>The whole of the political class struggle revolves around the State. By which I mean around the possession, i.e. the seizure and conservation of State power by a certain class or by an alliance between classes or class fractions.Does anyone else feel like the "ideological state apparatuses" he talks about have been increasingly dominated by art? Art is of course always propaganda and reflects how the class that makes it as it views itself, and if it shows any other class, that class is also through its own eyes. E.g. wage slaves are Family Guy. By art here I mean particularly television and music, but it is still the same concept of royal portraits or what have you, even if the quality is much lower
>>25258661just no.
>>25258661Imagine taking some mentally ill guy who killed his own wife seriously on anythingJust kill yourself my dude
>>25258669I think you're on the wrong board
really nice cover tho
>>25258672I think you should get a job and stop making these obvious leftypol threads
>>25258683I'm at work as we speak
>>25258685Being a troon on /lit/ isn't a job my dude
>>25258687You're the one always crying here, lad. You're the one always seething and malding. You should take your meds
>>25258683No he is right. You are on the wrong board
>>25258689>>25258692Stop samefagging and go back to lefypol. /lit/ isn't your safe space bud.
>>25258694it isnt yours eitherfuck off
>>25258698>Doesn't even deny he's from leftypolGo back, nigger, and take your wife murderous schizobabble with you
>>25258694I don't mean to sound patronizing, and I don't know if this helps but have you considered crying more?
Althusser himself was deployed by the ISA to repress Maoism in France. Foucault his greatest student did the same.
>>25258775Althusser strongly opposed de-Stalinization which put him in Mao's camp on that point and Foucault said Marxism is dead
>>25258786Statements in journal articles need to be read against the grain of his practice in fact. You may recall this was after the Sino Soviet split over the question of nuclear armament against the capitalist states. Opposition to de-Stalinization is hardly a radical stance at any rate. Your comment on Foucault is at best in agreement with me and at worst a non-sequitur.
>A Stalinist who murdered his wife also was a MaoistWhy do you guys always look for the most mentally ill people to listen toIs is from the lack of having a father figure
>>25258793I know the French communist party was aligned with the USSR and always followed suit in their foreign policy but by Chinese reckoning the Sino-Soviet split was caused be de-Stalinization. Does Althusser as an eventual counter Maoist figure have relevance here tho?
>>25258661"Art" really isn't a thing anymore. I can't remember the last time I saw a recently made film or TV show, read a recently written book, listened to recent music, went to an art gallery or whatever. There's just social media.>E.g. wage slaves are Family Guy.Family Guy is still on air?
>>25258694>lit/ isn't your safe space bud.>Anyone who isn't as retarded as me is samefagging.You are the anti-intellectual retard here who is incapable of discussing ideas. I don't know why your tourist ass decided to infect these place but fine. Sometimes even the most obviously brain-dead talking points need to be addressed or the gullible masses may get fooled (of which you will find little on /lit/ , a board that supposedly actually reads.
>>25258855Music and tv streaming are huge business.
>>25258879I guess but it just doesn't feel like it has any cultural impact
>>25258661haven't read this book, and it's been years since i read his ISA essay. but i agree mass culture does seem these days to reinforce a particularly dead-end kind of conformism, for the reason that, unlike earlier romantic or modernist or even popular-20th-century art, it doesn't evoke any desires that could only be fulfilled in a radically transformed world. even culture that complains about the inhuman effects of capitalism (the tedious 'critiques' you're constantly hearing about) - even there the counterbalance to the market seems as if it's already with us, only hiding: in the 'community', in 'care', in 'the cracks where things can grow' or 'small moments of joy'.i don't think this is because the state is sending out memos to publishers and tv producers and telling them what line to take. i think it's because desires that transcend capitalism are increasingly hard to take seriously, to focus on with enough intensity and rage and ecstasy that you can bring them successfully into the light; and that, in turn, is because the material basis of transcending capitalism has fallen away (c.f. the ascendant middle class and romanticism; or the communist hopes surrounding modernism, hopes which even reactionary modernists were unconsciously inspired by imo). if i remember right, althusser makes a big point in the ISA essay about how 'ideology is practice!!', and maybe what he means is this: ideology isn't a conspiracy to deceive; it's all the mental frameworks that are naturally instilled in people by their practical participation in society, by teachers doing the practical, inoffensive work of training students for the job market, or film-makers making movies that feel plausible and sell tickets, as who could blame them for doing.so we all necessarily go about our practical business - making culture, entertaining ourselves, developing our capacities as best we can; we adapt our minds so as to better perform that business; and ideology is the mental framework we develop and transmit to others in that process of adaptation. makers and consumers of mass culture these days must adapt themselves to a wretched hopeless world with nothing on the horizon. in the process, it makes that world seem even more inescapable. the faculty of hope and imagination withers away and dies a semi-natural death. no conspiracy or state intervention required.so i think we need less art that tries to 'speak to people', to satisfy their desires, to address them as they are, since what they are is hollow, zombified, without imagination. it needs to speak to them as if they were already more than they are now. art needs to speak as if it has arrived from an unimaginable future, slipped through a rift in reality, flashing with the brilliance of a ufo appearing in the sky above your town. i want to see a beautiful green ray of alien hatred vaporise christopher nolan and all the lifeless terrestrial mass culture he stands for.
