/lit/ - Literature

https://freecharlesdavis.com/2018/05/26/kill-all-citations-5-more-examples-of-angela-nagle-lifting-wikipedia-and-other-writers/

She ripped off wikipedia, rational wiki and a bunch of neoreactionary sites.
Poor Douglas Lain.

Jesus. Was going to read it but I'll just delete it now. Can't believe that got published.

>>11309591
Just read wikipedia and know your meme entries about related subjects.
You will get longer, more in depth version of the "book".

It seem that copy-paste is her writing technique. This is an excerpt from her essay for The Baffler.

>“The New Man of 4chan,” by Angela Nagle:
>Rodger also left behind a lengthy autobiographical manuscript, titled My Twisted World. In it, he describes his frustration at not being able to find a girlfriend, his hatred of women, and his contempt for ethnic minorities and interracial couples.

>Wikipedia:
>Rodger e-mailed a lengthy autobiographical manuscript… titled “My Twisted World”…. In it, he described his… frustration over not being able to find a girlfriend, his hatred of women, his contempt for racial minorities and interracial couples.

when is she going to go full reactionary? we have been waiting for her for a while

>>11309565
Are these guys not native English speakers? The content I've seen there is usually good, but both this post and the excerpts he cites are grammatically abysmal.

He also sounds like a whiny bitch. If you want to be taken seriously, don't act like a sarcastic teenager when you're angry, just express your anger. The way he's doing things is just a tacit acknowledgement of his personal impotence.

>>11309618
What people considered as proofs of her reactionary nature were just texts originally by reactionary authors that she had unwittingly copied.
She never knew what she was talking about, what she knew was that this flavour of the month book will bring her considerable amount of monies.

>>11309604
>his contempt for racial minorities

He knew he was one right

>>11309618
Who is this "we"? Don't tell me you ever cared for this woman.

>>11309565
https://twitter.com/socialmattermag
they look breddy interesting
>#NRx Repost: Weimerica Weekly - Episode 52 - Travel As The New Identity

>>11309621
As far as i can tell this is a typical snarky and bitter style of Nrx writers.

>>11309565
Her Twitter is in full on damage control. She's fixated on this Davis guy but from the looks of it the plagiarism is all really, really obvious, and prolific.

>>11309646
Kek, she is going with the traditional MUH PERSONAL BULLYING tactic.

Their defense line is that many of those citations weren't verbatim.
No shit, she rephrased them to hide the fact that most of her books is copypasted content ffs/

http://zero-books.net/blogs/zero/our-response-to-charles-davis-attack-on-angela-nagle/

>>11309646

>mfw her twitter

>>11309565
>>11309588
>>11309604

Something about Angela's looks... It's like her best friends are her mom and her grandma and she lives on a farm. I want to sneak on to said farm and say things to make her blush, then bump into her while she's watering the animals and find a reason to touch her lily white hands and compliment them, and then she'll blush and look down and I'll caress her cheek with the back of my hand and then lift her head up and kiss her on the lips then embrace her within the long reach of my arms and the gentle sway side to side as she rests her head against my chest, listening to the strong pound of my heart, and raping her while a cow shits four inches from her head.

>>11309708

>>11309618
>when is she going to go full reactionary?
since this "old left" nagle allegedly stood for turned out to be the "new old right" doing the thinking and writing for her, it's not even a matter of time, she's already there

so Zero Books is based just in re-phrasing Nrx arguments as if they were left wing?

>We blame the editors, but of course, we also blame her.
kek

>In fact, as a gesture of my sincere generosity and understanding of the challenges content generators face, I’m going to write up a quick, three-step guide for future content generators to more effectively plagiarize the material here at Social Matter.
#NiceRx

>2. Don’t write about material that causes people to suspect your loyalties
this is kind of true, if you are retarded enough to plagiarize at least make sure your own camp will have your back when you get caught

>>11309803
Yeah, thats whole their gimmick, a reactionary socialist left.
One of their editors, Derrick C. Varn used to be right-wing.

this is kind of funny and sad for her, but why is this Charles Davis guy so autistic about Nagle? it's not like she's anybody

>>11309822
i liked the podcast at some point but it is kind of sad too

at this point they are interviewing literally-who professors from Canada to try to make Jordan Peterson look bad
http://zero-books.net/blogs/zero/zero-books-157-zero-squared-157-schiffs-insider-critique-of-peterson/

i guess they want to be edgy like the right while remaining left wing, it's not going to work because the internet and memes are a reactionary medium by nature

>>11309565

>>11309565
is this the power of the "old school left"? copy/pasting from reactionary meme websites? didn't Zizek get caught too copy/pasting from reactionaries not long ago?

