/lit/ - Literature

Reminder that aristocracy is inevitable, and when global calamities briefly create a broadly shared prosperity, it never lasts, and the upper class always manages to reassert itself.

500 years of Reformation, Enlightenment, and Modernity is sufficient to prove that a broadly shared prosperity will never take place. We've had half a millennium of revolutions, reforms, revolts, uprisings, all with, essentially, the same goal: to take power and wealth away from the small cluster of elites who previously possessed it, and distribute it more equitably among the masses.

And where have we wound up? Right back where we started: with a small amount of people controlling most of the wealth and most of the power. Oh, sure, it doesn't look quite the same as pre-modern aristocracy. But its function is essentially identical. In fact, I would say that the aristocracy of Modernity is WORSE than the aristocracy of Antiquity and the Middle Ages precisely because it pretends it doesn't exist. Our elites self-style themselves as "common citizens" and insist that "elections" and "public opinion" are the real drivers of how the world is governed. This is a blatant lie, and makes the entire way the world is governed now fundamentally dishonest.

If I could work my will I would have a new de jure aristocracy reemerge; maybe not quite the same as the old system of kings, dukes, barons, and emperors, but definitely one that was open about its status. If I'm going to be ruled by a small elite, if it's inevitable that I will be ruled by a small elite, then I'd at least like them to acknowledge their status rather than pretending they're just like me.

In general, it is a bad idea to take life advice from philosophers who were not able to successfully put their philosophy into practice in their own lives.

>>17427111
The whole point of Buddhism is that these truths reveal themselves the deeper into your practice you go. If you haven't realised the truth of pratityasamutpada, rebirth, etc. then it means you still have to practice more

Your favorite writer killed himself/herself. How does that make you feel?

Reality is infinite therefore there must be an infinite being in it.

I was reading about paradoxes on Wikipedia because that sweet sweet browser narcotic, and as I was reading about the Abilene paradox, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox)), I got to thinking about the story of Spartacus. Each of his companions claimed they were themselves Spartacus as a sign of solidarity (and perhaps to keep the real one safe), but in the end they all got crucified, which is counterproductive to the whole "keeping the revolution alive" idea. Would the counterproductive self-sacrifice of Spartacus' companions be an example of the consequences of the Abilene paradox, an example of groupthink, or something else entirely?

>>11824452
I thought people on /lit/ sought to enrichen their lives with literature, become more intelligent and imaginitive, and grow better and stronger from the experience. But I see that I was wrong, and that you're still eager to go for the low-hanging fruit, lazily typing the same old dull shit without ever actually giving it some thought, occasionally throwing out a lame insult to anyone daring to call you out - and never simply going away and doing something actually productive and constructive.

You are a fat, pathetic dumbass, spending your days fantasizing about shit you can never have, utterly unable to think for yourself, and a broken record. I feel nothing but contempt for you.

>>11778538
Counterpoint: if religion didn't exist, or if it'd suddenly stop existing, it would take humans roughly five minutes to start killing and torturing and segregating one another over some other excuse.

Religion didn't fuck us up - we fucked the religion up. We're just garbage.

>>11729222
I mean it's not that terrible on its own, but it's still a pretty clear sign on where the author's priorities lie. Anyone too concerned of social justice and modern sensibilities is fundamentally unable to write good fiction.

>>11714621
>there's very little difference in the two
1. Socialism is an economic system while communism is both an economic and political system.
2. In socialism, the resources of the economy are managed and controlled by the people themselves through communes or councils while in communism, management and control rest on a few people in a single authoritarian party.
3. Socialists distribute wealth to the people based on an individual’s productive efforts while communists farm out wealth based on an individual’s needs.
4. Socialists can own personal properties while communists can not.
5. Socialism allows capitalism to exist in its midst while communism seeks to get rid of capitalism.
6. Socialism has been shown to work in practice without creating tyrannical hellholes of poverty and despair.

If you direct a film with full knowledge and understanding of what makes a film good, you will do a great film, same as how you would write a great book by knowing what makes for a good literary work. Every artistic medium has entirely different merits and flaws, different ways of doing things, and none are inherently better or worse than the other.