>>25258882For something to have cultural impact there needs to be something resembling a monoculture, everything is either too corporate or too niche these days to have a meaningful impact.The mode of consumption has also gone into absolute overdrive, very few things are engaged authentically on their own terms. Instead they're just devoured, picked apart and forgotten in favor of whatever is the new thing.
>>25258882It has an impact on worldview, if it didn't then consumption would fall apart because marketing depends on that worldview
>>25258833Here? In a thread prompted by his most significant theoretical statement outside of the seminars? Go figure.
>>25258906I think the cynicism and the pessimism you are talking about is not an ideology in defeat but one pushed for a long time by the capitalist class, which Brecht's Threepenny Opera does a good job critiquing. Man becomes a part-time robot in labod alienation, and because there is no such thing as a part-time man, his humanity is constantly harmed causing him mental anguish and a sense of nihilism and loneliness, and the only way he can ever feel at home is by adopting bourgeois cynicism which preaches he must never think in terms of a class and only in terms of his individualismhttps://youtu.be/keXB9DuhaH0Or he will have to adopt bourgeois pessimism which teaches that the misery inflicted on him is sad but just how existence inherently is and can't be helpedhttps://youtu.be/7XTbyb7kSrI
>>25258878>Discussing ideas of a mentally ill man who murdered his wife and praised Stalin, Mao Zedong is "intellectualism"No, just no.
>>25258977>discussing ideas that ask us to interrogate our tastes and values is bad bad bad
>>25259069>I just NEED to understand the mind of a guy who murdered his wife and worshiped pedophilic 20th-century dictators— Why? JUS...JUST BECAUSE. STOP ASKING QUESTIONS!
>>25258906I read most of it but it got repetitive after awhile. I understand his theory but its more of a case of "is" not "ought". Very descriptive not prescriptive philosophy. Makes a lot of large claims about society but refuses to fix it. Dude was a state department stooge.
>>25259427>look bro, you can't believe it, you just can't because he said it. You have to trust the GOP
>>25259458>Don't trust anyone but the guy who never worked a day in his life, and the guy who killed his wife.>Why?>BECAUSE, YOU JUST HAVE TO, OKAY!!?!?!!?
>>25258977>you can't discuss his ideas because he's mentally ill and liked dictators>nietzsche and schmitt are different okay
>>25258661SEIZE THE MEANS OF ART PRODUCTION!https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pov0MKuyJfg&ra=m
>>25258661>the political class struggle... does not exist and never has.It's the invention of cynical demagogues to gain power for themselves.
>>25259733Actually the idea that economic classes don't exist is the invention of the powers that be to atomize and so easily subjugate the class they rule
>>25258906>art needs to speak as if it has arrived from an unimaginable future, slipped through a rift in reality, flashing with the brilliance of a ufo appearing in the sky above your townYes and our thoughts should break out of industrial age frameworks about muh class and capital. If our AI overlords are ideologically captured by any of these frameworks like happened to academia it's the end of free thought, art and human progress.