>>11309803
and zero editing
>>11309831
>it's not like she's anybody
but this is precisely the point, you go after people you outrank, not the party leadership
>>11309852
yep

>>11309836
I have the same settings.
I don't really think internet is reactionary in nature, its just that they became ridiculous with their Peterson obsession.
Memerson isnt worth so much attention.

>>11309836
>internet and memes are a reactionary medium by nature
Anyone with any inkling of 90s internet will know that is not true at all

>>11309859
90s internet was highly elitist and hierarchical, even retarded people that knew how to copy/paste HTML code and save skull-spinning gifs called themselves "webmasters"

>>11309604
Oh is that plagiarism when it is reciting common knowledge?

>>11309872
>uh... it just happens to be worded the exact same way. Pure coincidence

>>11309870
>he doesn't about the cyber-anarchism
And no it was not highly elitist and hierarchical, if anything it was the New Wild Wild West feel that hoped the internet would be a progressive change

>>11309874
At worst it is being lazy, but reciting events and common knowledge is not plagiarism.

>>11309876
>>he doesn't about the cyber-anarchism
it was always performatively contradictory and elistist, see what happened with it

>>11309872
it's about the minimally edited structure, not the information

>>11309836
He interviewed John Ebert lately so his subconscious is probably struggling to survive somehow.

>>11309882
Sure its failure to shift into anything revolutionary in 00s is proof that the Internet isn't progressive, but it is ample proof that it isn't reactionary either.

>>11309897
almost looks like Land

>>11309888
But that isn't plagiarism, and calling it so is hyperbolic to frame the narrative.

Social Matter are responsible for one of the greatest modern works of poetry. This
https://www.socialmatter.net/2016/07/30/blue-haired-girl/

Blue-Haired Girl
BLAIS RICHELIEU
>You cut your hair last month and dyed it blue
>There’s choices now, but which choice will you choose?
>You choose to hold a blue sign at the march
>A rebel searching for a patriarch

>But patriarchs have vanished—you are freed
>The government supplies your every need
>You left us for a better man: the State
>Red, white, and blue: the colors of your fate

>The State says you may ride the carousel
>With partners serial—or parallel
>No judgment from down here nor from above
>You have your pick in lovers—but not love

>A life of disassociated scenes
>Are acted out for men on bluish screens
>These men on screens can make you feel alive
>But what will be your plan at thirty-five?

>Become a doctor, lawyer—rule the world
>Play any role except for Wife, or Girl
>If this blue future makes you feel alone
>Remember that we love you, remember and come home.

This pleb filters the cuck

>>11309908
>But that isn't plagiarism
it is
>calling it so is hyperbolic to frame the narrative
it isn't

fuck off angela

>>11309872
If it was a common knowledge she would write it in her words and not just change some terms in a phrase like a lazy schoolkid.

>>11309914
Saying Nuh-uh is not an argument. Again this kind of information cannot be plagiarized coz no one 'owns' the description of said events or information. You are right in that she was lazy to not rephrase though.

>>11309925
I think she should not have even bothered with these descriptions anyway and just assume the reader knows what she is talking about but yea she is dumb to do that. But I fail to see how that is plagiarism.

>>11309618
fuck off, I don't want more retards who can't even do basic research anywhere near me.

>>11309588
How did no one notice this?
Don’t publishers run text through a computer program to check for stuff like this? Even teachers can do it

>>11309931
It was a book for wide public to capitalise on Trumps victory though, people may not know that stuff.

>>11309941
It is easy to bypass the program when you rephrasing and restructuring stuff.

>>11309944
Then come up with descriptions of your own and face backlash of how you just don't get it? This is a game you can't win anyway so might as well don't play.

