Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It matters to me. My dad always told me matter is all that exists. I’d just like to know what others think. Do they accept nothingness?
Not relevant to socialism, but only those interested need answer.
But when you use words like idealism, materialism and socialism you are not getting a point across to most people. Not without circuitous philosophical and historical explanations, by which time they’ve already been inwardly yawning for a while.
So following your logic, shouldn’t you abandon these terms: or constantly fight an uphill battle to bring them back to their original meanings while people yawn every time they see you coming?
And doesn’t that contradict your “language changes, so get over it” exhortation?
How gadgets hook our brains.
Five year olds on average spend an hour and a half a day on smartphones. (Ca m’interesse magazine, June 2023).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ7onvK-gbo&pp=ygUcZG9wYW1pbmUgY29tbWVudCBsZXMgYXBwbGlzIA%3D%3D
Fair enough.
But do you see a place for bibliophiles in socialism? Will there be printed books for those who like them, and will old manuscripts still be preserved if they have nothing to do with the history of socialist thought?
Will old languages still be studied and ancient, medieval, Renaissance and Baroque works still be printed and translated?
Or will everything be on electronic screens whilst tangible works of literature and art are left to decay?
I ask only for your personal opinion, because I am aware that you do not know, and neither do I?
He’s reverting to type again.
” Nor by self-styled aesthetes who enjoy fine books ”
***
That counts out William Morris then. And all those who love literature and art. And all who hoped socialism would be marked by beautiful creations, a beautiful environment, and elevate the human mind.
So much for the hopes of yore, and so much for The Soul of Man under Socialism, as Wilde put it.
We rely on those brought up on X-box Armageddon 3. Good luck in the brave new world of gadgetry socialism.
Perhaps i’m playing devil’s advocate here in the hope of us looking at the communication barriers we face, and our insistence that Marxist historical materialism be studied and understood.
You yourself told me once that socialism can be achieved by those who have never read a single book.
You also agreed with me that people can arrive at our conclusions without knowing of our existence, and that this is regularly happening.
Your words gave me hope.True.
And i’m precisely one of the intellectuals who are practically useless and are
never listened to. So woe betide me if I thought socialist awareness depended on me putting my views across.
Thankfully, I believe it doesn’t, or there would be no hope.When and if revolution comes, it won’t be by Marxist intellectuals. It won’t be by people reading Marx and Engels, and it won’t be by people knowing what idealism and materialism mean, or even by having heard of us.
It will be a socialist revolution, but won’t call itself that, because most workers won’t ever equate the word socialism with what they’ll be doing. They’ll just be doing it.
“Agreed that “most people” are resigned—albeit grudgingly—to tolerating their subjugation to capital.
Social experience convinces “most people” that subjugation is eternal, natural and inevitable.”
***
To be resigned to subjugation implies that one is conscious of subjugation. In this part of the world, most workers do not see themselves as members of the working class, and they would sneer at you for calling them subjugated.
Yes. As I say above, for the ancient Greeks and Romans, and the Hindus, and indeed the Japanese, religion was/is primarily ritual, not belief.
We in the West associate religion with belief, because of our Christian heritage, and especially protestant heritage, which stresses belief over everything.
But religion for the Greeks, Romans, Hindus and Japanese holds its original meaning: as the expression, via ritual and performance, of social cohesion.
The Romans were open to all religious cults and persecuted none. Most Roman notables served as priests sometime during their lives, and attendance at the rites was expected of all citizens. It had nothing to do with belief.
The Jews, in abstaining from the Hellenist rites, were tolerated and exempted because they were an ancient people. But the Christians were not all Jews, and by rejecting the rites, they were rejecting Roman society. That was the reason for persecution. The Romans couldn’t care less what the Christians believed; they were snubbing Rome, and snubbing the Emperor. This was their crime.
So with China and Japan, essentially materialist societies. Which doesn’t imply there weren’t superstitions. But religion was there, and amongst the Hindus, about the stages of life, marked by rites.
And most people shun what they call “Marxist types”, and would never read these books. Heck, they’re no longer able to read English that was the norm in the last century!
I agree with you here. And linguistic snobbery in France has to be the worst.
When I use the older form of the numerals 70 (septante), 80 (huitante) and 90 (nonante), still the use in Switzerland btw, the French will always “correct” me, and some rudely. They think i’m being hip and modern, whereas these simpler forms are older than their convoluted ones, which are in fact very recent. And they’ll pretend not to understand, and shout at me “Nonante? What’s that? WHAT’S THAT?” and poke me in the chest.
