Reds fanfic
- Thread starter E. Burke
- Start date
Simply there is a scientific and there is a science fiction (simplified). Both will always exist - but in different social systems, they play a different role.
Other forms of fiction exist.... I don't know how many times this argument needs to be reiterated.
So what if a science fiction writer designed a creature based on a popular hypothesis at the time. Such a creature would then be regarded as possible and therefore would be accepted in the fiction But then say that the hypothesis that the creature is an extrapolation of is disproved. Would people then stop reading it because it has become fantastical? A lot of H. G Well's works were based on the cutting edge science of his day but a lot of those ideas were later shown to be wrong (The First Men in the Moon proposes that Helium has gravity-negating powers and War of the Worlds uses a now outdated explanation of the formation of the solar system to explain why Martian civilisation is more advanced than ours on the grounds that in this model Mars was formed earlier and thus they had more time to develop).
I also don't see why something being fantastical means that it wouldn't be accepted as fiction in a Communistic society. Art and stories do not have to be realistic in the real world. They speak to people's emotions and understanding of narrative. So long as the story is internally consistent according to the rules that it sets out and is able to appeal to the emotional and narrative sensibilities of the readers it shouldn't matter how fantastical or impossible the stories are.
This is the ideal Marxist approach to fantasy, you may not like it but this is what peak socialism looks like./s
More seriously, we've had this argument so often that all I'm going to say is that neither me nor Jello are doing it your way. If you don't like it, that's quite frankly too bad but we just don't care. I have no interest in doing this argument for the sixth time so all I ask is that you drop the lifestylism and move on so we don't have another derail.
More seriously, we've had this argument so often that all I'm going to say is that neither me nor Jello are doing it your way. If you don't like it, that's quite frankly too bad but we just don't care. I have no interest in doing this argument for the sixth time so all I ask is that you drop the lifestylism and move on so we don't have another derail.
I'm not worried about the fact of fiction, but escapism. Escapism is caused by alienation.
I'm asking you this once.
Drop this lifestylism and never bring it up again please.
Didn't Marx regard alienation, or at least the sheer scale of it, was a by-product of capitalist production and that it didn't exist in pre-capitalist societies (although they had plenty of other problems that are certainly worse than alienation). In spite of this escapism was still a thing in pre-capitalist and less alienated societies. Therefore it follows that even in a post-capitalist society where the economic basis of alienation has been resolved there would still be a place for escapist fantasy.
"Before the period of developed capitalism, the division of labor was not of universal significance for the social whole, and for this reason the alienation of labor did not have the universal power that it acquired only under conditions of developed capitalism, which means that it is possible to speak of the alienation of labor in relation to pre-capitalist societies insofar as the social link imposed on these or those social groups deprived them of the possibility of "self-activity", that is, the organization of their social conditions of production according to their own, historically However, in this case there was also a "mechanical" possibility to overcome the estranged state, as a result of the escapism of individuals and groups from the social structures imposed on them, for example, emigration to undeveloped territories, as an example of such a way of overcoming the alienation of K. Marx leads the Greek colonization. "
That is, before the development of capitalism, we can find alienation in one form or another, but under capitalism a similar phenomenon permeates our whole life (in fact, as a whole, this is obvious, although it would not be possible, for example, to explain the phenomenon of God from a Marxist standpoint) .
Escapism can be defined as the withdrawal of an individual from a true being through his simulation in entertainment. It is necessary to distinguish escapism from various addictions, which are not just "escape from ...", but a pathological "craving for ...", and to something specific. The realities of the culture of the XX-XXI century allow us to talk about the alienation of leisure, in which a person does not assert himself, but denies, does not develop his physical and spiritual energy freely, but exhausts his physical nature and destroys his spiritual powers by taking reality away from reality.
Aside from what we've seen from the in-universe AH.com discussions and how let's plays are still a thing, how else do you think the butterflies have affected internet culture. Personally I think Poe's law, Godwin's law, rule 34, and rule 63 would still exist. They might be called different things though. What do you think would be different?
BP Booker
Banned
Then again, a lot of powerful people got where they are because they were born into the right circumstances - old money, being the "right" race, having the right connections - that are just simply not afforded to the vast majority of people (Mot to say that people born into privilige cant be smart, driven or moral anyways, of course). Having magic or super-powers or whatever could be an allegory to that. I mean, having what amounts to inffinite money is basically a superpower anyways
I think LoK would have worked a lot better if the gol of the Equalusts was not "eliminate bending" but rather "make everyone a bender" because thats kinda the point of equaility, everyone should have the same advantages and opportunities, not "everyone should be equally lame". Its almost petty and it makes it look as if the equalists were jealous rather than righteous.
But I think this conversation is over so I will drop it, moving on
Always disliked Godwins Law, I feel like it is almost always used to stop a conversation about how things are getting fascist in a specific context
Last edited:
Rule 34 almost certainly exists for a pretty simple reason.
