Permanently Deleted

  • President_Obama [they/them]
    ·
    9 months ago

    Yeah it makes sense as a Marxist to do so. I'd recommend, and intend to do so myself, to read modern works, because you should always read things that go against your biases, in general. It's silly and dogmatic to only read work by Marxist academics, and worse yet to only read five-heads

    • ReadFanon [any, any]
      ·
      9 months ago

      I gotta be honest with you, and this is probably my ignorance and my bias shining through (a very powerful combination indeed), but I can't really think of any modern liberal philosopher that isn't primarily an economist besides... Fukuyama I guess? lol. And I really don't have time for him or anyone else who is just an apologist or who gets their ideas directly out of the trashcan of ideology.

      I'm open to being convinced otherwise though.

      • President_Obama [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Nah I mean economists. Piketty is the first name that comes to mind - broadly left wing, makes a strong case, but comes from a different philosophical background (not Marxism). It's why I am planning on reading Arrighi — a post-marxist but left wing view on imperialism.

        Michael Hudson is great, but he doesn't challenge a Marxist's worldview, simply because he too is a Marxist. But a modern one, and a good economist, and a proper academic.

        See how I don't even know real liberal academics to read? I want to improve on that. I'm still looking for a modern liberal analysis of imperialism

        • GhostofLeninsGhost [he/him]
          ·
          9 months ago

          Arrighi is good but a tough read (I got through about 100 pages before I tapped out). I've been reading Hegemony and Socialist Strategy recently, and while it's also tough it is holding me a bit better. It could be that I need to revisit Arrighi given how I'm doing with this current book.