of society] when placed in [situation] will probably do [thing]"

Absolutely nobody sane has ever or will ever suggest that humans are not influenced by the world around them. If that's what you are calling "human nature", then you're arguing against a non-existent straw man.

It seems like every single fucking argument anyone ever has on this board is founded in semantics. Holla Forums are even worse of course, but you fuckers all think with words. Worthless place.

spooky post tbh

Yes no shit scumfuck, thats litterally how people communicate and most people think.
WITH WORDS

also
Actually absolutely every time someone brings up human nature is about fundamental factors of human behaviour regardless of their environment. They put "humans are just greedy" on the same level as "humans smile when they are happy".

...

UPDATE
Professor talked about our school's left wing club in class today
Why is university so comfy?

feels haram

You're right, I should go outside

Checked!

Not a professor but

For all the shit SocDems get, it's working pretty good here.

Well you can argue that what they think is part of human nature is wrong. That doesn't mean that human nature doesn't exist.

Some very basic behaviors (suckling teats for infants; getting an erection when faced with sexual stimuli) are clearly part of human nature. The tricky part is determining when a more complex behavior is part of it.

Those are at the core very basic material exchanges, and do not permeate through all of society. Why are there woman nowadays who are opposed to breast feeding?

I renounced my faith that day.

They are liberals.

human nature =/= instincts

...

...

nein
hatte jemanden der trotzdem eine gewisse begeisterung für marx hatte

All the things that people might somewhat reasonably claim to be part of the human nature are actually so fucking banal that it has absolutely no relevance for the question of whether communism is possible or not.

Do you know what a crank shaft looks like?

Oh my fucking GOD, this pasta.