I just got around to watching 'Mark takes an IQ test' and it was honestly so hilarious seeing him try to build stuff and it keeps falling apart. I really want more of exactly that kind of thing. Does anyone have suggestions?
Im considering either Math, Stats, or CS for my major. I feel like I am well informed about CS but not so much the other two. What kind of co ops have you guys done for math or stats? Did they lead to any job offers? What kind of work can you expect? These are just so broad of fields that Im having a hard time imagining how that would go
Fascism is a word which gets used a lot, a lot of times for good reason. But, it has become something of a buzzword, even among what are supposed to be principled Communist places. I will go over the broader history and tendencies of Fascism and get at an actual, tangible, practical, and universal definition, as well as explain why a lot of the other commonly used definitions are bad.
Before I give my analysis, let us go over the commonly used definitions to explain why a further analysis is even necessary:
>"Fascism is colonialism turned inwards"
This is one you may have seen a lot. It fails because by defining Fascism relative to colonial policy, you end up defining all colonial rule as Fascist in nature. Which, while a nice sentiment, is fairly useless. For instance, the logical conclusion is that Germany was Fascist from its founding up until the end of WWI where it lost its colonies, and then stopped being Fascist until the Nazis took over. It also kind of implies that countries like the UK or France have been Fascist for centuries, but at this point the definition is useless and describes nothing. The counter argument might be that its only when colonial policy is used domestically, but then I have to ask what the difference between colonial policy abroad versus domestically is, why is it Fascism when it happens to white Europeans but not Africans?
>"Fascism is when a hierarchy enforces itself using violence"
Class is a hierarchy which by nature uses force to uphold and expand itself, thus class society has always been Fascist under this definition, and thus as a word its entirely useless and describes nothing. A word isnt useful because of the emotional response it triggers, it is useful because it describes something only it can in its own way.
>Anything to do with the 14 Points
The '14 Points' of Fascism is an entirely liberal framework which looks solely at surface level qualities of movements and little else. I have not read the original book in full, but I believe the author was trying to warn against what future Fascist movements might look like, not to define Fascism as an ideology. Regardless, the points have to be applied on a purely liberal angle or else they are useless and describe either nothing or everything. For some reason this is commonly cited as a real metric, usually when someone wants to call a certain country Fascist which clearly is not by any other standard.
>"Fascism is when ultra nationalism, militarism, etc etc"
A lot of these points either refer solely to rhetoric, or are very subjectively defined. If you try and take a literal definition, you end up finding that the 'ultra nationalism' of somewhere like Germany is very similar to that of the US, and now we are describing nothing. If you take the more vibes based subjective angle, then you get to just call whatever Fascist. Definitions of this variety also fail to recognize why these traits even existed, its the equivalent of a Doctor telling you a cold is caused by coughing.
So with some of the common ones out of the way, lets do a proper Marxist analysis.
Before we can talk Fascism we need to lay out the conditions which it was created under. World War 1 saw many of the world's imperialist powers crumble, capitalism globally began to tear apart at the seams, having been pushed to its absolute limit. In Russia, Germany, and Hungary, the Communist forces seized power for the first time in the world since the Commune of Paris, Communists in Italy and France began mobilizing and organizing larger than ever, etc.
The Communists however were defeated in all places except for Russia, as we all know. These are perhaps some of the worst conditions of imperialism the world has seen, and while they got close, most Communist movements were crushed for a variety of reasons.
So now we have a contradiction. Imperialism in many of these places has been firmly defeated, the conditions for revolution ever present, but there was no successful Communist revolution anywhere but Russia. A lot of these places then existed in this odd limbo state, they were corpses of capitalism made to continue walking past their own grave. While they could be propped up for a little bit, it could not be forever. Something had to give, the Communists were building up but not faster than capitalism was crumbling. We have the void revolution was supposed to fill, but no revolution, and all we are left with is a void unfilled.
Enter Fascism. Fascism emerged as a counter revolutionary movement, it was a revolutionary movement against the revolution, or perhaps a 'negative revolution'. Fascism was the solution to this contradiction, it would rebuild the rotten corpse of capitalism by replacing its institutions, crush the Communist resistance, and rapidly reorganize society as to facilitate the supremacy of private property.
Fascism then can be defined on three counts. First, as a reaction to anti capitalism, whether it be a movement or an actual collapse of it. Second, as a 'negative revolution,' to fill whatever revolutionary void exists but remains unoccupied. Third, as the gutting and self cannibalization of the capitalist order to keep it going.
But what does this process look like? First, lets go back to how traditional capitalist regimes look like. Capitalism normally relies on liberalism for its own legitimacy. Liberalism is all about individualism and idealism, where society consists of rogue individuals vying for influence and change occurs by the merit of ideas. In reality, this just means that the individual member of the bourgeoisie has full rights over their workers, and that class character of ideas is ignored in favor of moralism. Capitalism normally builds itself based on this individualism, the ruling class as individuals act to enforce their status, with the state merely taking the role of filling in the gaps where individuals cannot reasonably act, such as when it comes to the military.
Fascism seeks to rebuild the capitalist order by replacing this fundamental pillar of liberalism with collectivism. Instead of enshrining the right of the individual member of the ruling class, individual rights are pushed aside in favor of collective action. The individual piece of private property no longer matters, instead its private property as a collective which is advanced. This means things might be nationalized away from the individual owner to be managed by the state, which is a collective of the bourgeois, for the benefit of the bourgeoisie collectively. The entire economy is reorganized under the Corporatist framework to prioritize this bourgeois collective over the individual owner.
