Go Back   RevLeft > Members List
Register FAQ Members List RevLeft Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Tim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the leftTim Cornelis is a master of the left
Committed User

Tim Cornelis Tim Cornelis is offline


Visitor Messages

Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 250
  1. RedWorker
    19th December 2014 18:43
    I think Marxistpedia should be a Marxist wiki.
  2. RedWorker
    18th December 2014 21:52
    Which of the following should be implemented? Featured articles with article review system (includes article grading), lists of needed articles, several 'project' pages which track certain articles, etc... or other features which exist at Wikipedia.
  3. Halert
    17th December 2014 13:19
    huh, wat is er?
  4. RedWorker
    14th December 2014 01:41
    Where do we promote Marxistpedia? Could we ask for a plug from or something like that?
  5. RedWorker
    11th December 2014 20:50
    Some cut off? So it's first come first serve?
  6. RedWorker
    11th December 2014 20:48
    "he produces no commodities and sells his labour-power to no one in particular" But does this not exclude many workers from 'proletarian'? Such as teachers.
  7. RedWorker
    11th December 2014 20:07
    Another thing I've been thinking about is the media.

    What transition is the private media going to experience under the capitalism->communism?
    What transition would media in general undergo?

    By private I mean ran in a way that the ones who run it decide everything, and choose who is included in running it. Not about profit.

    Someone wants to start a newspaper and wants to have it printed 100,000 times each day. But this is not only one person wanting this. It's many wanting their private media. In capitalism this is handled by if you have enough money, you get served. How would it work under socialism?

    Otherwise how is the existence of private media guaranteed? Is the destruction of private media a given of communism? Would collective media not have the risk to fall under the influence of one party?

    Is the understanding of free speech to be limited to one individual speaking their thoughts and not to groups having access to having their own newspapers etc.?
  8. RedWorker
    11th December 2014 20:06
    I've asked these questions before but did not have satisfactory answers. So I ask them to you..

    Is a teacher a proletarian? Is a politician a proletarian?

    The teacher and proletarian are both wage-laborers and do not hold ownership of the means of production. The teacher 'produces' knowledge. The politician 'produces' law.

    But the politician is tied to the bourgeois state and capitalist mode of production. He also is tied to capital's wishes.

    WHAT does this tell us? Does it mean that the basic analysis of class society proletarian-bourgeois is not enough? Or does it mean that I have misunderstandings about these analyses and their functions? WHY do these questions appear to be relevant to me? ARE these questions relevant
  9. RedWorker
    11th December 2014 01:48
    I think using the terms 'socialist society' and/or 'socialist mode of production' is not sticking to classical Marxist.

    As far as I know, with 'socialism', Marx & Engels referred to movements, to ideologies. e.g. scientific socialism, utopian socialism, bourgeois socialism. They never used it to refer to a mode of production or form of organization of society.
  10. RedWorker
    10th December 2014 20:35
    For instance, neoliberalism does not make a revolution more likely. Rather, it hampers the organization of the working class, difficults the revolution. As well, social gains for the working class make the revolution have better chances to succeed. But this does not mean arbitrary restrictions upon the 'free market' in the capitalist mode of production should be supported.

    Of course, when the masses have extremely low standards of living, this makes a 'revolution' more likely, but this is not the revolution we talk about: a social revolution in the advanced states with a developed capitalism. Rather, this revolution is more likely to be socialist in words and authoritarian-populist in contents. That revolution would be more likely to take place when everyone has low standards of living, our revolution would be more likely to become stronger each time the proletariat has social gains.

    At least, that is how I understand it.

About Me

  • About Tim Cornelis
    Breakthrough/Doorbraak; Communist Platform - Compas
  • Signature
    "Marx talked about freely associated producers, what a Proudhonist he was!"
    -- 870, the one true authentic Marxist to have ever been alive

    "Marx talked about a principle concerning distribution, lousy Proudhonist"
    -- QueerVanguard


Total Posts
Visitor Messages
Total Thanks
General Information
  • Last Activity: Today 02:55
  • Join Date: 5th May 2011
  • Referrals: 0


Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 23

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:17.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.