Zdzislaw Beksinski would count? His work is intoxicating, it places me into a trance whenever I look at it. I would love to go to Poland and see his works in person!

He’s legendary. I’m reading Summa Technologiae atm, wholeheartedly recommend it. Here’s a cool quote:

“This would suggest that there is no such thing as transhistorical morality. Phenomena differ when it comes to the scale of their duration, but eventually even mountain ranges collapse and turn into sand because this is the way the world is. Man, a transient creature, keenly uses the concept of eternity. Certain spiritual goods, great artworks, or moral systems are depicted as eternal. Yet let us not delude ourselves: they are all mortal. We are not talking about replacing order with chaos or inner necessity with randomness. Morality changes slowly, but it does change, which is why the greater the temporal separation between two moral codes is, the more difficult it is to compare them. We are close to the Sumerians, yet the morality of the people from the Levallois culture would terrify us.” - Chapter 2, Summa Technologiae

Another…

"And thus a Monte Carlo–type hypothesis of the cosmic roulette—which is a naïve methodological extension of thinking based on the knowledge of extremely simple mechanisms—is replaced by a theory of “cosmic panevolutionism.” The latter transforms us from beings condemned to wait passively for an arrival of some extremely rare circumstances into designers capable of making choices from among the staggering overabundance of possibilities. Those possibilities are contained in the so far rather general instructions for building self-organizing systems of ever increasing degrees of complexity. What the frequency of the cosmic occurrence of these “parabiological evolutions” postulated previously is, and whether they actually culminate in the emergence of what our human understanding calls “psyche,” is a different matter. But this is a subject for a separate discussion, one that would require us to draw on an extensive assembly of facts from the field of astrophysical observation.” - Chapter 2, Summa Technologiae

Islamic Golden Era!

for any kinda in-depth research, going to my university library and grabbing all the relevant works and having them on hand to quickly switch between is so much better than having several tabs open.

Thanks for the response. I don’t agree with your point in tone policing. There are some of us here, myself included, who are much easier to harm with crude language and pejorative words. You can see examples of it to the responses I have made in this thread and the good faith responses I have made and the vote counts on those comments. I have already been quite hurt. There is already policy and ways which the community operates and how individuals conduct themselves if not explicitly than implicitly. If we’ve set a lower bound for this generally and in specific cases (as in interacting with other communities) I would argue subsequent changes are inevitable and necessary to protect the more vulnerable and sensitive members of this community and any community. If it really is inevitable, it makes sense to plan it out in some capacity.

I believe what you said about what pedagogy says, though this is a big claim to make and such claims require proportional evidence. Could you please provide me with some resources if possible?

I see. Well I’m sorry for making you feel that way. I don’t think I was being especially mean but I can say it was very cold and inaccessible and that could definitely be hurtful and inconsiderate. I still believe we are comrades and would very much not want to cause any further tension between the two of us.

I would want to engage further but I don’t think it would be very conducive especially as you are using pejorative language and writing in a condescending manner. I do think I mentioned your first and third point, I’m only mentioning this for your interest, feel free to ignore it. I won’t be responding to any replies you make to this.

Nice! This is so much more eloquently put. This is more of what I had in mind.

Sorry, to clarify, is the idea that the geographic region will not experience revolution? Or that it will and a distinction is necessary to be made by external forces engaging in some sort of ops to induce revolution? I am having trouble understanding as there will always be some internal resistance, and building upon that resistance and calling it occurring from the outside seems strange since that is one part but not the only part. Unless there is some threshold of external influence and its effects which need to be passed before one can say it is external and without following such a path there is no reason to believe there will be revolution.

I hope I understood you correctly, please feel free to tell me where I may have misunderstood.

Thanks for your response, I don’t disagree with your comments and agree with them. I suppose I don’t see how a dialectical approach cannot be entertained where there is determined through experiment a preferable or even formalized approach(es) are one of the mechanisms the energy already spent online is taken. I was not thinking of Twitter as a platform. Only the degree of aimlessness seems to be something which can be moderated through intentional engagement which would do much for the morale of comrades.

The other thing I want to ask, do you consider the internet to be material? You mention the real world as distinct, if so what is the distinguishing difference, as it seems to be the chief mechanism of propaganda of the modern era and paramount to changing minds by capitalists.

Thanks for the response. I have noticed that many of the comrades in my local org do not engage online and with their limited time they prefer to do material action which they can be certain of.

Could I ask, as there are a number of comrades online who do not have the access to a local org, and who manifest the lack of organization, discipline, etc. would a more formally declared subset of users fill in this role until perhaps access to a local org comes along? I’m honestly thinking like, Mao saw the peasantry as a useful force in his environment when trying to bring about socialist change, are the unorganized members of the community (both this and at large) not in a similar position?

It very much seems to me that the online environment is completely dictated by capitalists and their preference for a type of engagement which relies on hedonistic tendencies to counteract any potential revolutionary force. I am not advocating for a lack of pleasure as it is completely necessary, rather a space where it can be taken back for different aims as is evidenced by lemmy and the fediverse at large. It really seems that as someone in the imperial core there is a specific advantage in engaging online which does not make sense in other environments as a physical presence would be more apt. Maybe a lemmygrad strike force? Putting fear in the hearts of liberals everywhere.

Ah thanks for the response. If you’ve been a member of the community for long, would you say the reddit exodus is when some of this type of discourse increased in frequency?

If I understand correctly you don’t want the culture to change due to the sentimental value you ascribe to it. I wouldn’t want to alienate the existing members of the community and that was not my intention. I appreciate how clear you were in your disagreement.

