/lit/ - Literature

>>10673944
Jean-Claude Michéa is another good one

post-ideology

>>10673944
Good question. Clouscard is dangerously unknown in the anglo world. I'd argue he is the most important Marxist after WWII.

Every little anti-SJW critique that Zizek spouts is watered down Clouscard.

>>10673944
Nice to see Clouscard here
Have a bump

>>10673944
I think everyone in this thread is OP.

>>10674034
Are you?

>>10674034
op here you can frig off this is me >>10673944
>>10673951 that's it. But this thread isn't a Culture of Critique general or a brutal SJW takedown of Peterson so probably not worth posting it here.

>>10674037
Fact is, I hate if there are this many marxist cucks on a redpill website for white nationalism. Are you all shills?

>>10674047
is that really how you see this website?

>>10674047
The board is overwhelmingly leftist. You are a minority and will die out, much like the white race over the course of the 21st century. Good day, comrade.

>>10674047
Define Marxist

>>10674050
>>10674052
>Eating b8 this obvious

>>10674091
You're the only one who responded, fag.

>>10674052
This is b8 but there faggots who unironically think this. You leftist fags are just as bad as the pol faggots with all your spooks. Lit is a postmodern board no metanarratives allowed

>>10674096
No
>inb4 phone poster

>>10674099
It's not bait. I meant it and it's the truth.

>>10674099
Wrong. /lit/ is a african etnonationalist board

>>10674103
That second person was after your response.

>>10674114
Alright my guy since you're convinced I'm samefagging who do you suggest we talk about instead of clouscard et al

Alright stop derailing please this is an actual decent thread for once

>>10674099
>willfully seeing a bait as an example of what you already believe in

>>10674154
No it's not.

>>10674099

I thought lit was catholic integralist? That's why I'm here.

>>10673951
What's a good starting point with him?

>>10674167
Well it had the potential to be one

>>10674047
>>10674052
>>10674099
Stop derailing the thread, faggots. Read Clouscard and stop enabling the neo-fascist paradigm of neo-liberal vs boogey man idiot "far-right" nationalism.

>>10674304
Fine, I'll read Couscard.

>>10673951
This
.>>10674193
Le complexe d'Orphée or his first book on Orwell.

>>10674160
wut are u on about

>>10674002
What's he say? Doesn't look to be translated.

>>10673944
>parrots and /pol/ derail a thread about post-modern pseudo reactionary theorists who deconstruct techno-capitalism
WOWOWOW really makes you think!

>>10674362
What are these books about? Also seems to be lacking in translations.

>>10674193
I'd say Realm of Lesser Evil, at least because it's translated into english and even liquid man likes it.

>>10673944
I think naming them adds more spooks to sift through, just let them be I guess

>>10674550
op here, that's a fair assessment. The only reason I was asking is I want more, do you have any recommendations for others? it being in French is not a problem

>>10674399
He thought Freudo-Marxism (his term) of Reich, Marcuse, Deleuze & Guattari, along with the general may 68 boomer zeitgeist, enables a new paradigm he calls neo-fascism, which is simply neo-liberal vs dumb boogey man nationalism. The latter is held up as a threat but they're not really that intelligent or a problem for the system. In this way you don't really have a meaningful choice. Everything is permitted but nothing is possible. It's like having to choose between Trump or Hillary, Macron or le Pen.

His other work is a critique of what he calls capitalism of seduction (we've arrived at a service economy and it's very easy to create needs to and then create a service to cater to the need). Part of Clouscard's thinking is a need to critique orthodox Marxist dogma, which he thinks can end up serving capitalism as soon as Marxists stop thinking in truly dialectical ways (rigidly clinging to orthodoxy is a form of non-dialectical thinking for him, an easy example being how nationalism can in some instances be a tool to resist globalization, although he was far from being a nationalist). Basically, sometimes we ought to invert Marxist dogma ,and there's nothing wrong with this because that's what dialectical thinking is all about, we simply have to remain conscious of that fact and most Marxists forget to do this.

