Louis Althusser was a philosopher who wrote about Marxist theory.

His
most important contribution is the book "Ideology and Ideological State
Apparatuses". He argues that thoughts or ideas don't just come from our
minds, but are shaped by society's practices and tools like schools,
media and religion. This shapes what we believe in (our ideology) which
can lead to political struggles between classes of people. Louis
Althusser lived in France during World War II where he joined the
Resistance against Nazi occupation before becoming an influential member
of French Communist Party later on his life.
This is a book with lots of big words about ideology and the state. It
was made in Istanbul by some people who do printing, design, and writing.
The person who wrote it is named Louis Althusser. He talks about how
things are made again and again (like factories), how governments work,
and something called "ideology" which means ideas that aren't real but we
believe anyway. There are three parts to this book: one talking about
notes on research; another part discussing Marxism (which is like
communism); the third section looks at history through an ideological
lens!
The article talks about why the Soviet Union didn't succeed in creating
socialism, and how ideology played a role. The author believes that just
focusing on economics isn't enough to understand society; we need to look
at ideas too. They argue that some people believe everything is
determined by money (which they call "economism"), but this idea doesn't
explain everything. In other articles, Althusser explains how Marxist
theory was turned into something else ("political economy") and
criticizes Stalin's approach to science which separated it from politics
instead of seeing them as connected.
A man named Althusser wrote about something called "ideology" which is
important to understand in Marxism. He said that ideology is one of three
parts that make up a society, along with economics and politics. Ideology
has its own power and can change how people think. It's not just an
extension of the economy like some people believe. This idea helps us
better understand why things happen in societies, beyond just money or
politics controlling everything."Ideology can shape people's values,
beliefs and behaviors which in turn influence the decisions they make as
individuals or groups.
The author says that what we see in religion is the opposite of what's
real. They believe ideas are not just reflections of physical things, but
they're also material themselves. This means changing society has to
involve changing ideology too because it plays an important role and
comes from practical social practices like language or family life which
determine people’s roles within a given community formation based on
productive forces’ level development. The writer thinks individuals can't
be reduced only to their relations with others as these relationships
already define them beforehand due to those practices' determinism over
individual lives involved therein (Althusser versus humanistapproaches).
Ideology is how people see themselves in society. It gives us different
roles to play, like being Muslim or Turkish. When someone calls out to
you and says "Hey," they are making you the subject of their sentence.
The names we're called show what kind of things we do, like praying or
voting for a certain party. Everyone has their own way of doing things
that fit with the big ideas in our culture - religion, politics and more!
But sometimes this doesn't work well because everyone changes all the
time!
Muslim women who are involved in the current "revival" of Islam sometimes
show their protest by dressing conservatively. However, they still
struggle to find a place within the role that Islam gives to women since
it contradicts with what is expected from them as activists. This
contradiction exists and may lead to potential changes but can also
remain hidden under ideological structures. The importance of ideology
increases when class struggles arise due to accumulated contradictions
between reality and ideology which cannot be judged as right or wrong
according to Althusser's definition of an ideology concept because people
define themselves through ideologies based on how they perceive reality,
and therefore may resist any changes that challenge their ideology.
The text talks about different kinds of nationalism, including fascist
nationalism. The author says that even though elements of fascism were
already present in other ideologies like "noble blood" or anti-Semitism,
it wasn't until recently that people started paying more attention to
these ideas. Ideologies are general and can be used by any social class;
for example, the idea of patriotism is not just for rich people but can
also be found among working-class individuals. In conclusion, ideologies
have universal appeal because they contain certain common values such as
family love which everyone can relate to regardless of their background
or culture.
Ideology is a way of thinking that comes from how people live and what
they believe in. It's not always right or wrong, but it can have real
effects on the world. For example, even if someone has an idea based on
religion that might be considered wrong by some people, their actions
could still make things happen in the real world. This means we shouldn't
just judge ideas as true or false without understanding where they come
from and why people think them.
The is talking about a way of thinking that helps societies work well. It
compares how things were in the past to now and talks about religion and
education being important ways people learn ideas. The writer thinks it's
important for different groups, like workers and educated people, to come
together as one group with shared goals called a "Marxist Party." They
also talk about how government institutions help create these ideas but
can limit them too. Finally, they say this theory could lead to new
understanding of who creates ideology or beliefs.
The writer talks about a man named Althusser who had new ideas on how to
study things like economics and ideology. He helped people think in
different ways, using real facts instead of just guesses or theories. The
main idea is that for society to keep going, we need to make sure the
tools used for making stuff are updated too - otherwise everyone would
die! This concept has been talked about before but not many people pay
attention to it anymore.
Someone explained that the way we make things is important, but it's hard
to see because our everyday thoughts are tied up with how we do it. They
said that every society needs to produce stuff and also keep making the
tools they need to make more stuff. This includes materials, buildings,
machines and other equipment used in production. If you're a business
person or an economist studying money, you have to think about all of
these things when figuring out what kind of products can be made each
year without running out of resources or breaking down old machinery too
often."In other words, it's important to consider both production and
maintenance when planning for sustainable economic growth.
I summarized a passage in simple words for him. It talks about two smart
people who solved a big problem with making things. But they realized
that the way to make more things can't just happen at one company level,
it needs lots of other companies too. They all work together like an
endless chain to make everything we need and want available on store
shelves or online shops! This is called reproduction of materials needed
for production process which happens beyond individual firms so Marx
analyzed how this works between different sectors in his books but we
won't get into those details now!
