/lit/ - Literature

If you have to ask it's safe to say your position is not very well grounded. He is reading, you are not.

Obvious bait, especially since the more intellectual components of the far right have found many of the observations made by Debord compatible, with little modification, to their own analysis of modernity.

>>11264867
Forgot to mention I already rec'd him "The Reign of Quantity And the Signs of Time", "Men Among the Ruins" and some comps by William Blake.

>>11264882
Read above.

>>11264883
Still a Marxist book. Some degree of compatibility of ideas brought forth by mental gymnastics is a ridiculous way of going through life.

>>11264889
>Some degree of compatibility of ideas brought forth by mental gymnastics is a ridiculous way of going through life
If it's philosophy, then there's no reason for someone to not be able to synthesize different ideas, insofar as they are A. able to keep a consistent worldview and B. sensible enough to garner similarities of those ideas. Also, the way you treat his readings of Marxist theory seems as if you're attempting to stifle any potential critiques he would make of it, assuming that he would differ within the contents of the work.

>>11264889
>Some comps by William Blake
>Right Wing, Traditionalist, other buzzwords
oh no. it's retarded.

Instead of just a broad-based attempt to get him to read some broad "Right Wing, Traditionalist, Conservative, Reactionary literature," identify specifically what is interesting or bothering him that led him to that specific book (and other specific books presumably), and recommend him something you think addresses the topic better.

>>11264905
He's not treating it as "just" philosophy. This is a part of a series of Marxist books he's been dwelling on lately and he doesn't chose this book specifically because through some degree of mental gymnastics he can make it compatible with pre-existent Centrist or Right Wing ideas. He chose it specifically because it IS Marxist literature.

I've read my fair share of Marxist drivel in the first year of Uni when our Swedish foreign literature professor made it a mandatory for class. He's not reading it like I did. He's not reading it to critique it. The lad never had strong political convictions until now. He called me, his best friend and someone he's known for 6 years a "racist" because of a joke I made. This shit's rotting his brain. I have black friends with whom I joke about and vice versa in terms of race and never once did we call eachother racist.

If you're looking for an argument because you're bored and you're trying to shitpost to pass time, take a hike. Either contribute to the thread or stop wasting my time.

>11264919
Not even gonna dignify the post above with a (You).

>>11264920
This is a good point. I see where you're getting at.

I'm just not very familiar with Society of Spectacle. I treated it as a book report and nothing else, I read it to answer a "quiz", kinda like one would treat a school book in HS and never bother with it again. To be completely honest with you I don't remember that well what goes in it.

What would you recommend in these terms?

Suicide is always an option, OP

>>11264927
>he doesn't chose this book
He didn't choose* this book. Fucking hell, why am I posting this shit right after waking up.

>>11264929
Truly, consider it.

sage
>>>/pol/
>>>/r9k/
>>>/trash/

>>11264927
Well you probably are racist

>>11264927
>He called me, his best friend and someone he's known for 6 years a "racist" because of a joke I made. This shit's rotting his brain. I have black friends with whom I joke about and vice versa in terms of race and never once did we call eachother racist.
This has to be bait... No way you are this retarded.

Besides Debord was a racist who fucked his own sister and sexually assaulted lots of folks. You might like him, OP.

>>11264944
So?

>>11264946
>Second time in a row this shitposter has said "MUH BAIT"
Yeah, you're just shitposting. Carry on then.

This is your brain on Evola and /pol/ infographics, kids. Terrifying

>>11264958
It's quite interesting really

>>11264949
You freely admit to being a racist, but then get prissy when your friend calls you out on it? Sounds like you're the one engaging in mental gymnastics here, bub.

>>11264927
Did you try asking him what drove him (supposedly someone who has never had strong political interests in the past) to start reading multiple books related to Marxism?

>Goes back to shitposting and mumbling under his breath about an imaginary /pol/ boogeyman and Julius Evola
Sad.

>>11264963
My political views were never troubling for him. My political views were never troubling for my black friends, some of which agree with me (in terms of immigration and the whole "birds of a kind" thing).

Suddenly he starts reading this bullshit and he's behaving like this.

Again, either contribute or quit wasting my time. Stop wasting yours too while you're at it because doing some psychoanalysis of a random Anon online is pathetic even for your standards.

>>11264975
Not quite. I asked him what happened and why is he behaving like this, he gave me no concrete answer.

>>11264982
>why is he behaving like this
Being condescending is not going to help win him over.

>>11264927
What else would he be reading, then? Is he reading straight from Marx, or just from Situationists?

>>11264982
Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, he wants to have a good understanding of marxist thought since it's relevant in both a historical and contemporary sense

>>11264982
>my black friends
You know you sound like a fucking moron when you talk like this, right? And that's me being charitable by implying you might not actually *be* a moron.

It seems like your friend can read and come up with his own ideas. I don't see why us recommending you to recommend him a book will suddenly make him a different person. That sounds a bit silly.

>>11264982
What you're asking help with isn't how to help your friend, it's how to intellectually manipulate him so he ends up with the same conclusions as you. That's rather dark.

Here you go

start reading the same books and pretend to go full retard commie. so retarded commie that it forever turns him off being a commie.

>>11264889
>still a Marxist book
>mental gymnastics

death of the author motherfucker

>>11265007
That's marxist relativist postmodernism so it probably won't work on op.

>>11264867
Get him to read Bakunin's critiques of Marx

>>11264990
I'm just trying to help him see beyond this shit he's gotten himself into. I'm worried about him. I couldn't care less if he was a full on Stalinist, I have friends who don't believe in borders for fuck's sake.

But he's a very intelligent young man who is falling down a rabbit hole and it's affecting his life. You don't know how and it boggles my mind that there's people here more curious about us rather than just giving recommendations or not shitposting at all.

>>11264993
Straight from Marx (Manifesto, Value Price and Profit), this garbage I posted and some Avineri crap.

>>11264995
Yes and that's not the case. He doesn't read like that, he tried to sell me the ideas from the book.

>11264998
Not even gonna dignify this with a response. Especially coming from an absolute chode who criticises the way people talk and then goes on to type like Chandler would speak.
>Could you *be* any more autistic?

>>11264999
Read above. He never agreed with me politically and that was fine. I want him to see the other side. I want him to react positively to other literature that isn't Marxist drivel.

What the fuck is wrong with you people? What degree of mental gymnastics do you have to be on to make these retarded assumptions?

>>11265002
Great post, thank you very much!

>>11265020
Thank you! Idc if he turns to Anarchism, he was there before in a sense.

>>11264927
>He called me, his best friend and someone he's known for 6 years a "racist" because of a joke I made.
what was the joke

>>11265031
>I want him to see the other side.
>I want him to react positively to other literature that isn't Marxist drivel.
These 2 things aren't the same. You want to brainwash him because he realized you're a piece of shit.

>>11265031
>I want you, my dear friend, to stop reading books from one of if not the most influential line of thought of the past century and a half
This shit you're trying to pull is fucking grim, my dude

>>11264927
>mental gymnastics
Stop acting like you don't synthesise a wide variety of views into your own personal worldview, this is exactly what the study of philosophy is. It's not mental gymnastics, you can come to a wide range of subjective conclusions and directions.

Another bait thread.

>>11265034
Not quite a "joke" in a traditional sense.

I bought a Kippah whilst on a trip with some friends of mine. One of them is a full on Christian fundamentalist that makes me say "What an extremist cunt" and the other is a mild guy with zero politlcal inclinations but is familiar with racist memes. So we put the Kippah on and we took some pictures doing that Jewish caricature pose in this Jewish part of town.

Not the most tasteful thing but it was funny, when we showed the pictures to our other friends (most of them either apolitical or liberal) even they laughed or went "Oh man you racist fucks" but laughing. He reacted with absolute disgust and said it was "edgy" and "racist". That preoccupied me because from someone who held no political beliefs until recently to jump ship to one side like this is worrying.

>>11265041
>>11265049
>More autistic assumptions
Exactly how am I a "piece of shit"?

I have friends who literally don't believe in borders, friends who believe everything is a social construct, etc. I recommend them books every now and then but I don't really care because they've always been this way. He had a sudden shift and it's affecting his life negatively in many ways.

What the fuck is wrong with you "people"? I bet if this was the opposite and I was trying to give him Marxist shit to read you'd bust out your goodreads because that's the kind of shit you enjoy. Pretend you're not hypocritical all you want, if there's anyone who's mentally deranged here is you autists who jump to these retarded assumptions and feel the need fo fake this alarmist attitude to feel better about yourselves.

