The philosophy commune

Warning: This part of the website is mostly my inner nonsense released into the world and it likely doesn't make any sense. I plan on completely remaking it sometime.

Yes, I am a evil commie.

In this very "well" designed web page I will layout the basics of what socialism and communism really is (not the stuff that the bourgeoisie have lead everyone to believe) and what it means to be a commie.

While I don't know as much on this topic as a lot of other commies I can at least give you a start. I will focus more on the philosophy behind it all before even touching everything else.

Sections:

• the start
• the abstract
• the dialectics
• the applied

The start

This place is called the philosophy commune because Its more focused on the philosophy and how it interacts with communism then it is with the politics. Its a common misunderstanding that marxism is some crazy cult like political ideology (some marxist groups are tbh) though if you read any real writing of Karl Marx or Friedrich Engels you will find mostly philosophy and it being applied in more abstract ways instead of the lies we have been given. To understand topics like economics and politics its important to first understand philosophy as the base for everything else. Start out at any wikipedia page and continue clicking the first link and you will either reach the philosophy wiki page or get stuck in a endless loop.

Every complete ideology has a base made up of more abstract philosophy. For example classical and neo liberalism has many layers like right of the individual and private property rights and the way liberalism treats it is more or less connected to christian ideas like the idea that some people are closer to god then others so under liberalism right of the individual is more then just freedom but the idea that some people are narcissisticly above others and that government limiting there power over other people is going against nature or "gods will" in a sense. Because of this liberalism allows for people to do nothing but limit rights and freedom, call it rights and freedom, then get away from it. "Oh no, a new law proteching users from having google forcefully installing a microship in peoples heads is going to hurt googles holy rights and god given status over the people. This is anti-american to give people that choice to not have google install microchips in there head". As you can see there are many layers to liberalism like the often misunderstood morals and bits of christian ideas and much more I will not get into now and BTW when I target liberalism I am also targetting conservatism because conservatism is still a form of liberalism.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels created a philosophy called dialectical materialism and used it for historical materialism which is how they understood history and they used this to understand how society changes in mainly western countries (Russia wasn't really included in this so they had to work off of dialectical materialism and build up there own home cooked appied ideas for there revolution). With there philosophy marx and engels analyzed there current capitalist society and understanding of how the bourgeoisie (capital owning class) and proletariat (working class) interact with each other and found the exploitation between the two and how it upholds capitalism. Marx and Engels believe that like how the bourgeoisie lead a revolution to gain freedom from the kings and lords of the past the proletariat leading there own revolution for freedom from the bourgeoisie is needed for society to progress. The philosophy behind liberalism should make more sense now knowing that liberalism is the ideology of the bourgeoisie class.

The abstract

Before getting into dialectical materialism and that stuff I will go into my own ideas which are even more abstract but a good place to build on to understand the dialectics. Just bare with me while I throw your brain into a microwave and forgot about it for a while without even knowing its burning (like the way microwave popcorn got banned at school).

Verbs and nouns

In english we rely on nouns a lot to talk about things. Everytime we use a noun we are refecancing a thing or idea so we can talk about it. We can talk about how the thing looks like x-mas barf, smells like a dogs ass (I don't want to know how you know what a dogs ass smells like), feels like the random thing you found outside you wish you didn't touch...
but what if I told you there are other ways to talk about things!

A language where everything is called out by the action of it existing could exist. While the grammer of english is yelling a big "fuck you!" (like with everything I write) something like instead of "its a cat" "it be a cat" could exist and be normalized in the grammer and have the words planned out for it to make sense in its context. Also languages can have no verbs sense nouns also cover ideas so instead of the action of running it would be the idea of running. Take a look at how lojban handles this shit for some mind opening ideas.

Overthinking shit

I shall start us with a simple math problem: x^2=1 solve for x. It has two correct answers: x=1 and x=-1. If something like this pops up in a math problem you can only use 1 or -1 for the problem and it will effect the final requests of the problem though entail you solve it the problem is in a state of having two possible outcomes. Its just like Schrödinger's cat where you have a box with the dead/alive cat in it you can walk around town with your funky little dead/alive cat, go on a romantic date with your dead/alive cat, throw it into oncoming traffic to know for sure its fucking dead /hj... but entail you open the box its in a state of both but once its open you have a dead cat or a alive cat like how x^2=1 is both 1 and -1 entail used.

Another idea to think about is numbers like pi. If you have a forumal for pi you bascially have every single digit of pi in a set of instructions but you can't use them. You have to apply the forumal first but it will go on forever if you do that so x+generate_pi() wouldn't work. Instead you would only use so many digits of pi like this x+generate_pi(16) for 16 digits. We could in place of every magic number use a generator to be able to fine tune how everything is generated and applied. To keep everything constantant we could use generators for every number and treat operators as functions and use things like lazy evaluation, strict evaluation... to direction the flow of are logic for whatever we are doing. You can read about this kind of stuff in Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs.

