x
Click to expand

arisaka

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Interests: "Philosophy", "Art"
Date Signed Up:12/05/2011
Last Login:1/27/2015
Location:Canada
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 1432 total,  1575 ,  143
Comment Thumbs: 456 total,  956 ,  500
Content Level Progress: 32% (32/100)
Level 114 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 115 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 60% (6/10)
Level 145 Comments: Faptastic → Level 146 Comments: Faptastic
Subscribers:0
Content Views:50253
Times Content Favorited:2 times
Total Comments Made:1102
FJ Points:1917
Favorite Tags: tags (2)
It's you and I vs. everybody.
It's us vs. the squares.
You're my Bernadine Dorhn.

latest user's comments

#25707 - You're not reading what I had quoted deep enough; It's how the…  [+] (9 new replies) 03/21/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
User avatar #25708 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I'm afraid I still don't understand.

Ideology is, as a concept, a set of ideas. Marxism is an ideology, because it's a set of ideas and ideals.

Am I missing something completely? Would you suggest I simply read the German Ideology?
User avatar #25709 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Marxism is NOT a set of ideals! "Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics."

Marxism is more of a methodology - a grand social critique.

And yes, I suggest reading some of it. You could simply look it up on the internet. It's not a long read and is pretty focused on few concepts (it's not like it's capital or anything).
User avatar #25710 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
We'll leave this topic until then, then.

I should point out, just while we're at it, that I'm not actually a Marxist. That might immediately resolve any future misunderstandings.
User avatar #25711 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Yeah, I kind of see that now. But even still, he was a fantastic sociologist.
User avatar #25713 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I agree. And I do agree with most of what I've read from Marx. But as you can see, I haven't read enough. I know what Marxism is, in a general sense, but I'm still unaware of a lot of the details. That's the main reason I won't call myself a Marxist.

I really just take bits and pieces from various ideologies (and by that, I think you know what I mean) depending on what I agree with most. That's why I don't call myself anything specific, just a socialist, or maybe even a communist.
User avatar #25714 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
When it comes to Marx though, it's really all or nothing, as Marx was a social scientist and came to conclusions based on sociological inquiry. I find people who make compatibility with Utopian and scientific socialism are like those who support the theory of evolution but take parts of intelligent design.

But yeah. You're still dabbling, which is understandable. I, at one point, was a Bolshevik supporter. That was a long time ago.
User avatar #25715 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I wouldn't say Bolshevik supporter per se... Some things they did I would approve of more than others. Like I said in another thread, I don't think the USSR was perfect, but I do think it was a step in the right direction. And maybe Yugoslavia was a further step.

I don't really consider myself a utopian socialist either.
User avatar #25716 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
We must discuss this in further detail elsewhere. I got school tomorrow at like 8.

Ciao!
User avatar #25717 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
Ha, I'm in class.

Goodbye, friend.
#35 - You just brought back the whole 10th grade for me. It…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/21/2013 on The most dangerous game. 0
#37 - vana (03/21/2013) [-]
Same reliving freshman english II.
#25705 - Ideology is stagnant. The ruling classes use it to justify the…  [+] (11 new replies) 03/21/2013 on Politics - politics news,... -1
User avatar #25706 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I don't see it arisaka. Ideology is just a set of ideals. Whether it be the overthrowing of a king for a republic, or the overthrowing of capitalism to begin the road to pure communism.

Communism as a goal of a political party is just the same as communism as a goal. The entity that has the goal is irrelevant.
User avatar #25707 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
You're not reading what I had quoted deep enough; It's how the concept has been fetishized - transformed into an image and recuperated over and over and over.

Ideology and Marx don't mix. "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence."

Guy Debord and the other Situationists remind us that Marx hated ideology. Ideology is "the abstract will to universality and the illusion thereof," which is "legitimated in modern society by universal abstraction and by the effective dictatorship of illusion."
User avatar #25708 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I'm afraid I still don't understand.

Ideology is, as a concept, a set of ideas. Marxism is an ideology, because it's a set of ideas and ideals.

Am I missing something completely? Would you suggest I simply read the German Ideology?
User avatar #25709 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Marxism is NOT a set of ideals! "Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics."

Marxism is more of a methodology - a grand social critique.

And yes, I suggest reading some of it. You could simply look it up on the internet. It's not a long read and is pretty focused on few concepts (it's not like it's capital or anything).
User avatar #25710 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
We'll leave this topic until then, then.

