Album Review: Witchery - Nightside

Witchery - Nightside

Century Media Records - 2022

7/10

Somehow this record managed to sneak its way under my radar for several months. Witchery came back this summer for the first time in five years, coughing up a record more brief and to the point than the last couple. Wise move on their part, as Nightside probably couldn’t have withstood much more length than a half hour. This is an accurate statement for most black/thrash records, and this really isn’t an exception.

In fact, giving this the black/thrash label may not even be as necessary as we may think. True, it certainly holds all of the aesthetic. Between the album art, the harsh production, and being full of songs titled like “Churchburner” and “Popecrusher,” it almost seems on the nose. But stylistically, this seems to leap towards the melodic death metal end. Vocally, it teeters on that line of guttural and raspy, and the buzzsaw tones really drive this home. Perhaps this is attributed to being from Sweden, but man, there are more parallels to At The Gates than there are Hellripper.

Nightside isn’t entirely void of those classic elements, though. “Don’t Burn The Witch” has plenty of raw intensity over speed metal chops. I also can’t be the only person that thought “Under The Altar” sounded like three different Slayer riffs combined into one quick instrumental tune. Channeling as much evil fun as possible never ceases to touch every song, with only the tiniest touch of rhythmic groove.

For what it's worth, I’m pretty certain Witchery nails exactly what they’re going for here. Admittedly it’s pretty bare-bones and doesn’t have a whole lot to it, but I also can’t say that any of this felt like a waste of time. Certainly worthwhile for fans of the band or style.

Book Review: Yezhov Vs. Stalin, by Grover Furr

A very controversial author and professor, Grover Furr has a diverse selection of books on the USSR, especially on Josef Stalin. They tend to focus on one event, aspect, or misunderstood idea of history involving the Soviet leader, aiming to debunk false claims and going into deep detail on why a situation may be less black and white than what we’re led to believe. The first one I decided to step into is Yezhov Vs. Stalin: The Truth About Mass Repressions And The So-Called ‘Great Terror’ In The USSR, and the title itself is pretty much a dead giveaway about what this one hones in on.

I’ll admit right from the gate that this title could be misleading, as it isn’t so much a narrative around whether the repressions happened or not, as it may suggest at first glance. Rather, it’s a deep look into what caused the repressions, who was actually responsible, and how they could happen under the nose of Stalin if his hand wasn’t the one that orchestrated the mass repressions. The book’s intro and ending goes through this very point, and as a matter of fact, the last couple of chapters are not only some of the most important, but some of the best chapters in the book readability-wise.

For the bulk of it, Yezhov Vs. Stalin is a very dry read. It shouldn’t come as much of a surprise, seeing that many of the broken-down sections contain parts from interviews that were actually given at the Moscow Trials and other documentation taken right from the Soviet archives, much of which was classified for decades. Sourcing, for the most part, checks out, because of this. Furr not only refers to direct documents from the era, but also notes claims made by other respected historians of the subject, such as J. Arch Getty. Cross references with sources that he considers to be less valid, or not sourced in good faith (if at all) are brought up from time to time to point out contradictions within their own words, and why they aren’t correct. Additionally, weblinks are added in some footnotes to allow the reader to type it in themselves and check out the evidence he’s referring to. My only real gripe is that sometimes he cites his own work, which in super small doses like this is fine, but not preferred. This was only really done in instances where he sums up something else related, but doesn’t want to stray from the point too much. There are also a few spots that use wikipedia, which is fine for non-controversial research, however for this I’m unsure if I would have used it. Regardless, there is a lot of great work cited, with plenty of evidence to back his claims. A few questionable ones as well, but not enough to be concerned. 

But like I said, things are presented very matter-of-factly, not leaving much room for extrapolation. A good majority of this will present the evidence exactly as is, with little intermissions of his own comments to point out why something is (or isn’t) evidence regarding the repressions or democracy in the USSR. Thus, the reading experience itself can be an absolute trudge to get through, especially if memorizing many Russian names of others involved isn’t a strength of yours. 

Things are formatted chronologically, beginning with USSR democracy and the drafting of a new constitution. The first few chapters are harder to get through since this is an even dryer subject than the bulk of the Yezhov parts. Outlining this shows how the struggle of organizing secret-ballot elections following a bloody civil war and years of rebuilding from a backwards empire had complications. Focusing on elections, the need for greater democracy was stressed not only by Josef Stalin, but also by Andrei Zhandov and Nikolai Shvernik. Factions and opposition parties meant to undermine the CPSU were illegal, a point meant to display the difference between laws preventing corruption or coup, not being democratic. 

Right around here is when the conspiracy talk begins. Details on the Mikhail Tukhachevskii Affair are laid out, which was his confession to be working alongside Nikolai Bukharin as a German agent as early as 1928. This would set into motion the rest of the conspiracy sections and the documentations of each, some being presented with evidence of happening, while others were made up by oppositionists. Furr points out how this is all completely ignored by anti-communist historians that, rather than looking at the actual history, would instead follow the Anti-Stalin paradigm. This term is repeated throughout the book, and it always stresses the fact that all of this is commonly rejected as bogus, and a Stalin frame-up to dispute all of the evidence. It’s then to be understood that the election implementation taking place around this time got glossed over considering these conditions, and the rising of fascist Spain, Finnish aggression, and anticommunist pacts arming up in the west.

