Talk:Base and superstructure

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Superstructure was copied or moved into Base and superstructure with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

"base" and "superstructure" comes from Stalin, not Marx

At least according to Stalin: A Man of Contradiction: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B7trXEFcZimVS0tiSEF2cmRHRjg/edit (bottom of page 134 if going by the pdf page numbers, 112 if going by the book page numbers). — Preceding unsigned comment added by CommieFeminist (talk • contribs) 06:50, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Theory

I am merely putting the question out there, but is this truly a theory? A theory, according to the definition that we use at my university, is a proven scientific explanation of an aspect of the universe. Theory is in this case quite obviously used in the other sense of the word, theory as opposed to practice. Therefore, might it not be more exact to call it something else, something that does not falsely imply scientific credibility? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.226.54.134 (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're mixing up a theory and a fact? 69.122.244.46 (talk) 09:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with sentence in current lede about Orthodox Marxism

Saying that that implies unidirectional determination. To the extent that Marxism is an inverted or evolved Hegelianism, that's just false and it's not in the given source or consistent with what I think you'll find from reliable sources. Rather, the Orthodox understanding would be that the two are in a constant process of sublation but of course with the base being basic, determinative, but also with a back flow of effect from the situation of the superstructure. Lycurgus (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also this is relevant to the deletion edit of text supplied by someone else who was trying to say the above on the basis that it was unsourced (which it was) and a conjecture (which it was not). Whoever placed that text (it didn't sound like me) you can easily source per above. So the defects were actually that it was weasel worded and unsourced. Lycurgus (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Base and superstructure. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What malapropism?

>> In some non-Western languages, this concept [base and superstructure] is rendered as "Infrastructure and Superstructure" which could lead to a malapropism. <<

Which non-Western languages? Examples? Hindi, Korean...? (N.B. This "non-Western" has been changed at some stage from an earlier, even less specific, "non-Germanic").
What is the potential malapropism (the use of an incorrect word in place of a word with a similar sound, resulting in a nonsensical, sometimes humorous utterance)? It seems to me that the use of the word "malapropism" might itself be a malapropism here.
Is it, in any case, at all relevant to this article what terms other languages use for the concept?

Can anyone explain what is going on here, or at least suggest a reason why the whole sentence should not be deleted? -- Picapica (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]