Grow up. Either contribute or stop wasting my time.

>>11265054
See >>11264927

>That preoccupied me because from someone who held no political beliefs until recently to jump ship to one side like this is worrying
not really, we all mature eventually
one day you'll be a real person too

>"If you're not a liberal and don't hold Marxist beliefs, you're not a real grown up mature person!"
Classic shit my dude, hilarious.

>>11265080
>Liberal
>marxist beliefs
Looks like you're the one that needs to read some liberals and some marxists, mate

>>11265067
>see >>11264927
The issue with you quoting the post again is that the result is still the same: your friend can still synthesize ideas on his own, even if you believe him to be following Marxism dogmatically. You're viewing the issue as if he is entirely without intuition when reading, which says more about how you understand a philosophical text more than it says about your friend. If it is really that much of a problem, then maybe you should understand the works of Marxism at a similar level to him, and attempt to critique it with your friend.

>>11265067
Dude, your whole thread just screams of somebody not being able to cope that their friend is changing into a different person.

Maybe he is your best friend in the whole world, maybe you guys have known each other since you were kids and have basically fucked each other's moms at this point. That doesn't matter, people change as they grow older, and it's clear you and your friend are beginning to not see eye-to-eye.

If you truly value him as a friend, you would ask him his opinions, have a proper discussion with him, etc. You may or may not "convert" him, but that's not the point. The point is to be intellectually and emotionally honest with somebody who's life and input you value.

Shoving a bunch of right-wing literature in his face won't do much (especially if he's displayed anarchist / anti-racist tendencies in the past) other than to make him think you're slightly whacko. Talking to him as the human being his is will.

>>11265031
Your OP and first couple followups made you sound like a weird fascist who was being triggered by a friend reading Society of the Spectacle (which isn't even that marxist...). You sound a lot more reasonable here.

In this case: recommend him to start reading some "sort of" Left but not dogmatically Marxist. "Society of the Spectacle" is already a good start because it is more a postmodern critique of modern society and NOT a Marxist book, since Marxism is extremely modernist. If he likes the antimodernism of Debord, but wants a different ideological take, Richard Rorty is postmodern but has a sort of liberal pro-West point of view, and Alain de Benoist is postmodern from a right wing perspective. Bakunin as recommended is good for anarchism, as would Murray Bookchin for more contemporary anarchism.

>>11265091
>More assumptions who don't know the full extent of how it's negatively affecting his life, that includes him trying to sell these ideas to other people
He's not treating it like that. I don't fully agree with most Traditionalist literature I've touched. I take bits and pieces from one and the other and economically I fall under Corporatism.

I understand that just because he reads these ideas it doens't mean he'll become these ideas. But sadly, that's the case, he's embodying them and it's fucking up his life.

>>11265096
I'm not trying to "convert" him to agree with me because he NEVER agreed with me. We're not "beginning to not see eye-to-eye" because that was NEVER the case. I lived fine with him being apolitical or having anarchist tendencies just as he lived fine with me being an Ethno Nationalist. Hell, he even lived well with me when I was a full blown edgy Fascist.

It was never an issue until now. We never had problems with eachothers' views and I never tried to sell him my own. Neither did he. Now he's trying to sell me this Marxist drivel and all I want is for him to understand that there's a whole literary world outside of it in terms of politics. I want him to be informed and not just keep going down this horrible road. If after reading those books he still falls back to this Marxist shit, fine.

>intellectually and emotionally honest
I am. I recommended him some books and I told him what I'm telling you guys about this shit, that I want him to see that there's more than this line and I'd like it if he gave it a chance even if just to criticise it. He classified one of the authors I rec'd as a "right wing dum dum" and he refused to read it.

>>11265104
That's an excellent way of putting things.

Fuck, I was so caught up in this shit that I forgot I wouldn't care if he was a classic liberal or an Anarchist.

I'll take your rec's into my table. It doesn't have to be Right Wing bullshit, it can just be NOT-Marxist stuff.

Thank you for your input!

>>11265109
>it can just be NOT-Marxist stuff.
As a followup it's important to realize why postmodern folks like Debord are *not* Marxism in the modernist sense (i.e. the original sense), but instead they invoke Marx as a sort of muse and not as dogma. Marxism focused on the idea of a scientific structure to the human existence that could be predicted and understood as one would understand the science of biology or physics; this is of course the entire point of historical materialism, which is Marxism. Postmodernists like Debord absolutely reject this idea, but they do summon the spectre of Marx in their writing as a sort of rhetorical game.

Here you go OP

>>11264867
There's very little you can do in terms of literature recommendations. People tend to go through phases in which they wear their political beliefs as fashion accessories. Some never get past that stage. "The Society of the Spectacle" is a fairly decent book, if not a bit lazy, and it certainly raises some good points regarding the dangers of a consumer society. There is, however, a long leap from acknowledging those dangers to Marxism, or 'le capitalism is responsible for all ills meme' and any intellectually rigorous person would shy away from making that leap. But some do. The problem is these books are often weaponized. I remember being in my first year of Uni, doing a Mickey Mouse Humanities course and the reading list included lots of Debord, Foucault, Baudrillard, McLuhan. That wasn't the issue though. The issue was that they were all weaponized and taught as crypto-pillars of Marxism. Like I said, there is value in all of these, even as critiques of capitalism, but low-level academia and the internet certainly use them as slopes towards your new Antifa membership card.

All you can do is challenge your friend's assumptions and leaps of logic. Also engage with the literature yourself. Don't try to counter what you see as manipulation with your own, because that might push him further away from the center - not as a result of thinking, but as a psychological reaction. Just learn to be friends with people who hold different beliefs. If he goes full on SJW and blames the world and you for all the existent ills and evil, then consider a tougher intervention, or moving away from him.

Having said that, I suspect this thread is a /leftypol/ false flag, but on the off chance that OP was honestly worried I thought I'd give my two cents.

>>11264867
>I want to get him out of this retarded set of dogmas by making him believe another retarded set of dogmas
Marx is the opiate of the intellectuals OP, your friend is lost forever

When are you dipshits gonna learn that the people you meet in life are gonna have different priorities from you?

>>11265117
So it's basically like a classic liberal quoting Plato in some aspects but never fully agreeing with him (seeing as he was a supporter of slavery)?

It's a good way of putting it. Maybe I'm being an alarmist about Debord and considering it an essential Marxist book because it was put on my lap at the end of a series of Marxist literature.

>>11265120
Thank you! There's that Guenon book I recommended him and that Evola one too.

>>11265122
>The problem is these books are often weaponized.
That's what's making me worry. I don't truly care about critiques of Capitalism because I'm not a Capitalist in the traditional sense. I don't even mind restrained Socialism that much. But the problem is that he's falling on that line of thought that he might see this is a road to Marxism. He insisted I read the Manifesto for the longest time (something I did in HS, but he wants me to read it with a more mature mind for some reason).

>Also engage with the literature yourself
That's going to be more difficult, but seeing as it's been recommended time and time over ITT, I might go ahead and do it.

>Just learn to be friends with people who hold different beliefs.
I mentioned above he never agreed with me and that most of my friends don't either. I'm fine with that. I give all my friends the same freedoms they give me, to be myself. But recently it's been different, that's why I'm alarmed.

>I suspect this thread is a /leftypol/ false flag
With the recent wave I can see why you'd think that, but trust me when I say it's the furthest thing from it.

>>11265136
Excellent post. Agreed and it should be applied to most shitposters ITT.

>>11265120

>>11264867

Don't go for openly political things. If he already has an antipathy for this it will only make things worse. Sneak the ideas in with subtlety. Great texts to do this are the classics: Plato in particular can work wonders. But don't go for the Republic immediately, start with some beautiful work first (Apology, Phaedrus, Phaedo, Symposium ecc.) and then throw the Republic in. In general, everything from the Platonic tradition up until the Renaissance can be used to your aim. If he has the slightest interest in religion or even a new age tendency toward spirituality, maybe try some Eliade (first) or Guenon (second), if you manage to get the guy interested in ancient religion. Don't go for Evola, it's a meme and people dislike him a lot.
As for novels, again, classics are good. Melville is great to stir conservative tendencies. Junger is a bit problematic, but Der Waldanger (and maybe Der Arbeiter) can be sneaked in as "that edgy rightwing guy who clearly agrees with leftwing ideologies". German Romanticism can also be useful and even Nietzsche can be used to this aim (avoid every French interpretation of it, though). German philosophers (Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Heidegger) can all have that purpose. Point him toward Hegel with the excuse that he needs it to understand Marx. He won't recover.
He'll probably never confess that he has become a reactionary, but once you put him in the critical mindset of a reactionary person he will be unable to cope with the lack of depth and superficial materialism of leftwing thought. You shall never say to him what he has become, nor that you made him like this. You must deceive him for his own good, like a good philosopher-king would.

