/lit/ - Literature

Does great literature tell some insight or wisdom or is it a midwit thing to share life hacks in literature?

>>18016195
It's stunted by an absolute moralism. Entertaining, but you're fooling yourself if you think there is something deeper than its place in the civilization meta i.e. endlessly manufactured never gets old hamburger tier consumables.

>>15544847
>when their only literary icon in hundreds of years

Since /lit/ is being brigaded by 14 year old traditionalists let's get a /leftylit/ up and running!

Is truth true?

>>12911541
Actually Marx and Engels refuted this misunderstanding of their work as "deterministic" profusely. Here is what Engels stated in his "Letter to J. Bloch":

"I qualify your first major proposition as follows: According to the materialistic conception of history, the production and reproduction of real life constitutes in the last instance the determining factor of history. Neither Marx nor I ever maintained more. Now when someone comes along and distorts this to mean that the economic factor is the sole determining factor, he is converting the former proposition into a meaningless, abstract and absurd phrase. The economic situation is the basis but the various factors of the superstructure – the political forms of the class struggles and its results – constitutions, etc., established by victorious classes after hard-won battles – legal forms, and even the reflexes of all these real struggles in the brain of the participants, political, jural, philosophical theories, religious conceptions and their further development into systematic dogmas – all these exercize an influence upon the course of historical struggles, and in many cases determine for the most part their form."

So here is Engels explicitly stating that historical materialism is not meant to be deterministic, for anybody interested. This non-determining superstructure is what allowed so many critical theories to proliferate in the 20th century and analyze culture and media in meaningful ways.

Source: https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/ni/vol01/no03/engels.htm

To anyone interested in Marx or socialist literature, if you're actually interested in educated takes on this stuff you should go to /leftypol/ .It's basically filled with insanely educated NEETs that spend all day writing essay length investigations and discussions into marxism and marxist literature. There's some hardcore retard tankies but they're always willing to have a good faith discussion about this stuff.

>>12444059
>If the party and political hierarchy is abolished during the process of revolution, who'd react in case of a counter-revolution?
Well this answer differs depending on who you ask. For Marx it seems that in the "Critique of the Gotha Program" that there is supposed to be a transition phase before "communism" (an economic stage of society defined by total abundance and such) where there would necessitate a dictatorship of the proletariat until society can reach its apex. Keep in mind that "dictatorship" and "party" and such are vague - for example dictatorship doesn't mean an authoritarian state in 19th century english, it means "to dictate" as in the proletariat ought to have class dominance in society for this transition period. How this is achieved varies in interpretation among all marxists.

>Also once communism is established, how do you keep people from forming a new class system?
The idea is supposed to be that society forms in response to the productive power of society - if you read up on his theory of history (probably the most rich part of his philosophy imo even if its flawed) it will explain why this is impossible. For example who's to stop us from creating feudal economic relations in the 21st century? Well its not who is to stop us per say, but rather that at this stage in economic history it would be irrelevant and a hinderance to our society if we adopted relations that are suited to a completely different economic reality. Likewise marx thinks that under communism this would hold true - how could we have bourgeois private property if there was absolute abundance of all resources, "from each according to their ability to each according to their need"?

Hope that maybe explains a bit. This book is a bad intro to his theories desu and if you wanna get what he's saying you need to read about historical materialism. I would reccomend Elster's book "An Introduction to Marx"