Trotsyists, Rights, and Zinovievists are mentioned throughout, as these clandestine types were the seeds that lead to the conspiracies after the United Opposition was defeated in 1927 and Trotsky expelled from the USSR in 1929. Understandings of members being in contact with Japan, Germany, and other powers were revealing themselves more and more as the 1930s progressed forward, including attempted coup and assassination of Stalin and his leadership. Sergei Kirov was a close-companion of Stalin that was murdered early on, which was another large spark in 1934. Leonid Nikalaev, the murderer and his accomplices, were executed.

Where Nikolai Yezhov enters the picture is when news of him using his power in the NKVD for mass suppressions is uncovered. Lavrentiy Beria takes over, and the repressions are immediately stopped. Roughly halfway through the book is when we reach Yezhov’s confessions. This information is also pointed out to always be suppressed by anti-Soviet researchers, despite all of the information being available to them. Furr also notes why these reports check out to be what Yezhov himself wanted to say, and how no other evidence has yet contradicted this. 

Room for motivation is plentiful, as several chapters are dedicated to. One of Yezhov’s reasons was to cause distrust amongst Soviet citizens by curating mass arrests and repressions, and gain opposition to the Bolshevik Party. Arresting anyone who got in his way was also a tactic to win himself power in the politburo. Yezhov had personal gains to achieve through working with foreign powers; the killing of Stalin and Vyacheslav Molotov was just the final step. In these sections, Furr begins to show counter-evidence by researchers following the Anti-Stalin paradigm, such as dissecting and pointing out contradictions in passages by the likes of Jansen and Petrov. This is to do away with the misconception that Stalin saw Yezhov as his “loyal executioner.” Interrogations of Yezhov are outlined to dig up as much evidence as possible, which should make it easy to understand why this format gets very difficult to follow after a while.

Nikolai Yezhov

Others close to Yezhov are interrogated as well, with confessions from Mikhail Frinovskii, Samoilovich Liushkov (who agreed to be a spy for Japan), and Stanislav Frantsevich Redens, showing their roles in the plot to seize politburo power and the unfolding of events that led to Yezhov’s mass repressions. Shown are their connections to foreign capitalist powers and how they will be recognized once this work is carried out. These are detailed to reinforce what is referred to as Ezhovchina throughout the book, when Yezhov himself is interrogated for several chapters, tying it all together. Near the end, the role of GULAG is mentioned, and how the prisoners themselves were used to further their plan. 

The last few chapters of the book concludes all of this, and revisits the outlined points of “did the repressions happen, who was responsible, and if it isn’t Stalin, how could he have been oblivious to everything?” This follows source criticisms to validate where all of the information came from as it was used. It’s noted that the term “Great Terror” is misleading in and of itself, not because no terror happened, but because it’s attributed to Stalin and meant to be understood as an intentional mass murder or imprisonment of innocent people. Furr mentions that some conspiracies that were fed to Stalin were falsified, while others were true. This made it easy to blind him to what was actually happening during Yezhov’s repressions. It was done for his own self gain, aided by assisting fascist powers at the time. It would have been impossible to be certain of this immediately, considering the constant intelligence of conspiracies to be studied, preoccupation with the upcoming war, and figuring out what to believe over time. It’s noted that once this was realized, many of the prisoners arrested during Yezhovchina had their cases reviewed, and were set free, which was done with Beria in 1939.

So what do we make of all of this as a reader? It’s certainly a very well-researched book that can be overwhelming. Furr reinforces why these details are left out of so much history, and how it goes against the idea of “Stalin the dictator.” Statements as such are meant to address many of the uncertainties we as the readers might have, myself included. My personal opinion? It’s one of those works where the information contained in it is very valuable, but it probably won’t serve most as a great read from cover to cover. It works well as something to reference, especially if you familiarize yourself with one read to get a general understanding, first. Once that is understood, then perhaps pick through the documentation and Furr’s explanations of it as desired. Don’t expect to retain everything after just one pass. Noting the important parts and returning as needed could be helpful.

If nothing else, this gives us a nuanced look into something that many will dismiss as cut-and-dry. Would I take absolutely everything here at complete face value? Perhaps not right away, as this type of subject is good to analyze after reading several sources yourself. But it’s very clear that everything is viewed through the lens of someone writing for a different understanding, and not trying to sell a false narrative for no apparent reason. Yezhov Vs. Stalin shows that there was a heavy level of involvement in Soviet leadership, which was built with different levels of participation in differing areas and O’blasts, and how this can play into tragic events. In other words, it doesn't come down to just one guy, or some crazy idea of who he was. Josef Stalin may not be the ideal figure to everybody, but this certainly debunks any ridiculous claims of him being a murderous tyrant that mowed down anybody that voiced any kind of differing ideas.

