this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
110 points (99.1% liked)
Slop.
864 readers
398 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
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 bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Colleges are largely liberal and most serious Marxist/socialist scholars are blacklisted (Parenti, Graeber, Lady Izdihar) but anyone who says "don't go to college" is someone I don't trust. College isn't the only path to careers and isn't the only place people learn. Community colleges offering welding and mechanic certifications are also just as legit as universities. That kind of elitism is toxic. But people who have the means to go do learn and usually become better humans because of it, even if from nothing else but osmosis and being around different groups of people. College liberals arts professors working as adjuncts at 4 different institutions simultaneously are not class enemies. There's huge differences in degree from those to ivy professors spending all their time getting MIC grants for weapons research.
Ibrahim Traore has a geology degree. Xi Jinping has a degree in chemical engineering and further education in Marxist theory. Graeber had a degree in anthropology. Castro had a law degree. There's a reason education is one of the first things socialists focus on after taking power.
Also "marxist professor" could mean they're an econ ghoul who knows all about Marx in theory, but are not a Marxist themselves. There's a lot of those.
As a marxist who studied economics, I can assure you that there are almost no econ-professors who know anything about Marx at all. During my entire degree, I saw +/-5 pages about marx, which was given in a "history of economics"-course in a "Economics used to be shitty like this, but now, we have figured out the best way to model everything: the neoclassical way"-way. The fact that I even had a "history of economics"-course means that my university is considered quite heterodox and openminded compared to the standard situation in many econ)departments.
The rare marxist econmist you do see, is someone who I would consider very valuable, even if they're not engaging with activism or party building. For example, Anwar Shaikh, produces extremely interesting stuff.
Fair, I could have been off base with that last comment. He was talked about quite a bit in my philosophy degree, and I know was also discussed in religion classes, sociology, and even a little bit in business to the point that one of my business major friends was reading Capital. But he was completely uninterested in the "social or moral" content, and wanted only to know what as said about "the economy". So I know it happens where some majors are exposed, maybe think they know a lot about Marx, but don't engage with his work in any meaningful context or in a very deep manner.
To be fair, while ignoring the social content is ridiculous, a central element of Marxism is that it doesn't base itself on moral arguments, however morally passionate its authors obviously are.
Sure. They just pretty explicitly rejected the idea of reading anything else because they weren't interested in what people interpreted form his work or anything. Like reading Marx was pure and appropriate to their finance degree, but reading anything based on his work was not because then it entered the forbidden realm of politics.
That person should really be encouraged to keep reading Marx, you cannot not learn anything from it :)
Yeah, there's a vast difference between community colleges and some shitty private university that's full of nepos and legacies. Community colleges tend to be more working class due to not being outrageously expensive. Plus, you get a more representative societal slice. You have young people who are there to transfer to another university after getting their AA degree, you have middle-aged people (re)entering college to get a degree for career advancement, and so on. The professors at community colleges are a lot less dipshitty in terms of accommodating your schedule since the vast majority of community college students are working.