If Communism is about the Proletariat abandoning bourgeois individualism in favor of acting united as a class to end class society, then Fascism is the bourgeoisie abandoning their own individualism in favor of uniting as a class to ensure their own survival.
Fascism then can be defined as such: Fascism is the abandonment of bourgeois individualism for bourgeois collectivism, realized through the reorganization, but ultimately the upholding of, private property. The exact details depend on the specific circumstances which gave rise to Fascism in the specific society. Fascism serves the purpose of protecting capitalism at all costs and filling a present revolutionary void.
From this, all other traits and qualities of Fascism can be derived not as fundamental defining features, but as natural conclusions of this framework. All traits of Fascism fit under this analysis to serve one of these purposes.
My biggest strengths are numbers, logic, and problem solving, though in terms of what I enjoy I lean more towards logic and problem solving. My strongest subject has consistently been math, where Im just given a problem and do it with whatever technique is relevant. I particularly enjoyed AP Calculus in high school, with how many approaches youre introduced to and how you have to not only use them correctly, but have to find which one is gonna work best. Its that process of looking at things with a clear goal and then deciding the best approach from an amount of options that excites me.
As for other things I enjoy, I really like designing and planning things. This kind of feeds into the problem solving I mentioned above, but to be able to have freedom to make my own solutions is exciting.
For my weaknesses, Im not so good at more hands on kind of things. Ive always been horrible at anything which requires me to make something with my hands, or otherwise requires more physical involvement. Im horrible at even folding paper in a neat way.
But my actual passion is music, so whatever I go for its important that I have a good work life balance so I can continue to pursue that on the side. Occasional times of heavy workload is fine so long as the average allows me to pursue what I want and to have enough time for that. The major doesnt have to be music, but it would be nice if it could lead into music somehow though again not required. As long as Im enabled to do music in my free time, Im fine.
I should also add that I will be double majoring in music regardless of what I choose. Its not a performance degree, its a liberal arts degree with an emphasis in music, so it only adds an extra year of school since half the credits are from non music classes anyway. I have to do this because I have a scholarship from the music school, so not doing a double major makes school more expensive in my case
Its also a pretty big goal of mine to live in a major city, or at least in the immediate area, since thats where the best music scenes are. Something like New York or Boston. Remote work is also a plus (though not needed if the job otherwise has me in some kind of office), and then obviously high salaries are nice, Id really like something with the realistic potential for 6 figures. I come from a poorer family and would really like to break out of that
What immediately caught my interest was computer science. Just about everything to do with the degree sounds like exactly what I want in terms of day to day work, but the prospect of going into music tech makes it even cooler to me. But, obviously the job market is really bad for that, and since I would be double majoring, I wouldnt be able to dedicate as much time to CS as others and Im concerned that would make me less competitive.
Im also considering stats or Applied Math, but since the career pathway is a bit less 'obvious' there Im not sure how exactly I could make those work and still meet my other goals
Does anyone have ideas? Id really appreciate both a major as well as more specific jobs/fields they lead into
Affordable Michelin star restaurant is probably an oxymoron, I should clarify that I am fine spending 100-150 bucks a person but dont want to go that much over. 200 a person is too much. Ideally its closer to 100 but if thats impossible I understand
Also, Im not sure how reservations work, but Im going in under 3 weeks, is it too late to actually get a reservation? We've been planning the trip for longer but I just now had the idea to go to a Michelin Star restaurant
Suggest any type of food also, Im down to try anything, but I do really like either East Asian or American (I mostly mean steak) cuisine especially, or anything seafood
This subreddit is intended to be a 'general' space for Communists to discuss and engage in. Unlike other subs, which have a weird sectarian bend, emphasis on shitposting, or have some other niche role, this is intended to be a general space for all kinds of news, discussion, memes, etc.
Basically, think r/Communism but without banning everyone.
Make sure to read the rules and check on them often, as with a new sub there will no doubt be changes as we find what works best and what our goals become
Math was always my strongesr subject in school. I used to hate it but I absolutely loved it my last couple years, especially AP Calculus. Being able to have a problem and a definite goal while still having the freedom to look at a problem and determine the best way to solve it out of all the ways I know how is genuinely pretty cool. It also has sooo many interesting and cool applications in my life, I love being able to for instance optimize what Im doing in a game using math.
Just by looking st these 3 options on their own, CS interests me the most. Being a SWE sounds like something I would absolutely enjoy doing no questions asked. The other two seem broad enough to where its not as easy to get excited
For my career goals, its really important that Im able to live in a major city. Remote work would also be really nice but the priority is making sure I can afford to live in the city. If I can do both, all the better. Ideally, 6 figures is what Im looking for and im willing to do something harder to attain that.
Also, my real passion is music. I will be double majoring in eithwr one of these and music (I have a scholarship for music so I kind of have to). Workload isnt a concern because its a general music degree not a performance one. But i still would need tk balance these two things but Im willing to put music on the back burner for some time if needed. Working on music software would be the best job for me.
For my job, a good work life balance is crucial as a result. I want time to play music
So how should I go about picking one? Does antone have any suggestions or additional insight?