Album Review: Taylor Swift - 1989

Taylor Swift - 1989

Big Machine - 2014

8.5/10

Throughout Taylor Swift's entire career up to this point, she mostly stuck to a blend of country and pop, leaning more towards the pop as she reached Red in 2012. Following that record would see the full realization of pop under an umbrella that I would call far more appealing, which was showcased in 1989. Though there hasn’t been a full album of hers that I care to listen to often, until this one, the others at least offered a hit or two I could get behind. It probably also doesn’t help that most of them are a bit lengthy.

For one, 1989 corrects both of these problems. Instead of tossing sixty-five minutes of pop tunes over the wall and hoping some of them land, this feels like it was meant to have continuity, and structure. The hits then felt a little more put-together. I can’t pretend that “Shake It Off” isn’t sort of silly, lacking much substance, but its execution is serviceable enough. The real monster jam is “Blank Space,” an old guilty pleasure of high school me that couldn’t be bothered to admit it. This track ties together smooth vocal performance, strong progression, and actual poetic flow. “All You Had To Do Is Stay” shakes a sturdier foundation, just another example of the pop abilities being realized. Her integration of synths into a lot of the rhythm backing did wonders across the board.

With that, there’s a running theme of breakups here. That isn’t out of the ordinary for Taylor Swift, however this time around things feel a bit more linear. “Bad Blood” and “How You Get The Girl” are two strong reaction-type tunes that inject just the smallest touch of attitude, reaching that sweet spot. The latter is a slightly deeper cut, something that makes up a decent portion of the better tracks. In fact, opener “Welcome To New York,” while seeming to sidestep the theme, still serves as Swift’s strongest opening song to date. “Deep cut” may not even be the right word for some of these, but I hadn’t heard this one prior to listening to the album. Really an incredible way to introduce us to the work, and again, is aided heavily by the synths.

All things considered, everything I look for in this style of modern pop is present. There are absolutely some goofy lines here and there, and a couple of throwaway tracks that we could have done without. But, you could say that about almost any KISS record, or most early rock ‘n roll and metal in general. The focus has never been more present prior to this, the catchier tunes feel more thought out, and overall, I couldn’t recommend it enough to someone itching to seek out this style.

Book Review: The Green Book, by Muammar Gaddafi

Something that’s talked about a little less in leftist circles than others is Muammar Gaddafi, and his Green Book. The Libyan revolutionary was a controversial figure in recent U.S. history, and was killed following a NATO attack in 2011. In the midst of having power for several decades, he put together a work known as Third International Theory, which is in three short parts, all within this book. Being heavily anti-capitalist, as well as rejecting Marxism, leftists tend to have mixed feelings of Gaddafi and his works. While certainly running with a socialist model, it’s not exactly in alignment with Marxist-Leninist theory. So the goal here is to give my perspective of the work through a Marxist lens.

The first section focuses heavily on democracy, something that Marxists hold close, which can be defined in many different ways. Gaddafi quickly details his distaste for any kind of authoritarianism, starting with the issues of parliamentary government. This points to the issues of using propaganda to win parliament and ultimately be an untrue voice of the people. He also mentions that a party taking parliament yields control of the population with only the perspective of that party, which is also misrepresentative. Classes are then tied into this, and this section closes off with the importance of popular conferences and people's committees to be the center of a governing force, as well as the driver for societal law and how to manage it.

Economics takes the mainstage for the second section, which is where socialism enters the picture. Right about here is where Third International Theory syncs up closest with Marxist analysis. Housing, income, and land are the three largest points, which are spelled out exactly as they would (should) be in any true socialist model. It stresses how essential these three things are, and how they are to be provided to anybody in order for survival. Land specifically is pointed out to be the property of none, and that it’s to be a public utility, as it’s more permanent than the everyday lives of how and where people live. Wage labor for society vs. private enterprise is compared to close the shortest section.

Finally, the social model makes up the last section. It addresses nationalism, and how it results in minorities’ heightened oppression. That then gives way to different family and tribal structures and roles within family, tribe, and nation. This is where things probably stray furthest from Marxist thinking, as women are seen to fulfill a certain role and appear a certain way in relation to man and the family structure, despite capitalizing on equality. Education makes its way into the fold, being something that should not be state controlled, and that variety of it should exist, giving a large criticism of world education systems. Entertainment, such as music and sport are briefly touched on at the end, and the work is then closed out.

So it should become easy to see why Marxists tend to have mixed feelings on Gaddaffi. On one hand, he was a revolutionary that sought to bring liberation to Libya, Africa, and the black community as a whole, as outlined in The Green Book. He believed in an economic model that was meant to fight exploitation, that saw housing, land, and proper wages as a need for society, and ultimately should stay out of the hands of private capitalists. Having a foot against imperialism certainly helps things too.

At the same time, many problems also arise within this context. For starters, the idea of a role for women and how they should be portrayed is a bit off when it comes to equality. While there may be some progressive ideas, and that equality is stated as necessary in the beginning of this section, there are some takes that strip away certain identity and involvement of women. Outside of social issues, some may disagree with the sentiment of giving one party control of the government. Movements meant to benefit private profit for the few, this certainly makes sense. But a revolutionary movement with the masses behind a party doesn’t quite seem to be the same thing in my eyes, which is another spot where Gadaffi exits the Marxist-Leninist idea. Using popular conferences and committees is certainly something we can agree on, as this form of democratic involvement is crucial for a socialist setting, but discounting the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat renders it less useful, and more utopian.