I’ll try to show what I meant in response to this comment. There are a few points here which I will make explicit and argue against explicitly for clarity. I hope it makes it easier for us to come to an understanding.

Argument

P1: you are manifestly not leading the charge on engaging liberals “productively and fruitfully”.

P2: Why don’t you engage liberals in the way you recommend?

P3: This is the second post like this from a low activity account

P4: I like the culture here.

P5: The admins are also aggressive and meme-y sometimes.

P6: I like that too. I would not be here without that.

C: and it honestly is starting to feel like wrecker shit to suck the fun out of the grad.

Examination

If I did not get the points or conclusion correct please let me know.

You made an inductive claim in P1 stating that as someone without a history of engaging in quality discourse I have not provided evidence of this being a valid strategy, either because I presume as someone who has not engaged in it I cannot know the effectiveness of what I claim perhaps due to some idealistic notion. There is some knowledge conferred through experience which I do not have and which I may have if I had engaged in the way I mentioned. The other point I see is that there is a degree of authority I lack as someone who does not have this experience which could be deferred to if I at least did engage even if it was not done “productively and fruitfully”.

For P2 I think this is the stronger charge, you question my actions as not lining up with what I espoused. If this was such a great method why not engage in it? There are several reasons why this may not be the case but they would require being open-minded and considerate of options which are non-typical. As you said I am new, at least this account is, I have been doing my best to learn, observe, and lurk, prior to making any comments or engagements. I did not think I had even a base level of understanding until now where I think I have met some threshold. The other, I may be able to, as a seeming outsider, to give a useful perspective from a different standpoint as I have not subsumed the specific tendencies in this community. The weakness here comes from you not knowing where I come from or what my strengths might be. This is definitely less of an argument based on the content but rather closer (but I would not say it is) an attack or questioning of character and authority.

In the case of P3 the frequency of this type of post brings into question its validity. I do not think this is particularly important but perhaps it is because you have been a member for a while and the recent uptick is notable.

P4 and P6 are similar, these are emotive claims about your sentimental value towards the community and the norms and customs you have become accustomed to. Any change to this would presumably want to be avoided as it would necessitate change in the behaviour in existing members and what made this community, going so far as to push away the members which made this community what it is. This is disastrous as change could mean a cessation of what made this community as it is and there is little guarantee that some future evolution of this community would maintain what made the community initially great to you.

P5 This is an appeal to authority, perhaps there must be some good reason the admins behave in the way they do. The other is that though it works for them, it is something non-admins can attempt to emulate. This could be modus operandi which works for admins but not others.

C The current mood and environment of the community is starting to sour and turn you and potentially others away from the community. I mentioned why this could be an issue in my response to P4 and P6, as well it causes discomfort towards you and perhaps others.

Response

I’ll put my response as clearly as I can below.

1 Change in communities always occurs. Members of communities always adjust. There is a rate of change and rate of adjustment which can be made so as not to alienate existing members and also develop the community towards some goal. Explicitly monitoring and modifying these rates is useful as opposed to in-explicitly or organically.

2 There is always some goal for some community, it may be vague, it may be better represented as multiple points, but the set contained is the goal.

3 Working towards a goal is beneficial for the belongingness of members of the community and it can mitigate any alienation or issues with change.

4 The feelings or sentiment members have is important, and can be accommodated through open and regular dialogue. This is true besides notions I am advocating for.

5 There is a way which members of the community can engage which develops their argumentation and theoretical knowledge which is preferable or better than it currently is. This is true generally and certainly not for all.

6 Engaging in such a way is an extension of the beliefs and values of the community.

C We should at least attempt to do something different even if it seems unviable. As scientific thinkers we cannot determine in advance what will happen and experiments are necessary. The costs and the benefits must considered, but it should not be avoided for fear of potential harm. We use models to determine what may happen, as materialists we know what we think is provisional and not the same as the material world.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk

Thank you for the thoughtful comment.

Could you clarify the meaning of the irony in the name Hussein? Does it have to do with the history of Eid Al Adha?

Christ, this has to be a deliberate effort to present China negatively. Makes you wonder how the process looks when the decision making is going on. As well, whether the opposite happens for stories which they might want to show favourably, with additional saturation or whatnot.

Interesting, I have a similar mindset to what you had, do you have any suggestions for creators or accounts which you find particularly worthwhile?

The comments on that article are wild. It’s a strange mix of realistically evaluating China’s improving capabilities and reconciling that with deteriorating US hegemony. All while the undercurrent of nationalism and American Exceptionalism looms in the background like a puppeteer guiding their thoughts…

I watched the whole video after reading your comment, I have to say I disagree. There isn’t really any hatred of men in this video, more of a description through a historical context which I found novel and inviting of questions. Could you clarify where you think the hatred of men would come from?

He mentions people who sell masculinity at the moment literally sell goods as a way for individuals to engage in their masculinity. It’s contrasted with men who would take action as a direct form of support as opposed to becoming a consumer to what is essentially sophistry. This isn’t unique towards men, I would argue this is common across different groups with which people readily identify. It provides a facile basis for what it means to be a man, but nothing which can exist independent of the seller-consumer dynamic.

I was a bit skeptical of this, not due to what the content might be but more so the rhetoric or the length (referring to 30+ min video essays which are not too structured…)

I was pleasantly surprised, and had not considered looking at the issue from the context of pre-liberation women. I recommend this to anyone who wants a more nuanced understanding of masculinity especially one that isn’t strictly prescriptive like what you might see generally online.

I feel like a bunch of these types of videos tend to rely on feminist theory and philosophy, of which I am a huge proponent, but I think is a bit difficult to sell in a video format. Something shorter and focused like this video is much appreciated.

Great comment, especially the last sentence of the first paragraph.