I should point out, just while we're at it, that I'm not actually a Marxist. That might immediately resolve any future misunderstandings.
User avatar #25711 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Yeah, I kind of see that now. But even still, he was a fantastic sociologist.
User avatar #25713 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I agree. And I do agree with most of what I've read from Marx. But as you can see, I haven't read enough. I know what Marxism is, in a general sense, but I'm still unaware of a lot of the details. That's the main reason I won't call myself a Marxist.

I really just take bits and pieces from various ideologies (and by that, I think you know what I mean) depending on what I agree with most. That's why I don't call myself anything specific, just a socialist, or maybe even a communist.
User avatar #25714 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
When it comes to Marx though, it's really all or nothing, as Marx was a social scientist and came to conclusions based on sociological inquiry. I find people who make compatibility with Utopian and scientific socialism are like those who support the theory of evolution but take parts of intelligent design.

But yeah. You're still dabbling, which is understandable. I, at one point, was a Bolshevik supporter. That was a long time ago.
User avatar #25715 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I wouldn't say Bolshevik supporter per se... Some things they did I would approve of more than others. Like I said in another thread, I don't think the USSR was perfect, but I do think it was a step in the right direction. And maybe Yugoslavia was a further step.

I don't really consider myself a utopian socialist either.
User avatar #25716 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
We must discuss this in further detail elsewhere. I got school tomorrow at like 8.

Ciao!
User avatar #25717 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
Ha, I'm in class.

Goodbye, friend.
#25702 - furthermore socialists who talk about 'ideology' bother me bec… 03/21/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
#25701 - I always thought these were silly. Ideology is a too…  [+] (13 new replies) 03/21/2013 on Politics - politics news,... -2
User avatar #25704 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
Please elaborate.

Ideology is really just a set of ideals. Communism is an ideology, so is socialism. Certain ideologies may be tools of the ruling class, but I don't see how ideologies as a concept are, especially as the Left are generally quite supportive of each other, even if we differ on the specifics. We recognise our common enemy well.
User avatar #25705 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Ideology is stagnant. The ruling classes use it to justify their actions. It has itself become counterrevolutionary.

Marx wrote a book about it called the German Ideology. Here is a quote from it. "Communism is "not a state of the future, but the real movement which destroys the existing state of being."

Communism as a goal is one thing. Communism as a goal of a political party is the work of ideology and allowed the bureaucracy to usurp power in Russia (and create a counterrevolutionary force of state capitalism from day one).
User avatar #25706 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I don't see it arisaka. Ideology is just a set of ideals. Whether it be the overthrowing of a king for a republic, or the overthrowing of capitalism to begin the road to pure communism.

Communism as a goal of a political party is just the same as communism as a goal. The entity that has the goal is irrelevant.
User avatar #25707 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
You're not reading what I had quoted deep enough; It's how the concept has been fetishized - transformed into an image and recuperated over and over and over.

Ideology and Marx don't mix. "Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence."

Guy Debord and the other Situationists remind us that Marx hated ideology. Ideology is "the abstract will to universality and the illusion thereof," which is "legitimated in modern society by universal abstraction and by the effective dictatorship of illusion."
User avatar #25708 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I'm afraid I still don't understand.

Ideology is, as a concept, a set of ideas. Marxism is an ideology, because it's a set of ideas and ideals.

Am I missing something completely? Would you suggest I simply read the German Ideology?
User avatar #25709 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Marxism is NOT a set of ideals! "Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics."

Marxism is more of a methodology - a grand social critique.

And yes, I suggest reading some of it. You could simply look it up on the internet. It's not a long read and is pretty focused on few concepts (it's not like it's capital or anything).
User avatar #25710 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
We'll leave this topic until then, then.

I should point out, just while we're at it, that I'm not actually a Marxist. That might immediately resolve any future misunderstandings.
User avatar #25711 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
Yeah, I kind of see that now. But even still, he was a fantastic sociologist.
User avatar #25713 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I agree. And I do agree with most of what I've read from Marx. But as you can see, I haven't read enough. I know what Marxism is, in a general sense, but I'm still unaware of a lot of the details. That's the main reason I won't call myself a Marxist.

I really just take bits and pieces from various ideologies (and by that, I think you know what I mean) depending on what I agree with most. That's why I don't call myself anything specific, just a socialist, or maybe even a communist.
User avatar #25714 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
When it comes to Marx though, it's really all or nothing, as Marx was a social scientist and came to conclusions based on sociological inquiry. I find people who make compatibility with Utopian and scientific socialism are like those who support the theory of evolution but take parts of intelligent design.