Is this worth reading? Sure. It's a short enough work that would probably take the average reader a day or two, and from an educational standpoint, it’s helpful. Americans could especially use this to gain insight on a leader that had such a recent conflict with the U.S. If nothing else, it provides one more taste of nuance. Prioritize it as you see fit, and take it with a grain of salt.

Album Review: Konquest - The Night Goes On

Konquest - The Night Goes On

Iron Oxide Records - 2021

7.5/10

Upon discovery, Konquest didn’t really do a whole lot for me. It struck me as a well-executed brand of Iron Maiden and NWOBHM worship that was fine for a listen or so, but lacked staying power. Time And Tyranny then hit the scene, changing all of that, by capitalizing on their own identity and injecting loads of uplifting energy alongside the beefy riffs. This called for a revisit of the debut, The Night Goes On.

Structurally, this is almost identical, showing where the groundwork was laid. Opening on an instrumental, sticking one somewhere in the middle, and closing off with a longer tune becomes the game. Packing everything into eight songs of heavy metal establishes their classic brevity trick. Production wise, however, things feel a bit dry, which I would expect from a debut of an up-and-coming band anyway. Because of this the drums do feel a bit louder at times, jumping above the mix in heavier parts, which made a nice impact, intentional or not. See “Keep Me Alive”; its descent into the first verse is solid.

But I would be lying if I said The Night Goes On stuck much harder upon revisiting. Being stripped of anything original, its Iron Maiden influence is too on-the-nose. Again, being a great band to model off of, the whole ride is pleasant, but memorable songwriting feels far less obvious. Convincing leads take a strong priority, trading off with vocals that come through nicely. I also love that despite the aforementioned atmosphere, the bass is very present, shown in the gallops of “Too Late.” “Helding Back The Tears” also gives a taste of what’s to come with the emotion, which I greatly appreciate. But alternatively, the “The Vision” closer was a bit underwhelming, working as a repetitive song rather than several phases consolidated into one. It also doesn’t help that the solo-bridge is nearly identical to Maiden’s “Hallowed Be Thy Name.”

Perhaps I’m being nit picky with my criticisms, or maybe I’m subconsciously forcing this to measure up to their sophomore full-length. There is plenty to dig up, you just have to look a lot harder. It becomes tough to overlook certain aspects, but at the end of the day I would call this plenty serviceable. 

Understanding Capital Vol.1 (Part 1), by Karl Marx

Welcome to Understanding Capital Vol. 1, where the goal is to analyze all angles of Capital, extract the important points, and summarize as much information as possible. The purpose here is less about inserting opinions on the work or what's said, and more about laying everything out to someone who has never read it, or someone who has a tough time reading it, yet can get a full understanding of the information.

One of the most important works to many left-wing circles, especially from a Marxist-Leninist standpoint just so happens to be one of the most massive and difficult to digest. Considered the "Communist Bible" to some, taking the form of three volumes total, Capital is the work of Marx (and Engels) that critiques the capitalist economic model down the the absolute barest of bones, and it's naturally a dry read and struggle for many to get through.

Going chapter by chapter, the aim here is to summarize the main ideas presented in each chapter and attempt to connect them to each other, eventually conveying the overall theory presented in Capital. Essentially, I will do the tough reading so that others don't have to. Each part within each volume will get its own article, starting here with the very first one.

Chapter 1: The Commodity

Heavily considered the hardest part of the entire three-book series, the first three chapters break down the concepts of value to their core ingredients, and boy can it be a slog to get through. The first chapter focuses on the commodity, so perhaps we should start by defining this term. A commodity is a thing outside us that satisfies human wants of some sort or another. Literally just about anything can be a commodity (though isn't always), be it the raw form or a manufactured good. The examples Marx uses throughout the first chapter is linen and a coat. But why do we care about this?

The simple answer is because of the values that are held within commodities, which also come in different forms. First, we'll look at use value, which is the fact that it has (or doesn't have) utility, or some sort of usefulness in life. Another word for this is the qualitative form of value, and what it can do for someone. This is realized through consumption, which is the basis of a capitalist economy. The properties of the commodity are what's used, thus, they are what determines how useful something is. For example, look at a microwave. Its usefulness is determined not by what it's made of, but of its actual properties. It heats up your food quickly, and that's what gives it its use. This has zero relation to the labor time that went into making the microwave.

Enter exchange value, which is quantitative, and can change depending on time and place. Exchange value is the commonality mode of expression of something within the commodity that is distinguishable from it. This is where use value and exchange value contradict each other, as they can't both be realized within the same instance. That said, both do play a general role in the overall value of a commodity, which is different as well. In order for something to have exchange value, or to be exchangeable, it has to have some kind of use. Nobody would exchange something of use for something of no use. For example, you would not exchange a pack of cigarettes for a bag of trash.

