212
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
212 points (99.5% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15908 readers
700 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
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 ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
it was workers destroying the products of their own labor instead of seizing them from the bourgeoisie because pro-labor movements before Marx not yet developed an internally consistent theory of surplus value. it was also not anti-industrialist. It was simple flash-in-the-pan anger at technological unemployment. They were not opposed to technology in other areas of society outside their craft. So it was a form of craft consciousness, as Debs calls it, rather than class consciousness.
maybe but they did focus their destruction on the industrial machines. It wasn't a very organised movement and it didn't have a well thought out stance on things but it was an anti-industrial movement.