Everyone who draws people also draws naked people at some point.
Everyone who draws people also draws naked people at some point.
Bookmark1995
Banned
I find the idea of Comintern becoming a unified political-economic zone like the EU to be fascinating. Of course, achieving it will probably involve a shit ton of negotiation and evolution, especially among the pathologically paranoid Soviets.
This TL can be used for exploring such hurdles, so...
Daily Worker Book Review
Andrei Gromyko, Lothar Bolz, and the Negotitations that Opened Eastern Europe
March 10, 2009
Harry Bukharin
In his new book, historian David Walter explores the consequential relationship between the two men that would transform the Soviet bloc into a zone of free travel and commerce.
Over seven decades after the horrors of the Second World War, East Germans and Soviets enjoy very close relations. East German teenagers and young adults spend their summers at Black Sea resorts, while Soviet teenagers visit the legendary East German night club scene. German tourists visit the architectural marvels of Leningrad, the city their grandparents sought to destroy, while Soviet tourists pass through Wittenburg, the birthplace of the Protestant Reformation.
It is taken for granted how only a couple of generations ago, the Soviet bloc was little more than an armed camp. The paranoid Soviet nation sought to exert influence in its newly conquered territories, not through the soft power the UASR exerted in its sphere of influence, but through armed presence in preparation for conflict with the capitalist West.
Nowhere was this more true than the DDR, which in 1971, had more Soviet soldiers living in it than Soviet civilians, and underneath the banner of socialist unity, the strains of recent history defined the Soviet treatment of its German client state.
"The Soviet soldiers patrolled the severed remain from the old fascist regime, waiting for the cancer of future to return,'
But underneath the shadow of paranoia, two men were seeking to push the past away, and pursue a future of less paranoia.
Lothar Bolz, the foreign minister of the DDR, and Andrei Gromyko, the dominating figure of Soviet foreign affairs in the Cold War era, both were working to emulate the relationship the UASR had with its Latin American allies, and create a common market and visa zone.
Walter explores the deep relationship between the two men, and their attempt at battling their superiors (as well as their own prejudices) in their desire for a truly socialist Eastern European bloc. In it, Walter paints a picture of a culture evolving from a model of authoritarianism, to one of openness and cooperation.
A much recommended read.
4 out of 5.
This TL can be used for exploring such hurdles, so...
Daily Worker Book Review
Andrei Gromyko, Lothar Bolz, and the Negotitations that Opened Eastern Europe
March 10, 2009
Harry Bukharin
In his new book, historian David Walter explores the consequential relationship between the two men that would transform the Soviet bloc into a zone of free travel and commerce.
Over seven decades after the horrors of the Second World War, East Germans and Soviets enjoy very close relations. East German teenagers and young adults spend their summers at Black Sea resorts, while Soviet teenagers visit the legendary East German night club scene. German tourists visit the architectural marvels of Leningrad, the city their grandparents sought to destroy, while Soviet tourists pass through Wittenburg, the birthplace of the Protestant Reformation.
It is taken for granted how only a couple of generations ago, the Soviet bloc was little more than an armed camp. The paranoid Soviet nation sought to exert influence in its newly conquered territories, not through the soft power the UASR exerted in its sphere of influence, but through armed presence in preparation for conflict with the capitalist West.
Nowhere was this more true than the DDR, which in 1971, had more Soviet soldiers living in it than Soviet civilians, and underneath the banner of socialist unity, the strains of recent history defined the Soviet treatment of its German client state.
"The Soviet soldiers patrolled the severed remain from the old fascist regime, waiting for the cancer of future to return,'
But underneath the shadow of paranoia, two men were seeking to push the past away, and pursue a future of less paranoia.
Lothar Bolz, the foreign minister of the DDR, and Andrei Gromyko, the dominating figure of Soviet foreign affairs in the Cold War era, both were working to emulate the relationship the UASR had with its Latin American allies, and create a common market and visa zone.
Walter explores the deep relationship between the two men, and their attempt at battling their superiors (as well as their own prejudices) in their desire for a truly socialist Eastern European bloc. In it, Walter paints a picture of a culture evolving from a model of authoritarianism, to one of openness and cooperation.
A much recommended read.
4 out of 5.
Bookmark1995
Banned
The culture of the UASR would greatly influence the progression of these things. OTL America is a somewhat puritanical, rightist, religious, and capitalist state that values individualism and self-reliance (except for plutocratic bank managers who get socialist bailouts).
The UASR is a promiscuous, humanist, statist society that values collectivism and intervening in social issues. So it may view these things much more differently than we would.
How they would, is up to your interpretation.
So for example Yaoi fanfiction would not be seen as "weird" (for lack of a better word) and 4chan would be only popular in the FBU?