What is the point of knowing the difference between these modes of values? Workers are interested in the use value of something. What can they get out of it? How can it be used in their life? Capitalists, on the other hand, are more interested in the exchange value. What can they get in exchange for the product produced by a worker's labor? This is where the labor aspect of value itself enters. Use value alone isn't connected to labor value, but the value of the commodity itself can be expressed in the form of another commodity, what it exchanges for. Here is where wealth is realized, appearing in the form of commodities, which are a product of human labor. The usefulness doesn't care about how much labor power went into it, but the commodity itself exists because of the human labor power, which is where the commodity's value itself is realized aside from its usefulness. That very value is what the capitalist is interested in exchanging. One person has no need for five hundred microwaves, for example. But if they can exchange five hundred microwaves, then they have the value of five hundred microwaves made from the labor of each one, because they are of use to five hundred people.

So how is the labor value in a commodity measured within itself, then? A couple points on this are brought up. The first one is the aforementioned expression of a commodity value in another commodity. This goes back to the linen and coat example that Marx uses. You can't measure the value of linen in linen. That would be like saying "one dollar is equal to one dollar"; it holds no meaning. Instead, it's expressed in the value of another commodity, the coat. In Marx's example, one coat equals twenty yards of linen. This is considered a social relation, since value isn't just a natural part of the commodity. The value comes from the concrete labor, which is a productive activity of a definite kind exercised with definite aim. Or in other words, a specific type of work that has an end goal in mind. The linen and coat example show two of these, one of them being tailoring, the other being weaving. Both of these are different from one another, but are also alike in being expenditures of human brains, nerves, and muscles.

This is what makes value a social concept. Marx defines this measurement of value as the necessary labor time under normal conditions of production using the average degree of skill necessary. In other words, it isn't as simple as how long it takes to make something. Example? Suppose it takes two hours to manufacture an engine for a car. If the conditions or skillsets involved don't change, but the time suddenly doubles, the value does not double with it. But let's say somebody quits, or a machine breaks. Now the skill level and the conditions have changed, and the value goes up. It's not physically possible for as many to be made, thus there is a higher demand, thus the value of these things move up. This is on a small scale, just for brevity's sake. Notice how the use value of the engine doesn't change, the engine serves the same purpose. But the exchange value of it did change, thus the capitalist can charge more for it, based off of harder labor being used by his workers. As the socially necessary time (read: conditions and skill) go up, the value goes up. If they go down, so does the value.

But where does the use value in this come into play? Human labor in motion in itself is not value unless if it is being channeled into something useful. In this situation, the engine is useful, it makes the car run. Couple that with the exchange value that is the product of concrete labor, and you've got the full measurement of a commodity's value. To the inverse point, use value can exist without a commodity having value at all. Air, soil, and land are certainly useful, but they don't contain value without the labor step as discussed earlier. Compare that to a machine shop. There's loads of use value in the machines, as there is in owning land or soil, but until those things produce something useful, they aren't of value in the social sense.

But what about use value in something that isn't a commodity? You can certainly put labor into something that doesn't have an exchange value, and thus isn't a commodity. Say you make a nice frame, put a picture of family that you took in it, and gift it to a relative. This has no value that could be exchanged for something else. Instead, its use value is only going to satisfy the needs of one particular person (or a few people) in mind. But there is no social use value, and it can't be exchanged. You could argue that the frame alone has value, but that's changing the conditions of the situation, and again, this is for brevity.

The last point of this is where money comes into play. This is only touched on lightly, as price is an entirely different entity of its own discussed in chapter 3. Money is a universal equivalent of how all commodities are exchangeable, through a single representation of value in general. Gold is the money form used throughout the book, which enters the position of monopoly. It works across the entire board for different exchange value of different commodities.

Chapter one of Capital serves the purposes of showing the relationships between human labor, the different types of value, how a commodity gets its value, and how wealth is gained by controlling all of these factors. Marx refers to this as the fetishization of commodities, and ends by showing an ideal restructuring of how this would all work under communism, where individual laborers control their own production in common, and the labor power is consciously implied as the full labor value of the community. One person isn't able to control every one of these factors, and force the population to sell their labor power in order for survival, all for the sake of a capitalist's profit.

Chapter 2: Exchange

Working as a bit of a transition, chapter two is a very short bit on the exchange process itself. Chapter three heavily focuses on the contradictions of capital and labor, as the former works to increase the rate of exploitation (lower wages, worse working conditions), and the latter works to decrease the rate of exploitation (higher wages, better working conditions). This would become the basis for dialectical materialism, something to touch on at a different time. Because of this contradicting relationship, it's dealt with in a very systemic manner. To understand why, Marx goes on to describe the exchange process first.

Two consenting owners of commodities exchange by recognizing each other as owners of the commodities being exchanged. The owner that wants to exchange commodity A has no use for it, so for it to be useful to someone else, it must have a use value. If the owner of commodity B sees the use value, it's then realized through the exchange. It really is as straightforward as it sounds.

This short section is wrapped up with the concept of crises. If a mass amount of commodities are produced that have no use in a market, that's called a market crises. Often times, this happens when commodities are produced without knowing if it has a value or not. The need may have never been there in the first place, or a different commodity was released that made it useless. For example, if you mass produced flip-phones and Ipods in the age of the smartphone, the result would be crises, as the smartphone renders the other two useless.