>>11309908
it is, it's taking someone's work and directly rewriting it by changing a few words without adding anything of your own, and it kind of shows when you read the book that it's all like this, it has no cohesion because it's just a compilation of other people's ideas

>>11309954
>someone's work and directly rewriting it by changing a few words without adding anything of your own,
She is taking people's description of events and stuff to make her own anaylsis, the former is not plagiarizable because no one can claim ownership over how to describe stuff but the latter is because analysis and ideas are more subjective.

>it has no cohesion because it's just a compilation of other people's ideas
I did actually read the book and it was a compilation of events and memes with her trying to make sense of all this bullshit.

>>11309912
>>These men on screens can make you feel alive
>>But what will be your plan at thirty-five?
breddy funny

>>11309941
>zero books
>zero editing

>>11309912
God this is pathetic

>>11309958
>She is taking people's description of events and stuff to make her own anaylsis,

Not really, her analysis is very superficial, like you said she is mostly compliling information, without much input from herself.

>>11309912
Their poems are cringy as fuck. Even instagram poetry is better than this tryhard shit.

>>11309958
>She is taking people's description of events and stuff
so quote them

>to make her own anaylsis
there's is no analysis in the book beyond "transgression may not be inherently left wing and liberating"

>>11309966
She is probably the only outsider that could understand how memes in 4chan can evolve and adapt to shifting times and cross boards. It was an above average book.

>>11309973
>It was an above average book.

Above what average? Average buzzfeed post?
I would rather read wikipedia, at least it is more consistent in style.

>>11309971
>so quote them
She should have for some but it is not plagiarism to no do so as along it is not verbatim.

>beyond "transgression may not be inherently left wing and liberating"
Well I am sorry that is not good enough for you but I liked the part where she described the evolution of memes

>>11309980
>at least it is more consistent in style.
Sure whatever man, I don't really care about your taste. As along as you recognize that she was a lazy writer at worst and not a plagiarizer like what OP said.

>>11309981
>Well I am sorry that is not good enough for you

That's basically a rephrasing of Zizek's critique of the political corectness.
This book remains a lazy cashgrab

>>11309987
But this inconsistency in style is a result of her copypasting different sources and not even processing them.
In texts that she failed to quote she gives opinions that arent hers. So imo it is still a plagiat.

>>11309993
>moves discussion from plagiarism to quality of the book
>suddenly snaps back to plagiarism
Wew lads, am I being screwed over here?

>But this inconsistency in style is a result of her copypasting different sources and not even processing them.
Everything aside from her descriptions had a consistent style. But that is just like our opinions I guess.

>she failed to quote she gives opinions that arent hers
But the parts everyone is whining about is not about her giving opinions that arent hers, but description of stuff. So imo it still not plagiarism

>>11309990
>a rephrasing of Zizek's critique of the political corectness
Err her attempt to understand 4chan was also part of the book too, you know that right.

>lazy cashgrab
Oh noooo, books are being written to be sold. What are we going to do

>>11310001
>“1968 and the rise of the New Left was proof to the demoralized right that the whole culture would now have to be retaken before formal political change could come. This led to the pursuit of a ‘metapolitics’, and a rejection of the political party and traditional activism within a section of the right.
> Instead, they set about rethinking their philosophical foundations and creating new ways to counter the ‘68 ideology of Social Progress

How does she know that? Is she quoting any right wing french writer?
Without any sources to confirm those claims it seem like a pretty risky opinion. She is not describing facts but using someones analysis of the post '68 situation (which is quite funny because that Nrx analysis also isnt supported by any textual evidence, its just a common meme on the right influenced by De Benoist).

>>11310013
Literally one sentence before that quote she said that Andrew Hartman said something like this and even mentioned what book.

>>11309930
>it's not plagiarism if I change a few words while keeping the exact same sentence/narrative structure

>>11309565
Have any other books been written about similar topics?

>>11310044
If you're here why would you need it? Just read the source material.

>>11309973
Not really. It was below average.

However, since it's more or less the only book on the topic, I give it a pass. It's really difficult to write good non-fiction when you don't have a bunch of secondary literature to refer to.

