• quips@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      46 minutes ago

      Counterpoint, you can understand the core points of socialism very quickly. One need not read 50 books before joining the conversation.

  • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Are there no anarchist books? I’m pretty sure there are and anarchy doesn’t mean willful ignorance.

    • SybilVane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It’s technically a work of fiction but The Dispossessed by Ursula Le Guin can maybe be considered an anarchist book. It does a deep delve into an anarchist society and how it could theoretically be organized. In my opinion it could also be interpreted as a critique, but I think it’s stronger for it.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      There’s plenty, and they can help, but you ain’t gotta read em. They’re guides and ideas. Nobody ever told me I needed to read Proudhon to think the state’s bad, and usually older texts become more of historical interest than theory interests. When I wanted to understand anarchism I was told to go out and engage in praxis.

      • Dharma Curious (he/him)@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Fully agree that that’s the way to learn. Do praxis, theory will develop.

        However, I recommend the bread book to anyone I think might enjoy reading something like it. It changed my life fundamentally to see some one lay out the math of how a society could function like that. As suggested above,nthe dispossessed is also an amazing work of theory disguised as a very fun sci fi read. I routinely quote “where do you go when you die in hell” ever since reading it

    • backalleycoyote@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      There are, and like any social/political group it’s not a monolith but has plenty of various subsections that would broadly be called “anarchist” but aren’t themselves all in agreement (and at times accuse others of not being “real” anarchists). This watered down meme is just [insert political group here] Utopianism jingoism. Of course people tend to help each other that are like them, leftists tend to be more likely to help outside their tribal communities, but the extent to how much they help and under what circumstances is not blind enabling. If I see a person drowning I’m not going to ask who they voted for before helping. If I see some Trumper with a flat tire… fix it yourself, asshole.

  • reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I like the anarchist tendency to encourage thinking for yourself because I think outsourcing political opinions and generally the narrative that politics is too complicated for the layman to fully grasp goes a long way in enabling a world where everything is treated as sophistry leaving gaps for people to blindly follow ideologues. Something similar happened with science and now we have folks ‘debating’ things that are clear as day if you just look.

    Encouraging each person to think for themselves isn’t to say everyone should live in a private conspiracy. I think everyone should take a course in propositional logic or higher because it truly helps your brain sort through information more clearly and quicker, and makes you much sharper at catching sophistry.

    In ourselves we should try to note when we hit that point in an argument when we are arguing just to win. At that point we should (potentially apologize) and bow out. Arguing just to win is unhelpful.

    Theory is much more helpful once you have your feet under you. You are committed to dignity for all. That is a strong position to assess the world from. The categories are quite clear. Once you are here reading theory, especially examples of successful revolutionary projects, helps you understand the types of tools and approaches you might use (or avoid) to bring about change. It also saves lives to avoid strategies that commonly fail.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Neither theory nor science should be gatekept, but that doesn’t mean studying both aren’t still necessary.

      • reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Agreed, I just think we need to nurture how people relate to/ground their opinions before theory can take root properly. Currently both science and politics are treated like sophistry—it’s all a matter of argument

        What I think is especially unhelpful is people who have not read enough theory to understand what they are talking about (let alone considered it in the context it was written), but they are passionate about an issue so they try to debate people using the logic of that theory and they end up just making the theory seem like nonsense because they didn’t understand it. Only in the context of debate does it make sense to argue for a theory you don’t really grasp. Debate is about winning an argument but not about what is ‘true’ or ‘right’. I would rather that person just stick to their guns on the basics of whatever the argument is over (ie. genocide is bad no exceptions). This way they stand firmly on their own feet but can also have confidence in their reasons even without a nuanced historical perspective of how things got to where they are.

        Anyway I love reading and discussing theory and philosophy (including your guides) and find it extremely rich and rewarding. It should be used as fodder to help you think rather than a guidebook to inform what you should think.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          What I think is especially unhelpful is people who have not read enough theory to understand what they are talking about (let alone considered it in the context it was written), but they are passionate about an issue so they try to debate people using the logic of that theory and they end up just making the theory seem like nonsense because they didn’t understand it.

          This is very common, well said! And thanks for the complement. My goal is mostly to make sure people unify theory and practice, theory is a guide to action.

  • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Anarchists wrote books too ya know, you can’t just escape reading by changing you’re allegiance.

    The only real problem with the people who don’t want to read theory is they just love talking over the people who did. The Dunning Kruger effect exists in revolutionary spaces.

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      37 minutes ago

      The all theory and no action crowd are definitely more annoying and proficient at taking over spaces and killing the vibe, in my experience (e.g. socialist alternative here in Aus)

    • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Reading theory ≠ being highly competent, though. Dunning Kruger states that people with low competence (in specific areas) overestimate themselves, and highly competent people underestimate themselves.

      Reading doesnt necessarily make you better at things (though obviously it can help). A community organizer that’s been feeding the hungry for 40 years but has never read a political book will be more competent than someone who’s read hundreds of books but never gone out and done stuff.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    You can’t read a revolution into existence, but you can’t have a successful revolution without properly preparing for it and studying revolution. You wouldn’t want someone to perform surgery just because they want to help, they will almost certainly end up doing more harm than good. Revolution is the same way, we stand against the most brutal global system of imperialism, we must be prepared for it!

    If anyone wants a place to start with theory, I wrote a new basic Marxist-Leninist study guide. Give it a look!

    • quips@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      53 minutes ago

      This is again part of the problem. You can understand the fundamentals of ML in like an hour or less. A quick start guide being like 12 hours long is insane.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        47 minutes ago

        I don’t think that’s accurate, though. How do you explain dialectical materialism, historical materialism, imperialism, why capitalism is fundamentally unsustainable, revolutionary strategy, and more in under an hour?

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          39 minutes ago

          You can definitely explain most of those in a way a 5 year old could understand in under 20 minutes.

          Not dialectical materialism though. I’ve read about it and had it explained to me more time than I can count, and my brain refuses to hold on to what it means.

        • quips@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          43 minutes ago

          However else you explain any other concept, these are very simple ideas.

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The US military is always asking for recruits. If you don’t read, you won’t know that “helping them” means killing civilians.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Putting on my D.A.R.E. T-shirt and clutching my state issued copy of the Ten Commandments and snapping an Amazon Ring Camera on my front door, so I help the state identify any of those nasty, America hating Antifa I’ve been hearing so much about.

      I’m helping!

  • SadSadSatellite @lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Remember kids, you can’t be a good communist if you don’t have any skills. We already have people well practised at arguing on the internet.

    • Andy@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I think you’re taking the meme way too literally.

      I’m not advocating for an illiterate revolution. Anarchists are famous for reading and writing a lot of manifestos too.

      I do believe that there are a lot of overly intellectual Marxist-Leninists who need to go touch grass and actually practice more mutual aid among working class neighbors, though.

      But I’m definitely not anti intellectual. (I’m also not actually an an-com. I just shared the meme because I agree with the broad sentiment).

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        There are some Marxists that don’t put theory to practice, true, but the solution isn’t to not read, but to do both. As a side-note, Marxist practice is less focused on mutual aid and more on organizing the working classes for revolution, though some ML groups like the Black Panther Party use things like free breakfast programs and such.