being for-itself rather than in-itself and all that jazz

And if the objectivty of diamat informs our subject, it is no longer a choice.

Sartrean existentialism never says that you control your situation, but you do have absolute control over how you react and what you do with those situations

And Sartre said that he was never more free than he was in prison, because he still had the freedom to interpret life, his situation and his own thought

s

@dontchewglass But the arrow of time is linear. It is impossible to demonstrate this is true. In what way do we have control?

You have the absolute freedom to revolt, if you have no chains on your wrist, then you are physically free to punch a cop, organize, crush Capitalism

@dontchewglass But will you? The objective laws of the universe are deterministic. How does any definition of freedom exist here?

Diamat predicts revolutions, not because we choose it, but because social progress determines it.

self consciousness and subjectivity

thats how freedom exists

@not_matt So the introspective sense that 'it could have been different', the imagination of our conscious mind, shows we are free?

Seems like a redundant definition.

Just like individualism.

agree to disagree i guess, i should be studying for finals rn lmfao

@Deleted User
I conclude that the fact that our perspective on our control of the world around us affects how we behave and undertake responsibility in the real world implies our ability to have free will; the capacity to make decisions that are irreducible to subconscious parameters: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764213506215

> tfw my formerly liberal boyfriend is slowly radicalizing

he's bitching to me about united states imperialism >:)

Who owns the means of production in current America

"but maddy, we have to teach the savages using bombs!"

@★ Commissar Regi ★
The US government.

Is it possible for corporations to own the means, if so what would this be called

Corporatocracy.

capitalism lmao

I see, thanks fam

hey guys, i'm new here and i don't really have any strong views of my own. i'm just here to gain some knowledge and insight ☺

^^^

Same

Corporatism is the merger of state and corporate power

which is what capitalism inherently devolves into

can you expand on the notion of "merging?" what does that mean in this context exactly? subsidies?

Yeah, capitalism gives corporations and monopolies too much opportunity for power

@dontchewglass
I argue that it isn't capitalism unless all transactions are exclusively private and voluntary, which implies a free market. Corporatism is what you end up with when you start a nation with a _preexisting_ government infrastructure to interfere in the economy and draw out taxes and impose regulations and fees in order to sustain itself, which wouldn't be capitalism since the entire infrastructure requires coercion in order to sustain.

@Tʜᴇ Sᴛᴜᴅʏ ᴏғ Cʜᴀɴɢᴇ#1345 "the fact that our perspective on our control of the world around us affects how we behave" Which is predetermined, not caused by 'free will'.

Do you guys even read Marx?

no, i'm new here 🤗

@Deleted User
No one argues for maximal autonomy. Also, I'm an anarcho-capitalist, lol.

Explains. Fair enough.

I essentially deny Marx and Engel's Dialectical Materialism framework of metaphysics.

@Mawk Would you like to? https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/sw/

lmao why is there an ancap in this chat