i'll have it be known that this is the tweet that finally pushed me over the edge into reading althusser https://twitter.com/mallghost/status/1331094329927012355

YEAH. YEAH. YEAH.

i rly do think that a lot of contemporary communist theory/strategy/politics undersells the importance of the state, via mandatory public ed, having captured & systematized a significant chunk of childrearing/identity formation/ideological development across the whole of society

like, prior to industrial development and at the earliest the beginning of the 20th century, the nation-state had yet to develop universal public ed. that is suddenly a new 7-12 years of instruction, during a formative period, being directly conditioned by the state.

this question may be reducible to "[to my knowledge] there haven't been any revolutions in which a socialist project seized state power in industrialized nation beyond a brief period" but

...has there ever been such a revolution in somewhere with compulsory universal public ed?

russia, china, cuba...none of these countries had the majority of children in schools prior to revolution. small sample, but still. much to think about and all that.

and teachers are one of the professions with the greatest remaining union density in the US...makes you think...

also bring back socialist sunday schools for kids

ok back to althusser, now starting at the beginning of the chapter, and again: YEAH! YEAH! criticism of the marxist overemphasis on the point of production and underemphasis on the point of reproduction as grounds for struggle! ive been On This one for a bit let's goooooooooo

THE RECIPROCAL ACTION OF THE SUPERSTRUCTURE ON THE BASE!!! LIKE THAT ONE (MUCH IGNORED) ENGELS LETTER I QUOTE ALL THE TIME!!! YES!!! YES!!!!!!

WHILE THE ECONOMIC BASE IS DETERMINANT IN THE LAST INSTANCE, SUPERSTRUCTURAL ELEMENTS ACT AUTONOMOUSLY UPON IT!!!! YEAH!!!!

the entire time i'm reading althusser i feel like this guy

althusser's brief recognition that the bolsheviks did not, in fact, smash the bourgeoisie state apparatus, as traditional marxist theory (including lenin's own state and revolution) predicts as necessary

oh wow. the state is "the precondition for any distinction between public and private" & as such public/private distinction is itself a bourgeoisie distinction & marxists are better off analyzing institutions in terms of their function, not status in bourgeoisie law. the INSIGHT.