>>11264867
>inb4 /leftypol/ shills flood this thread

Dunno, try poststructuralism and postmodern semiotics until he's completely desensitized from that. Unless you think those are marxist or something, meaning you're a chode lol

>>11265144

The main idea is: you should never give a leftwing person the idea that you want them to become rightwing. Discuss things only from a philosophical perspective with them, never political. Get them to agree with philosophical points that are incompatible with modern leftwing belief. Never get them to the point where they have the feeling they are being "converted": ideologies are exactly like religions. They will never forgive you for insulting their religion. You just have to subtly lead them to contradict themselves, and turn their head toward the entrance of the Platonic cave that is their current worldview. I have indeed brought many friends to my own side this way. It usually takes a couple of years or more, and they will not thank you, nor acknowledge what you did. The experience of the light of truth is painful, so do not expect gratitude for your actions.

>>11265135
Now that I think about it, you could try the road of making him read Deleuze and Sloterdijk. If he ever starts blabbing about la revolucion just make him read Foucault and he'll shut up.

>>11265168
>ideologies are exactly like religions
obviously, you're not ideological

>>11265175
he's read Evola so he's clearly an independent non-ideological thinker anon

>>11265168
>The experience of the light of truth is painful, so do not expect gratitude for your actions.
>dares to speak about religious mindsets

>>11265144
Excellent post. I can get him to re-read Plato and perhaps he'll see some light there, I have a feeling he's forgotten what he read when he was younger or just blatanly ignored it.

The problem is I can't recommend him religious stuff as he is atheist at fedora levels to the point where he outright rejects anything Christian. I can't blame him really because I have a lot of difficulty doing it but ancient religion is a much better approach.

And fuck, I already rec'd him Evola. If /pol/ niggers didn't cling to him as if he had written the Holy Bible 2.0, I doubt he'd be that divisive and would be taken more seriously. He's almost on Pierce levels of parody at this time.

I don't see him becoming a reactionary in all honesty, but that was never my intention so it's perfectly fine. Continental Philosophy seems like a good way to go.

>(avoid every French interpretation of it, though)
>Hegel
Please explain, I don't understand the first one and on the second I never thought of Hegel as an anti-Marx booby trap.

Thank you very much for your recommendations, even if you don't respond I took everything in.

>>11265148
They tried already, but I gave them nothing.

>>11265164
I'm not JBP, nigga.

>>11265168
This whole "conversion" thing is beyond my actual objective of just shaking him up and getting him to see that there's more into political literature than Marxism.

Classic Liberalism, Anarchism is all fine. I'd struggle with the idea of him being a Marxist. but I'd accept him because he's a friend. Problem is it's fucking up his life and he's become very judgemental of me (and others) with this stuff.

>>11265170
>If he ever starts blabbing about la revolucion just make him read Foucault and he'll shut up.
>Mfw

>>11264867
>right-wing
>literature
The right doesn't read. Even their economics books are high school level and their last serious thinker was de Benoist, even he had to appropriate Gramsci

>>11265187
>This whole "conversion" thing is beyond my actual objective of just shaking him up and getting him to see that there's more into political literature than Marxism.
Ah ok, then why don't you try Max Weber? He directly refuted Marx but came to similar conclusions about alienation and capitalistic societies.

>>11265187
you haven't read focò have you

>>11265135
It's sad because this is fucking true.

>>11265175

I never said that. I know I am religious. I believe in transcendent deities/minds. The difference is: I am aware that I base my thought on certain assumptions I believe to be true on faith - and willing to discuss it.
They mostly are not. Therefore, the only way to show them your point of view and discussing in a civilized manner without stirring immediate hostility and rejection is through deception.

>>11265202
I'll try everything you recommended, to be honest. Whether he agrees with me in the end or disagrees (which has always been the case) it doesn't matter as long as he's at the very least questioning the Marxist bullshit he's been gorging on.

I'll add Weber to the list. Thank you again, I'm grateful.

>>11265187

>The problem is I can't recommend him religious stuff as he is atheist at fedora levels to the point where he outright rejects anything Christian. I can't blame him really because I have a lot of difficulty doing it but ancient religion is a much better approach.

Try entering new age spirituality. Most people have problem with religion - especially in the us - because there they have such a memeable shit-tier version of christianity that you can't help rejecting.
New age spirituality, though, is a good way. Try some oriental stuff - Zen, for instance, can work wonders on atheists. Start from there, then to Plotinus, then to Eliade again to show how christianity is just a manifestation of that. Everyone has some religious thought they somehow acknowledge, in their intimacy. Cling to that and then bring them slowly toward perennialism. It never fails.

I see summer is in full-force already. See you in a couple of months lads.

>>11265219
A person that struggles to read Marx at first due to other lectures is always better than a person who only reads things influenced by Marx (that isn't usually the case, it's probably a mix of USSR memes (Politzer) and Lenin without undestanding basic theory). Debord is already much better than tankie lit, although many don't get to read more of the situationists.

>>11265220
Wouldn't he reject a trail of thought that eventually led to Christianity though?

He's been in contact mostly with Orthodox Christianity in his life.

>>11265229
He's read some other stuff by Marx and Avineri.

At this rate there's not telling where he's going to be honest.

OP is a master troll and you all got baited

>>11265240
Grow the fuck up.

Exactly what of anything I posted so far is bait and why?

Take a hike already, I heard you the first 10 times you said "B-BAIT LOL!!".

>>11265248
stop larping lmao

>>11265240
He seems legit really concerned by "marxist bullshit", but he seems to be sane and open. That's good.

>>11265234
What I meant is that leading him to other paths of thought can only be better for him, as a marxist reader or not. Enrich not destroy and so on.

>>11264927
>racist" because of a joke I made
racist jokes, are the cringest, juvenile thing. Your friend is maturing as a person and you are staying retarded.

>>11265187

Hegel's philosophy of history is based on a notion of mind and transcendence that is incompatible with marxist materialism. For both history develops toward an end, but the first sees all historiacal manifestation in a spiritual perspective rather than materialistic. For Hegel, history is not the history of how goods are produced and distribute, but the history of how spirit manifests itself. They both point toward non-conservative ideas in that they deny that any historical manifestation is justified in itself - each and every one of them can and must be destroyed until the end of history is reached. But for Hegel this end is not material. Showing him that the origin of the philosophy of history is not based in historical materialism can work wonders. Once you get him to refuse the premises of materialism the work is pretty much done.
But beware Hegel is not entry-level philosophy, so it may have negative effects if your friend is not into philosophy already.

>>11265254
Nice falseflag

>>11265259
Huh?

>>11265266
everything that reveals them for the idiots they are is a leftypol falseflag

Reminder that each time Communism has been tried it has failed.

>>11264867
nick land + moldbug

>>11265253
A solid point. In the best case scenario he'll enrich and get rid of what's not useful or feasible, like Marxism.

>11265254
Not even gonna dignify this level of autism with a (You). Seems like YOU have some growing up to do, plus a thicker skin.

>>11265256
That's a very succint and concise answer, I never saw Hegel in that light even if I did read the Lectures on the Philosophy of History.

Is there anything else you'd recommend of his or just that book?

>But beware Hegel is not entry-level philosophy, so it may have negative effects if your friend is not into philosophy already.
He's a sharp minded fella who has read his fair share of Philosophy, I think he's up for the task.

Thanks ahead should you recommend more and thanks for what you've recommended already.

>>11265271
What does this have to do with racist jokes being incredibly immature and unfunny?

>>11265234

You can do everything without mentioning christianity at all, as long as you point him toward any kind of spirituality. This is the path I was suggesting:
1. Start from spiritual/religious tendency
2. Direct him toward something new agey, possibly oriental, to stir that tendency - as long as it has a tradition (Zen Buddhism, Induism, Zoroastrianism, whatever is more compatible with him)
3. Shift from that to the idea of perennial philosophy: that religious tradition he likes is actually part of a larger picture where all religious traditions are actually the manifestation of a single philosophical truth
4. (not necessary) get him to see that certain aspects of christianity are actually a manifestation of that philosophy as well. Discussing the pagan influences in christianity may be a good start. Distinguish between church and religion - hate on the institutions and push him toward engaging with the philosophical thought behind it. Insist on symbolism (not on the literal idea that Jesus resurrected, for instance, but on its symbolical meaning/contamination from other religions such as cults of Osiris and Dyonisus).