The passage talks about how workers need to be paid a wage (money) so
they can take care of themselves and their families. This is important
because it helps them stay healthy, have food to eat, clothes to wear,
and a place to live. The writer says that even though wages are included
in the accounting books of businesses where people work at, they are not
seen as essential for the "reproduction" or renewal of worker's labor
power - which means being able do more work every day.
In simple words, the amount of money a worker gets paid is not just based
on their basic needs but also historical factors like what past workers
needed. This minimum wage was forced by the struggles of workers and is
important for them to survive and continue working. However, having
enough money isn't enough - a worker must also have skills that match
with modern production methods in order to be useful. These skills are
learned through various job requirements such as task division within
society's technical framework. (Note: 100 words) Additionally, workers
must be adaptable and willing to learn new skills as technology advances.
This can include proficiency in computer systems, automation equipment
operation, or specialized training for specific industries. It is crucial
that individuals have access to education and training programs that
provide them with the necessary knowledge and abilities required by
today's job market.
In this text, the author talks about how education is changing. In the
past, people were trained to work in their jobs while they worked. But
now, schools are teaching more things outside of work too like reading
and writing. They also teach rules for behavior and respect for different
social classes. The goal of all these lessons is to prepare students to
be good workers who can speak well and follow instructions correctly when
they have a job someday in the future!
The author is saying that when people work, they not only need to learn
skills for their job but also have to follow the rules of society.
Schools teach us skills, but they also make us believe in and obey those
rules. Everyone who works has to "accept" this way of thinking so that
everyone can do their jobs well. This idea applies not just in factories
or offices, but everywhere we work including schools and churches too!
The author thinks it's important because how we think affects our ability
to be successful at our jobs.
The author talks about how things are made and who makes them. They say
that it's important to think about not just the tools used, but also the
people doing the work. The author then says that we need to talk more
about how society works together as a whole - this is called
"reproduction of production relations." To understand this better, we
must first ask ourselves: what is society? Marx had an idea where he
thought societies were like buildings with two parts: a foundation (the
economy) and a structure built on top (laws, government and beliefs).
This helps us see how everythingin society is interconnected and how
changes in one area can affect the entire system.
The key ideas in this text are about how the economy affects everything
else. The author says that metaphors using buildings and spaces can help
us understand this idea better. They say that the economic foundation is
what ultimately determines things, even though other parts of society may
seem more important at first glance. This means we should think about how
different parts of society affect each other and be aware that our
language might not always accurately represent reality.
The author is talking about how we use language to describe things and
wants us to think deeper about what words really mean. They focus on the
concept of "building" as a metaphor for explaining ideas, but argues that
this can limit our understanding instead of expanding it. The main
argument is that in order to answer certain questions related to law,
government, and ideology, we need a different perspective than just
repeating old sayings or metaphors. The author believes that Marxist
tradition offers useful insights into these topics by viewing the state
as an instrument used by ruling classes (like capitalists) for their
benefit over workersand other oppressed groups.
I read a long text about the Marxist-Leninist theory of the state. The
author explained that in this theory, the government is made up of many
parts including police, courts, prisons and even soldiers who can
intervene when needed. They said that this kind of description is only
partly true or "descriptive" because it doesn't capture everything about
how governments work. However, they also said that describing things like
this is an important first step towards understanding them better later
on.
The writer is talking about a theory that helps us understand things.
They say this theory isn't perfect and needs to keep growing. The example
they give is the idea of "the state" in Marxism, which means how
governments work with different classes of people. Even though it's not
perfect, this theory can help us see many examples from history where
powerful people have oppressed others - like during wars or when rulers
censor art or speech they don't like. But we still need to keep improving
our theories so we can learn more!
The passage talks about understanding the relationship between pressure
and control in a government. It explains that the accumulation of
information does not necessarily advance scientific theory, so it is
important to add something to the classic definition of a state apparatus
as part of developing descriptive theories into complete ones. The
article also mentions that all political class struggles revolve around
state power (the acquisition and maintenance thereof) while
differentiating this from what comprises 'state apparatus'.
The writer is talking about how the government stays in power, even after
big events like a revolution. They say that people who believe in Marxism
(a type of political idea) think that: 1) The government controls things;
2) We should separate control from the actual parts of the government; 3)
People fight to have control over the country and use it for their own
goals; and 4) To change everything, we need to take down old systems and
put new ones in place. The author also talks about something called
"ideological apparatus" which means ways governments try tocontrol
people's thoughts and beliefs in order to maintain their power.
The text talks about how Marxist theorists viewed the state as more
complex than what is commonly understood, even in their own theories. The
author proposes developing a theory that distinguishes between the
apparatus of the state and its power, including not only traditional
institutions like government or police but also other entities like
schools or churches - these are called "the State's Ideological
Apparatuses." These differ from what they call "the State's Repressive
Apparatus," which includes physical force.
The writer is talking about how we need to study and fix different groups
that exist in society, called DIA's. There are many different kinds of
DIA's like religious ones, schools, families and more. They have
important roles but they're not the same as the government or "Baskı
Aygıtı". Some people might argue why some private organizations should be
considered a part of DIA's when they don't have public status yet.
Gramsci was aware of this argument even back then as a smart Marxist
thinker.
The text talks about the difference between two kinds of systems: one is
called "burgeois law" and it's used in places that are controlled by
people who have power. The other system is what they call DIA, which
doesn't care if something is public or private - only how things work.
