Last time I tried this with chatgpt it was able to give well-worded summaries that were basically what reddit thought the book was about. So like, if you’re only ever gonna get a superficial understanding of something I suppose an ai simplification is as good as anything.
Kinda fun to have it write a debate between Marx and deleuze lol
That’s how libs feel about capitalism
Yeah, symbols are imperfect representations of their essences, and each layer of abstraction is ripe for ideological obfuscation. The entirety of our culture seems trapped in a semi-orchestrated signifier dance that suppresses not only class consciousness, but consciousness in general.
First as a tragedy, then as a tragedy, then as a tragedy, then as a…
Wouldn’t want to dilute their mediocrity with good writing
I have a special plan for this world
This reeks of volcel psyop
Because pretending either of these parties have wide support of the working class is disingenuous at best. You have to drastically move the goalposts to try and retain any claim to truth.
Low voter turnout suggests that some segment of potential voters don’t support the given options. If voter turnout was 20% would you still think your adjusted claim is identical to your original? “When [some subsection of the working class] chooses to vote, it votes for one of the only two real options” borders on tautology.
Not to mention the extant parties have a duopoly over electoral institutions, meaning it’s illogical to assume that even the people that do vote necessarily support either party, rather than voting for whichever one they find less bad.
If half of people don’t vote, then that’s half of the population not voting Democrat or Republican.
I mean, that’s just as false as it is true. Voter turnout ranges from 40-60% depending on the year and election, meaning that roughly half of eligible voters don’t vote for either party. And generally, active voters skew wealthier, so I’d bet the stat is even more pronounced.
The tweet is saying the same thing you are with a different framing.
From most people’s perspectives, things are not working as intended. A working class person might be inclined to say things are upside down or they live in a backwards world (I’ve heard this a lot).
A hundred people lose their jobs while their CEO gets a bonus, ten thousand people lose their homes while the banks get bailed out, ten million people starve while the world produces an overabundance of food. No normal empathetic person would call this rational.
The tweet effectively explains that while the world is irrational from any reasonable perspective, it’s not chaotic or unorganized, it’s this way for a reason, and that reason is to protect the institution of private property. This logic, this subjective valuation of property above all else, makes sense only from the perspective of the bourgeoisie, a minute fraction of people.
The state suppressing class war is one of many ways bourgeois subjectivity gets reproduced and enforced at the expense of working class subjectivity (a subjectivity so broad compared to the statistically miniscule bourgeoisie that it arguably verges on objective truth).
Yeah tbh. After all he did and at his age, let him rest.
Plus he could still be an advisor to oversee a smoother transition period.
Yeah that’s fair, my knowledge post WWII gets really fuzzy so I can’t confidently critique what followed.
It’s easy to claim things should have been done differently, in retrospect after the fall of the USSR. But it’s not very useful without careful examination.
Also given his age it seems like there should have been a better succession plan
Damn I never realized he lived to be 74.
Still died too soon but that’s a long life for his time/place/experiences.
Okilly Dokilly and Babymetal maybe?
Is that the instance filtering that out? Thats removed lol
What are you trying to say?
Lmao
I’ve heard it with varying degrees of the R sound. There’s a common shorthand “bougie” (BOO-zhee) that people often hear before learning the original term, so they’ll maintain the pronunciation into BOO-zhwa.
Sometimes the R is slightly swallowed so it sounds more like BOH-zhwa, maybe very light throat vocalization. Or people skip over it and it’s buh-ZHWA. Some commit fully for BOR-zhwa.
Universally seems to maintain (my non-native understanding of) the French “oi” and silent S.
I have yet to hear anyone pronounce it correctly: bor-gee-oice.
Word around the office is you’ve got a little guy