>>11265256
Hegel's philosophy of history is based on the gapes left behind by his philosophy of spirit where he had to channel mystical themes to make his phenomenology work at all at a level where it could explain things and even then it's completely magical and shit.

>>11265271
>>11265266
>>11265277
Good job admitting it moron.

>>11265280

Which is exactly why it would work in that context, anon. You say "Marx is heavily based on this guy" and then that guy is a proto-nazi magician with mystical tendencies - what would work better than that?

>>11265281
What?

>>11265187
Have an Evola guide OP

>>11265300
Why would you read refurbished Christian thoughts thru Eastward-Muslim lens of Evola?

>>11265303
>Not attacking the pagan angle.
Are you even trying?

>>11264867
Let him do what he wants mang

>>11265187

As for the Frenchemen, I meant Derrida, Foucault, Sartre and similar. They tend toward eithe nihilism or relativism alternatively and are bad interpreters of continental philosophy. No relevant word of philosophy was ever written in French, but a lot of ideological leftwing gibberish is in that language. Do not insult these authors if he likes them, but point at the originals and how they are better. After a close reading of Nietzsche, Foucault's interpretation will sound like the absolute baseless sociological nonsense that it is.

>Everything is da fugin spectacle
T. Debord

>>11265318
another one that hasn't read focò

>>11265278
This would be a good path. I see this approach to religion not so much religious as it is anthropological and historical, which would certainly kindle his interest.

I think he's aware of the Pagan influences on Christianity (one of the reasons why he dislikes the latter a lot) but not much more. Although it's important to know he's extremely rational and pragmatic with his ideas (or was until recently) so it's hard to get him in touch with spirituality as he doesn't believe it's a thing. A study of religion though, that would be more like it.

>>11265300
Evola is a much more prolific writer than I gave him credit for. Thank you for the infograph, should he ever work around not calling Evola "edgy" I'll use this well.

In the meanwhile I'll use it for myself, as there's some stuff I clearly missed.

>>11265318
I'd off myself before recommending Derrida, Foucault (especially him) and Sartre to my worst enemy. I never could get into Foucault (philosophically speaking, because as a historian he's a god damned joke that no one who doesn't agree with him politically will regard in a good light) and you've made me realise it's because I had read Nietzsche before.

So stay clear of French Philosophy, I got it down. Thank you, bro.

I'll be back in a few hours lads. Thank you very much to those who helped and recommended stuff, your empathy made my day.

>>11265318
Foucault and Sartre are basement tier charlatans, but Derrida is top tier. His writing is half performance art though, so I wouldn't devote much time reading him closely.

Foucault is pretty good if you want to learn some insight into control mechanism. He was so obsessed with them that he died by it, getting AIDS in San Francisco while being punished with anal sex.

real funny guy in the end

I suggest you read said book and talk to him about why it is bad.

Or maybe you will find something good in it who knows.

If he is your friend then talk to him as a friend, the fact that the internet is effecting you long friendship is pathetic and you need to find a way to remove both Marxist and trad "beliefs" and "ideologies" from your conversations, they are just stupid categories more fit for large communities of people, not between individuals.

Just cut him off. He'll probably just inform his anarchist gang of your "troubling" behavior if you try to recommend that sort of stuff to him. Don't get yourself jumped.

>>11265380
>Don't get yourself jumped.
Northern european antifa (OP seems to be Euro/Swedish) does a lot less of the jumping and fighting that the Americans like to do. They're more likely to put antifa stickers on your bicycle as edgy vandalism.

>>11265380
mommy the mean commies are after me :(

>>11265395
Nothing says 'fuck the fascist' better than using physical violence to curb thoughts you don't like.

>>11265399
You're doing the American thing of confusing leftists with liberals. Liberalism is supposed to be pro-free speech, pro-debating thoughts, etc. Leftists have always believed in violence of some sort because the revolution and all that.

>>11265404
I was referring to anti-fascist/antifa.

>>11265395
I think we're lucky enough to live in a time where left wing violence is limited, but I think a bunch of them are eager for the chance to start up again.

>>11265410
Yes, and antifa are leftist, not liberal. Never in history have leftists not carried some implicit threat of violence to curb thoughts they don't like. The phrasing of your post suggest you think there is some irony there, when there isn't.

>>11265428
There is irony in their name.

>>11265447
no there isn't. Fascism =/= violence. They aren't anti-violence, they're antifascist. One can be a fascist pacifist or a violent anti-fascist.

>>11265447
He won't see it. Academic types get too hung up on semantics for them to ever seriously understand what they're saying.

>>11265453
lol dim dim, it's ironic because they use fascist tactics to progress anti-fascist agenda

>>11265453
He's commenting on the authoritarian tendencies of both sides. It's not that they use violence but how they use violence and how they justify it.

They're dependency on punk-rock style sloganeering is probably the most fascistic thing one can witness in modern politics.

>>11265457
anarchists and communists were pulling this shit for decades before Mussolini ever went into politics, do you seriously think street violence and intimidation is only fascist? Are you that stupid?

>>11265457
calling someone dim while calling violence a "fascist tactic" and boiling down nazis to "opinions they don't like"

>>11265460
Why are you talking about out of context, are you telling me anti-fascist existed before the thing it is opposed against, fascism?

ARE YOU THIS FUCKING STUPID FUCKING COMMIE CUMSTAIN ON YOUR MOTHERS MORNING DRESS AFTER JAMAL IS FUCKING DONE WITH HER?

>>11265462
lol dimdim still dont see the irony, wilfully playing retard, rite of passage to enter the cumstain of marxism-communism historical inaccurate materialism, lol.

dim dim

>>11265459
>authoritarian tendencies of both sides
yes, the guy beating up a rapist is the same as the rapist, that's really deep

>>11265453
I'm not so sure, anon. There's an active and totalizing element to the Will-to-Power elevated to the mass/nation-state level essential to Fascism which seems to require the use of violence and war.

>>11265468
lol dude cant save face so he moves a goalpost to rape

lol fascist thoughts are rape and they deserve to be beaten

lol jewish thoughts are rape of GErmany and they deserve to be raped in Auscwitz-Birkenau for all eternity.

haha dim dim

>>11265462
>opinions they don't like"
All political disagreement boils down to this now matter how disgusted they appear by it.

>>11265463
I'm anti-communist, you fucking moron. I'm explaining that leftists (Antifa are leftist) have been violent for centuries. They are not using fascist tactics, they are using leftist tactics. I know this blows American minds, but leftists are not democrats and they are not liberals. They do not believe in democracy and liberal rights, they are violent and incoherent. And yes, antifa is the same.

>>11265466
dim dim, dim dim
I come inside
your mother's quim

>>11265476
>. I'm explaining that leftists (Antifa are leftist) have been violent for centuries
wow who the fuck is conflating things now fucking retard

you are telling people anti-fascist/Antifa existed before the thing they opposed

fucking good god dim dim get a grip

>>11265468

>>11265473
yes, dummy, marching for an ethnostate and "peaceful" removal of other races isn't just a different opinion

>>11264889
William Blake was a socialist you fucking retard

>>11265474
then them beating you is just a difference of opinion since they think you should be beaten and you disagree
which means your insistence on vilifying them is curbing their self expression, their freedom

see, I can play wordgames too

>>11265484
neither is rape but there you fucking went,
well actually rape is a property rights question which is a opinion, so haha.

>>11265490
hahaha
hahahahahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>11265479
>you are telling people anti-fascist/Antifa existed before the thing they opposed
no I'm not. Leftism obviously did, Antifa obviously grew out of punk music in the 80's. I am saying this because your original comment here: "it's ironic because they use fascist tactics to progress anti-fascist agenda"
is wrong. They use leftist tactics, not fascist tactics.

Do they even provide education in America or are you all fucking morons?

>>11265490
T. Too fucking ugly to ever fear getting raped

>>11265495
>is wrong. They use leftist tactics, not fascist tactics.
oh its nazi that is strying to whitewash fascist, ok i got your issuenow

you are wrong

>>11265495
>Antifa obviously grew out of punk music in the 80's.
Yikes

>>11265499
>>11265492
how is not a property rights question?