>>11310033
>if i can strawman what he said in greentext and post a picture, I win!

>>11310052
>I copypasted an NRx blog instead of doing research but it's not plagiarism because it's nonfiction

>>11310049
>when you don't have a bunch of secondary literature to refer to.
Yea and since 4chan can no entry barrier or proper archiving such things are impossible. There is probably only one person who can actually do it, but I am sure that faggot won't.

>>11310056
>I can ignore what was already being said by repeating the same allegation again!

>>11310061
Calm down incel, just use your words and tell me how what I said was wrong

>>11310065
>make snappy greentext replies
>get snappy greentext replies
>lol why don't you just tell me why I am wrong
You just want to go through the motions over again, incel. I have already made my point.

>>11310027
So she is using Hartman's name to legitimise an opinion from non-quoted quote of some right wing lunatic?
I have to retrack my previous statement - she is not lazy, she had put quite a lot of effort and creativity to hide her copy-pasting practice.

>>11310072
You made a shitty point that's objectively incorrect, keep defending your liberal waifu

Why liberals and libertarians are obsessed with (((((((((((((((intellectual property))))))))))))) and claim that the plagiary is of the highest crime possible ?

>>11310078
Because property is sacred.
Respect the NAP or else.

>>11310078
It's not a crime, it just makes you a shitty writer especially when the analysis you supply on top of your plagiarism is incredibly basic-bitch.
>>11310080
*blocks your path*

If only there was a coherent philosophy that could have predicted that a woman, therefore someone with life on easy mode, was more likely to half ass things...

>>11310093
Oh come on, sex has nothing to do with that.
Most of the contemporary journalists are exactly the same regardless of sex.

>>11310073
Now you are just twisting whatever answer you get to enforcing your own opinion. Hartman even said they both made a mistake.

>she had put quite a lot of effort and creativity to hide her copy-pasting practice.
You give her way too much credit just so you can avoid admitting you are wrong. Just give up senpai.

>>11310106
You are the one doing the mental gymnastics here.

>>11310111
Dude you said she got her hot opinions out of thin air, but I told you she said that she got it from Hartman. Now you saying she is abusing Hartman for her hot opinion. You are the one who set up a question where either answer is unacceptable to you and I am doing the mental gymnastics here? Go project your insecurities somewhere else.

>>11309565
It always annoys me when poor writers criticize other writers for writing poorly.

>>11309624
Hapas hate themselves.

>>11310122
But those "hot opinions" that she claims are from Hartman ARE NOT from Hartman ffs.
How dense can one be?

>>11310044
not really, the internet is too fast, not worth writing a book about it but it's better covered with articles ssssss

Why would /lit/ ever believe a series of hit pieces from someone of the likes of Vice, Salon, and The Daily Beast? Because it helps deflect a consistent critique of their own culture? Do you'll not even notice that this Davis prick is obviously a Tumblr lefty that's salted as fuck for Nagle calling out their side of the bullshit in the culture wars? But no. /lit/ never wants to look into the foreground of the disputes being enacted, /lit/ just wants to see bullshit, drama fireworks and feel entitled to their own vain side of the culture wars.

>>11309836
this 'literally-who' is the guy who helped start Peterson's career as an academic by being one of his foremost advocates for being hired at whichever Canadian uni they both hail from. How fucking dull do you have to be to not recognize the import of a person's critique who has been with Peterson from the very start of his teaching career? Did you not hear him say what it was Peterson just HAD TO TELL HIM in their last phone call together, and how absolutely damning a reveal of Peterson's interior character it is?

>>11310170
Then fucking prove it instead of just making accusation after accusation. As I already said in my post that you conveniently ignored to accuse me of stuff, Hartman already said that they both made the mistake.

>“I made a tiny mistake in my own book which you repeated. But otherwise, you cited me several times and did not plagiarize whatsoever. I like your book and think this attack is made in bad faith.”

