Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

The version of the audio book I posted is a little rough, a decent amount of background noise, and the encoding leaves a lot to be desired. There is one on piratebay, no idea if it's the same audio, though it looks to be audible rip.

pirate bay . org / torrent/ 13872739 / Debt__The_First_5_000_Years_-_David_Graeber

I'm on Chapter 3 already. As far as the book goes, it is enlightening so far. Especially the first chapter with the facts about the IMF. I had understood that the IMF was Pretty Fucking Evil� but things like how countries have paid the original principle multiple times over etc.

Just finished the first chapter. I didn't know that there were credit systems in place before our understanding of the monetary system was used. I'm glad it'll also talk about the relations between state and capitalist, as I've been looking for more research to help me there.

I'm liking the book too. Good job with the first pick, comrade.

What I get from chapter 1 is that we intuitively perceive debt as being a moral issue, as we can see from the reaction of the girl at the beginning when he suggested that the third world's debt should be cancelled. Inversely, we also talk about morality in terms of debt and repayment, like in the story of Hiromushime where she had to pay her "karmic debt" for being merciless towards her debtors. The difference between debt and obligation is that debt is quantifiable whereas obligation can be something vaguer like returning a favour. His main thesis is that debt is a result of a society based on violence. He thinks money acts as an abstraction of the world that allows us to ignore social relations by instead seeing them as mathematics.

Anyone know of anything that elaborates on Graeber's assertion that "primitive communism" is a myth? (p. 95)

Hello, I have just joined.

One think I think is super interesting and important in Debt is the concept of everyday communism. "The peasants' visions of communistic brotherhood did not come out of nowhere. They were rooted in real daily experience: of the maintenance of common fields and forests, of everyday cooperation and neighborly solidarity. It is out of such homely experience of everyday communism that grand mythic visions are always built." (326) "Society was rooted above in the "love and amity" of friends and kin, and it found expression in all those forms of everyday communism (helping neighbors with chores, providing milk or cheese for old widows) that were seen to flow from it." (330) "If someone fixing a broken water pipe says, 'Hand me the wrench,' his co-worker will not, generally speaking, say, 'And what do I get for it?' (...) The reason is simple efficiency (...): if you really care about getting something done, the most efficient way to go about it is obviously to allocate tasks by ability and give people whatever they need to do them." (95-6) "small courtesies like asking for a light, or even for a cigarette. It seems more legitimate to ask a stranger for a cigarette than for an equivalent amount of cash, or even food; in fact, if one has been identified as a fellow smoker, it's rather difficult to refuse such a request. In such cases—a match, a piece of information, holding the elevator—one might say the "from each" element is so minimal that most of us comply without even thinking about it. Conversely, the same is true if another person's need—even a stranger's—is particularly spectacular or extreme: if he is drowning, for example. If a child has fallen onto the subway tracks, we assume that anyone who is capable of helping her up will do so." (97) "communism is the foundation of all human sociability. It is what makes society possible. There is always an assumption that anyone who is not actually an enemy can be expected to act on the principle of "from each according to their abilities," at least to an extent" (96) The sociology of everyday communism is a potentially enormous field, but one which, owing to our peculiar ideological blinders, we have been unable to write about because we have been largely unable to see it." (101)

What do you think about this? Lifestylist garbage? Interesting way to look at the concept of communism?

Its not lifestylist in the slightest.

He is saying that the way humans interact on a personal day to day level is mostly communistic. If you think about communism as any society that adheres to the maxim 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' Something basic like, 'Pass the salt' which you would do for free, adheres to this maxim. The person closest to the salt has the ability to pass it, the person who does not has need of it, so the one with the ability passes to the one in need. Both parties know that if the situation was reversed the other would also pass the salt.

This is labour, in its strictest sense, a labour agreement where two parties agree to work for each other for mutual benefit, that is the essence of communism, in this instance so commonly held that it goes unspoken. At no point do I ever set up a salt passing pact prior to passing it or having it passed to me. If you pass the salt, you are a communist at heart.

Will these small infographs help to make it easier to understand this book and spread it in leftylel?

JustHugitNigga wrote: "
Will these small infographs help to make it easier to understand this book and spread it in leftylel?"

Bretty gud comrade

So are we gonna discuss Debt before we pick a new book?

TamRab wrote: "JustHugitNigga wrote: "
Will these small infographs help to make it easier to understand this book and spread it in leftylel?"

Bretty gud comrade

S..."

it would be much easier if it was a thread on leftylel tbh famlam

Well I guess to start, what did everybody think of it? What was the most important argument he made and why was he so good at making it?

Did the group die already? ;(

Just finished it. The ending had pretty much nothing to do with debt, it was just autistic screeching about neoliberalism and I loved it.

Is anyone still active here?