>>11265495
Jesus, most of what you've been saying but fucking hell how do you not know the origins of Antifa when you insult others' education??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifaschistische_Aktion

Fucking read some.

>>11265489
Of course the left is all wordgames. Language is a social space that the left colonized in order to ensure that all discourse can only lead to leftist conclusions. Contemporary leftism is one giant amorphous word game.

But here's the problem with what your saying: by advocating that the body politic take certain actions, they are expressing a political opinion taking place within a political discourse. Beating people up to in this way is an act of exiting the discourse in order to silence those participating in it, and shouldn't acceptable in a civil society.

>>11265513
But killing minorities should be acceptable right?

>>11265505
Of course the butthurt incel is also a neonazi.

Anyone who can be turned in to a Marxist by reading Marxist drivel is too low IQ to be saved. He’s probably around 110 IQ

>>11265513
>Beating people up to in this way is an act of exiting the discourse in order to silence those participating in it, and shouldn't acceptable in a civil society.
t. American liberal

>>11265513
>Language is a social space that the left colonized in order to ensure that all discourse can only lead to leftist conclusions. Contemporary leftism is one giant amorphous word game.
easy on the foucault there

>>11265518
Nazis are communists but for huwhites, why do you think I'm a neonazi or incel?

>>11265495
The aestheticization of their politics through punk, hip hop, and most recently pop music is kind of a fascist tactic.
>>11265515
Whatever the state does is inherently legitimate as are any calls for the state to behave a certain way. Civil society is far more valuable than lives or bodies or whatever sentimentalist nonsense you harp on about.

>>11265515
>hurf trumpf and pence are gonna put the gays on Auschwitz NYTimes told me so

>>11265526
>Nazis are communists but for huwhites
lmao americans are incredible

>>11265513
this is why picrelated exists
you'd rather have everyone be civil than actually do some good

>>11265535
I'm from East Europe where Nazis burned my hometown but OK. They're same socialist garbage, one is for huwhite germans and one is for slavs

Anarchy state and utopia
Capitalism and freedom
From under the rubble
The gulag archipelago (I seriously don’t give a shit that’s it’s not entirely accurate)
The people v Barack Obama (if they’re an Obama supporter)

>>11265539
The civil, state oriented society is good. The individual man is evil, and the state is what redeems us. Anarchists shouldn't shouldn't have their personhood recognized.
>>11265520

>>11265521
They've just been putting Foucault, Derrida, Lefebvre, etc. into action.

>>11265549
>and the state is what redeems us
the thing that wages war and slaughters peoples in tens of millions? kek, state just refines our killer instincts.

>>11265560
All human greatness rests on mountains of corpses. Our celebrated humanitarians are the greatest villains the world has ever known outside of the anarchist.

>>11264927
>He's not reading it like I did. He's not reading it to critique it.
Why don't you apply some of that critique you've done and tell your friend what's wrong with the book then?

>>11265567
>Bach's music rests on mountains of corpses
2edgy4me

>>11264867

Maybe you should expose yourself to it so you can have a meaningful discussion with him?

Or read some Fukuyama— I haven’t personally, but as I began to find myself doubting communism (and I guess Marxism) I found references to Fukuyama, who is allegedly connected but does not approve of (?) neoconservatism. He believes liberal democracy is the final evolution of human political progress— the end of history.

From a political standpoint it seems like some good counter-theory to Marxist thought, but this is just me approximating based on what I’ve read ‘about’ it (and thought it seemed promising)

>>11265567
>misreads nietzsche once

>>11265935
>He believes liberal democracy is the final evolution of human political progress
He doesn't anymore.

>>11265935
>He believes liberal democracy is the final evolution of human political progress— the end of history.
hegelians are so fucking arrogant and dumb when they run around making pseud claims like this.

sad.

>>11265935
>He believes liberal democracy is the final evolution of human political progress— the end of history.
LOL, reeks of "The Wall is broken, Marx' DEAD" rhethoric, which is endlessly funny at how much and how sudden it was in the 90s-00s. I've come to read introductions to Brecht with that shit.

>>11265985
I mean liberal democracy may not be the end of history but the anti-capitalist left is basically nonexistent at this point

>>11265997
I may agree or disagree, but the triumphalism around that time was incredible.

>>11265896
Bach's music was a direct result of the advancement of Europe due to the colonization of the Americas. Bach's music rests on a higher mountain of corpses than most great western achievements.
>>11265949
Nietzsche was another small-minded sentimentalist obsessed with life. He couldn't have been more wrong.

>>11265955
>>11265959
>>11265985

Again, have not read Fukuyama beyond summaries of his beliefs (which I noted here because I found them interesting). If he went back on his belief that lib. Democracy is the end of political evolution I did not know, but that idea is what initially interested me.

Best translation for Society of the Spectacle? Fredy Perlman or Ken Knabb annotated?

>>11265985
also, does every communist have to scoff at ideas that communism might not be possible at this point (save for accelerationism, which is vaguely crazy).

I think at this point we aren’t going to become communist— in the US we cannot revolt as a people because we have no physical means of power. Communism is idealism, unfortunately (coming from someone who for a brief period of time believed in it)

>>11266007
In general I wouldn't recommend esential neoliberal-core like Fukuyama to someone you're trying to wean off the left, because it's precisely discontent with neoliberalism that's pushing people towards the far left and right today.

If you're OP, Moldbug is pretty much the only relevant thinker on the anti-neoliberal Right today so I would push your buddy towards Unqualified Reservations

>>11264889
Blake was a lefty artist, mon ami.

is it just me or is op a sociopath

>this entire fucking thread

>>11266024
I find the line of thought of dunking all of Marx' body of work in the dumpster because states influenced by him were (and the Brecht intro legit did that, "just read him as an artist and skip the didactical pieces"). Specially for the point you bring up.

>>11264946
What? Sauce on these claims?

Try turning him into a national-syndicalist instead.

>>11266078
What, through the disastrous Rousseau-Marx discourse?

>>11266027
I read UR and Moldbug (though extremely well educated) doesn’t seem to offer much of a solution if I remember correctly— I remember a lot of shitting on both the right and left and several references to him being a Jacobite, which I still don’t believe he’s serious about.

NRx doesn’t fully make sense to me

you're so fucking weird OP. It's really bizarre having to share a planet with people such as yourself.

I left the US 8 years ago and it feels like everyone there has been politicized to absurd levels. It's almost pathological. Mass politicization preceded the two last world wars.

>>11265049
friends don’t let friends turn commie

>>11264927
This is what we would've been treated to - sincerely - if /lit/ existed when JP was 15.

>>11264889
>and some comps by William Blake.
Ahahahaha, bitch is like some hardcore anarchist

>>11264882
>The only measure of an opinion's validity is the number of words read before reaching it

y i k e s

>>11266110
Brexit and Trump were the launch off points for much of the chaos today, as well the general distrust of government, lack of progress, endless lies and lack of direction. Tribalism and nativism took hold and general blaming of others with easy answers provided by shadowy figures on the internet posting images that juxtaposed easily recognizable individuals with an underlying fascist/conspiratorial air with them made for easy brainwashing of the masses

These will ease him into more reasonable territory (economically).
>Foundations of Economics: A Beginner's Companion (written by lefty)
>The Economics and Politics of Wealth Redistribution (centrist)
>The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century
>The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
Then destruction of preconceptions.
>The Trouble with Africa: Why Foreign Aid Isn't Working
>The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy
>The Ethics of Redistribution
>That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen
>The Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, And the Radical Remaking of Economics, and/or: The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World
>Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism

>>11264889
>Still a Marxist book. Some degree of compatibility of ideas brought forth by mental gymnastics is a ridiculous way of going through life.

Capitalism is incompatible with tradition. A hyper-focus on the individual is the ethical antithesis of the communal ties that bind together the nation-state. Debord is right to point out the corrosive effects of late-stage capitalism on society, however insufficient a prescription he offers up to resolve it. This is the farthest thing from "mental gymnastics".

>>11266542
>Trump were the launch off points for much of the chaos today, as well the general distrust of government, lack of progress, endless lies and lack of direction

Do you mean that Trump caused this? I object to this. I propose that it is precisely these factors that caused Trump..

>distrust of government
-Snowden, Assange, Obama spying on reporters, Brennan spying on Congress et cetera.
>lack of progress
stalling economy under Obama even under 0% interest rates
>endless lies
Clinton even lied about Benghazi ambassadors diary.