They say that the big difference between these two systems has to do with
using force versus ideas to get things done. Police and army use both
methods but give priority to force while schools and churches prioritize
ideas over force even though they might still use a little bit of it
sometimes for symbolic purposes like punishmentsor security measures.
The author talks about how different groups of people, like shepherds and
families, have rules they follow to stay organized. They also talk about
something called "DIA" which is a group that uses ideas (ideology) to
make decisions. The government can sometimes control these DIA groups by
using laws or pressure ("Baskı"). Even though there are many different
DIA groups with their own ideas, they still all share the same basic idea
from the leaders who control them. This means that even if someone
belongs to a certain group, they might still be influenced by another
bigger group'sideology.
The author talks about how important it is for certain groups to have
control of the government, but that doesn't mean they can always keep
their power. They use an example from history when Lenin said education
was important for keeping his group in charge. The author also says that
different classes struggle against each other and sometimes even win
battles within these institutions, like schools or governments. Finally,
they explain there are two parts to a government: one part controls
things with force (like police), while another represents different
groups' interests (like schools).
The author talks about class struggle and how it happens in different
ways, including through ideas (ideology). They explain that even though
ideology is important for class struggle, the root of it comes from
production relationships. The author asks questions like "What are these
ideological forms' real impact?" and "How do they function without
force?". Finally, they ask a fundamental question: How are production
relationships reproduced over time?
The language used in the law, politics and ideas are important for how
things work. They help to make sure that production is done well. The
government has tools like DIA's and State Apparatuses to help them do
this job. These groups use different methods - one group focuses on force
while the other uses ideology more often. There are many smaller parts of
these groups which have their own jobs to do but they all come together
as a whole under control from higher-ups who represent powerful classes
fighting for dominance over each other. It’s important not forget about
how ideologies play into this process too, as they can shape the beliefs
and actions of individuals within each group.
The article talks about how the government uses its power to control
things. The government helps rich people stay in charge by making rules
and using force if they need to. This is called a "State Apparatus." Even
though different parts of the State might have different opinions, they
all work together because of what's called an "ideology" that everyone
agrees on - like a set of ideas or beliefs. The way this works can help
keep rich people in charge even when some other groups don't agree with
them.
The author talks about how in modern capitalist societies, there are many
institutions that control different parts of our lives like schools,
religion and the media. But in older times with a feudal system (when
kings ruled everything), there was only one institution controlling
things called "State Repression Apparatus". They also talk about how
important families and politics were back then too. The Church played a
big role as well by doing more than just religious services but also
teaching people things. Overall, they're saying that society has changed
over time to have more specialized groups overseeing certain aspects of
life instead of having one group, like the Church, overseeing everything.
In the past, people fought against religion and priests because they were
in charge of everything. During the French Revolution, they wanted to
take power away from rich nobles and give it to business owners. They
also attacked the Church's control over things like money. Over time, new
ideas replaced old ones and a big fight happened between different groups
for many years until a new government was formed that put business owners
in charge instead of religious leaders.
The writer is talking about how the ruling class (burjuvazi) can adapt to
different political systems. Even though parliamentarism seems like a
good system for them, history has shown that they are able to adjust and
thrive under other forms of government too, such as empires or
monarchies. In England, they were even successful in sharing power with
aristocracy for a long time. The author gives examples from Germany and
France where the bourgeoisie was also able to maintain their control over
state institutions despite changes in political regimes.

The author talks about how schools are used to teach ideas that help the
rich people stay in power. Even though we might think democracy is a good
way of choosing leaders, history shows us that there have been other ways
too. In England, for example, the wealthy and powerful people were able
to share control with others who weren't as rich or important. The author
thinks schools now take over some of what churches used to do in teaching
kids certain beliefs and values along with families at home."Therefore,
it's important to consider that there may be alternative methods of
teaching and instilling values within society. The student summarized a
text about how the education system in capitalist societies is controlled
by certain ideas. These ideas focus on reproducing relationships of
exploitation and maintaining power for the ruling class. Different parts
of society, like politics, media, religion and family all play a role in
this process through their own unique ways. Even if we don't notice it
happening, schools are one part where these ideas are reinforced every
day to students without question or challenge. The passage talks about
how children go to school and learn different subjects like math,
science, literature, and philosophy. As they grow up, some become workers
or farmers while others continue their education to become technicians or
office workers. Some even become leaders in society like police officers
or politicians. Everyone is taught certain ideas that fit with the job
they will have when they are older - whether it's being obedient as a
worker or knowing how to order people around if you're in charge. The
important thing is for everyone to believe what their role requires them
to believe so that things run smoothly in society! The author is saying
that many good and bad behaviors are learned in families, churches,
schools, books and movies. However, the most important place where these
behaviors are taught is school because kids spend a lot of time there.
The education system teaches us how to think like the people who have
power (the rich) so they can continue to be powerful over everyone else
(the poor). Some teachers try their best not to teach this way but it's
hard when everything around them says otherwise. The author talks about
how schools are like churches used to be - very important and natural.
Schools help the ideas of society stay strong, just like churches did
before. The school works with families, but sometimes this causes
problems in society because it changes things too much. This is called an
"ideology" which means a system of thoughts that people believe in
strongly. It's been talked about for many years by smart philosophers
like Cabanis and Destutt de Tracy! Marx wrote about politics and ideas.
He wanted to understand how society worked, but he found it confusing
because people had different opinions. Marx tried to make a theory that
explained why people thought the way they did, but his theory wasn't
perfect. His book called "The Elements of Ideology" talks about how our
thoughts come from what we see and hear around us. If we study this more
closely, then we can learn about history and why societies work the way
they do based on class struggles in production systems within them.