But yeah. You're still dabbling, which is understandable. I, at one point, was a Bolshevik supporter. That was a long time ago.
User avatar #25715 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
I wouldn't say Bolshevik supporter per se... Some things they did I would approve of more than others. Like I said in another thread, I don't think the USSR was perfect, but I do think it was a step in the right direction. And maybe Yugoslavia was a further step.

I don't really consider myself a utopian socialist either.
User avatar #25716 - arisaka (03/21/2013) [-]
We must discuss this in further detail elsewhere. I got school tomorrow at like 8.

Ciao!
User avatar #25717 - oxan (03/21/2013) [-]
Ha, I'm in class.

Goodbye, friend.
#25666 - watch yr edginess 03/19/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
#239 - some guy literally told me if you're "not in the pit you'… 03/19/2013 on Anyone else agree??? 0
#226 - >calls daughter a whore for getting pregnant wat … 03/19/2013 on oh.. -3
#30 - Let's not kid ourselves... It would be a LOT bigger t… 03/17/2013 on Makes sense... 0
#182 - edd is kill no but really it's because he's an amazin… 03/16/2013 on The Boss +3
#25382 - That's a very Leninist attitude towards that concept though. L… 03/16/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
#918 - >implying the civilians outside of Hiroshima or Nagasaki kn… 03/16/2013 on nothin new 0
#412 - My girlfriend is American. We're even-Steven! (I hope…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/16/2013 on Clearing it up +1
#413 - TopDawg (03/16/2013) [-]
The only name I need is.

Freedom.
#25345 - Maybe it's because I'm canadian (funny how I was just talking …  [+] (2 new replies) 03/15/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
User avatar #25381 - oxan (03/16/2013) [-]
They're not so much the means for survival anymore. Culture is more of a way for society to function. It teaches us the norms and mores of our society. Multiculturalism is inherently divisive.

It'd be like having one culture that was predominately 'socialist' and another that promoted capitalist concepts. It just wouldn't allow of a peaceful and cohesive society.

Class solidarity can't be achieved whilst we have conflicting cultures. To achieve class solidarity, and in turn class consciousness, we need to achieve cultural solidarity.
User avatar #25382 - arisaka (03/16/2013) [-]
That's a very Leninist attitude towards that concept though. Left Unity needs to be abandoned.

People need to understand the culture, like many things, are simply reifications of something else.
#25344 - Yeah but nationalism itself is reification. Borders are reific… 03/15/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
#116 - give me all ur god damn money so i can bank it 03/15/2013 on Capitalist America +2
#25332 - nationalism is poo poo and is a tool used to distract the work…  [+] (5 new replies) 03/15/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
User avatar #25333 - oxan (03/15/2013) [-]
Eh, I'm a bit of a nationalist.

I think that multiculturalism is inherently divisive and class consciousness will never be achieved in a society divided my culture. Individual countries should be home to only one culture. Of course, immigrants /are/ welcome, but so long as they agree to have solidarity and leave their old culture behind them.

Solidarity is the most important thing for the proletariat.
User avatar #25345 - arisaka (03/15/2013) [-]
Maybe it's because I'm canadian (funny how I was just talking about nationality being reification) but multiculturalism is actually in our constitution. I mean, it wasn't MEANT to be multiculturalism but actually biculturalism, but still. We're more of a melting pot than most nations out there.

Culture itself is socially constructed; they are just the means people have adapted for survival. If we make the fear of survival vanish, 'culture' as a rigid social power will also vanish.

By people focusing on national identity instead of class solidarity, it really gets in the way of the development of the proletariat and its struggle; it can even be hijacked as it was in Nazi Germany.
User avatar #25381 - oxan (03/16/2013) [-]
They're not so much the means for survival anymore. Culture is more of a way for society to function. It teaches us the norms and mores of our society. Multiculturalism is inherently divisive.

It'd be like having one culture that was predominately 'socialist' and another that promoted capitalist concepts. It just wouldn't allow of a peaceful and cohesive society.

Class solidarity can't be achieved whilst we have conflicting cultures. To achieve class solidarity, and in turn class consciousness, we need to achieve cultural solidarity.
User avatar #25382 - arisaka (03/16/2013) [-]
That's a very Leninist attitude towards that concept though. Left Unity needs to be abandoned.

People need to understand the culture, like many things, are simply reifications of something else.
User avatar #25344 - arisaka (03/15/2013) [-]
Yeah but nationalism itself is reification. Borders are reification. Countries themselves, in abstract, are reification. They are no more real than the concept of gender.