It is precisely these that caused Trump; you have the cause and effect completely reversed in my opinion.

>>11264867
>Debord
>left wing

sounds like your friend is pretty woke dude

>>11264867
this is a marxist board sweetie take your brainlet ass out of here and go open up a book

>>11266005
>Bach's music was a direct result of the advancement of Europe due to the colonization of the Americas
lmao what

>>11266614
This is a post-marxist board.

>>11266542
More like CIA™ fueling divisiveness as to curb social cohesion, putting an end to any form of revolt before it even started. Let's not forget the US has the most violent institutions in the world.

>>11264867

There's nothing in DeBord's Society of the Spectacle that's incompatible with Radical Right-Wing Traditionalism. It's a critique of Capitalism. Traditionalism is critical of Capitalism. Stop being such a simpleton.

>>11266642
>post-marxist
What a meaningless label. This ranges from liberal hacks like Chantal Mouffe to first rate philosophers who also stayed true to Marxism's goals like Cornelius Castoriadis.

>>11266642
I have been member of my country's Socialist Party for a decade now: I have never in my life heard anyone call himself a Marxist.

>>11264867
>Society of the Spectacle
>Not a good read
Wew lad, even it it falls within the the usual Marxist economic determinist purview , from the environmental side of understanding human behavior it has a lot of interesting theories

>>11266571
Sorry, I should've been more clear, but the movement behind Trump (Pepe etc.) was a collective catharsis could disrupt and destabilize, an actual viable means of panic.

It's not just Wikileaks and Snowden etc that generated the distrust of the old guard, it was the lack of evidence in Iraq, the lies that brought the world there and stayed there, and how nothing changed in the region.
>Lack of progress
Occupy movement was the closest thing to a collective uprising, but it went no where as there was nothing to united all of the factions and at the end of it it became more fractured than when they began. Obama promised hope and change and delivered nothing; then again the world never lets anyone do what they truly want.
>Endless lies
its not just Clinton, although those two definitely didn't help their case. For years politicians sold the idea that the power rested with the people and that if they wanted betters lives, they could aspire to it, and the government would allow them to do so, but it was completely the opposite, people fought, work and strove to make a brighter future, but only the rich and powerful became the ones with true power. So what was there left to dream about? I think the American psyche was enamoured with the idea of Zombie apocalypse or total destruction of the society, so they could have that blank slate wherein one could build what they seemed to be a better alternative.

>>11266676
You'd have to be a retard to vote for the inheritance spoiled brat billionaire scumbag however. Say what you will about the scumbag without a small penis, she got where she is by all the work done by her husband,

>>11266667
You have to look at the CONSEQUENCES of what people do, and not their utterances. If the consequence is the breakdown of society - there you have it, they're Marxists.

You should read Wigan Pier (and Jung).

>>11266614
fuck out of here
>>11266642
this

>>11266676
>>It's not just Wikileaks and Snowden etc that generated the distrust of the old guard, it was the lack of evidence in Iraq, the lies that brought the world there and stayed there, and how nothing changed in the region.
Yes, I just named few example.

>Occupy movement was the closest thing to a collective uprising,
And it got taken over. Now Trump is the closest thing to a collective uprising. You can hate him, but the establishment does not want him there.
>It's not just Clinton.
My listing was just few examples before I hurried to buy ice cream from store.

>>11266697
So you have no idea who or what you're talking about, what is the doctrinary view of Europe's(and Canada's) Socialist Parties, but feel so smug and superior sending me off to read some mystical esoteric bullshit by a drugged mystic and another 80 year-old, pre WW2, pre-Cold War book. What era do you live in?

"Critique" can only ever occur inside the premises of Marxism. Have him read an absolute rebuttal, instead.

>>11266714
The ancients had it right, we just need to LISTEN to what they wrote.

The current crop of writers have become so corrupted by Marx and Derrida et al that they're not to be trusted. I'm wary of recommending another book (it seemed to upset you before!), but Stephen Hicks is very food on this.

>>11266724
>BÖHM-BAWERK
I see you are a man of high intellect.

>>11266724
>1890

jardon penison 74 rules for life

Religion, Magick, Occult - https://mega.co.nz/#F!AE5yjIqB!y7Vdxdb5pbNsi2O3zyq9KQ!cE5yWZoI

General - https://mega.co.nz/#F!LotEVRxT!YE-YrG6SZ54nJqltrYN8Nw

Psyops - https://mega.co.nz/#F!m00SjRRA!R_I9wzUTEhSN6spP35TyZg

/pol/ books - https://mega.co.nz/#F!eMs1HDRD!LJcwVTJXhhx1a5bUu2l0dg

Poems/stories - https://mega.co.nz/#F!6sgETKCa!vGFF5iTfCR6lH3ZLXaQorQ

Propertarianism library https://mega.co.nz/#F!0F5GXTjS!oGdz8UP5JbcleNMy6YKLvg

Fascist - https://mega.co.nz/#F!cZoSEbpC!kdnYuLw3hvYSus9uZl6PRQ

Stats and facts - https://mega.co.nz/#F!4MJE0L6Q!teKAfBlT2m3Ija-Tun-EFw

Sydney traditionalist reading - https://mega.co.nz/#F!pYRnSJaC!HrC3Siqyioo9PjdGMNWs3Q

General collection - https://mega.nz/#F!flYQGbzI!p1AFjtMuCLHQqocJqxV7rg

Homestead/History - https://mega.nz/#F!WQ1j0Q5A!BrV-uEsC2VZlhFsqJV-YHg

Book dump - https://mega.nz/#F!B4dB2SzQ!h_pMC30v2a_y31iD0dy0sg

Book dump - https://mega.nz/#F!8YhT1SwT!naXLsLCamWPYP6YxJZAopA

Languages - https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B9QDHej9UGAdcDhWVEllMzJBSEk

Military History - https://mega.nz/#F!ZAoVjbQB!iGfDqfBDpgr0GC-NHg7KFQ

Philosophy - https://mega.nz/#F!MQBRHBJA!L_on3h-XUrtbc719UaMygw

Warfare - https://mega.nz/#F!x4JD1RzD!4_nIFmI2sBdSYg14j7pIdA

The entire /pol/ack journey, minus JQ, which I doubt your friend would want.

>>11266751
>magick

>>11266751
>minus JQ
Left is very anti-semitic nowadays, just check Womens March andBlack Lives Matter or Biritish Labor Party ran by Corbyn the AntiSemite

>>11266702
Well, I just cared to extrapolate. Also, what ice cream, it better be mint chocolate chip or you can leave this board forever

>>11266737
Yeah man, let's just check Xenophon, I'm sure he'll be of great help when we need to regulate sealanes and how to deal with Chinese encroachment in the South China Sea. Or we should check what Sun Tzu has to say about civilian casualties of chemical warfare. If you find yourself fighting a guerilla warfare against a fanatical military force entrenched inside a large civilian urban center you should probably ask Napoleon, yeah?

>>11266762
JQ - https://mega.co.nz/#F!UdxSVLJB!bgBwqzuFIV3z0HvCswA0dQ

Here you go then.

>>11266765
I thought about chocolate but decided to go with strawberry

>>11266762
Corbyn isn't an anti-semite. He went to a party hosted by anti Israeli Jews because the people work in government these days are fucking abysmal at their jobs. I'm 100% convinced The Thick of It is a documentary

>>11266762
>>11266773
Just trying to save some time, there's like a 100GB worth of stuff there.

>>11266697
What the fuck does Wigan Pier has to do with anything, now?

>>11266779
>I'm 100% convinced The Thick of It is a documentary
It was very funny.

>>11266774
>>11266765
Salted caramel is clearly the superior ice cream.

>>11266797
Defo not a bad choice if it's not too sweet

>>11266772
Of course you don't read it literally. You need to consider the meaning behind what they (and I) say.

>>11266784
Orwell knew the left of his time was dominated by anti-West and malevolent forces. Remind you of anything??

>>11266809
Reminds of fascism.

>>11266740
Then read this, instead.

>>11266809
Yes, and he also went on a charade about vegetarians and put himself as a social democrat against stalinism. Again?

>>11266762
the boy who cried antisemitism

>>11266827
Already have, he is my go to guy when it comes to economics. Fine taste tebehe

>>11266845
You should really read this >>11266724

>>11266845
If ypu like him, you'll like Bohm-Bawerk, as he was Schumpeter's doctoral advisor. Schumpeter synthesized much of his thought with elements of historical analysis.

