I was recently relayed a story.
I am permitted to share it with you.
I think I had better, since it is very well at risk of never being told again. An Oral Tradition can be stamped out, in much the same way a Written One can.
Anyway, this is not about the stamping out.
After meditating a little on the 2023 Australian Referendum, and its horrific failure, I feel as if some absolution has fallen upon me.
Part One--What is materialism?
first of all, what is materialism? we need some sort of set of explicit principles or standard against which to compare freud.
the black letter statement of what i take to be dialectical materialism is the 11 theses on feuerbach. it is possible to memorise them, and, i think at least being able to paraphrase the most important thesis statements is actually a good idea.
Introduction: The Static; the Eternal.
I think all the haters of Plato have got it all wrong. Please bear with me:
Most of the haters of Plato see him as a wizard of sorts. The forms are meant to command the influence of the petulant, dirty real world--which is a reflection of these perfect ideals.
These ideals are supposed to be static, and fixed in time and space.
Clearly this is an unacceptable philosophy, and I think Plato would have been smart enough to know this.
Most of the people attending today could each individually be asked to introspect and provide some answer to the question, "What is fascism?" It is my hope that most people walking about the Perth CBD also have some intuition for being able to recognise fascism if they saw it.
I have been asked, however, not to recount a definition of fascism, but provide a small about of guidance for this forum about how to fight it, and win against it.
So, my main focus here is not to talk about fascism as it appears, but to cut right to the heart of the matter. We are accustomed to treating political and social behaviour in this day and age as a function of ideas inside human brain boxes.
This is a liberal attitude. It only gets one so far on this topic. Or any topic regarding politics and social behaviour for that matter.
It is certainly possible to treat of fascism as a philosophy, on the terrain of political thought and ideology--but, here, much ink has already been spilled.
An infantile disorder.
Monarchism is, fundamentally, an 'infantile disorder'. Lenin might have put that phrase to the anarchists, but I think it is equally as incisive about the worshippers of the Crown.
This peacock fluffing about 'constitutional monarchy' is mere Empiricism about how political structures are formed. I have said this elsewhere: it amounts to saying, 'just because this is where we have arrived, this is where we should stay'.
Knowing 'That', But Knowing 'How'.
Statecraft and Totalitarianism.
I recently had the chance to discuss more concrete and prefigurative politics with the ASF-Perth.
Plato is normally regarded as an enemy of the anarchists. I suppose my own trajectory into anarchis has been highly unorthodox (having never been a trotskyist, I have duly been a member of a few trotskyist organisations, before finally shedding Libertarian Marxism altogether) so I was surprised to hear negative recollections of Plato reading from comrades.
It is certainly true that anarchism shares the 'needs principle' with the Marxists. The needs principle states: "from each according to the ability--to each according to their need".
However, Kropotkin--and I argue we should follow in suit--says Marxism is "mere collectivism". That is to say, Marxism dissolves the individual into the will of the Marxist Political Party.
Today, I want to convince you of something else. I think some of my other letters and emails have been well received, and it is my hope that this one will be as well. I am, however, somewhat conscious of the fact that what I am about to say will probably not be as easy to digest as before:
I believe we here in the West--Australia most perceptibly--are undergoing a process of political, economic--societal--collapse.
Objectivity comes in many forms. Here, I would like to convince you of the need for the universality of just one kind: the anarchist conception of freedom.
I have spoken with some people online about this. It is very popular to say that values or attitudes are relative to individuals or cultures themselves.
I think this is wrongheaded. We have to assert that the freedom to be anarchist, and live in an anarchist society, must be universal, or, objective.
This blog covers zizek, revolution, republicanism, reformism, psychoanalysis, political economy, plato, philosophy of mind, philosophy, pancasila, nazism, morality, monism, monarchy, marxism, lenin, lacan, kautsky, insurrection, indonesia, individualism, hitler, freud, first nations, fascism, egoism, dualism, dreamtime, class analysis, china, australia, atheism, anarchism