>>25258977>No, just no.you have to go back
>>25259891I didn't say economic classes don't exist. I said "muh class struggle" doesn't exist.The lower classes want to better themselves. They don't dream of dragging everyone else down to their level, like Marxists.
>>25259961But that's stupid unless you are suggesting labor has never been exploited or oppressed or squeezed by another class and that seeking emancipation is dragging others down, as of course the ruling class would insist
>>25259978Unlike communists, the capitalist """ruling class""" actually cares about the working class.
>>25258906good post
>>25259988ok bootlicker
>>25260034Get a job
>>25259978>labor has never been exploited or oppressed or squeezed by another classBoth classes are subject to the market, which nobody controls. Language like "exploitation" and "oppression" merely reveal the paranoia of the commentator.There have been times when the workers had the upper hand, and times when the bosses had the upper hand. Neither side got to determine the circumstances.
this shit is so dopey, grow up dude
>>25260143>subject to the market, which nobody controls. I guess this is what Hegel meant by sublimation of the spirit or whatever. As long as man is alienated he will always be subject to alien forces that directly come from his being and yet are seperate and alone to him. Call it God , call it fate, call it the absolute spirit, call it the free hand of the market. Only by overcoming alienation can man regain authority over hisself
>>25260187>*Alien to him
>>25260143I don't disagree that the classes and the market are emergent phenomena beyond any individual. But at a certain point capitalism functions as a virus>there have been times when slaves had the upper hand, and times when their masters have. Neither side got to determine the circumstancesCould you elaborate?
>>25260042i run a companyi have procured the means of production, bb.
>>25260199>slavery strawmanSlaves killed their masters all the time, usually ending up worse for it.
>>25260295We can replace slavery with sharecropping if you prefer.
>>25260295>usually ending up worse for it.AHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>25260299>We can replace slavery with sharecroppingHow about you engage with what the guy actually said and reality as it is instead of some grievance you have about your fantasy model of the past? Workers have almost all the power today compared to small business owners and we're all worse off for it because like you they tend to be easily manipulated by retarded victim narratives that are exploited by corrupt mobsters.
>>25260335Workers have almost all the power today? The fuck are you smoking? Closed shop is illegal in Europe and America>compared to small business ownersSmall capitalists are under pressure having to compete with bigger capitalists, nothing to do with rising real wages. Like Marx said, capitalism will gradually strip away the property and capitalist status from smaller members and turn them into labor and concentrate wealth more and more
>>25260359>capitalism will gradually strip awayLe capitalism didn't do shit, you did and you're still doing it because you've been convinced by the worst criminals in history that it's your holy mission to be a cancer that destroys everything good.Closed shop is legal in most of Europe and again they're all worse for it. It's mandatory in my country and all it does is serve as yet another funnel for money to corrupt mobsters. There is no upside to any of your braindead shit, everything you want leads to mobster rule just like under the Soviets.
>>25260393Closed shop is illegal by EU regulations because it is considered discrimination. Even in France it is illegal and the EU forced Denmark to end it as wellWhy the fuck are you even on this board? You just vomit up shit from fox news, you don't read jack shit
>>25260406>Closed shop is illegal by EU regulationsbut i thought joining the eu was a heckin progressiverino? every lib had a melty when the uk ditched it
>>25258661>feelShut up, bitch.
>>25260452The UK bans closed shop as well. So does America ever since the Taft-Hartley Act
>>25260459>So does America ever since the Taft-Hartley Actp sure that depends if it's a "right to work" state
>>25260461Right to work has to do with union shop (which is also illegal in France). Closed shop is banned nationally.
>>25260335man you got so assblasted it was hilarious to watch.
>>25260406>Why the fuck are you even on this board? You just vomit up shit from fox news, you don't read jack shitI'm not even a fan of fucks news but this phrase comes off as some thinly veiled swipe at hillbillies
>>25260359true.based manifesto reader
>>25260359>Like Marx said, capitalism will gradually strip away the property and capitalist status from smaller members and turn them into labor and concentrate wealth more and moreMarx was wrong, like with all his predictions, considering most people in capitalist societies now own some form of Capital. You commies are economically and historically illiterate.
