• 29 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle

  • You know… That’s actually not a crazy thought. I’m not a professional Bible scholar but I’m super interested in the topic and read my share of books and research articles on critical biblical studies.

    Some of the craziest prophetic writings in the bible are actually super anti-elite, criticizing kings and priestly leaders for extorting the poor and not caring for their people, decrying foreign and domestic opressors, etc, etc.

    If you read Amos, Baruch, Ezekiel, Isaiah and so on it’s not rare to find stuff like “what is the value the sacrifices in the temple have if you’re starving your people?” directed at kings and other elites.

    Not all of it, but some of the later stuff (exilic and post-exilic) is surrounded by crazy visions like “… the angel of lord showed me the throne of YHWH and it was awesome and terrifying and full of eyes and wheels within wheels and 200 heads”, etc.

    So… part of it might be a way of saying “BTW, here’s the mothefucking terrifying being that’s going to fuck you up if you don’t stop oppressing the people…”.

    Of course, all that was later coopted by an institutional priestly class who couldn’t give a fuck about the actual social message. But there was a lot of social preoccupation by some of the original authors.

























  • I’m a relatively old (let’s say more than 40, less than 55) guy living in a dependent country in the periphery capitalism (Brazil). It always felt to me that building strong socialist movement in core capitalist places like the US or in Western Europe would be damn near impossible.

    Back 20 years ago it felt like those countries had a very solid way of providing life’s necessities and a more or less comfortable existence for a fraction big and politically strong enough of their populations that it would be really hard for organic movements to raise and make people see the exploitation. Hell, it’s hard to talk about radical politics with workers here, who see the exploitation first hand and are mostly aware that the game is rigged against them. I imagine how hard it would be in a place where everyone you know have a car, a house and so on.

    Of course that was built on the backs of the Global South. But it felt like exploitation had been exported to places where it was invisible and wouldn’t make any waves back in the places to which this wealth was flowing.

    I’m not a well versed in marxist theory to be honest. Just enough to understand we’re all being fucked and need to take over. But I always thought that any next big revolutionary movement with international impact would start in super-exploited places like Latin America, South East Asia, Africa, … I made an analogy with the Russian Revolution. The first revolution happening in a rich but relatively relatively peripheral country. It was Russia, not Germany or France. It wasn’t the most advanced capitalist country. It was a place where there was enough capitalist development for a proletariat to emerge and material conditions that made proletarians more readily radicalizable for whatever reasons.

    So, I thought, maybe it will be India or the Philippines, places that already have active revolutions going on. Maybe it will be Brazil, Malaysia, etc…

    But this right-wing turn in politics in the last 10 years, the successive crisis and the need for more and more exploitation to keep ever increasing accumulation seems to be bringing over-exploitation right to the core of the system. More and more the working classes of Europe and the USA are being impoverished and denied what used to be available to them.

    I wonder if that doesn’t make those places a lot more prone to political radicalization than they were 20 or 30 years ago.


  • I took a look at the article and the authors. The senior author is a computer science guy focused on researching online harmful behavior.

    It’s quite telling that he has no humanities training whatsoever in his academic background. A CS guy doing humanities research without any training in humanities.

    I myself fit the description of guy from a hard quantitative science background who delved into humanities and social sciences research. I’ll honestly say to you: the only thing worse than a humanities researcher who eschew any type of quantitative research as “positivist reductionism” is a “hard science guy” who thinks he[1] doesn’t have to give a shit to the work that was done by humanities researchers because “numbers will tell me everything I need to know”.

    [1] Masculine referents 100% intended because it’s usually a guy.