Molossus Spondee
@molossus-spondee.bsky.social
Reposted by Molossus Spondee
It's not directly commodity fetishism and brown-nosing people who dress fancy.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
November 11, 2025 at 4:26 AM
It's not directly commodity fetishism and brown-nosing people who dress fancy.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
People think the problem with Carl Schmitt is the state of exception. But IMO the rule of law is itself incredibly oppressive and asinine.
It's the combination of the rule of law and the state of exception, civil and criminal disputes which is incredibly assholeish.
It's the combination of the rule of law and the state of exception, civil and criminal disputes which is incredibly assholeish.
November 11, 2025 at 4:43 AM
People think the problem with Carl Schmitt is the state of exception. But IMO the rule of law is itself incredibly oppressive and asinine.
It's the combination of the rule of law and the state of exception, civil and criminal disputes which is incredibly assholeish.
It's the combination of the rule of law and the state of exception, civil and criminal disputes which is incredibly assholeish.
Anyhow it's absolutely exhausting being hypervigilant.
You can't relate to others person to person but either as so-called "equal" property owners or as enemies.
You can't relate to others person to person but either as so-called "equal" property owners or as enemies.
November 11, 2025 at 4:35 AM
Anyhow it's absolutely exhausting being hypervigilant.
You can't relate to others person to person but either as so-called "equal" property owners or as enemies.
You can't relate to others person to person but either as so-called "equal" property owners or as enemies.
Not trying to imply civil law is better than criminal law. Both frameworks of social engagement are fucked but in different ways.
It's John Locke's state of nature and state of war.
You might call it the liberal and fascist states.
It's John Locke's state of nature and state of war.
You might call it the liberal and fascist states.
November 11, 2025 at 4:33 AM
Not trying to imply civil law is better than criminal law. Both frameworks of social engagement are fucked but in different ways.
It's John Locke's state of nature and state of war.
You might call it the liberal and fascist states.
It's John Locke's state of nature and state of war.
You might call it the liberal and fascist states.
It's not directly commodity fetishism and brown-nosing people who dress fancy.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
November 11, 2025 at 4:26 AM
It's not directly commodity fetishism and brown-nosing people who dress fancy.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
It's the difference between a civil trial and a criminal trial.
Joe vs Jane and Joe vs the State.
Criminal trials are stacked against you in ways that civil trials are not.
idk there's just a particular pervasive style of discussion and relating between people which treats social relations as between property rights of people as opposed to between people themselves.
It's just very jarring once you notice it.
It's just very jarring once you notice it.
November 11, 2025 at 4:18 AM
idk there's just a particular pervasive style of discussion and relating between people which treats social relations as between property rights of people as opposed to between people themselves.
It's just very jarring once you notice it.
It's just very jarring once you notice it.
I mean the actual legal logic is legal humanism IG
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, legal humanism
Anyhow socialism is a material base.
What I want is a certain kind of legal ideology.
Not convinced democratic centralism is the ideal foundation for socialist legal logic.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, legal humanism
Anyhow socialism is a material base.
What I want is a certain kind of legal ideology.
Not convinced democratic centralism is the ideal foundation for socialist legal logic.
November 11, 2025 at 4:14 AM
I mean the actual legal logic is legal humanism IG
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, legal humanism
Anyhow socialism is a material base.
What I want is a certain kind of legal ideology.
Not convinced democratic centralism is the ideal foundation for socialist legal logic.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, legal humanism
Anyhow socialism is a material base.
What I want is a certain kind of legal ideology.
Not convinced democratic centralism is the ideal foundation for socialist legal logic.
Replacing the state with liberalism or maybe humanism almost works.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, liberalism
Sometimes the problem isn't sexism or racism it's really a deeper issue of liberalism is almost correct.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, liberalism
Sometimes the problem isn't sexism or racism it's really a deeper issue of liberalism is almost correct.
