/lit/ - Literature

>>10642404
>His story isn't that he decided he didn't like capitilism and exited the system. His story, as this guy reminds us
>>>10642226
>Is that he entered the job market and left after seeing the only ones he could do were miserable.
I don't know much about REI's personal life, I don't even know if that story is truthful or satirical. Perhaps he can get other jobs and chooses not to. I think he has stated that he is a NEET by choice at some point (and some ITT think he is in the military, which, to my knowledge, is false. I think he has stated that he will fight in WW3 against the Zionists and forces of hybridization). Regardless, a philosopher can live in a barrel and still provide insights into our world.
>I'm not going to spend all my time reading someone who I think is a shallow, obscurest with a shitty, reactive spirituality.
If you think he is being obscurest, I would ask you to explain his ideas in a more coherent form. Personally I find him far more readable and easier to understand than many other philosophers.
Also, I do not see his ideas as reactive, as I mentioned before. What makes you think that they are reactive, as opposed to proactive, as he characterizes them?
If you don't want to read him, you don't have to; no philosopher's work is essential.

Also, you did not answer my question:
>In what way is REI's perspective "unhealthy"?
I explained that REI is not trying to escape from the world, but is trying to change it, so I don't see why you perceive it as "unhealthy" that one would want to transcend a perfected world.