It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
The Communist Manifesto? Is that a video game?
Leon Trotsky? What's his Twitter handle?
Antonio Gramsci? Did he invent Instagram?
me, before federation: "fuck dude, I've gotta skim through these books I read way back when, wanna be on my top form during arguments with libs"
me, now: "oh. these people haven't read books since high school, and even in high school they were 'the curtains are just blue' dweebs"
oh. these people haven't read books since high school
Not true, they've read Harry Potter
60 times each
ah, but it drops down to single digits when you stop counting the movie marathons
they saw “young adult” and thought they had to be 18 to read it
Given how much cringe YA novels are generally packed with, I'd say that's a rare good call on their part.
the real good call would be avoiding it entirely. but yeah, i prob could have done without reading A Song of Ice and Fire at 14 with all of the weird sex pest shit GRRM wrote in
Off topic: The term "sex pest" refers to someone who pesters for sex, i.e. persistently asks or makes advances even if the other person said they aren't interested or are specifically averse to this person. It's a form of badgering that is functionally aimed at wearing someone down until they consent despite not wanting to because they feel pressured or are sick of dealing with this person putting them in that position but don't have a way to shut them out. It's a specific group of abusive behaviors.
A violent rapist is not a sex pest, and the type of marital rape seen in ASOIF is also closer to that than pestering. What ASOIF has is not sex pest shit, it is rape shit.
did not know this, thank you! i thought it was a synonym of sex predator
but yeah, the rape is disgusting, especially when considering the age of the victims. GRRM has no excuse
Off topic: The term "sex pest" refers to someone who pesters for sex, i.e. persistently asks or makes advances even if the other person said they aren't interested or are specifically averse to this person.
This is not really how any British people I've ever known (and I've known a few cuz I was an exchange student for a bit) used the term and I think it originated there. So...
The power of perspective
Instagramsci 
Jokes aside, we might have better success with Parenti or asking them to watch Klein's "Shock Doctrine" for a quick primer
Agreed, maybe add in David Graeber's 'Bullshit Jobs' and 'Debt: The First 5,000 Years' as a starting point towards leftist ideas. It might be a good idea to create a 'leftist 101' reading list to ease them into it. Theory is great, but it tends to scare newcomers.
Bullshit Jobs has a lot to say about the immediate experiences of most first world workers. Debt is very readable and important, but it's also abstract and a fuckin doorstopper. Like based on the title alone I don't know that most normies would have an interest in what presents itself as an economics textbook.
bullshit jobs also comes as a much shorter article that introduces the book, which is incredibly useful. in fact reading that article when i was 15 is what really started my radicalisation and lead me to reading theory. the key to cracking libs is just letting them know that yes, that vague feeling they have is right, something is wrong, and people (graeber or perenti at first, then marx/lenin/etc) know why. bullshit jobs is fucking great for that.
Blackshirts and reds is an awesome polemic. It's exciting to read and very engaging. The assassination of Julius Caesar may also be worth suggesting as a starting point for some kinds of people because it is about a time and place far away, and so is less ideologically threatening than the story of the allies subordinating nazis into western anticommunist terrorism.
Good recommendations! Blackshirts and Reds is 
Hot take: telling a lib to read State and Revolution probably won't work or radicalize them.
Agreed. The Lib --> Leftist pipeline for westerners needs to start with youtube videos that seem inoffensive on the surface, like Second Thought, Hakim, etc. Then after the more approachable video content, they might be willing to dig into theory. It's like trying to convert someone to Christianity by telling them to read the Book of Revelations.
Honestly, Second Thought is what started my lib->leftist pipeline. I owe them so much, lmao
Because they won't read it anyway?
State and Rev is mostly a DemSoc vs RevSoc debate along with theoretical details on the latter, it's not a "self-identifying liberal" vs socialist thing.
It's a common but unproductive habit to wave favored books at people like they are scripture. I think State and Rev is great, but I would never tell someone to read it as a first Marxist work.
