/lit/ - Literature

If they don't seek it on their own they don't deserve it. They can have Marvel movies and sugary food, that's all they get.

>>16140883
>Most of my students don’t give a shit about the language or literature in general.
>Every now and again, though, a student comes along who shows real promise and just gets it, so to speak.
How does it make you feel that the former will always have more power than the latter?

Also do you teach advanced placement English or Coretard English?

>80% of the username is made up by affluent millenials
>71% get their news from the network itself

>>15673830
The ONLY way a completely demoralized person can be converted, is if they have a life shattering event happen to them (loved one killed by minority/immigrant, mugged by immigrant/minority, raped by immigrant/minority), and even then it's not certain that they will see the error of their ways. When a person is completely demoralized, there is no logical argument hat can sway them from their programming.

All you Ted Kaczynski, Ellul, Sorel, Bernays, etc. People.
Why do you not talk about this guy?
Is he a fraud or is his Magnum Opus not actually that important, since it certainly does seem like it.

The objective of abolishing hierarchy and oppressive structures is a patently irrational fantasy driven by an infantile observation of social systems. Exclusionary classes are often formed to define collections of individuals but there is no reason why one cannot fit into multiple sets used to subdivide people within some category. This is a limited approach to analysing social systems. Society can be broken down into non-exclusionary sets where a member of one set is also the member of other sets within a specific context.

An example of such a context is to take the population of some nation and create two sets, "the masses" for all individuals of the population, and "you". The moral and value hierarchy places the masses above you. In this case, the masses may hold some belief that is not, or cannot be, justified by empirical reality. At this point I believe it is clear how the individual 'you' is oppressed by 'the masses' despite being a member of both classes and how this can be applied to all social systems. Hierarchy can capture individuals and groups with non-exclusivity in many different contexts.

This explains how those seeking democracy, equality, and the destruction of hierarchy, are acting irrationally or in bad faith - seeking a rise of their person status within the context of some hierarchical structure. The criticism of hierarchy itself is therefore invalid.

Only the ignorant can be happy.

So you feel bad when you see a video of a brutal child rape or whatever makes you repulsed and upset?

Why does it make you feel bad only when watching or remembering it? Are you upset by the fact you're viewing the material or are you upset because of the fact this terrible thing had happened and watching/thinking about this makes you upset? If it's the latter then should you not always be upset? NO! of course not, because your indefinite ignorance allows you to be happy.

Ignorance is bliss.

I strongly believe that the only way to be happy and the only way to conform to society is to be grossly ignorant.

>Colonopolgist
>Noun
>A person who shows extensive guilt for the accomplishments of his ancestors and seeks to appease any perceived victims, particularly relating to colonisation.

The fact that pretty much every philosophy is based upon the notion of an absolute morality and value system that is just present and universal and this is something that everyone implicitly or explicitly accepts has put me in the psych ward twice.

Good books on terrible political systems?

Books to make me stop hating people and seeing them as cattle?

Coercion and violence is employed every single day to enforce the status quo and either the demands of the tyrannical majority or the desires of the powerful minority. This has been reality for all of history and every single movement you've been told is a moral good.

If you're upset about a mass shooting, you're not empathetic, you're not virtuous, you're not intelligent and you're certainly not better than others. You're just another irrational idiot.

The only axiom of logic that matters, the only fundamental values people have that matter, the only initial assertion that everyone makes to start their logical process that matters is the one that is enforced through violence and coercion.

For some reason, people have to believe otherwise. People have to believe that there is some religious morality that just exists out there like natural laws of physics. They have to assert that their initial assertions are not assertions, but proven and objective facts that cannot be contested because it is society-destroying to admit that the fundamental premises we build everything else on top of cannot be proven. Now, we all have to pretend these values are shared by all and if someone disagrees then its not a matter of equally valid assertion but instead blasphemy that must be repressed through use of violence or coercion.

Don't think all humans have objective spiritual value? Yep, you're to be ostracized.

This is how things have always been and this is how things will always be. It drives me insane because it results in constant turmoil between people who cant even agree on a direction, let alone a destination, let alone how to get there. If the Umbungo tribe fervently believes that scientific theory cannot reveal truth but instead only spiritual ritual and divination through an oracle then there is no way to agree sincr you cant rven agree on what is truth, thus war is inevitable.

Again, this drives me insane. What seems to make most sense would be if a society started from scratch with a constitution that asserted a fundamental set of values, the ultimate purpose of the society and the system used to uncover truth. Make these rules completely inviolable which means to abolish these fundamental rules would require the utter collapse of the society. This system seems to make the most sense since it solves the persistent issue of apathy and major internal conflict due to differences in values and objectives of the citizenry.

What is the correct Latin to say "Life from death"?

Vita a mortem
Vita a mortam

>>12531183
Yep.