What I have read makes him a lot more interesting and perceptive than anything Zizek, Jameson or Harvey farts out. And definitely more interesting that Derrida and Foucault.

Interesting fact, Sartre disliked him. I take that as a sign that he was on to something...

>>10674665
I highly recommend Paul Piccone, the founder of Telos Press (it went to shit after he died). Very interesting Marxist thinker who became highly critical of orthodox Marxism.

There's Pasolini and Georges Sorel. Carl Schmitt has some interesting things to say for any anti-liberal left winger.

>>10674677
This sounds like very standard critical theory stuff. I mean, for someone criticizing the 68ers, the man seems to have a very simiular outlook as that of the situationists.
I'm only replying because I had never seen this lad mentioned, started reading a Girard book in which he's mentioned today and now see this thread.

>>10674722
It seems like standard critical theory because he was one of the first to say this and since then he's been plagiarized heavily (Zizek, I'm looking at you) He's so prescient that he pre-empts Angela Nagle being called far-right by the left because she dared to critique tumblr.

His outlook isn't really similar to the situationists but I can see how you could think that. And everyone knows late Debord is best Debord.

Girard is a cool thinker, hope you enjoy him. Politically, I'm not sure where you go with Girard. Why not say mimetic theory is standard theory stuff? Or that Girard is "too simple?"

>>10674776
If he was one of the french pomo thinkers, he was at least 20 years late for the critical theory part, but I'll give him a read anyway, seems interesting. Anywhere I should be starting with? Also, I don't see how it's productive to name post-war capitalism as neo-fascism, I'm very weary of the indiscriminate use of the word, as it tends to turn "fascism" into a (a)moral situation. Idk I've been drinking since the afternoon so it's kinda difficult to organize my ideas.

>>10674776
What you are taking about in >>10674677
doesn't sound that far off from the Dialectic Of Enlightment and Adorno and Horkheimer wrote that shit in the fucking 40s when Clouscard was still a teenager.

>>10674696
>Paul Piccone
after looking around a bit he seems pretty awesome, thanks anon

>>10675073
There's a handful of his essays on booksc. Telos Press charge an arm and a leg for his books now. Sad!

>>10673944
u should read Christopher Lasch
http://thezeitgeistmovement.se/files/Lasch_Christopher_The_Culture_of_Narcissism.pdf

>>10675445
Michea is highly influenced by Lasch.

Lasch is great. I'd recommend Revolt of the Elites and True and Only Heaven.

>>10675445
>http://thezeitgeistmovement.se/files/Lasch_Christopher_The_Culture_of_Narcissism.pdf
thanks anon checking it out now

>>10673944
>a good name for the critical post-marxist distancing from left wing politics and notions of cultural "progress" that borders on reactionary?
a faggot, like OP

>>10673944
I don't like Clouscard because I don't border on reactionary at all, but I have to admit he looks like a fucking angel.

>>10673944
what's the antithesis to this? any post marxist writers who are progress obsessed bluehaired sjws as far removed as possible from anything remotely reactionary?

>>10673944
>progress
>reactionary
What does this mean? The very foundation of all leftism (and modern conservatism) is based on "muh progress". The only way to reject progress is to be a reactionary, isn't it?

>>10673944
how do you guys deal with sjw shit irl?

>>10675986
how do you guys deal with decent empathetic human beings irl?

>>10675445
Came in here to recommend Lasch, wasn't disappointed.

>>10675905
Clouscard seems reactionary to contemporary leftists, but he argues that it's these contemporary leftists, these Freudo-Marxists, who are anti-progress and anti-revolution.

>>10675905
what? you can still be fundamentally for an idea of progress, while critiquing common forms of "progess", you know? adorno and the like were often called reactionaries because they had an extremly pessimistic idea of "progress" and a very narrow definiton of what could be considered true progress, but that doesn't mean you have to throw the whole idea out of the window. This whole idea of either you have to accept all progress or become a luddite reactionary that hates all progress is total brainlet ideology.