been thinking about online disagreement lately and i've arrived at the unfortunate conclusion that it's contextual and conditions for positively evaluating a particular method of engagement are not antecedently specifiable
i will say however that my reflection was spurred by being impressed with the futility in certain adversarial interactions and wishing that people took advantage of more creative and indirect methods.
on the other hand, i've had a number of thoughtful and expository engagements lately that felt appropriate and kind. and further still, i still maintain that there are plenty of occasions where overt confrontation is beneficial:
to defend indirect engagement for a moment: partly it's because i think squabbling can sometimes preclude the full expression and development of one's own perspective, and partially it's a matter of some positions best being best expressed in the tone "try thinking of it this way"
over the years i've also become increasingly impressed with all the ways in which i can harm those i care for during the heat of passion. i've won plenty of arguments that have lost me plenty of friends, and i can tell you which constituent i recall more vividly.
marx's value theory is not trying to establish an operational standard for price at all, it's explaining the process of equalization of different forms of labor that actually take place
The object of Marx's theory of value was not exploitation or prices, but labor itself. Marx wasn’t searching for a price determinant and finding the answer in labor. Rather, he was trying to figure out why labor takes on the form that it does in capitalism and what consequences follow from this.
i mean its not even esoteric he just has pretty solid conceptual clarity, which is a massive triumph in comparison to the quality of marxist thought going on at the time
THE RELATIONS BETWEEN ABSTRACT LABOR AND VALUE CANNOT BE THOUGHT OF AS RELATIONS BETWEEN PHYSICAL CAUSES AND PHYSICAL EFFECTS. VALUE IS THE MATERIAL EXPRESSION OF SOCIAL LABOR, IN THE SPECIFIC FORM WHICH LABOR POSSESS IN A COMMODITY ECONOMY, I.E. ABSTRACT LABOR
Political economy has indeed analysed value and its magnitude, however incompletely, and has uncovered the content concealed within these forms. But it has never once asked the question why this content has assumed that particular form, that is to say,
why labour is expressed in value, and why the measurement of labour by its duration is expressed in the magnitude of the value of the product.
- Marx, Capital Vol. 1, 173-174
the theoretically sensitized lover constantly works with the reflexive instruments of ambiguity and irony, relativization and distance, the endless play of “as if"
significantly modified quote from Raymond Geuss, "The Actual and Another Modernity: Order and Imagination in Don Quixote" in Politics and the Imagination, pg. 79.
i used a friend's alt client that they're keeping somewhat priv, but links themselves are just facets so you could login to pdsls and create a post record manually as a middle ground (yes it's painful but i have done this before)
For we are not chasing after some dream of justice; we are doing what must be done, what cannot be left undone. The old world dug its own grave, and is now falling in. Let’s give it a little shove.
- Victor Serge, Conquered City, pg 37
reference to Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, On Old and New Tablets, §20 "O my brothers, am I cruel? But I say: what is falling, we should still push."