Chapter 3: Money

Money was defined as the representation of value in the chapter one breakdown, but we'll look at it a little deeper here in chapter three. It bridges the products of labor of different forms together, and we return to the aforementioned contradictions. The contradictions of the qualitative value in use, and quantitative in exchange are realized with money. Exchange with money goes back to the necessity of trading with different communities, due to the material conditions of each community. The differing material conditions produce different surpluses, and thus render a use for community A that doesn't apply to community B.

Right about here is where gold and silver enter the picture. They each have two use values. One is the inherent physical property of each as a mineral, the other being their function as money. In the U.S., money was tied to gold up until 1971. After that relation was broken, the U.S. dollar became what we call fiat money, which has no physical material base. It's still a representation of value, showing labor time and material. The issue, however, is that this allows for far broader manipulation of the currency. As it becomes the more desirable form of money, sanctioning another country by cutting off their access to the U.S. dollar proves to give those with money far more control. This specific example isn't in the book, but is more of an extrapolation to show why Marx's point applies even today. Money being attached to gold also gave it a material basis. If there was a shortage of gold, the value of the dollar could go up, and if new gold was discovered (such as in the California Gold Rush), it then went down. Without this material basis, inflation has much more room to move, and those who own can control those who work by controlling what money can buy.

Enter price. As you can't physically see value in a commodity, a price is used to depict it by one who owns a large amount of exchangeable commodities. It's purely mental and ideal, because the price of something does not always correspond to the market value of something. Price can change without the fundamental value of something due to material conditions, as noted in the last paragraph. Marx summarizes this by saying that price and value will always be different. Value is social (As the necessary labor time), where price is individual (varying on a case-by-case basis). This contradiction becomes crucial for commodity circulation under capitalism. It can also lead to another form of crises, which would be an extreme difference in value and price. If price gets too out of sync with value, the price no longer even remotely expresses value. A great example of this would be the stock market crash in 1929.

The back half of this chapter focuses on a money circuit, in a way. It's expressed as commodity - money - commodity, or C-M-C for short. One commodity is sold for money, which is then used to buy another commodity, bringing together the concepts of money and exchange in the value-commodity relationship. Expanding on this, it becomes easy to understand that this cycle is continuous. Marx uses the example of selling the linen in order to purchase a Bible. But following this, it's shown that this circuit works as an endless cycle. Continuing from the same example, the purchaser of the Bible then sells it to buy brandy, showing that under capitalism, almost everything can be commodified, even those that could be held as sacred.

A contradiction exists within this, however. Going from the C to M phase is tougher than going from the M back to C phase, as there's no promise that the value of the commodity exchanged will be the same. In other words, it's easier to buy something than to sell it. Money is good to purchase anything, whereas not all commodities are going to have a constant value. Some may argue that this shows no sign for crises, as every purchase is also a sale, but then we bring on the concept of hoarding. This is when someone constantly sells, but does not buy, because while money is good for virtually anything, it's also far easier to hold onto if you're a producer of commodities, and aren't relying on selling labor power for survival. 

Hoarding is what allows for the possibility of private property (different from personal property, which gets touched on at a different time). Money is now realizing its power over others, and while value is social, the money is held privately and takes command over the circulation. With social power becoming private property in the hands of few, it gives those few a lot of control over others. You can hoard any amount of money (assuming you aren't laboring for survival), but there's only so much you can spend it on. 

Credit is mentioned near the end, which gets its own section later on, but it is worth knowing in this stage that it's a representation or claim on future value. Banks can use it as a universal medium to settle international relations. They can also keep the appearance of growth and circulation, by reducing the amount of available money to lend. This can also lead to crises, as the inability to pay back money lent out becomes a rampant part of society.

Conclusion:

To sum up the entire first part of Capital Vol. 1, it lays out the relationships between the major players of the capitalist system: commodity, value, use value, exchange value, exchange, money, price, owner, and labor. A commodity's values and how they differ is shown in all of chapter one, as well as its relationship to labor time. Chapter two and three go on to discuss the exchange process itself, its contradictions, and how money has been used to control even the social relations of these terms. Although it's very dry, wordy, and confusing at times, this is all necessary info for understanding the very groundwork of capital, and thus, capitalism.

Book Reivew: The Mongol Empire, by John Man

Being the second largest empire in history, topped only by the British Empire, The Mongol Empire boasts a lot of events in what is arguably a rather short time-span. Key figures would become immortalized throughout the centuries, as the Khans would cover nearly a sixth of the Earth's land, giving way to Dynasties, wars, and borders that would influence today's geography. John Man steps forward to touch on some of the pinnacle events that took place during its run, as well as some legacy, points of interest on the map, and the early pre-Empire days. As the title of his work would suggest, The Mongol Empire: Genghis Khan, His Heirs, And The Founding Of Modern China focuses a majority of its depth on the leadership of Genghis, as well as his grandson Kublai, without failing to connect the dots between eras. Early on, he mentions that much of the information in the book came from The Secret History, a chronical written in the 13th century AD that has been researched by modern historians to uncover the information. 