They are promoted by the bourgeois to create false consciousness and that's it.
#25331 - watch yr edginess  [+] (1 new reply) 03/15/2013 on Politics - politics news,... -3
#25379 - Rascal (03/15/2013) [-]
That's not edgy, he's just an asshole. But at least, he's honest about it.
#185 - Military is fine as it is. Money should be invested into more …  [+] (1 new reply) 03/14/2013 on Not Funny because it's true 0
#186 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
Partially right. Our military is in the process of rearming and updating certain equipment, for instance, the majority our military helicopters are using the same basic equipment that they used in Vietnam.

How ever, the point of that is that raising the taxes to pay for roads, power plants, power grids, and rearming the military (in the way I described) would have the duel effect of raising government revenue, thus paying the debt, as well as injecting cash back into the market, and providing jobs, thus employing people and lowering unemployment.
#182 - Exactly. It becomes dead capital.  [+] (3 new replies) 03/14/2013 on Not Funny because it's true 0
#184 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
Which is the main thrust of my comments, that a progressive tax (as was done in the 50's-60's) would not only push the rich and ultra rich to keep most of their wealth invested, but would also give the government funds with which to update our roads, power grids, perhaps build new nuclear power plants, to rearm our military.

User avatar #185 - arisaka (03/14/2013) [-]
Military is fine as it is. Money should be invested into more important things like health, education, and the welfare of the population.

Like I said earlier, I am by no means a capitalist in any way, nor do I support it. What I mean to say is that if they are going to do it, at least do it right!
#186 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
Partially right. Our military is in the process of rearming and updating certain equipment, for instance, the majority our military helicopters are using the same basic equipment that they used in Vietnam.

How ever, the point of that is that raising the taxes to pay for roads, power plants, power grids, and rearming the military (in the way I described) would have the duel effect of raising government revenue, thus paying the debt, as well as injecting cash back into the market, and providing jobs, thus employing people and lowering unemployment.
#220 - I get the vibe people think I'm racist to Serbians or somethin… 03/14/2013 on Faith in humanity: Restored 0
#54 - He's the whale equivalent to the guy that always has a spare c… 03/14/2013 on Even Whales .... 0
#140 - The entire concept of capitalism revolves around investing bac…  [+] (5 new replies) 03/14/2013 on Not Funny because it's true 0
#172 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
This is cool, but the problem is that the rich (especially the ultra rich) don't do that. They keep the vast majority of their wealth in liquid (hard cash) instead of investing it.
User avatar #182 - arisaka (03/14/2013) [-]
Exactly. It becomes dead capital.
#184 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
Which is the main thrust of my comments, that a progressive tax (as was done in the 50's-60's) would not only push the rich and ultra rich to keep most of their wealth invested, but would also give the government funds with which to update our roads, power grids, perhaps build new nuclear power plants, to rearm our military.

User avatar #185 - arisaka (03/14/2013) [-]
Military is fine as it is. Money should be invested into more important things like health, education, and the welfare of the population.

Like I said earlier, I am by no means a capitalist in any way, nor do I support it. What I mean to say is that if they are going to do it, at least do it right!
#186 - tomthehippie (03/14/2013) [-]
Partially right. Our military is in the process of rearming and updating certain equipment, for instance, the majority our military helicopters are using the same basic equipment that they used in Vietnam.

How ever, the point of that is that raising the taxes to pay for roads, power plants, power grids, and rearming the military (in the way I described) would have the duel effect of raising government revenue, thus paying the debt, as well as injecting cash back into the market, and providing jobs, thus employing people and lowering unemployment.
#209 - I know a girl who denies Serbian war crimes committed during t…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/14/2013 on Faith in humanity: Restored 0
User avatar #220 - arisaka (03/14/2013) [-]
I get the vibe people think I'm racist to Serbians or something. I'm not.

I'm just adding to the whole conflict between the people in former Yugoslavia and why the content is so astounding and amazing. That people are able to live outside the hatred that is instilled in them at a very young age.
#25271 - No. One person can't put themselves into context with the enti… 03/13/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2500
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #8 - lulzformalaysiaair (01/30/2015) [-]
heyy whats up? Why did you stop coming to the /politics/ board?
#2 - Rascal (06/06/2013) [-]
Hey decided to take a couple ***** on your comments, don't really know why but enjoy.
User avatar #3 to #2 - arisaka (06/07/2013) [-]
thank you
User avatar #1 - airguitar (07/17/2012) [-]
First!! :D
 Friends (0)