>>11266724
If op's friend is reading DeBord then it's unlikely that he follows historical materialism and isn't a traditional Marxist. Economic critiques of traditional Marxism aren't going to deter him much, they may in fact do the opposite.

>>11266853
>>11266860
Well, fuck me straight and call me Lilly, I'll give that weird Austrian fuck a try.

>>11266724
>materialism and structural realism
disgusting

>>11266838
Vegetarians are anti-human, just like the left. If you don't understand I'm sorry. You;re ideologically possessed it looks like.

>>11266863
>>11266869
Traditional marxists have stopped existing in the early 30's. They either embraced Stalinism or became Social Democrats.

>>11266868
And another anarcho-capitalist in the making..

>>11266667
Gee, it's almost as if "socialist parties" are reformist liberal garbage.

>>11266882
I've been looking for this, /lit/ library only has the truncated version.

>>11266878
There are plenty of traditional Marxists, especially right now, they're just irrelevant to politics.

>>11266882
>Hayek
>rand
>mises

Yeah, not even bothering with anything you'd suggest. Should have stopped at Bohm-bawerk, now I see you're just a weirdo cultie. Fuck off.

>>11266893
So they don't matter and aren't worth discussing. I know my batch had a few and they either let go of 19th century socioeconomic romantism or got told to fuck off

>>11266882
Just remember to also read neoclassicals.

>>11266910
Your loss

economics is just theology for people of autism

>>11266922
No, your party's loss at every election.

>>11266928
what
>>11266926
its post hoc rationalization for events basically.

>>11266910
Different guy, anon.

>>11266926
You should read Pareto. Very insightful.

>>11266737
I can guarantee you that Marx, Derrida, and their ilk were better students of ancient philosophy than you ever will. Stop being such a reactionary who's barely even read ancient Western thought.

>>11266875
I see.

>>11266838
I think you meant tirade.

>>11266963
Yes, sorry.

>>11266947
I'm a Classical Liberal actually.

>>11266971
Right, still fighting for the right of the burgeoisie against the Houses of Bourbon and Habsburg yeah? Just call yourself a fascist and stop being such a pussy.

>>11266969
Orwell is overrated, slightly.

>>11266971
So the worst sort of reactionary.

>>11266982
>fascism is related to classical liberalism
How can one person be so uninformed. Have you ever read either the doctrine of fascism or even mein kampf?

>>11266982
He was a good hands-on journalist (the first part of Wigan Pier is pretty good), but he can get fickle as fuck theorically when he comes to political commentary.

>>11266982
>>11266987
Yeah, because everyone you disagree with a Nazi. This is why Clinton lost.

I wouldn't have voted for Trump personally, but the postmodern neo-Marxist gave us him.

>>11266993
Have you read dialectics of the enlightment?

>>11266993
Nigger you'd suck Benito dick the first time you got the chance, fuck off.

>classical liberal
You don't exist anymore. The world moved on. Now you're a reactionary, bordering on ethnic nationalism/fascism. Get fucked.

>>11267001
But you did vote for him, because someone called you a racist once, yeah? Emotionally you're still in kindergarten

>>11266993
Basically every "Classical Liberal" is just a fascist in masquerade. People like you have outright contempt for discourse other than your own and would stop at nothing to stop it, despite pretending to be pro "freedom of speech."

>>11267002
>>11267004
classical liberals want everyone to fuck off. They usually end up fucking off themselves, they just leave and set up society elsewhere, away from people trying to bother them

Fascism is a totalitarian anti-individualist conception. It is explicitly idealistic and rejects the idea of natural rights.

you cannot reconcile these two ideas

>>11267010
Hillary Clinton herself called half of Trump voters non-Americans, what does that make her, emotionally a toddler?
>>11267013
This is bait.

>>11267001
Hillary and Trump are exactly the same.
>Postmodern neomarxist
You don't know what any of those words mean

>>11267018
>Hillary Clinton herself called half of Trump voters non-Americans, what does that make her, emotionally a toddler?
Not him, but nah, just really bad at picking campaign managers who can assess the reasonable prognosis of an inflammatory statement.

>>11267018
The onion levels of bait in that post.

>>11267013
i am not a fascist or a classical liberal, i am just pointing out that they are very different things. Fascism is closer to communism or democracy than it is to classical liberalism, which is a very extreme and unique sort of political philosophy.

>>11267014
>>11267014
Just like you can't reconcile libertarianism and fascism, yet libertarians just throw in with fascists the first time they get. They're petty petty men, eternally butthurt by their irrelevance and only other people desperately in need of allies(fascists) would ever give them the time of the day.

>>11267018
A retard, she's a retard, and so are you.

>>11267022
>Hillary and Trump are exactly the same
>>11267023
>Hillary couldn't herself realize that calling half of Trump voters non-American and deplorables was a bad move.

>>11267022
hilary clinton is a comunist prove me wrong protip you can't

>>11267010
You really should read Jung.

>>11267022
This book will change your life:
http://www.stephenhicks.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ep-ee-2014-printing.pdf

>>11267030
>a rich entitled inheritance illiterate troll is not the same as a rich entitled former first lady cunt

>>11267029
libertarians who become fascists are basically recognizing that libertarianism is a losing strategy.

actual libertarian societies can only exist outside the net of centralized power. The American frontier was somewhat libertarian

in general though it is a utopian and unrealistic idea

>>11266724

lol this is completely irrelevant you retard.

>>11267043
Libertarianism can only work at high-trust societies, which requires racial and cultural homogeneity more or less.

>>11267052
There you go buddy, only took you 6-7 posts to show your fascism

>>11267056
How is that fascist statement? Is Finland fascist? Is Poland?
What is wrong with your scrambled brains

>>11267056
racism and fascism are not the same thing. I am becoming increasingly convinced that you guys really have not read any Fascist literature

>>11267034
>Situates Postmodernism against Reason
Garbage. Postmodern critiques of "Reason" are the use of Enlightenment ideals and methodology against itself; postmodernism as a philosophical movement (this is itself a dubious claim) is the re-evaluation of the Enlightenment and its logical continuation toward increasingly "neutral" grounds. Read Adorno.

>>11267065
I think it's just a leftypol bait.

>>11267046
Why? It contains a direct rebuttal to the theory of exploitation.

>>11267060
>finland
Lmao, they're social-democrats you twit

>poland
Fascist since 2016

>>11267065
Like there's a major fucking difference. Like Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, David Duke and Erdogan wouldn't find they have so much in common if you ever sat them down at a table

>>11267052
japan is high trust and homogenous as fuck, but they are not even vaguely libertarian. The entire libertarian idea was a massive break with tradition dreamt up by enlightenment autists, and really the only people to ever take it seriously were Anglos, who I think must have some sort of genetic proclivity to running away from fights.

There are a bunch of Jews who like libertarianism as well but I think they are coming at it from a different perspective.

>>11267086
And a bunch of Austrian barons that got pissed Truman didn't put a Habsburg back in power in Vienna.

>>11267067
Adorno was a communist known for corrupting academia. Academia used to produce people like Kant, Neitsche, Jung and Steven Pinker. Now they're all decronstuctionalists trying to tear down the West (ever since the USSR lost). I'm aware of this and so don't listen to intellectuals, but you really need to read Hicks. Intelligant guy,

>>11267083
I was referring to racial and cultural homogeneity which produce high trust societies; I was not naming them as an example of Libertarian orders, but places where it could be achieved due to existing conditions.

>Poland
>fascist since 2016.
Prime bait.

>>11267086
Like somoene said earlier, frontier America was the best (only?) example.

>>11267083
they are not even vaguely the same idea. you can have a racist monarchy or a racist anarchism. The idea that different groups of humans are not the same has fuck all to do with how you organize political power.

Im not sure how you can even think the two ideas are related. racism fits very awkwardly into fascism, as evidenced by the incoherence of Hitler's conception of the aryan nation and 'national socialism' generally speaking

>>11267075
Not the same guy, but how does he "disprove" exploitation? especially when his theory of exploitation is really just a continuation of his theory of alienation and fetishism?

>>11267094
ass

>>11267095
Like Belarus, North Korea, Albania, Qatar and so on, yeah?

>>11267096
Because libertarianism, like communism, is a stepping stone towards absolutism. Not even a stepping stone, it's the building block of totalitarian abuse and horror.