Except video games. Video games are inherently shit.

>>11658329
A good indicator would be whether the work was actually good.

I think it's safe to say that in this instance, that's not the case.

>>11616910
People really like to downplay the importance of repentance and forgiveness, and exaggerate the need for revenge and cathartic bloodletting. In the end the scope of the crime doesn't matter: if you truly and genuinely regret what you did, wish for forgiveness, and will never ever repeat it, then at that point what good would it do to gun you down and send you to hell for eternity?

I'm not saying you're any likely to ever come back if you stuck your meat into an infant, but in theory it can happen, and we should let it happen if it does. Otherwise, you know, all the other baby-rapists are just going to run away and rape more babies, because they know no one's going to forgive them for it and they shouldn't even bother trying.

Jack Kerouac used to just sit down and spam whatever he had on his mind until it formed into a book.

I do a similar thing, I spam absolute shit then go back and meticulously edit it until it's readable.

>Study Platonism, Aristotelian, and other ancient Greek philosophies
>Read the Bible, Quran, Hadith, Mormon Canon, Swedenborg canon, Paradise Lost, Divine Comedy, and other Abrahamic writings to form a mythos
>Practice what you have determined to be the truth
Is this the most /lit/ religion?

You have two choices.

1) a long and highly prosperous career churning out shit, lowest common denominator fiction that has no lasting cultural value.

2) you write two or three beautiful, albeit poorly selling novels in your lifetime that come to be regarded as classics only after your death. You earn very little from them in life and have to continue working a day job until your retirement.

Which do you choose?

Ayn Rand premise is that people being rich doesn't affect other people.
But it does, it was proven in 1850's by karl marx.
When somebody has massive amount of capital they'll just keep getting rich at the workers expense until the rich have sucked every last dollar from the working class and the system collapses.

I'm copy-editing/proofreading a tabletop RPG book for a friend, and I'm not sure if a grammar construct he's using is correct.
>This guarantees uniformity in magazines, spare parts, and ammunition, as well as familiarity.
If I remember correctly, each noun in a list like this should have a comma after it, with the article "and" or phrase "as well as" at the end of the list. My current correction reads like this:
>This guarantees uniformity in magazines, spare parts, ammunition, and familiarity.
Is my suggestion correct?

I have a research project for my English class in which we have to draw a thesis about Christ figures and then back that thesis with examples from liturature. I have already bought and read my literature (A Tale of Two cities, The scarlet Ibis, and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner) Im having a hard time thinking of a thesis to draw however about Christ Figures throughout the ages. Im not asking for anyone to do the work for me but If anyone wants to discuss possible thesis statements I would appreciate that a lot. Currently my thesis is "The way Christ figures are depicted changes but the symbols used for Christ figures don’t change over time." But that is kinda dumb.

TLDR: Please come and discuss christ figures with me so that i can better my thesis statement.

hi frenchfag here. I speak french/english/hebrew/yiddish and even though french has by far the greatest modern literature of the four, I seem to enjoy more the latter three. I kread baudelaire, rimbaud, hugo, rostand, zola, camus whom I know are a level above eg poe (at least the first three) but weirdly I feel more shaken by poe's the raven than baudelaire's l'albatros, for instance.

Do you guys too have difficulty with enjoying your native language?

ancient hebrew, ancient greek, latin, french, russian, english (a bit lesser than the others but useful for reading encyclopedias and comunicating). second tier are german, italian chinese, sanskrit. third tier is spanish, portuguese, japanese (great nation but lacking lit wise). fourth tier is the rest

What are some good secondary texts on Roman/Greek philosophy?

Hey /lit/, what books do I need to read in order to have an identity as a "leftist"? I like the general idea of communism and hate capitalism on a visceral level but I'm uneducated!

And I think social issues (abortion, gay marriage, bathrooms) are irrelevant and tools used to distract the masses from issues that effect them.

I find international politics interesting too.

Gimme some literature pls