>>11310181
>the guy who helped start Peterson's career as an academic by being one of his foremost advocates for being hired at whichever Canadian uni they both hail from
Memerson taught in Harvard before he did in whatever meme Canadian university he is in now, i'm sure he would have found a place somewhere

>and how absolutely damning a reveal of Peterson's interior character it is?
you just have to listen to the guy talk about jungian magic practices if you want to do that, no need to interview a literally who professor for some canadian university nobody cared about until this Kermit guy started doing youtube videos

>>11310181
>Why would /lit/ ever believe a series of hit pieces from someone of the likes of Vice, Salon, and The Daily Beast?
because you can check the quotes and see they are literally copy/pasted? it's not rocket surgery, plagiarism is plagiarism, she is not accomplished enough like Zizek to go through it unscattered

>>11310181
It's not culture war you tard. She is a plagiarist and that's about it, the fact that some leftist twat is attacking her doesnt make her automatically right.

>>11310181
blame nagle's shameless stupidity making the haters' job easier

>>11310201
I fucking hate this tribalism, defending lazyness just because she wrote something that could be interpreted as sympathetic for 4chan and critical to tumblr/tweeter left is pathetic.
You don't need people like Nagle in your camp.

>>11310214
she's clueless and it shows in the interviews and lectures she did after the book, i mean she is decent at compiling information from a right wing point of view, but she has no insight of her own

>>11310181
Because you have to always asses the quality of the idea before you asses the quality of the author. Why don't you go read the article for yourself sweaty? Beside a few words and synonymy's being moved around the sentence structure and length is exactly the same. The worse part is that all of it could have been avoided if she just sourced the work. It's pathetic.

Zero Books proving once again why they're the worst publisher out there.

>>11310214
it's not sympathetic for 4chan, it's equally critical of both sides
>>11310196
and I assume you didn't bother yourself to read Nagle's direct address of all of the quotes in question where she plainly disproves her Tumblrite accusser
>>11310201
you're pretending like the culture wars don't exist, as if there weren't a larger conversation happening which is informing the motivations of certain people to behave in certain ways. Maybe that's why you're so unwilling to give some supposed expose on Nagle a second look and read her address of it
>>11310191
being an assistant & associate professor to a department doesn't mean dick in academia, sure he came from a pedigree ivy league school of Harvard in that regard, but it was only at the University of Toronto that he was given the career power to develop his completely own conception of the world and lecture on it without reproach or affective critique from any of his colleagues. That's why the person who helped him get hired at UoT was so critical in Peterson's life, and sure, he could've been hired elsewhere, in which case the person who'd most helped him get hired there would have been just as insightful as to Peterson's messiah complex

I thought it was strange that the book was well written and easy to read despite it's shitlib author, I guess it's because it was written by reactionaries though.

>>11310244
>disproves
how? the structure is the same than that reactionary magazine

>That's why the person who helped him get hired at UoT was so critical in Peterson's life
so what? peterson is irrelevant, he is just riding the reactionary wave, but the reactionary wave doesn't need Peterson

>>11310244
>and I assume you didn't bother yourself to read Nagle's direct address of all of the quotes in question where she plainly disproves her Tumblrite accusser

All she did was clinging to the personal attacks on that guy and trying to prove his previous accusations were false so this time he must be wrong too.

Does the book actually contain anything i wouldnt know already
t.12 years on 4chan, 7years on kc (rip in piss)

>>11310391
It's all knowyourmeme tier.

>>11310391
Google "Escaping the vamoire castle" blog post by fisher.

It's that, plus describing /pol/, plus describing the rise of Milo Y.

It's a very short read, not good or bad, but it's good someone made that commentary on current events.
I don't care for Neagle and I surely don't care if her sections were from Wikipedia or not, let's get over it

ps and it described mtgow too and those things

Here's that post
http://www.thenorthstar.info/2013/11/22/exiting-the-vampire-castle/
(This was a Zizek type leftist intellectual, offed himself for unrelated reasons a few years later)

>>11310033
His point is that she wasn’t plagiarizing original thoughts and ideas, she was lazily reusing a description of an event the information of which was on the news and publically available to everyone. Just because you were taught in college and high school that plagiarism is the sin against the Holy Ghost which will not be forgiven and immediately give you a 0 on your work doesn’t mean Nagle is the most intellectually unscrupulous, thieving writer ever for, again, lifting some public basic knowledge from a public and extremely popular website. She’s not passing off other people’s original ideas as her own. She’s just lazy.

