Right off the gate, while we do have libraries where i live, they are mostly outdated or don't have books on controversial topics, So how does anyone find reliable information when so much of the internet is slop ๐คข and search engines only give the same top 5 "How to stuff ๐ค " websites.
I have been listening to a couple of podcasts ๐ป about debunking popular pop culture misinformed science ๐งโ๐ฌ claims(Your wrong about, Maintenance phase, If books could kill) and that got me interested in trying to research my own topics. But where does one start. I understand that there is no universal solution ๐งช , really what it takes, is alot of googling and going beyond the results first page but maybe there are some good sources?
Sharing some of what i found useful here:
-
While libraries in my area are not really an option, looking up books online is a good start. I use goodreads to look up different topics and see what the reviews are saying about the quality and reliability of the book. Its also worth fact the citations of books.
-
Turns out google is very good with finding pdfs ๐ , so add type:pdf to whatever your searching. you can also add site:.gov ๐ข to search only gov websites ,or site:.ca ๐จ๐ฆ to search websites that label themself Canada in the URL, for example.
-
Use before:, A lot people suggest that you use before:2023 to filter out most AI Slop, date before chatgpt came out, but also i have found interesting stuff when going back further like before:2015.
-
I have tried alot of different search engines and they all just serve google results. the one good one is Marginalia . Its not really reliable like say, google in certain cases is, but alot of the time will serve me new sources, its focus is on non-commercial websites
-
The last one is kinda of mixed bag(and Meta). When you ask people online for suggestions for something, like say some podcasts recommendations, they tend to give you the same five podcasts. Sometimes its something totally different but its a hit or miss most of the time.
P.S: I discovered emoji markdown just now but its kinda of lacking a bit. Still cool though,
I'm generally knowledgeable of my field of work, but I'd rather not share that and dox myself. Among subjects I'm more comfortable discussing online, I'm a bit of a Marxism nerd, sources like ProleWiki and Red Sails are usually good starting points for theory, and can help point towards primary sources in a similar way that Wikipedia can (neither are sources themselves, but frequently reference primary sources, books, etc that can be a kicking off point for in-depth study). Those aren't really what most people on this post are looking for though, I imagine.
I am open to learning about Marxism. I copied a couple of books on my countries Politics from my sister and among them are some communist books. Haven't gotten around to reading them though
Coming to you as a believer in the inherit problems of Capitalism, but who struggle to imagine a world without it(that isn't set in the past),do you have anything that's prescriptive instead of just descriptive? I have seen mountain's of critics online(mostly YouTube) but no real way forward. I aslo want to know if a communist society is achievable compared to a socialist democracy.
For starters, I compiled a basic Marxist-Leninist study guide and host it over on c/communism. The first section might be interesting for you, it's intentionally short and punchy, and you don't need to go beyond it unless you want to.
That all being said, the easiest and most intuitive way to imagine it is as a continuation of the increasing interdependence of humanity as has happened with capitalism, where production has been socialized globally but distribution remains private, into one where the social surplus created by society is controlled and directed by those producing it instead. Essentially, an increase in interconnectedness, and a full collectivization of production and distribution globally.
That's communism, a global system. However, the process of building that comes from socialism first. Socialism is essentially where public ownership is the principal, ie rising and dominant aspect, of the economy, and the working classes control the state. Socialism is a transition to communism. Socialism begins in each country, communism arises from socialist countries gradually developing advanced production and stitching themselves all together over a long period of time.
Markets essentially "socialize" production, creating an interconnected system. Central planning cannot work without highly developed productive forces at a large scale. In this way, capitalism prepares the ground for socialism. Just as capitalism prepares the ground for socialism, so too does socialism prepare the ground for communism. Most revolutions have happened in colonial countries revolting against colonialism, so this means they have had to take more drastic measures when it comes to creating self-sufficiency, with very underdeveloped productive forces (largely agrarian instead of industrial).
That's the basics of it! Does that answer your question?