Working fairly chronologically, there are several key points that are drilled in throughout every era of the empire. The protection of Blue Heaven (and later Eternal Heaven) derived from from Shamanism early in Genghis's life, mostly a belief heheld from his ability to survive capture and conflict, as well as escaping these traps at such a young age. Generations prior to the empire's days touch on his family's idea to unite Mongol tribes, and how he was the first to do it. Luckily for the Christian, Islamic, and other ideologies that would fall into empire expansion, Shamanism didn't seek to suppress other forms of religion. This made it easier for The Great Kahn, to win people to his side, protecting Mongol sovereignty after causing others to surrender.

This of course, doesn't mean that there was no violence. Quite the opposite, the bloodshed that ensued in many of these wars is also touched on by Man, including the military tactics as well as the weaponry that was used. The sequence of when to move forward and where was imperative. For example, taking West Xia prior to the mighty Jin would be necessary due to needing allies and not wanting to take on a heavier guarded region before prepared, and it's all detailed out. Showing how brutal it could get at some points, this work outlines an example of Hulagu committing what's known as the Fall Of Baghdad, a horrific attack in modern day Iraq that devastated the entire Muslim population.

Context of Genghis's grandson Kublai coming to power is needed, getting to the "heirs" part that the title mentions. The transition is shown wonderfully. Family would play a key role, and each of Genghis's sons are mentioned, touching on why power was taken over by his daughter-in-law Sorkaktani first. Another key figure, one of his sons Ögedei was the one who sought out to secure his father's dream of taking Karakorum, which is now in central Mongolia with ruins that can still be seen. This type of unity proved to be one of the biggest reasons many of the conquests were successful. Occasionally, infighting is mentioned, but that never appeared to have a significant enough impact until far later.

By the time we get to the Kublai era, things took on different meaning. The Yuan Dynasty's establishment is embraced, seeing that it took fruition under his rule. The "founding of modern China" section of the book is emphasized most here, as many of the borders established still exist today, as well as different Chinese provinces. Today's Yunnan, Shaanxi, Sichuan, and Gansu all owe their thanks to the Yuan era.

Right around here is also where the crossovers between Mongol and Chinese culture are laid on far heavier. Detailing the venture of the Song territories in the south, as well as Tibet, shows where lines were drawn between east and central Asian territories, and the struggle that went into this just as it had for taking on the Jin. Sure, plenty of European land even made its way into the empire at this time, but there was less presence the further west you went. Kublai's fascination with the looks of Mongol Gers but skills in Chinese building would see much of the merging of two nations. A big area that Man touches on in this regard is Kublai's capital of Xanadu, and spending time between it and Beijing. Doing this meant Karakorum, which some Mongols see as traitorous to this day. His adaption of Buddhism, inspired by his mentor Phags-Pha gets its own passage to highlight where the older Mongol traditions met Tibetan ones as time went on.

Mongolian Ger

For the Majority of The Mongol Empire, continual successes are what's shown in its expansion, leaving little room for drawbacks. This would change as we enter the last quarter or so, particularly when reaching the sections on Japan. Several attempts were made to take on Japan, and why they failed miserably. This is tied into certain Japanese beliefs and where certain Japanese terms come from (such as kamikaze) to give a broader historical perspective. Very little beyond this is mentioned, besides some theories on why the Yuan Dynasty slowly began to fall, and with it the Mongol Empire itself. Ming Dynasty would effectively see the end, and John Man closes things off with the legacies, and how the modern world and ages since have been effected.

Mongol Empire With Modern Borders

From an educational standpoint, this is a great book to get an idea of many of the largest events that took place during the empire's reign. Specific years, names, locations, and relationships between them are given, and a general look into why certain things worked and why others didn't are shown. Reasons for what was carried out, and the beliefs of different figures can certainly be a lot to juggle, especially if you're shaky on east Asian names and pronunciations. But objectively, it became easy enough. The maps showing the progression of the borders as the book goes on were very helpful, especially at the end when modern borders were used for comparison.

On the other hand, no specific event is covered to in a deep dive fashion. As the book aims to cover the entire empire in roughly 400 pages, little room is left for anything beyond a chapter-by-chapter summary of each larger event. John Man's ability to relate his own travels to much of the discussed information proves to be helpful, and the footnotes are a nice touch for extra context on certain words that aren't going to be familiar to your casual reader.

Ultimately, the goal here was to touch on exactly what the title states: Genghis, his heirs, and how the China and the cultures were affected. For this narrative alone, everything you could need for a basic understanding is included. His closing statement on how Genghis and Kublai are still important figures to both modern day Mongolia and China summed it up wonderfully. “If the Chinese take over Mongolia, they will do so in the names of Genghis and Kublai, who made Mongolia part of China. And if Mongols resist, they will do so in the name of Genghis and Kublai, who made China part of Mongolia.”

Book Review: Critique Of The Gotha Programme, by Karl Marx

One of the shortest works of theory I’ve ever read, Karl Marx’s Critique Of The Gotha Program can be summed up in just a couple of paragraphs. Written very late in his life (1875), this was essentially put out in the form of a letter to the SDAP (Social Democratic Workers’ Party Of Germany). To put it simply, this short work basically breaks down statements within the program itself and extracts the areas that Marx sees as incorrect, and his way of addressing the change.