To continue with my madness we could compare this to the verb and noun thing and say that functions are like verbs and numbers are like nouns. yet we refecance the function as a noun and its made up of instructions which are things but those things are verbs because they define the actions of doing things then we can grab that logic of it being a refrecance to the thing then go through the same steps on the instructions... what doth life?!

Back to x^2=1 there are things I call logic gabs. Are society pushes a very linear and isolated "if this and that then that and this" kind of logic. Peoples minds get fried when shown things like x^2=1 kind of like a computer going mad when asked "what doth life?!". While more standard thinking is more newton cradle like with "this causes that" we live in a world that is closer to a bunch of marbles of different sizes thrown into a box then shaked around and thrown everywhere. Talking about what causes what is too much for are tiny stupido minds to understand with all those marbles getting thrown around so instead we can think about the relationship between the marbles and how they interact with each other. We could look at the way the big and small marbles react when they hit each other and how it effects the movement of the marbles in the box. There is no supreme lord marble or any of that shit. Just a bunch of marbles getting fucked up when I decide to throw the box into oncoming traffic.

The dialectics

I am not going to go much into dialectics because A: The abstract shit I went into has the infomation you need to know to understand dialectics. B: You can watch a fucking youtube video you fucker. To sum things up with dialectics we describe the relationship between different things to understand them.

To understand Marx's dialectics we need to understand idealism vs materialism. Karl Marx read lots of Hegel (the old dude no one understands) and Hegel was very idealist and his idealism is all about the mind and spirit and how they shape reality. Idealists believe that everything around us is shaped by are own mind. "If a tree falls and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound?" is a common question used to bring forward idealist ideas because it shows that senory feelings exist in the mind and not in the world around us and that every single thing we see and feel is in are mind and not the world around us. Materialism is about the world around us and believes that matter is the base of reality. Vulgar materialism as blunty as possible states that everything is just matter and a common example of vulgar materialism is kicking a stone to prove its existance. Karl Marx is a materialist but not a vulgar materialist. For understanding things vulgar materialism really isn't that helpful.

Karl Marx's dialectical materialism is often thought of a materialist version of Hegel's dialectics though I like to think of it as more of a dialectic between idealism and materialism being applied on other things as a way to understand the world. Karl Marx applied his dialectical materialism to history to create historical materialism. Its a view of history where instead of being centered around the actions of one great leader or key events like some big ass battle its more about different ideas floating around, ideas things and people interacting with each other, changes in conditions in the world... Karl Marx believes that people are shaped by there envirtment and not just destined to be something. A rich man is rich because he was born into a rich family, was in the right place at the right time... and not because he "had that rich chad alpha mindset and pulled himself up by the bootstraps". Karl Marx isn't discrediting anyones work put into something but more of saying that the conditions someone is in is important to how they grow as a person and how there effort interacts with the world.

A good example is trumps "small loan" of a million dollars. He brags about building up his company from a loan of a million dollars to make it sound like he was a average guy who built up a empire from hardwork and mindset alone when really being able to grow up seeing how his dad handles real estate and getting to met other people in that business and having his family name as a symbol is priceless and really impacts the future of someone. Somone growing up in a average household isn't going to get to learn all the insider secrets of real estate at a young age in a time without internet then grow up to be given a loan of money bigger then any amount any normal person will ever touch to apply there knowledge to conitnue spreading the family empire.

A did a TERRIBLE job with Marx's dialectics so please read Marx's shit instead of taking my word on anything. I am a tired lazy fuck that isn't to be trusted about anything.

The applied

Just like how I talked about that a function that generates pi exists in a abstract form and has all the digits of pi entail applied I think of marxism the same way. There is the more abstract parts of marxism like dialectical materialism and historical materialsm then there is the applied marxism like the science of revolution and all the stuff about the bourgeoisie exploiting the proletariat.

When people say that marxism is a science they don't mean the science you learned in school but instead they mean wissenschaft which is more about learning, studying, and understanding the world instead of just the search for truth like how we know it today. Wissenschaft is more broad and includes things like art and religion as long as its the search for knowledge. Also in marxism the term socialism is used more broadly. Because of decades of the red scare its meaning have been completely fucked up. Karl marx often used socialism to describe the idea of things along the line of any form of social ownership of the means of production, modern society planned around a need or idea... He would describe people we would now know as conservatism as something like "petty-bourgeois socialism" meaning socialism made for the petty-bourgeois (small business owners).

Communism means stateless, classless, moneyless society and to be a communist doesn't mean you are setting that as your up front idea of what needs to be done now but instead supporting a form of socialism that brings us closer to that. As a communist I believe in the bourgeoisie class coming to an end and the means of production being controlled by the proletariat. The government we know is nearly just part of bourgeoisie society. The government is ran by and actively supports the bourgeoisie. It sets laws that gives companies copy rights that make sure even just there ideas can't be touched by the proletariat or petty-bourgeoisie that are a risk to the big companies. One isse with liberalism is it sees big companies and government as isolated entities. With that mindset they will often support government thinking its keeping them safe from the bourgeoisie or support the bourgeoisie keeping them safe from the government.

I completely fucked this up so PLEASE read good shit like Socialism: Utopian and Scientific .