Ideologies are a big part of history and they have different types like
dividing people into groups or classes. Even though ideologies play an
important role, their theories cannot be considered in general because
the history behind them is too complicated. However, if we can come up
with a theory that includes elements on which ideology depends then it
might work. It seems paradoxical but this theory suggests that there is
no historical background to the concept of ideology itself.

Marx proposed this idea similar to how metaphysics doesn't really exist
beyond morality (and other forms of ideologies). In Alman Ideology's
formula for example, ideology is merely a reflection of material
conditions and class interests. This talking about ideas called
ideologies and how they are related to history. The writer says that even
though we talk about these ideas, they don't have a real place in history
because they're just made up thoughts. They compare the idea of ideology
to dreams - both aren't really there in the world like things you can
touch or see. So when people say "ideology," it's like saying "dream"
because it isn't based on anything solid from reality but rather
something imagined by someone else! The person says that in a book called
Alman Ideology, they talk about how there is no history of ideology
because it only exists where people live. This means that the idea of
ideology is just like a dream and doesn't really mean anything important
on its own. The author disagrees with this way of thinking and believes
that even though ideologies don't have their own specific histories, they
are still an important part of history overall. They compare it to dreams
without any real meaning but also say it's necessary for understanding
society as a whole. The author is talking about something called
ideology, which means the way people think and understand things. They
say that just like our dreams can show us different ideas in a special
way, ideologies also show us reality in their own unique way of thinking.
Even if specific events or history affect what we believe, they don't
change how our minds work overall because it's been the same throughout
time. That's why some people consider ideology to be eternal or never-
ending. The writer thinks this idea connects with another theory by Freud
about unconscious thoughts being always present too.

(Note: Word count - 99)These two concepts suggest that our beliefs and
values are deeply rooted in our psyche, shaping the way we perceive
reality and interact with others. As such, ideology may persist
throughout history as a reflection of society's collective unconscious,
constantly evolving but never truly disappearing. The author is talking
about something called ideology and how it's a way that people imagine
things in their minds. It can be related to religion, morals, politics or
laws. Sometimes these ideas are not real but they help us understand the
world around us better. Even though some of these imaginings may not be
true, we still need them because they make sense to us and help explain
our reality. The writer mentions famous examples like God or kings being
represented as imaginary figures by humans throughout history for example
during 18th century when mechanist genre was popularized.
This shows how our collective imagination has played a significant role
in shaping human history and culture. The author talks about different
ways people interpret holy texts and how it can affect our understanding
of real life. They say that sometimes people imagine things in a way that
isn't true, but they don't realize it because they've been told to
believe certain things by leaders like priests or kings. This can cause
problems for regular people who are just trying to live their lives. The
author says there are two explanations for why this happens: either bad
leaders trick us into believing false ideas, or we're so used to
imagining fake scenarios that we forget what's really important in life.
The writer talks about how people feel disconnected from their own lives
because of the way society is set up. They say that this causes people to
imagine things in a fake or unrealistic way, and they don't understand
what's really happening around them. The author thinks it's important for
us to recognize this problem so we can work on making things better for
everyone. They also talk about something called ideology which means
ideas that are not based on reality but still affect our thoughts and
actions.
By understanding how ideology shapes our beliefs and behaviors, we can
begin to challenge harmful ideas and create a more equitable society. The
real world is designed with imaginary ideas at its center, and this
relationship needs to be explained. The fake distortion that comes from
designing the real world ideologically lies within this relationship or
in other words, every ideology has a distorted imagination under it which
can only be observed if we do not live that ideology as reality. In
ideologies like Marxism, relationships are derived from production
relations ultimately leading to individuals' existence conditions being
imagined through their positions in scientific practice tasks of
spreading exploitation and oppression.
Ideologies show an individual's imaginative connection with productive
relationships rather than showing the actual system governing their
existence; thus, creating a false perception of reality. The writer is
talking about how ideas and designs that create an ideology are not just
spiritual but also have a material existence. They mention that this idea
has been around since the beginning of science, where people believed in
ideologies as being either right or wrong. The writer believes it's
important to understand this concept when analyzing any ideology
critically because they all exist materially and practically through
machinery. Therefore, an understanding of their physical reality helps us
better comprehend them rather than explaining different political views
with simple explanations like "clicks" within communist circles for
instance which doesn't answer questions on overcoming ideological issues
properly. The passage talks about ideas and beliefs that people have in
their minds, which are called ideology. These ideas can affect how we
behave and make choices. Sometimes our beliefs come from things like
religion or justice. Even though these thoughts aren't physical objects
like a rock or gun, they still exist inside us as part of who we are. Our
actions might be different depending on the ideologies we believe in -
for example going to church if you believe in God.
Therefore, our thoughts and beliefs have the power to shape our behavior
and ultimately impact how we navigate through life. The article talks
about how our beliefs and ideas should guide our actions. If we believe
in something, then it is important to act accordingly with that belief.
This means following rules and even protesting if those rules are broken.
The article also explains that sometimes people don't follow their own
beliefs, which can make them seem dishonest or inconsistent. Overall, the
article discusses how ideology shapes our behavior in small ways every
day like going to church or playing sports on a team but reminds us of
the importance of staying true to ourselves and what we believe in no
matter what situation arises. Pascal said to kneel down and pray, just
like Jesus. He wanted people to believe in peace instead of division.