Yeah no one really reads theory until they're already a socialist and are curious to learn more about it
"Let's all rush to judgment, yeah" says guy who rushed to judgment
https://hexbear.net/comment/3708784
Be nice to them, they're just not as submerged in these things as we are.
The average non-marxist has probably only read Marx and Engels' introductory works and maybe a little bit of Lenin.
e: I know there's nothing that really indicates this but I was joking
The average non-Marxist has heard of the Communist Manifesto and thinks that is the extent of the philosophical canon. The average Liberal has not even read any Liberal philosophy, like Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Paine, etc.
The average non-marxist doesn't know that "Capital" and "The Communist Manifesto" are different things, much less that the latter is a pamphlet and not a book.
100%
I remember reading the communist manifesto in university twice because I was sure I must have missed something. (This was extra curricular, I was in engineering) Like it was fine, but it didn't really live up to my expectations of reframing history by analyzing it through the lens of class.
I only recently figured out that it wasn't Capital. (It was before I read your post but probably within the last year, so ~15 years from when I read the manifesto).
I haven't gotten around to reading Capital, would it work as an audio book?
I haven't gotten around to reading Capital, would it work as an audio book?
Here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUW6cjZgi7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4Cpj_wXF88
I would also recommend David Harvey's supplemental explanations of Capital, he is very down to earth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5vu4MpYgUo&list=PLWvnUfModHP9Ci8M1g39l4AZgK6YLCXd0
Reminds me, I've been thinking about pivoting to audiobooks since I do delivery driving for a living. Wouldn't be able to focus totally on the material, but possibly more worthwhile as learning material than podcasts.
I want to say Capital was serialized in magazines in France for similar reasons?
Capital is pretty difficult, though if you're enthusiastic than go for it. I just thought I should include what I said to the OOP:
Personally, I think the best introductory work for someone who doesn't have the patience for The Principles of Communism (and I don't have that patience myself) is Engels' Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, here as text and here as an excellent audiobook.
It's personally my favorite audiobook (not that I listen to a ton), but that's because I think the reader's dry tone is charming and works well with the type of humor Engels occasionally employs.
They are way more likely to have read Voltaire or even Montaigne than they are Montesquieu unless he substantially overlaps with their field of study, at least to the best of my memory. Swift is another.
I thought it was a great joke.
thank you, that's kind of you to say
Relevant xkcd?
i can't find it now but yeah :p
found it!
In what country? In the USA, a lot of people don't read books unless it's required for school or work. If they do read for pleasure, it's often young adult, bs 'self help' (ie Rich Dad, Poor Dad), or shallow non fiction that reinforces what they already believe.
i was doin a dumb joke sorry
As others mentioned, you are vastly overestimating the literacy rate of average people. People talk about 95%+ literacy rates in developed countries and this is true in that the majority of people recognize basic words, but this level of emergent or basic literacy is insufficient in the context of political understanding. In most of the west, about 50% of the populace is below level 3 literacy per piaac definitions (see link below).
Comparison of some developed countries WRT literacy levels https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/adlt-lowlit-aspx/
Definitions of piaac literacy levels (near the bottom, press the plus) - note the details of the definitions, effectively level 4-5 literacy is required for meaningful political understanding, let alone analysis https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/measure.asp
Gramsci? thats like the metric system?
Gramsci is the abbreviation for Gram Science, the study of mass.
Libs love to flaunt their L's for some reason.
"I'm actually too important to bother knowing things. Honestly, I'm a little embarrassed for you for taking the time to read something."
Huh I wonder if there was any way I could click a link and find out what someone was referring to?
Maybe in the future, but it is impossible now so I shall remain ignorant thanks to your inability to describe something that you provided a link to that had a full description.
I bet they've read the entire Harry Potter series 3 times though
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain taught me everything I need to know about revenge as a motivator. Namely that it's cool and good and drives you to clean up landmines