cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4028381

The only thing I can think of is Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord and Marshall McLuhan's work on media.

Oh, and this work by Christian Fuchs.

Problem being:

I think Fuchs is a Marxist-Humanist and I'm not sure what to think of Marxist humanism.

But I could be wrong.

Maybe I should ignore that aspect of their work.

Thoughts?

Got any book recommendations at all?

I'm looking for:

Media studies

Cultural theory

Communications

Internet

Social media

Management and organization

Community-building

Trends

Technology

etc.

^ These are the topics I'm looking into.

And, hopefully, from a Marxist-Leninist or Marxist standpoint (or at least leftist).

Got anything? Maybe advice?

    • heartheartbreak [fae/faer]
      ·
      8 months ago

      On the reproduction of capitalism: ideology and ideological state apparatuses is a really great read. You can look up the chapters as essays individually but I think collectively they shine a bright light on how to navigate ideological reproduction, class struggle and the superstructure in relation to each other. Ideology and ideological state apparatuses the essay in particular you would really like I think

      • Makan@lemmygrad.ml
        ·
        8 months ago

        On the Reproduction of Capitalism: Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses. eh?

        I'll check it out.

        Let me know if there's anything else I should check out from Althusser.

        • heartheartbreak [fae/faer]
          ·
          8 months ago

          There's technically his writings on the young Marx old Marx split but I haven't really gone through them in depth or found a really great reason to yet. I like althusser as a Marxist leninist theorist more than his philosophical musings.

          His essay on over determination is essential imo to understand dialectical materialism in its entirety.

            • heartheartbreak [fae/faer]
              ·
              8 months ago

              Yea it's just weird that he walks it back and forth multiple times and the demand for an epistemological break is unnecessary. He's essentially trying to explain the confusions people have about Marx, but it's overcomplicated and impractical to actually pinpoint the exact epistemological point of inflection.

              It's pretty much all explained in the essay on over determination anyways, the young Marx old Marx stuff is just like extra fluff essentially.