>>11267065
The situation of fascism matters in the way of when and how it happens, not the excuses they make for the happening, which almost always end up being milketoast excuses for the creation of accumulation of wealth under the guise of the nation.

>>11267094
Nice.

>>11267094
Oh, okay. Now I know this is bait. Thanks.

XX11267108

>>11267094
Lost it at Steven Pinker

>>11267097
He does so in part by rejecting the premise of labor as central to the creation of value. He also identifies wage labor as having an inherent time-preference that employers include in wage calculation.

>>11267094
top quality bait

>>11267135
Could've dispensed the Steven Pinker reference to be more realistic.

>DONT READ THINGS I DONT AGREE WITH OH NO
>ONLY READ BOOKS THAT ENABLE CONFIRMATION BIAS

>>11267146
I don't read books about communism for same reason I don't read books about unicorns when I read about biology.

>>11267129
>He does so in part by rejecting the premise of labor as central to the creation of value
He can't really do that without dismantling the entirety of liberalism, or really just property as whole.

>identifies wage labor as having an inherent time-preference that employers include in wage calculation
So doesn't that seem to actually support Marx's labor theory of value?

I mean, I'll have to check it out, but I'm fairly dubious already.

>>11267146
It's the 4chan way

>>11267075

Here's the thing: LTV and STV are two theories talking past each other. The original unqualified Marxian LTV is wrong, but the STV and it's backwards-derivation of value from the final sold product is equally wrong. The STV takes as axiomatic the incidental exchange value of the good in question and then, working backwards, attributes the value of the inputs on the basis of the final value, just like magic. Well... that's nonsense. What are you implying? That none of the inputs had any value until all the product was sold at the specified price and turned profit? That's silly, the same labor applied elsewhere would have been revalued much higher, yet it's the same labor. A pure STV is untenable. It doesn't explain any of the values, it just describes them. The truth lies somewhere in-between: value is based off of many things acting in conjunction. Commodities are partially the embodiment of labor values yet only within certain parameters.


The reason it's irrelevant however, is that you're posting a refutation of Marx's LTV in response to a work of cultural critique a full century after Marx's formalization of economic theory. It (DeBord) has nothing to do with the specific mechanics of Marx's theory. It has only to do with the undeniable fact that Capital is a non-neutral and irresistible dehumanizing force acting upon its participants as they act upon it. You don't need to believe that Labor is the Sole Source of Value to realize that Capitalism creates its own values. And it's on that basis that of the three qualities, Conservative, Capitalistic, and Educated, one can only pick two. Capitalism neither tolerates nor affords anything that obstructs the breaking open of new markets. As Fire breaks the molecular bonds in woods, thus releasing energy, Capital breaks the social bonds among us, thus releasing money.

Read Othmarr Spann's criticism of Bohm-Bawerk. It's almost like he anticipated Sraffian Capital-switching.

>>11267086

Japanese are not nearly libertarian in any sense.

>>11267159
>dubious already

He was a Finance Minister for the collapsing shithole that was A-H.

>>11267163
>Capital is a non-neutral and irresistible dehumanizing force acting upon its participants as they act upon it
wow i'm now ready to denounce the capital of my own body and sell my self to slavery for a big dick Jamal to prove how capital was dehumanizing and decapitalizing my body is humanizing

damn
this is probably how foucault ended up getting fucked in the ass

>>11267179

I'm NatSoc you retard

my usual argument in favor of capitalism is incoherent ramblings regarding black men's dongs, you should try that out on your friend OP

>>11267179
>immediately goes for the "sucking black cock fantasy"

Black dick is just always on your mind anon

>>11267192
If you dont have property in your own body thats yours and yours only why the fuck should anyone respect you, on what basis?

>>11267191
So the black cock fantasy is just up your alley (and fat whiteboi ass)

>>11267214
You should ask jamal anon, you seem to love his black dick

>>11267214
based gibberish poster

>>11267230
How is that gibberish, it's John Locke.

>>11267159
>He can't really do that without dismantling the entirety of liberalism, or really just property as whole.
Only if you define economic liberalism as the gospel of Adam Smith. Bohm-Bawerk identifies that Labor was arbitrarily selected as the value-creating element of the economy, and can be consistently substituted for something else, like interest.
>So doesn't that seem to actually support Marx's labor theory of value?
No, Marx does not identify a time-component to value.
>>11267175
He is actually credited for revitalizing the Austrian economy at the beginning of the 20th century. If you want to identify a fatal flaw in Austria-Hungary, you'd have to look toward ethno-linguistic division and their alliance system.

>>11267163
Neo-Ricardians just love to throw the baby out with the bathwater, don't they?

>>11267163
>The STV takes as axiomatic the incidental exchange value of the good in question and then, working backwards, attributes the value of the inputs on the basis of the final value
But that's wrong.

>>11264867
the concept of the 'spectacle' can be used in both Marxist Critical Theory as well as Reactionary anti-modernism

>>11267163
Can you succinctly define a "social bond," and then demonstrate that there are now fewer social bonds per capita than at any prior point in history?

>>11267236
>Only if you define economic liberalism as the gospel of Adam Smith
I mean more of Locke's labor theory of property
>Bohm-Bawerk identifies that Labor was arbitrarily selected as the value-creating element of the economy
Labor is Marx's definition of the human individual. It's not arbitrary at all. If economy is, at its core, the relations of product and its production, of course labor is going to be the basis.
>No, Marx does not identify a time-component to value.
You clearly haven't read any Marx. Labor-Time is one of the key components to the Labor Theory of Value.

>>11267299
>I mean more of Locke's labor theory of property
You should read marginalist and neoclassical economists, as they are the only economic "liberals" as you define that have any contemporary academic relevancy.
>It's not arbitrary at all.
It is arbitrary, or at the very least non-fundamental, as it relates to the calculation of value.
>Labor-Time is one of the key components to the Labor Theory of Value.
I don't think you understand what is meant by "time preference."

>>11267252
How?

>>11267297
Are you serious?

>>11267244
How do you mean

>>11267335
If it is the conclusion that you derive from your premises, then you should be able to demonstrate it in an undeniable way. I am doubtful, since most reactionary screeds against modernity are reliant on appeals to aesthetics.

>>11267330
>You should read marginalist and neoclassical economists, as they are the only economic "liberals" as you define that have any contemporary academic relevancy.
You realize I mean Liberalism as in the Liberalist tradition, right? But I'll explore more, sure.
>It is arbitrary, or at the very least non-fundamental, as it relates to the calculation of value.
It's really no more arbitrary than capitalist formulations of value, itself equally stemming from an arbitrary notion of human nature, which Marx himself rejected.
>I don't think you understand what is meant by "time preference."
It might help if you clarified, then.

>>11267335
The STV does account for the costs tied up in the production process--that is what contributes (in large part) to the calculation of value on the part of the seller. It simply acknowledges that ultimately we can only observe value at the moment of exchange, wherein both parties have agreed upon a sale for a particular price.

>>11267346
After the Cambridge Capital Controversy, Sraffa and the Neo-Ricardians rejected nearly every premise of neoclassical economics, when the actual findings only implicated one or two premises involving aggregate production.

>>11267371
>ultimately we can only observe value at the moment of exchange, wherein both parties have agreed upon a sale for a particular price.
This makes the most sense to me.. am I stupid? I really don't see value/price formations in any other way no matter how hard I try.

>>11267365
I have been talking about post-Marxist economic theory in particular, so of course there have been many changes in premises as theory develops. Sorry for the confusion.
>It's really no more arbitrary than capitalist formulations of value
Socially constructed perhaps, but not arbitrary. There are a myriad of factors which ultimately contribute to the calculation of value.
>It might help if you clarified
Simply put, time preference is the value associated with receiving something now rather than later. Marx treated all units of labor as equal, where Bohm-Bawerk identified that laborers are willing to lower payment costs in wage negotiations in exchange for the guarantee that they would be paid immediately for their work rather than at the moment of commodity sale. Risk is also tangentially related.

>>11267349
eh, if you're already skeptical of that conclusion then I'll probably have to prove to you a whole host of other things as pre-requisites, which I'm not really interested in doing.

>>11267371
But factors are priced according to their marginal product, which in turn is reciprocally determined the final price

>>11267388

Ah, right

>>11265487
no he wasn't

>>11266037
Just you. I see a guy who's (rightfully) worried about his friend. I read the thread and he has a point that you people wouldn't be throwing a tantrum like you are if he was on the other side of the political spectrum.

Shame threads like these have a bump limit.