@MindTraveller@lemmy.ca putting out some transphobic as fuck posts recently

  • robinnn
    ·
    5 months ago

    The dialectical materialism bit gave my multiple aneurysms. These relationships ("social constructs") are a result of the material! Are they honestly saying that they think this "social construct" has no cause but just is because of itself?

    When the slave owner oppresses the slave, or a capitalist the worker, his ability to do so is because of his possession of materials (farm and factory) not his possession of materials because of his oppression except in continuation. Or put another way, commodities are sold after the worker is given their wage, so how does the capitalist initially pay the worker? He must have capital to start! This all returns to the material situations these groups found themselves in and how this progressed.

    There is a common misunderstanding of dialectical materialism where people forget the dialectical aspect and point out any example of ideas giving rise to action as disproof. Dialectical materialism flips Hegel's subject-object dialectic which regards the subject (ideas and the like) as primary into a subject-object dialectic where the object (matter) is primary, or object-subject dialectic. The material gives rise to ideas in the human mind, which then are transformed into material action, or for another example, national culture is at first the product of natural conditions, then later asserts itself upon those conditions through human action. The argument this person makes goes: "By skipping one step chronologically the entire dialectic is flipped again and the ideal is the primary aspect, the material secondary! Did I just disprove dialectical materialism?"

      • robinnn
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Hmm, so you have ideas that if carried out would cause change in the material? Waiter! Waiter! One cup of Marxist tears please! I guess we’ve found something more universal than mere matter!