Pascal used a special language called Jansenism which made him speak
differently about things that already existed. We can use Marxist
language now too! When we talk about one person's beliefs or ideas, they
come from the actions that person takes within their culture's rules and
traditions (like going to church). Some old words don't work anymore but
new ones have taken their place when talking about our thoughts and
actions today. The writer is talking about something called "ideology"
which they say is like a set of rules that tell people what to do. They
also talk about how our beliefs and thoughts can disappear when we follow
these rules too closely. The main idea is that this ideology only exists
because of us - the individual people who believe in it and follow its
rules. So, without us, there would be no such thing as an ideology! The
article talks about something called "ideology" and how it affects the
way we think. The main idea is that every ideology has a category called
"subject", which means people like you and me who believe in that
ideology. This subject can be different for each ideology, but they all
play an important role in making the ideas of that ideology come to life.
We also learn that even when someone writes about science or facts, they
still have their own beliefs (their own subject) influencing what they
say. The writer is talking about how we all have ideas and beliefs that
affect the way we think and act. They use a word called "Logos" which
means our ideology or belief system, like religion. The writer says that
even things as simple as language can be influenced by these beliefs.
Sometimes it's hard to recognize when something comes from our belief
system because it feels so obvious to us, but this is just part of how
ideologies work. The example they give at the end is someone knocking on
your door asking who you are! Someone asked about the word "my" in a
banana. We all have friends named Ren that we know, and when they come
over to our house, it's really them! This is like how we recognize
someone on the street as a friend by saying hello and shaking their hand.
These are rules of recognizing people around us that make sure we know
who each person is - including ourselves! Even reading this right now
follows these same rules too. Understanding these simple everyday
practices helps us be aware of how our minds work without even realizing
it. The talks about ideology and how it affects people. It says that
instead of just talking about ideology, we should try to understand it
scientifically without being a part of it. We can do this by using
special words that are easy to understand but also make us think. The
text explains how calling someone's name or "Hey, you!" makes them become
an individual in the eyes of society. When someone turns around after
hearing their name called they become a subject because they recognize
themselves as the person who was called out for attention.

Word count: 98This recognition and acknowledgement solidify their

identity as a unique individual, separate from others in society.
Scientists did experiments to see if calling someone using different
communication tools would result in them recognizing their own name. They
found that people can recognize when they are being called, even if it's
just a whistle or a verbal call. However, this is still an odd occurrence
and not everyone who recognizes their name will feel guilty about
something like the scientists thought they might. People walking around
may hear someone calling out "Hey you!" but turn around because they
suspect that it could be directed at them specifically.They don't always
know for sure though since these events happen randomly without any order
or pattern.
Ideology meansa set of beliefs or principles that guides an individual,
group, or society's actions and decisions. Sometimes people get in
trouble for having certain beliefs, even if those beliefs aren't really
harming anyone. It's like a rule that applies to everyone except the
person making the rule. This is called ideology and it affects how we
think about things. Even though some ideas might seem true or scientific,
they could actually just be part of someone's ideology without them
realizing it! The idea that people are always subjects (or "soyut") can
also sound strange at first but it just means that every person has their
own thoughts and feelings as soon as they exist - before they're born
even! Before a baby is born, they are already determined to have a
specific identity based on their family's beliefs and values. This
includes carrying the father's name as an important symbol of who they
will be in society. The idea of the "father's name" represents not only
the real biological father but also cultural laws that determine how
families should function. Children imagine themselves taking over this
symbolic role when they grow up, leading them to believe that it is
natural for fathers to hold power within patriarchal households. The
article talks about how people are labeled as either a boy or girl even
before they're born. This idea is part of society's rules and beliefs,
which come from things like religion. For example, Christianity says that
God exists and humans have to answer to him. It also uses rituals like
baptism and marriage ceremonies to reinforce its message. But these ideas
can limit our understanding of ourselves because we don't get to choose
who we want to be - it's decided for us based on what others believe in.
The text talks about a religious ideology calling individuals like Pierre
to follow God's commands and become part of Jesus' community. The writer
finds it strange because the religion calls people by their names,
recognizes their place in the world, and acknowledges them as already
existing subjects with personal identities. However, despite knowing that
every individual is an "I" or subject themselves; they still use this
term. This text talks about a new and special Subject called "Absolute
Other Subject" or God. It says that people can only exist if they believe
in this subject, which is mentioned with capital letters to show how
important it is. The Bible also talks about this subject and gives an
example of Moses talking to God through the clouds. By following God's
commands, we become part of His subjects too - like mirrors reflecting
Him. God needs humans just as much as humans need God. Even when people
are sinful and do bad things, God still needs them to fulfill his plan
for salvation. This is why he created Jesus and sent him to Earth in
human form - so that people could see and touch him, making it easier for
them to understand the power of God. The idea of subjectivity (individual
experience) being divided into subjects who need other subjects shows us
that every ideology has a mirrored structure where reflection shapes its
existence."However, ultimately it is up to each individual to choose
whether or not they will accept and follow God's plan for salvation. I
read a paragraph about an idea called ideology. It talks about how
everyone has their own image, but they can see it in one big picture with
something called the Absolute Subject. The Absolute Subject is like God
and people who know him are part of his family. This idea also makes sure
that everything will be okay if people behave correctly and recognize
themselves as part of this bigger thing. Some people follow this way on
their own while others need help from powerful groups to understand it
better."Ultimately, it is up to each individual to decide how they will
approach the Absolute Subject and their connection to it. The writer
talks about following rules that God, conscience, the boss and others
set. They also say we should love our neighbors like ourselves. The
philosopher Hegel believed in something called Absolute Knowledge which
is an idea that can't be proven right or wrong but many people admire it
anyway. Another philosopher named Feuerbach talked about human nature
being influenced by ideas around them instead of just themselves making
choices freely. Finally they mention a word "Amin" meaning "so be it"
used in prayers to show agreement with what's said even if you don't
really believe it yourself sometimes because someone else toldyou to say
it. The writer talks about how important it is to say "Amen" so that
things can be the way they should. This helps with different areas of
production, like work and money, as well as people's feelings and
beliefs. There are two meanings for the word "subject", which means
someone who follows orders or is controlled by others. The idea talked
about here says that if people accept being told what to do, then
everything will be okay because this keeps things going smoothly in
society. The text talks about how different ideas affect society,
especially the laws and morals that people follow. It explains that in a
society with rich and poor classes, the way they make things is important
because it affects their relationship. The leaders of the rich group want
to keep making things this way so they can stay powerful. But sometimes
people don't understand why these rules exist or what purpose they serve.