November 11, 2025 at 4:08 AM
Replacing the state with liberalism or maybe humanism almost works.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, liberalism
Sometimes the problem isn't sexism or racism it's really a deeper issue of liberalism is almost correct.
The family, imperialism, capitalism
Sex, race, liberalism
Sometimes the problem isn't sexism or racism it's really a deeper issue of liberalism is almost correct.
I do really like Pashukanis' "The General Theory of Law and Marxism".
www.marxists.org/archive/pash...
It boils down to a more general notion of bourgeois democracy that can apply to organizations such as unions or even informal meetings.
www.marxists.org/archive/pash...
It boils down to a more general notion of bourgeois democracy that can apply to organizations such as unions or even informal meetings.
Evgeny Pashukanis: General Theory of Law and Marxism (1924)
Evgeny Pashukanis: The General Theory of Law and Marxism (1924)
www.marxists.org
November 11, 2025 at 4:00 AM
I do really like Pashukanis' "The General Theory of Law and Marxism".
www.marxists.org/archive/pash...
It boils down to a more general notion of bourgeois democracy that can apply to organizations such as unions or even informal meetings.
www.marxists.org/archive/pash...
It boils down to a more general notion of bourgeois democracy that can apply to organizations such as unions or even informal meetings.
So you have the material base such as the family or imperialism. And you have the superstructure such as sex or race. There's something deeper than just capitalism and the state facilitating political repression through sex and race.
November 11, 2025 at 3:57 AM
So you have the material base such as the family or imperialism. And you have the superstructure such as sex or race. There's something deeper than just capitalism and the state facilitating political repression through sex and race.
It might just be the area I live in that has a strong Anarchist/Social Fascist bent.
November 11, 2025 at 3:01 AM
It might just be the area I live in that has a strong Anarchist/Social Fascist bent.
Just a reality to acknowledge that socialism isn't very popular in the imperial core.
It's not a matter of selling socialism. Cultural hegemony isn't quite how it works either.
It's not a matter of selling socialism. Cultural hegemony isn't quite how it works either.
November 11, 2025 at 2:04 AM
Just a reality to acknowledge that socialism isn't very popular in the imperial core.
It's not a matter of selling socialism. Cultural hegemony isn't quite how it works either.
It's not a matter of selling socialism. Cultural hegemony isn't quite how it works either.
I don't mean the Democrat party. Republicans are a kind of liberal.
It's annoying but you just have to be a little quirky to be a socialist in the imperial core.
It's annoying but you just have to be a little quirky to be a socialist in the imperial core.
November 11, 2025 at 1:57 AM
I don't mean the Democrat party. Republicans are a kind of liberal.
It's annoying but you just have to be a little quirky to be a socialist in the imperial core.
It's annoying but you just have to be a little quirky to be a socialist in the imperial core.
Not a fan of the TWist line that workers in the imperial core aren't exploited. However, the exploitation of workers in the imperial core by the capitalists is not yet the principal contradiction IMO.
Consequently, the revolution must be prepared by the lumpenprole who commit class suicide.
Consequently, the revolution must be prepared by the lumpenprole who commit class suicide.
November 11, 2025 at 1:50 AM
Not a fan of the TWist line that workers in the imperial core aren't exploited. However, the exploitation of workers in the imperial core by the capitalists is not yet the principal contradiction IMO.
Consequently, the revolution must be prepared by the lumpenprole who commit class suicide.
Consequently, the revolution must be prepared by the lumpenprole who commit class suicide.
The individualists won't lead the revolution but they can help prepare the ground and recruit the first collectivists.
It's a little related to class suicide. I think Amilcar Cabral talks about that stuff. But it's reversed in the imperial core. The lumpenprole will need to commit class suicide.
It's a little related to class suicide. I think Amilcar Cabral talks about that stuff. But it's reversed in the imperial core. The lumpenprole will need to commit class suicide.
