@Deleted User It will. I hope it is on my side.

its the reason south korea has such a huge suicide rate

even Stalin talks about free time

because people can educate themselves, see the improvements

i think he talks about that with religion too

Makhno as anarchist puts a focus on self-discipline

yeah he had chain gangs lol

platformism

makhno was basically a pirate

Free time is the greatest value for proletariat. You can do literally anything and evolve faster.

All of this is an argument over "what's god want us to do"

the platform text is good

it's called anarcho-leninism

And it's not necessarily work all the fucking time

There is nothing sacred about happiness.

But it's not necessarily juche

But it's also not one size fits all.

@Deleted User It is not about happiness it is about progress

I think working in a gulag is happier for me

than for a capitalist, because at least I have a sense

Ehh but what if this gulag has been monetized?

I don't like mixing marxism with spiritual elements, neither the cult of personality, the leader culture

@Ornament Exactly. Science may determine that happiness and recreation is necessary to progress or it may suggest to move away from this paradigm if it means progress is faster. We should not hold onto our preconceptions as sacred cows.

So as to provide revenue for the glorious daddy state

there are religions for socialism, like dhamnic socialism

Ehhhh

Buddhism works

I don't think to prived renevue for the glorious daddy state; I don't think this state as a daddy

I think in the people, in the working class; the state means violence, state power is used by a class or by other one

@Deleted User it is not preconception. I see it happening everyday. It is a great advantage to have free time.

except when corruption is there; then it could all be degenerated

which is why I prefer anarchist models like a federation with delegates and so on, no ban on factions; the platform and the unions to achieve it

@Ornament Free to do what?

maybe a party but independent from the rest

@Deleted User anything.

@Ornament It is a great advantage to do 'anything'?

@Deleted User yes. To grow as a subject

@Ornament Grow in what way?

If it wasn't for that, how could have I read about marxism, anarchism, etc.?

@Deleted User in a sovereign way

@Ornament What is the great advantage in personal sovereignty?

@Deleted User Fast evolution.

Not being guided blindly

Not obeying from authority, thinking for yourself

Thinking process is the best

thats the next step

historical materialism

there are anarchist critiques of education, for self-management

@Blebleh Who said anything about being guided blindly? If science shows that progress is better in another way, who are you to abandon it for idealistic reasons like 'personal growth and sovereignty'?

people would want to become scientists more often

as the greeks did

Today people are guided blindly with media, with biased books of history and pseudoscientifc closed models of economy

looking for yourself more leads you to compare, to see what's happening

with this shitty education system, it makes people want to become mathemations and scientists even more

because they always associate it with a 50 question test

@Deleted User it doesn't say the other way. Both objective and subjective is present. And there is ways to be on each side. And in the middle. Or anywhere. Both ways are working. You can carefully direct in both ways. Science says it.

I'm not saying that we should leave public education for total freedom of learning

We inherit scientific knowledge

But in some areas today the social science is totally bourgeois

We have to teach to think critically and give tools to self-learning

@Ornament That's true. I was hoping the context was not lost. If science shows that free time is good for us, then let's do that. I wasn't saying either/or. However, if we have a clear goal in mind, then the opportunity for idle activity only exists insofar as it creates greater progress, which is measurable.

@Deleted User Idle is not so very idle. More thought is present after accumulating free time. Every subject learns faster and use it for its development. There is a combination of social freedoms and authoritarian government. The subjectivity must grow for a developed consciousness. It is best for whole society.

You abstract yourself from developments without certain liberties.

@Ornament If that is true, I support it.

I think that a lot of people in capitalism instead of looking for an alternative they go and "carpe diem"

drink alcohol, get fun

etc.

they conceive leisure time to get fun nothing more

their duties are the work

@Ornament But it may not be true forever. And if progress becomes difficult in this way, we should not shy away from it. That is my contribution.

@Deleted User Why would one or the other way be prevalent? For which purpose? Two ways is better than 1.

Maybe at times one is more prevalent

@Ornament That's true, but we can not foresee the future. There are qualitative changes in the dialectic that may be forms that are unexpected. I wanted to be rigorous about that point. Things that we like are not always correct. Which brings us back to the original contention of intention when it conflicts with correctness.

@Deleted User Which forms?

@Ornament You mean like what comes after Communism? I do not know.

it's the end of history

Is it?

yes, to each according to his need

Forever and ever amen?

https://youtu.be/n5mOd-QnsE4

if we conceive this as post-scarcity yes; and I can't imagine what it would take

how many time

@Deleted User There shouldn't be many for long.

Wow, I did not know about this End of History idea. I assumed the Dialectical process went on forever, and if it didn't, then it's end was just part of a process within an even greater Dialectical process.

@Deleted User not history, but men.

Can you help me understand the difference? The end of men?

@Deleted User I think robots will be smarter very fast. I think you can create AI, it will be done soon.

What will robot society look like? Will this represent future development of the social dialectic?

@Deleted User robot society will die soon too.

How? And then?

And thats it.

What about alien life, will they die soon too?

Depends. If they progress, they do die.

Die because they are being replaced by newer forms or die because they totally self-destruct and take out all possible descendants too?

Is life just a cosmic spasm of carbon that's fate is an inevitable as the inorganic processes around it?

Maybe you can preserve the long existence, but why?

Are you asking why or how?

I just realised that Marx's idea of The End of History is economic freedom, not a literal end. I wonder what happens then.

Freedom to do what though KARL!?