I should read that book. In my head I always thought it was a flaw of unscrupulous markets to allow for anti-capitalist messaging to proliferate and spread across consumers to potentially and/or ultimate destroy it. I still think that somewhat but it would be good to see another perspective on it.
Its definitely not a risk free strategy of the bourgeoise, but for the most part unless everything goes extremely to shit the bourgeoise can just rob socialist revolutionary messaging of all its power by putting it on this mythological marketplace of ideas and drowning it in shallow "debunking" by the "free media" and other mediums like academia.
Because the resources of the average bourgeoise will never be less than that of the working class and revolutionaries this strategy works very well while being hard to detect because of all the obfuscating indoctrination like the whole idea of the free press vs state press, or using the dismantling of historical socialist projects as proof of the failure of socialism, as if dismantling a person limb from limb would mean proving all of their ideas and goals a failure too.
yeah it's pretty short, if you read theory already you may probably think it's too basic, but i think it's still fairly on-point and provides a handy map to explore modern leftist thought for beginners wanting to delve themselves into it
The book manages to fit in a couple of thoughts about Fisher's students being unable to muster enough attention to actually read a book. I'm pretty sure he had them in mind when writing capitalist realism so it's a very approachable text. As someone with ADHD himself, I found his diagnosis to be a bit of a mixed bag, but he does have some good insight on the matter.
It's a good jumping off point for Marxism and 20th century critical theory in general. If you find any of the people he brings up and references interesting, it's worth checking them out. For example, his discussion of Postscript on the Societies of Control got me into Deleuze.
I should read that book. In my head I always thought it was a flaw of unscrupulous markets to allow for anti-capitalist messaging to proliferate and spread across consumers to potentially and/or ultimate destroy it. I still think that somewhat but it would be good to see another perspective on it.
Its definitely not a risk free strategy of the bourgeoise, but for the most part unless everything goes extremely to shit the bourgeoise can just rob socialist revolutionary messaging of all its power by putting it on this mythological marketplace of ideas and drowning it in shallow "debunking" by the "free media" and other mediums like academia.
Because the resources of the average bourgeoise will never be less than that of the working class and revolutionaries this strategy works very well while being hard to detect because of all the obfuscating indoctrination like the whole idea of the free press vs state press, or using the dismantling of historical socialist projects as proof of the failure of socialism, as if dismantling a person limb from limb would mean proving all of their ideas and goals a failure too.
Citations Needed’s most recent episode on #deleteuber being co-opted for their “anti-racism” campaign is extremely relevant to this.
yeah it's pretty short, if you read theory already you may probably think it's too basic, but i think it's still fairly on-point and provides a handy map to explore modern leftist thought for beginners wanting to delve themselves into it
I have adhd so nothing can be too basic lol. I’ll just forget it again anyway.
The book manages to fit in a couple of thoughts about Fisher's students being unable to muster enough attention to actually read a book. I'm pretty sure he had them in mind when writing capitalist realism so it's a very approachable text. As someone with ADHD himself, I found his diagnosis to be a bit of a mixed bag, but he does have some good insight on the matter.
Very short and very good. Like a couple hour's read.
It's a good jumping off point for Marxism and 20th century critical theory in general. If you find any of the people he brings up and references interesting, it's worth checking them out. For example, his discussion of Postscript on the Societies of Control got me into Deleuze.