The article says we need to look at who benefits from these rules if we
really want to understand them better.
By understanding who benefits from these rules, we can gain a deeper
appreciation for their importance and the impact they have on society. I
summarized a big idea for my friend. It's about how different groups of
people fight against each other to be in charge and have power over
others. This fighting is called class struggle, but it can only happen
when there are two opposing groups with different ideas on who should
have control. The winning group puts their beliefs into action through
things like the government or schools, which affects everyone else too.
But sometimes even though one group wins, they don't always get what they
want because another group might come along with better ideas that win
out instead! In this article, the author talks about how different social
classes have their own beliefs and ideas. They say that we can understand
these ideas by looking at something called DİA's which are places where
class struggles happen. The author also says that Marx's philosophy is
all about understanding class struggle and it plays an important role in
Marxist theory and politics. Basically, they're saying that our beliefs
come from the conditions of our lives like what social class we belong
to. The writer is talking about Marxist-Leninist philosophy and how it
helps us understand the world from a working-class perspective. They say
that we need to be careful when reading books like "Capital" because they
can be influenced by ideas from rich people (called bourgeoisie). The
book talks about economics, like money and jobs, but also mentions social
classes and class struggle. Marx wants us to remember that these things
are connected - our place in society depends on what job we have or who
owns the businesses where we work. People are divided into different
social classes because of the capitalist economy. The existence of these
classes leads to a class struggle, which is not just a simple result but
an important part of understanding capitalism. Social classes aren't just
at the end of Karl Marx's book "Capital," they're throughout it. Class
struggle and the existence of social classes go together in one thing -
we can learn about this from reading Capital closely and carefully
studying all aspects related to economic production, exchange and
distribution within society as well as analyzing political struggles
between groups over time too! The writer is saying that in a book called
"Kapital", some people might think the process of making things is
simple. But actually, it's important to understand that there are two
groups involved: workers who get paid and capitalists who own everything
and make money from others' work. These classes always exist because
they're part of how production works. The way we produce goods also
depends on these relationships between workers and owners, which means
our entire system relies on exploiting laborers for profit. Marx
explained this very well in his first book! The author is talking about
how the people who make things and the way they make them are connected.
They say that there can't be just making things without any economics or
money stuff involved. There have always been different groups of people
with different ideas about how to do production, like bosses and workers.
The boss wants to keep making lots of stuff no matter what it costs for
their workers, but the workers fight back so they get paid fairly.
Sometimes this happens outside of work too when powerful people use
schools or newspapers to control what others think - this isn't fair
either!

The author talks about how different classes of people have been fighting
each other since the beginning of production. They say that there is no
"pure" economy or production because everything is influenced by society
and relationships between producers. The capitalists need to keep
exploiting workers in order for their society to exist, but this creates
a constant battle with the working class who want better conditions and
pay. This fight happens both at work (through wage cuts, punishment,
etc.) and outside of work through things like government control and
propaganda from media outlets like schools or newspapers. The writer is
talking about a book called Kapital and how it explains the theory of
capitalism. They say that if you read the book in a certain way, you can
understand more about class struggles and how they happen. The main idea
is that there are groups of people who have money (called capitalists)
who use other people's work to make even more money, which isn't fair.
But sometimes those workers fight back by organizing themselves and
demanding better treatment from their bosses. This fighting between
different classes has been happening for a long time throughout history.
It is a constant struggle for power and equality in the workplace. The
passage talks about a book that discusses the history of something called
the "worker's movement" and how it relates to Marxism. The author
mentions another book by someone named Lyssenko, who was controversial
for his theories on science. The author suggests that questioning
Lyssenko's ideas from a Marxist perspective is dangerous but wants people
to read both books and form their own opinions. They also discuss an
important event in Soviet history where there were arguments over farming
techniques which caused lots of problems until it suddenly stopped being
talked about altogether. The author talks about how some people haven't
written the true history of communism because they were afraid. Even
though there are archives with information, many communist philosophers
and scientists didn't speak up to shed light on the darker parts of their
history. The author also explains that even though Marx gave a scientific
method for understanding history, not all Communist Parties have
successfully used it in evaluating their own pasts. They need to admit
when they made mistakes and correct them so that we can understand what
really happened in communist countries like Russia. The author is saying
that if someone makes a mistake and then fixes it, there's no point in
ignoring the fact they made a mistake. They give examples of how other
groups have fixed their mistakes instead of denying them, like when
Soviet Union corrected its previous beliefs about people worshiping
leaders. The author believes it's important to correct misinformation
because silence or denial can lead to bigger problems than admitting one
was wrong in the first place. Lenin said that it's important to
understand the conditions of a situation before making decisions. He
learned this lesson during the Brest Litovsk agreement and with his
experience leading communism in Russia. Lenin believed that knowing
history is necessary for fighting battles, but not because he loved
history - rather, understanding past mistakes can help avoid repeating
them. Proletariats must analyze their own struggles and resolve conflicts
within themselves while also working towards unity as a class against
bourgeoisie oppression. I read and understood a difficult text that talks
about how different relationships can affect the way people think.
