Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Cindy Milstein's also done some recent stuff on Jewish Anarchism

5

subrosa wrote (edited )

Why's this downvoted, book looks interesting at least.

8

ruminator wrote (edited )

Hey — you deleted your post in the weekly reading thread. I thought what you posted was interesting. Gave me a sense of the author’s anti-dialectical method, but less of an idea of how that mapped onto the politics/argument of the book. Wanted to look up the book but your post is gone. Can you share the title here?

Also agree that the book posted here looks interesting.

7

subrosa wrote

After Israel by Marcelo Svirsky. I think I wanna finish it before discussing it some more, deleting my comment probably wasn't necessary tho.

7

ruminator wrote

Oh cool. That makes sense. I’d be keen to hear your thoughts.

I’ve been thinking and writing about the Christian origins of Hegelian dialectics a lot lately. Doesn’t work the same in Islam, in my view. Not even amongst the sufis. At least this is an argument I am working on. Anyhow, that’s the broader context in which your post was of interest to me.

7

Tequila_Wolf wrote

What good stuff has been written on the Christian origins of Hegelian dialectics? I'm super interested.

2

lululu wrote

Have you read Hegel?

6

budgecommander wrote

Has anyone?

1

lululu wrote (edited )

Yes. And most ppl who think they haven’t are prob wrong. He’s everywhere and pretty impossible to escape. Lots to say on this, but the answer to your question though, is yes. In many different ways, yes. :)

6

budgecommander wrote

Everyone's "read" him, but I'm fairly certain the number of people who have actually gone and read those damn tomes of incomprehensibility is like... 3.

2

ruminator wrote (edited )

They are incredibly straightforward texts. Lengthy, yes, incomprehensible….not in the least. If anything, Hegel is so predictable as to be boring. Mystification only increases his stature.

3

subrosa wrote

pretty sure we have tankie eyes on us right now

2

ruminator wrote

Yeah, but the tankies have only read him through Marx’s critique/inversion (which is of course just another way to be Hegelian).

6

subrosa wrote

He sure is everywhere and pretty impossible to escape in Marxism.

2

ruminator wrote

Yeah, but dialectics not just a problem in Marx, and neither is state thinking.

5

subrosa wrote

Sure. What I'm saying is, I don't trust u/lululu, and I don't trust the downvotes in this thread to be representative of the raddle.me userbase.

1

ruminator wrote (edited )

Oh that is a little funny. I noticed there’s a lot of tankie panic on the website. I assume its history/drama that I don’t know.

I’m pretty uncooptable tho, so that stuff is whatever. No one else’s framing/reading/attempts at capture have ever worked. I value the ‘miracle’ of my own mind way too much :).

4

subrosa wrote (edited )

Wouldn't call it tankie panic, but it's annoying when they show up every now and then to push anti-anarchist talking points and downvote anarchists in our own forums. Dealing with that is never fun or interesting.

2

subrosa wrote

how very predictable

1

kelyn wrote

miracle in quotes because? ( i spoke of miracle yesterday near the phone) ya listenin in on me?

1

kelyn wrote (edited )

that's really creepy spooky, just saying.

thanks for telling me, though. i guess?

1

kelyn wrote

your mind is incredible, whatever you do.

have pride in the miraculous, please!

1

ruminator wrote

Hi Kelyn, I’m a little lost on our interaction. First I thought I had upset you, then I thought you were joking. I’m still a little lost. Genuinely hope the conversation about miracles was not upsetting. :)

1

kelyn wrote

we didnt have a conversation about miracles.

you made 2 snarky comments you quickly deleted .

your opinion on miracle and humility doesnt upset me. the intrusion and psycho-bullying are distressing and i struggle with wondering about it; who? what for? since when?

1

ruminator wrote

I was having a conversation with subrosa about tankies and then you said some something about using the same word as you did on the phone. This is the first time I’ve seen a post from you so that was puzzling. I prob didn’t need to delete the post. I just wasn’t sure if it was further upsetting since I thought it was a joke and I’m still not sure what it was.

If you think I was mocking you, I promise you I never saw/heard your reference to miracle. I was being snarky about my own comment and adding humility to my own comment, too.

2

kelyn wrote

then it was coincidence. i'm sorry to wrongly accuse you.

just, i dont often use that word so it seemed rare. and i have these suspicions for a while about the hacking and monitoring, among other things happening. so i want to assert some defense.

prior to all that : miracle ! wow! queer reality~

2

ruminator wrote

Oh I’m so so glad this is cleared up. I was worried I hurt your feelings. That would be very horrible. :(

I realized at some point that you were genuinely asking me if I was listening to your conversations. I felt horrified since I had been joking in my responses to you (because of the tankie talk before). I’m sorry i misunderstood you.

You are right that it’s a very rare word! Esp on raddle! 🌸 💚

3

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

I'm only really familiar with some sections in The Science of Logic where he establishes enough of a metaphysics and getting a grip on what Aufheben means that I could then properly understand the section the The Phenomenology of Spirit on lordship and bondage. Especially for how it is taken up in anti-colonial struggle - like Fanon's work. Otherwise only secondary materials and critiques from the million anti-Hegelians that exist. Why?

1

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

TIL Hegel was properly Christian. As if I needed another reason to think he was one of the worst things to ever happen to the planet lol.

Potentially also explains Ellul's apparent enthusiasm for dialectic.

1

ruminator wrote

Hey - not sure who downvoted this but lululu is right. It’s all in the primary source material, which I’m pretty sure you’ll manage to find.

PS. Please don’t do this again. Thanks.

4

ruminator wrote (edited )

After Israel seems fascinating. The blurb accurately describes Zionism as a secular moral project, but I’m wondering which literatures the author is relying upon to define the secular. Is it kantorowicz and Taylor?

5

black_badger wrote

Milstein is a Bookchinite, meaning that her relationship to anarchism is tenuous at best. She's primarily a liberal-leftist.

3

subrosa wrote (edited )

Fair warning I guess, but I have no reason to expect this new publication going for a contemporary renewal of Jewish anarchism to be fatally affected by direct democracy and social ecology nonsense. I know that she at least doesn't write like Bookchin, which is a huge plus.

It's like, it's got the AK press label on it, I know what I'm getting into.

[the "I guess" sounds more dismissive than intended, it is very much fair warning]

3