November 11, 2025 at 1:46 AM
The individualists won't lead the revolution but they can help prepare the ground and recruit the first collectivists.
It's a little related to class suicide. I think Amilcar Cabral talks about that stuff. But it's reversed in the imperial core. The lumpenprole will need to commit class suicide.
It's a little related to class suicide. I think Amilcar Cabral talks about that stuff. But it's reversed in the imperial core. The lumpenprole will need to commit class suicide.
People tend to moralize this sort of stuff, it's just the material and subjective conditions we have to work with.
The normal people will get on board and end up leading the revolution eventually as contradictions sharpen.
IDK the role the pariahs have to play for now.
The normal people will get on board and end up leading the revolution eventually as contradictions sharpen.
IDK the role the pariahs have to play for now.
November 11, 2025 at 1:42 AM
People tend to moralize this sort of stuff, it's just the material and subjective conditions we have to work with.
The normal people will get on board and end up leading the revolution eventually as contradictions sharpen.
IDK the role the pariahs have to play for now.
The normal people will get on board and end up leading the revolution eventually as contradictions sharpen.
IDK the role the pariahs have to play for now.
Either the pariahs protect themselves by fawning over everybody else or they protect themselves by isolating themselves.
It's not really a conscious choice just how your childhood shakes out mostly.
Unfortunately, some people have a tendency to call everything they don't like bourgeois.
It's not really a conscious choice just how your childhood shakes out mostly.
Unfortunately, some people have a tendency to call everything they don't like bourgeois.
November 11, 2025 at 1:37 AM
Either the pariahs protect themselves by fawning over everybody else or they protect themselves by isolating themselves.
It's not really a conscious choice just how your childhood shakes out mostly.
Unfortunately, some people have a tendency to call everything they don't like bourgeois.
It's not really a conscious choice just how your childhood shakes out mostly.
Unfortunately, some people have a tendency to call everything they don't like bourgeois.
The bourgeoisie are individualist because they are exploiters who are paranoid and hateful of the people they exploit.
The proletariat tend collectivist because they have solidarity against the capitalists.
The pariahs tend to be hyper-individualist or hyper-collectivist.
The proletariat tend collectivist because they have solidarity against the capitalists.
The pariahs tend to be hyper-individualist or hyper-collectivist.
November 11, 2025 at 1:34 AM
The bourgeoisie are individualist because they are exploiters who are paranoid and hateful of the people they exploit.
The proletariat tend collectivist because they have solidarity against the capitalists.
The pariahs tend to be hyper-individualist or hyper-collectivist.
The proletariat tend collectivist because they have solidarity against the capitalists.
The pariahs tend to be hyper-individualist or hyper-collectivist.
Anyhow the communists are weird and unpleasant and "not normal."
And some people paint this as a bourgeois bias but really it's because all the "normal" people are liberals.
And some people paint this as a bourgeois bias but really it's because all the "normal" people are liberals.
November 11, 2025 at 1:27 AM
Anyhow the communists are weird and unpleasant and "not normal."
And some people paint this as a bourgeois bias but really it's because all the "normal" people are liberals.
And some people paint this as a bourgeois bias but really it's because all the "normal" people are liberals.
The Democrackkka Fully Automated Luxury Gay Military Keynesianism is almost a thing what with Pete Buttigieg and all.
idk it just depends
idk it just depends
November 10, 2025 at 11:33 PM
The Democrackkka Fully Automated Luxury Gay Military Keynesianism is almost a thing what with Pete Buttigieg and all.
idk it just depends
idk it just depends
idk like you can see it happening with Raytheon and so on but it's just not a thing yet
idk if I can give an objective measure for when a political movement turns toxic
idk if I can give an objective measure for when a political movement turns toxic
November 10, 2025 at 11:28 PM
idk like you can see it happening with Raytheon and so on but it's just not a thing yet
idk if I can give an objective measure for when a political movement turns toxic
idk if I can give an objective measure for when a political movement turns toxic