Sometimes, mistakes happen in class struggles because of these
conflicting relationships. Even if some people warn others before
something happens, it might still end up being wrong or misleading
afterward. It's important to analyze why these mistakes happened instead
of just trying to fix them quietly without understanding what caused them
in the first place. The author is saying that if someone makes a mistake
and nobody corrects it, the mistake will continue. Just fixing part of
the mistake won't really help either because you need to understand all
parts of it before you can fix it completely. If people stay quiet about
mistakes, they are letting them keep happening. Lenin thought correcting
mistakes was important because politics were always involved in making
and fixing those mistakes. The writer is talking about how important it
is for leaders to fix their mistakes instead of ignoring them. They talk
about a time when the Soviet Union made a big mistake, but they didn't
want to admit it because of political reasons. Eventually, they had to
admit and try to fix what happened, but they still haven't talked about
why it happened in the first place or tried to prevent similar things
from happening again. The author thinks this silence is not good and that
leaders should be honest with themselves and others when something goes
wrong so that everyone can learn from their mistakes. The Soviet leaders
have stopped trying to make things better and are living in silence. This
is not good because sometimes it means they know something bad is
happening but won't say anything about it. Even Lenin said that staying
quiet when there's a problem can mean you're letting the problem continue
on purpose! Some people think everything is getting better in Russia, but
really some of the same old problems from Stalin's time are still around
today. Barok müzikte, iki ayrı enstrümanın birbirini tamamlayıcı
sesleriyle örülen melodiyi anlatmak için kullanılırmış. Althusser,
SSCB'deki Melodinin halk üzerinde terör yaratırken karşıt olan insanlığa
saygının da olduğunu söylüyor. Marksist sapmaların çoğu
"hümanizm/ekonomizme" indirgenebilirmiş ve SSCB bunun farkında olmadığı
için Melodi ile insanlığın bir arada var olabileceği düşüncesine
kapılmıştır. The author talks about how some people in history like
Stalin and Lysenko did bad things that were not properly analyzed. This
happened because the society at the time didn't want to change or be
criticized. The article says we should ask ourselves what caused these
problems instead of just blaming them on accidents or mistakes. It also
mentions how Communist parties tried to fix their errors without really
understanding why they made them, which is not good for progress and
learning from past mistakes. Overall, it's important to think critically
and understand all sides of a situation before making conclusions about
it! The author is talking about conflicts and relationships in school,
but says that no one talks about the political and economic reasons
behind them. They also mention a scientist named Lyssenko who had
theories accepted as true because of his connection to an official
ideology called dialectical materialism. The author thinks this caused
problems with Marxist philosophy being taken seriously later on. They
think it's important for people to ask questions and criticize ideas
instead of just accepting everything as it is without thinking
critically. The author talks about a philosophy called dialectical
materialism which says that everything is made up of matter and has
certain laws. But some people have taken this idea too far and don't
believe in other ideas or opinions. They also support political practices
without questioning them, even if they are not good for everyone. This
way of thinking can be harmful because it doesn't allow room for new
ideas or changes to happen. The writer reminds us that the original
creator of dialectics said it could either be used as a tool for
criticism and change or to keep things the same, so we need to use
ourcritical thinking skills to determine which path we want to take. The
passage talks about Marxist philosophy and how it helps the organization
of a party by creating unity among its members. It provides them with
common slogans, signs to recognize each other, and serves as an internal
ideology for the group. However, this type of thinking can also cause
problems because it isolates the party from outside perspectives and
limits their political benefits. The French Communist Party lost many
intellectuals due to their defense of Lysenkoism (a discredited
scientific theory) which showed that ignoring philosophical issues can be
harmful in politics too. The author talks about how some people already
have negative feelings towards communism. They say that intellectuals
should criticize and question things, but sometimes they just go along
with what is popular or convenient for them. This makes it hard to solve
problems between the intellectuals and the communist party. The author
also mentions a historical event called Lyssenkoism where mistakes were
made but not fixed properly because certain people wanted to keep their
power. The article asks if history will continue repeating itself even
though this story has ended?

Someone that the way things are made and how people work together to make
them is really important. They said that separating the ways of making
things from who makes them is not a good idea because they go together.
There have always been different groups of people who want different
things out of their jobs, so there has always been fighting between these
groups called class struggle. The rich group needs to keep using the poor
group's hard work in order for society to continue like it does now.