So what exactly is The Gotha Programme? It worked as a political platform and eventually was adopted as a congress for the party. Gotha was simply the German town that this was held in in 1875. Part I goes through the first five statements, picking apart each one and pointing out contradictions or inaccuracies. For example, point number two under this section points out that the monopoly of the capitalist class arises from their grasp on the instruments of labor. Marx then goes on to express how this leaves out landowners, and how in England, most of the capitalist factories aren’t even on land owned by them. Thus, the importance of the distinction and why they both matter is corrected. Similar such rhetorics are brought from the other four critiques.

Part II and III are very short, using only a couple of pages to discuss the wage labor issues and the plan to do away with it, along with the flaws of “state aid”. The work ends with IV, returning to a broader definition of the “free state” as well as embracing the need for the socialist phase as the lower phase of communism. It stresses how the dictatorship of the proletariat starts with “to each according to his contribution”. Finally, this is where democracy through a Marxist lens is just touched on.

What a lot of this really boils down to is that most of the information can be gained from reading other more important and in-depth works by Marx. It’s also very specific to one place and time. Would I recommend reading this one? Sure, but less out of necessity and more out of understanding a real-life socialist project from a different time at a different place. There are plenty of works I would suggest before this one, though. Consider this my critique of the critique.

Album Review: Leather Nunn - Take The Night

Leather Nunn - Take The Night

Key Records - 1986

7.5/10

Looking back on bands with one album that never really took off from the 1980s always seems to have a bit of a special place in my heart. Nine times out of ten, they reside somewhere on the traditional metal or early thrash end of things, feeling a bit undercooked (which only adds to the charm). Florida’s Leather Nunn fit this exact description, putting out Take The Night in 1986 and bouncing without another word. Three years following would see the band’s breakup.

From the get-go, the raw veneer is coupled with buzzsaw-like guitar coats to give this an extra sense of heaviness. Admittedly, this does clip away a potential boost to the already heavy riffs that would deliver with more power, but that’s a mild complaint. Despite sporting such a coarse foundation, the vocals never venture into harsh territory. On the other hand, the solos are plenty striking, and the bass rumbles can be felt wonderfully. The steadier flow of the title track with its “power stance riffs” really showcases this beautifully.

Saying that the songwriting on Take The Night is memorable would be a bit of a stretch, as a lot of this blends in decently with the basics of the style at the time. Variance on the basic riffing structure is somewhat lacking, but at least the one trick is a good one. “Taken Ground” and its edgier gallop holds a bit more oomph, this one also being a tune I would say fits what a majority of this album follows structurally. I wouldn’t call this a ballad, but “Take Me Back” diverts from the more monotone layout and injects emotion heavier than anywhere else on the disc. Same could probably be said about “You’re The One.”

It’s a shame that Leather Nunn ended so early, because this shows some serious potential for growth amidst what’s already plenty strong. Taking this basic foundation and applying unique tricks and a slightly more focused aim could have seen a perfect record. Regardless, this is a very worthwhile spin, and it’s quite digestible. Fans of Wolf, Steeler, Bride, or early Motley Crue should give this a shot.

Album Review: Twisted Sister - Come Out And Play

Twisted Sister - Come Out And Play

Atlantic Records - 1985

5.5/10

Following three consecutive banger records that had varying levels of success and heaviness, there was really no doubting that Twisted Sister had an ear for melodic hooks appealing to radio crowds and metalheads alike. It would take the hits of Stay Hungry to break Dee Snider and co. into the largest realm of the mainstream. That very success would influence the next album heavily, taking the poppier elements and stretching them across an entire record. The end product is Come Out And Play, one that receives mixed feedback for what I think are obvious reasons.

Never will it be an issue to swing towards something more melody oriented, or just a general step back in heaviness. That said, reaching too far for the sake of that identity can sometimes overcompensate and leave out an otherwise sturdier bottom. The overall theme here seems to be a bit of a response to the 1960s easy going feeling combined with 1980s heavy metal riffing. Between the Shangri-Las cover of “Leader Of The Pack,” and the obvious nod towards The Beach Boys in “Be Chrool To Your Scuel,” it’s pretty hard to overlook such a template that’s almost too obvious for its own good. Admittedly, I love the cover, but if it’s my favorite song on an album, there may be an issue.

The rest of Come Out And Play feels like an uncertain path towards that pop/metal bridge. The title track is almost misleading, opening on the fastest and heaviest note on the disc, only to give way to repetitive leads that make up the majority of this disc after the first two tracks. The outcome is a handful of songs that are fun enough on the surface but struggle to go anywhere. “You Want What We Got” has the anthemic glam metal charm in its chorus, but almost no weight in the music to carry things smoothly. “Kill Or Be Killed” reflects the earlier Twisted Sister vibes, raking in the violent nature but to the inverse, focusing too much on that and not enough on memorable riffing. Even “I Believe In You” drops below the typical ballad that the band would put out, only being memorable because of the repetitiveness in the chorus.

Perhaps I’m a little hard on this record, because it certainly isn’t anything terrible, and there are moments that I enjoy. But it does lack some serious ingredients that made the first few records so great. It’s tough to overlook how non-linear the flow on this feels despite having several clear ideas. If they had landed with a little more cohesion, and maybe if this wasn’t so rushed, this could have been better. After all, they have done an album every year since their debut up to this point.