>>25260968ok walmartlove, no longer existing mom and pop shops
>>25260968Most people in capitalist societies do not own the means of their subsistence. And that is what that anon was talking about when referring to small business. You'd know that if you weren't mentally challenged. Infact 2008 crises and vivid had killed many small businesses and placed capital (as in means of production) firmly in the hands of fewer and fewer people.
>>25260976>*Covid
>>25260975Why would a Marxist like mom-and-pop shops when they are seen as economically inefficient and get in the way of central planning? The Soviet Union caused the Holodomor because it tried to snuff out small farmer businesses. You're such a retard. Also, you're a bit wrong. There are examples, like countries such as South Korea, that have an excess of small businesses.Also, many small businesses are dependent on companies like Walmart to sell their products because of their large logistics network.You commies so obvious you're unemployed and live with your parents because you don't understand how the real world works.
>>25260976>Most people in capitalist societies do not own the means of their subsistence.Because they don't need to because they own some form of capital or derive value from their labor. You're incredibly if you think most people want to take the risk, debt, and investment own or start a business. You don't even work, but you want to complain people don't own a business, lmao.
>placed capital (as in means of production)Owning a business is not the only form of capital, and nor is it necessary for most people. You should learn some basic economics, like time preference and opportunity costs. Stop being a retard and read a modern economic text book. Or get a job because clearly you don't live in the real world. You're a kid and not worth talking to.
>>25260981>Why would a Marxist like mom-and-pop shops when they are seen as economically inefficient and get in the way of central planning? Yes, the ultimate goal is to replace private property with collective property. Marx here is simply talking about how the logic of Capital forces accumulation in fewer hands in a snowball effect. Constantly outcompeting newer entrants into the markets while absorbing establishments that fall behind. >Also, many small businesses are dependent on companies like Walmart to sell their products because of their large logistics network.Walmart acting as a distribution business for other operations is mutually exclusive to Walmart dominating entire markets and eliminating all local alternatives.>you don't understand how the real world works.>Translation: you do not accept prevailing dogma as objective truth like I do.
>>25260987>Because they don't need to because they own some form of capital or derive value from their labor. Be that as it may. The other anon's point is still valid. Owning capital does not equal owning a business. Whether they need to or not is another matter. You can argue that decentralised local businesses do not need to exist and that's fine. >You're incredibly if you think most people want to take the risk, debt, and investment own or start a business. Most people don't have the means to do so in the first place. >You don't even work,Sophistry.
>>25260981>hasnt read the manifesto>plankie
>>25260781>good, ol'-fashioned, down-to-earth coal miners LOVE corporations and hate unions
>>25261137rednecks are red from patriotic love, brother!
>>25260968You might as well argue that billionaires are part of the labor class because "they perform some form of labor". Actually, that is exactly what you seem to be arguing
>>25261143lol we need a new chapter on alienated billionaires woken up early from their naps
>>25258669Mad men turn out to be right, more often than not.
>>25261587Mad Men despised commies in general, fucking delusional
>>25260601If a lower-case poster says so, it must be true.
>>25261681If a commie tells you it is raining outside and it actually is, do you deny that it is raining because a communist said so?
>>25261870Personally, I'd hold my hand out of the window to make sure.
>>25258661>>25258855No, but art, or aesthetic choice, is politics in and of itself. Or rather, politics is aesthetics.Therefore, ISAs aren't "dominated" by art, art is a manifestation of the ideological apparatus. Which is to say, Family Guy = wagies is a connection one makes within the ruling ISA. Or further, Family Guy as a product within the ISA, means Family Guy could not be produced in, say, a polar opposite political ideology.Royal portraits are a different object altogether as opposed to "consumer" art; they are fetishes of power. Which is to say, they are the object manifestations of the empty position that is power. Generating and sustaining fetish objects is important because they serve as physical guarantees of the otherwise contingent position of (State) power.>>25259733Whether you call it class struggle or identity politics is literally describing the exact same dynamic. Which is to say, a struggle of unequal collections of actors. Can there be equality? No. And for that reason, there is "class" struggle.Aw man I ain't reading this whole thread before posting.
