/lit/ - Literature

>>18174721
Yes, as long as it's from the first half of the 20th century or earlier.

>>18176131
imagine having a grasp this bad of neocameralism. it's bullshit, but not for this reason.
>>18176147
see picrel
>>18176680
gray mirror makes it more formal but no less stupid. honestly it only works in the systems-theoretic, hardcore liberal worldview. that's what neocameralism always was, liberals trying to be the very best liberals and finding out its ideological errors and contradictions lead them into what ends up being elaborated as neocameralism.
>>18176708
his substack is free, and based.
>>18176852
unironically, yarvin was the first to diagnose liberalism for what it is and they're still injured over it.
>>18177398
leaders aren't selected. leaders just are. the only way you, or anyone, could "select" a leader is by applying and deploying another, more subtle leader.
>>18177495
nah, the main thing he does that causes such harm to shitlibs is his diagnosis of liberalism as a contingent, specific, historical event, instead of being the ideological culmination of an inevitable human nature (something that the marxists and whiggish libs share in their world-images)
>>18177648
you can tell by the writing style, it's true
>>18177667
lole urbit's more complicated than that, but if it's successful (and i imagine it will be) he's gonna be a real renaissance man.
>>18177729
those two things do definitely contradict each other, and you have to pick one. really, he doesn't get away from liberalism, and its atomization-globalization contradiction gets deployed all the time in his worldview.
>>18177834
really high iq take. do you watch vaush?