Sometimes they try mean tactics or use ideas (like religion) and
newspapers to get what they want instead of just workingtogether with the
poor group. Someone wrote a big book called "Capital" that talks about
how capitalism works. They say it's important because it shows us the
ideas and rules behind how people who work for someone else get paid less
than they deserve. But, if we read this book differently, as saying that
working together is better than fighting each other all the time, then
maybe we can change things for the better! The author also thinks that
learning about history helps us understand why things are like they are
now with workers' rights. Someone wrote a book about workers movements
and how important it is to remember them. They also talked about another
book that was written by someone named Lyssenko, who people thought was
not very honest but some people still liked him anyways. The writer of
this article thinks it's dangerous to question Lyssenko from a Marxist
perspective because he caused lots of trouble in Soviet history for many
years until his theories were finally forgotten. The author talks about
how Soviet philosophers and scientists have not been able to write a
Marxist history of their country due to censorship and fear. The same
silence is seen from other communist parties who also faced similar
oppression in the past. Even though Marxists were the first ones to use
scientific methods for understanding history, many Communist Parties
failed at writing an accurate account of their own histories. However,
it's important that they acknowledge their mistakes through corrections
so that even dark parts of history can be accepted by others. Sometimes
make mistakes, but it's important to admit them and try to fix them. Some
examples of this are when the Soviet Union admitted they were wrong about
"person worship" and when a French political party stopped supporting
false ideas like Lysenkoism. Even though we have a theory that says
action is more valuable than thinking, it's still important for us to
correct our mistakes so we don't keep making the same ones over again.
Lenin believed that ignoring or staying silent about our errors is worse
than admitting and fixing them in order to learn from experience. Lenin
is saying that it's important to understand the conditions around you
when making decisions. He gave examples of times he made mistakes and had
to learn from them. Lenin thinks it's important for workers in their
fight against those who have more power (bourgeoisie) to know about their
past struggles so they can make better choices in the future. He also
says that sometimes there will be confusion within a group, but
eventually everyone will figure things out together through struggle and
hard work towards unity and common goals. The author talks about how the
struggles between different groups can lead to mistakes and
misunderstandings. Even if some people predict these things will happen,
there's no one in charge who knows everything that will happen ahead of
time. This means mistakes are sometimes seen as normal even though
they're not really right, and only after something happens do we realize
it was a mistake or misunderstanding. The writer says that just fixing
those problems isn't enough; we need to understand why they happened so
we can prevent them from happening again in the future like Lenin did
before."We need to learn from our mistakes and take proactive measures to
avoid repeating them. The writer is saying that if someone makes a
mistake and nobody corrects them, the mistake will keep going. Even just
fixing part of the mistake won't make it go away completely unless you
really understand why it was wrong in the first place. Sometimes people
stay quiet when they hear something wrong because they don't want to
cause trouble, but this doesn't help fix anything. It's important to talk
about mistakes so we can learn from them and not repeat them again in
future decisions or actions. The author talks about how it takes a strong
political will to fix something that is wrong, just like pulling out the
roots of a bad plant. But sometimes people don't analyze or try to
understand what's wrong and they stay silent because of politics. This
can lead to tragedies happening again in the future. The Soviet Union
made mistakes but eventually fixed them after some people spoke up
against them even though many were hurt for doing so. However, there are
still deeper reasons why these mistakes happened and no one wants to talk
about it which is not good because we need learn from our past mistakes
in order improveour future.The article is about how the Soviet Union
leaders have stopped trying to make things better and are being quiet.
The writer thinks that this silence might mean they want bad things to
keep happening on purpose, even though there aren't as many people
getting hurt compared to before. They also talk about a group of
important French Communists who say that it's not really a big deal that
the Soviet Union isn't very democratic because they're just "late" for
socialismThis passage talks about a type of music called Baroque that
uses two instruments to make a melody. The author, Althusser, says that
in the Soviet Union, there was terror on one side and humanism on the
other side mixed together. Most Marxist mistakes can be explained by
focusing too much on either economics or human values instead of both at
once. The Soviets wanted "democratic socialism" but didn't have what they
needed for it yet. They refused to analyze their mistake using Marxist
terms because it would show how important their political role is in
keeping this mistake going without being corrected.
Instead, they blamed external factors and continued to cling onto their
flawed ideology. The talks about people who do bad things but still have
good careers because no one analyzes what they did wrong. They say this
happens for political reasons and nobody wants to change it. The writer
suggests we should ask ourselves why these bad things happen in the first
place, instead of just blaming individuals or making excuses for them.
They use examples from Soviet history and a scientific controversy called
Lysenkoism to show how important it is to understand the root causes of
problems if we want to fix them properly. The writer is saying that there
were problems in the Soviet Union with how people treated each other and
politics, but no one talked about it. They also didn't discuss a man
named Lyssenko who had ideas supported by the government even though they
weren't true. This caused issues for things like philosophy, which should
have been looked at again because of these wrong ideas. But instead,
everyone just ignored it all and went on with their careers without
fixing anything or asking important questions to make things better. The
writer talks about a belief called "dialectical materialism" which says
that everything is made of matter and follows certain rules. Some people
think this idea is very important, but others don't agree with it because
they believe ideas are more powerful than just the laws of nature. The
author thinks we should be careful not to blindly follow one way or the
other without thinking for ourselves. They also say that sometimes
political beliefs can influence how people view dialectics (the study of
change), so we need to pay attention to our own biases when discussing
these topics. The text is about a Marxist philosophy that helps the
organization of militant groups by providing them with a common language
and signs to understand each other. However, this philosophy isolates the
party from the outside world and prevents it from being politically
useful in history. The French communist party lost many members because
they did not address important philosophical issues or make their
ideology revolutionary enough for intellectuals who are interested in
theory. The author talks about how some people have prejudices against
joining a communist party. They also talk about the relationship between
intellectuals and political parties, and how it can be difficult to solve
problems that come up between them. The author mentions an example of
something called the Lysenko case, where mistakes were made but not
properly analyzed because people still needed help from certain ideas.
The article ends with a question: has history really ended or is it
ongoing?