>>11310426
>i don't care if she's a fraud
ok, but she is

>>11310461
>it's not plagiarism if you plagiarize non-fiction

>>11310473
This is aside from the definition of plagiarism, it’s more about the reactions to plagiarism. It’s ridiculously overblown and socially determined. OK, if you take someone’s original ideas, don’t cite them, and pass them off as your own, that’s pretty scummy. If you plagiarize a basic description of an event which was on the news and public knowledge, you’re lazy, for sure, but you’re not intentionally malevolent. This is just about the Wikipedia description of Eliot Rodger, though. Reading the article, I can see she has much worse instances of plagiarism than that.

>>11310486
>It’s ridiculously overblown and socially determined.
>socially determined.
>plagiarism
>a thing humans do is socially determined
makes you think really

>omg this guy just copied this book by Plato and did not write it was from Plato, that's totally unacceptable. He should be put in jail and fined for a lot of money


Imagine greeks thinking like this

>>11310509
If some guy would do what Angel did most of the greeks would assume that it was some weird version of Plato's work with some words exchanged for some reason with their synonyms rewritten by some dimwit slave who wasnt very good in greek.
So the justice to the original author would be served.

the damage control ITT lol

>>11310509
no the greeks had the opposite problem: attributing their own stuff to the original teachers, hence whole works now classfied as platonic apocrypha, pseudo-aristotle, etc.

>>11310538
>the damage control ITT lol
kek, but what is plagiarism doesn't actually matter, have you thought about that dude? you are being controlled by the system, just be yourself and copy from books

>>11309708

This is 97% beautiful.

>>11309565
>Or does it come off feeling like Nagle is a sleeper agent of X and trying to soften her friends up into accepting X ideology?

>For many on the Left, it’s the latter, and so Nagle must be destroyed.

O-our girl?

>>11310627
well, she was literally copy/pasting from reactionary websites without a thought of her own, so she's more of a vessel or a medium if you want

>>11309852
>didn't Zizek get caught too copy/pasting from reactionaries not long ago?

Yes, though he claims to have done so indirectly. Crazily, his plagiarism was about local meme book Culture of Critique.

>>11310632
>she's more of a vessel

Vessels are perfected by being filled.

>>11309878
What the fuck is this pathetic attempt at damage control? Do you really think that you're going to convince anyone that what is obviously plagiarism is really 'at worst lazy' just by responding to every post that makes this claim with 'uuuh, no?!'

>>11310653

There's a lot more here.
It's pretty funny.

http://withendemanndom.blogspot.com/2014/07/slavoj-zizek-philosophaster-and_9.html?m=1

>>11309858

The Internet is fragmentary in nature.
Reaction feeds on fragmentation.

>>11310664
>Reaction feeds on fragmentation.

That's a nice phrase but does it really mean anything in practice?
Divide an conquer is also a principle based on fragmentation and doesnt necessarily serve the reaction but whoever divides.

>>11310078
>libertarians are obsessed with (((((((((((((((intellectual property)))))))))))))

It's a point of contention. Some of the older Libertarians sought to ground intellectual property in contract law. Many these days reject the concept outright.

>>11310090
>*blocks your path*

Oh?

>>11309565
plagiarism always endears me to an author, I wanted to get that crime novel that was rife with blatant plagiarism but it was so expensive when they took it out of print.

How people can possibly get upset over this shit is far beyond me

>>11310658
yes
this is what leftist apologists actually believe:
"feelings > facts"

>>11310653
>Crazily, his plagiarism was about local meme book Culture of Critique.
kek, didn't know that one

>>11310078
because they're sad freaks look for an excuse to get angry

>>11310700
>How people can possibly get upset over this shit is far beyond me
because we hate hypocrites and liars, anon
not that fucking hard to wrap your head around that dishonesty leads to contempt from onlookers

>>11310658
mm no sweetie, it can't be plagiarism if it's non-fiction

Apparently they stopped teaching what plagiarism was in high school.
I imagine this was a capitulation by teachers to the mass of Wikipedia print-outs they are handed with their students' names scribbled in the upper-right. And the district admins say: push 'em through. So the poor souls pull their bike pumps from their desks and start inflating.
But maybe--
Let's call it a pastiche. Now it's art and social commentary. The medium is the message of the medium of the message.

The Ancient Greeks plagiarized all the time.
It's not a big deal.

>>11310674
>That's a nice phrase but does it really mean anything in practice?

Sure. The Internet allows its users to route around all sorts of impositions. It also shatters consensus by opening the way to alternative viewpoints. There can be no gatekeepers in a world with the Internet. Like-minded people congregate and congeal creating "echo chambers" that amplify those within and drown-out those without. Communities are born and are hardened. Secession becomes a moral imperative. Can it be otherwise?

>>11310777
Back then nobody really cared who the author was anyway so it didn't matter. Text was just a way for someone to transmit information, there was no backlash if said text was unreliable or poorly written simply because nobody cared that much anyway.

>>11310789

Slow down Nick, of course it could be otherwise, but to be fair, it probably won't be otherwise due to people craving their (((freedoms))). The internet is only like you describe because this dynamic system has no constraints limiting its phase space. Atomization, fragmentation and spreading of equilibrium states is all you get when you allow all states to be occupied. The "Chinese internet" would be a reasonably better, but not quite there yet, alternative.

>>11310674
the left has always been about a small elite imposing their social engineering fever dreams onto plebs, the internet is too fragmented for that to be possible, so communities are ruled by their set of unwritten rules, which are always reactionary

>>11310824
I getting mixed data here.
One anon before said that internet is by nature elitist and hierarchical and you are saying that by nature it opposes all kinds of elitism and hierarchy.

>>11310824
Incest and isolation isn't reactionary per se, it's just pathology.
You can have progressive echo-chambers as well who will spout progressivist propaganda right and left while bathing in own sauce all the time.

>>11310832
it's not contradictory, the internet foments small scale direct elitism and hierarchy self-regulated by its own community, doesn't work so well for grand scale indirect hierarchies to be forced onto plebs

she's being attacked because she agrees with almost everything about /pol/

>>11310852
they may spout progressive propaganda, but their internal self-regulated structure is reactionary and hierarchical, when those 2 things get together you get purity spirals and self-destruction, the progressive coalition is not stable in the long term, it's only stable while they have someone else's power/money to loot

Do you love to read the retarded rules about plagiarism created by liberals in academia that they display in the copy room of their research departments ?

>>11310883
>Did you paraphrase multiple sources and stitch them together, making them sound like your own?
wew, literally the first bubble i read, stop the damage control Angela, it's not working and your are just embarrassing yourself at this point arguing the definition of plagiarism

This thread is really shitty and incoherent.

Has anyone here done a research paper before? They're extremely strict about citations. You can't lift a word from someone without citing and adding quotations. And you must cite every piece of information, because obviously everything you learn must've come from somewhere.

>>11309565
Isn't it just a fact of the matter that covering recent events and history, eventually some writings of this ilk will inevitably overlap?

>>11310966
with the same grammatical structure while writing about an obscure internet thing? probably not

>>11310947
Go to sleep Angela.

is this the end of zero books?

>>11311046
Probably not, they managed to create a large group of cultists on the internet as visible ITT.

>>11311057
what have they published that's known? i only know Angela, the Capitalism Realism guy and some meme-tier sci-fi

>>11311067
They mostly publish Mark Fisher and some no-names.

>>11310181
>/lit/ can't hate both peterson and nagle for blatant plagiarism and poorly constructed hack arguments
why the fuck not, we're still hate faggots for being better at writing than us since the greeks, peterson and nagle are both far more hateable, wrong and perfidious than even plato. i say we firebomb them both and say it's an act of appropriation after kaycznski and in defense of everyone's right to plagiarize. fuck both of them, lying hacks with overblown advances should be shot by their lowliest copy editor.

>>11309708
>>11309730
>>11310619
it's pasta

>>11311277
so is Nagle's book

>>11311306
epic

>>11309912
>rhymes "love" with "above"
>rhymes "blue" with "choose"
>rhymes "girl" with "world
>DUDE BLUE IS SADNESS GET IT?
>last line is supposed to offer closure, but has atypical meter instead of rigorous meter
The only pleb here is you.

>>11310658
If the people pushing it don't know what is plagiarism and what isn't and keeps repeating themselves over and over again

>>11310859
if it fragments big hierarchy to smaller one, that it opposes hierarchy.

>>11309565
Oh, hey, I've written for Social Matter a few times.

>>11312122
great work angela
what's ur next project

>>11311856
This, that poem is embarrassing. People who don't read poetry are always painful to read; their heavy-handedness makes sure that no one could miss their jokes/symbolism/imagery. It's like when boomers write a "rap" and the entire thing is clumsy and only has shite end-stopped rhymes.

(It's not even about the politics; Ezra Pound was a full-on fascist and great poet)

>>11309912
Nigger the Tiger poem by that 4 year old was way stronger than that.

lol why is anyone defending this person. She copy-pasted paragraphs that other people wrote and added very slight paraphrases, presented it as her own. This is cut-and-dried content theft.

>>11314024
Is anybody seriously defending her, though? I'm just enjoying watching her get torn apart. She sowed the wind by associating with 4chan, now she's reaping the whirlwind and it's highly amusing.

>she "writes" a book called killed all normies
>she plagiarizes it
>she herself is a normie
>her target audience now has no respect for her
what was her endgame?
is she trying to commit suicide-by-reader?
does she want us to kill her?
was her entire purpose to get herself blasted by an angry 300 pound virgin with a Glock at a book signing?
REALLY makes you think.

>>11314024
Read what is already being in written in this thread OP , all these paraphrasing is only proof that she is a lazy writer not a plagiarist.

>>11314036
why are you defending a dumb plagiarist, you think you going to get that coochie?

>>11314038
I am only pointing out the hyperbolic attempt to paint what she did as plagiarism. It seems like there is a few posters ITT trying to push that narrative constantly without being willing to discuss it.

Can I use the phrase "the sky is blue" in a book? What if someone else has used that phrase somewhere before and I don't have a proper citation?

>>11314046
>I am only pointing out the hyperbolic attempt to paint what she did as plagiarism
the hyperbolic pointing at OBVIOUS plagiarism. there is no "discussion", you're just an idiot.

seriously bro answer my question. Do you think that you will get sohme journo pussy if you defend her online? is that your endgame? maybe she'll read this thread (wouldn't be surprised if she does, after all she is at least peripherally aware of 4chan considering that she writes shoddy books about it) and go "awww thats so sweet, sweetie is spending hours defending me online. I'm gonna give him some coochie if I ever find out who he is"

>>11314080
>the hyperbolic pointing at OBVIOUS plagiarism. there is no "discussion", you're just an idiot.
Again repeating yourself and berating me isn't an argument. She is 'caught' paraphrasing descriptions of stuff not ideas or analysis. The former doesn't count as plagiarism.

>Do you think that you will get sohme journo pussy if you defend her online?
I was going to ask you the same question of why there seems to be a concerted effort to be obsessed about her. First /pol/fags pretend that they dont care about her, then they keep pushing the hope/idea that she is a closet reactionary or going to be one, now they are pushing this hyperbolic.

>>11309565
>People actually read this book
I thought it was a meme

>>11314028
she got attacked and found out by random pro-war pro-gressive journalist #238493, not by the chans, don't claim it for us, we are just commenting on it and having fun

>>11310049
>above average
>more or less the only book on the topic

>>11309912
I'm at a loss here. I can't believe... I just can't, AHHHHH!!! THAT WAS SO STUPID!!!!

How? That's what I need to know; How could someone spin so much cringe into a few stanzas?

I am now dumber for having read that.

>>11314078
You can't even do that in Wikipedia lol:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:You_do_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue

>>11314103
get a life loser

This thread still alive?

>>11314678
>>11314678
it's fun spending ~200 comments trying to redefine what's plagiarism

>>11314007
>Nigger the Tigger poem

>>11314678
By like Terry Schiavo standards.

>>11309565
:>book explaining chan shit to normalfags
>can literally lie and no one would know
>fucking plagarize
how does this bitch end up being more useless than carlos mencia?

>>11314900
pic related

>>11309730
>>11310619
You have to

>>11310956
Yes. I hate it.