/lit/ - Literature

basado y rojopillado

>>12130316
Did this happen yet? Been waiting forever it seems.

>>12130343
It won't, they're both irrelevant now, the media has moved on.

>>12130343
Kek

>>12130316
>There is no more left, only right. Two sides battling it out to the end. Winner take all. Who will take home the title? Who will walk away with the belt?

I thought these matches were rigged and that's what makes them pleasing. The contained war is a beautiful spectacle, but this is just people who can't even decide on the definition of a slur. Can we not just have a war already and drowned these people out with the sounds of godly bombs and whimpering children. I'm soo bored right now.

Only one of them is a philosopher

>>12130316
Žižek is strawmanning like a faggot. The only good point is his critique of the "cultural Marxism" meme.

>>12130316
Holy shit, this is the most coherent thing Zizek has ever said. For once I agree with him

>>12130374
Only *none* of them

>>12130376
After 30 years of people using the cultural marxism meme why the fuck are people suddenly so upset by it in the last couple of years?

>>12130376
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Cultural Marxism is, in fact, Cultural Deleuzianism-Guattarianism, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Deleuzianism AND Guattarianism. Idpol is not a political philosophy unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning philosophical non-system made useful by Guattari's schizoanalysis, rhizomes and vital deterritorializing components comprising a full philosophy as defined in "What Is Philosophy?"

Many left identitarians use a modified version of Deleuzianism every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of Deleuzianism which is widely used today is often called 'Cultural Marxism' and credit is given to the Frankfurt School, but many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Deleuzian non-system of difference, developed by the Liberal identitarians.

There really is a 'Cultural Marxism', developed by Adorno, Marcuse, and Walter Benjamin, but these people aren't using it; it isn't a part of the system they use. Deleuze's repetition is the philosophy of liberals: the difference in the plateaus that allocates the machinic desires against the oppressive totalities and identities that you know. Deleuze is an essential part of Guanttarianist identitarianism, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete liberal college campus. Deleuze is normally used against Frankfurters: Cultural Marxism is actually the whole system of Deleuze and Guattari with the name of Marx added. All the so-called Cultural Marxists are really Cultural Deleuzeans!

>>12130386
Reminder Deleuze was a crypto-fascist and currently being used by racial separatists and imperialistic warmongers.

>>12130316
>In another repost to Peterson, Zizek asserted that the problem with political correctness is not that it’s “too fanatically marxist” rather “it's precisely that it's not marxist.”
b-but it wasn’t real communism
zizek is still based though

>>12130386
But Marx is easy to hate on, so....

>>12130394
but was ok when american's on the left used him, right?

>>12130406
The American left have never utilized Deleuzian tactics, they're embarrassingly sincere unlike the American right which at this point are full on post-modernists.

>>12130316
Zizek is such a fucking joke lmao. I can't believe anyone takes him seriously

>>12130316
Peterson isn't a philosopher tho

>>12130316
Go pinker kill him. The humanities prof need to be taught a lesson

>>12130409
You mean their level of Deleuzian tactics didn't make it far out of hearing from the backrooms, right? How many levels is there bro?

Finally I can stash my copy of Jordanetics

>>12130343
Peterson pussied out like a faggot again

>>12130386
I see what you did there, and it was mildly amusing. I chuckled. Thanks, anon.

>>12130384
Academics don' like it when their intentions are made to look malicious, so they have impotent tantrums over semantics.

>>12130386
Is the baby not a wolf anus onto oneself?

>>12130409
Actually it's exactly the opposite, the right are the mongs clinging to muh constitution and muh freedoms while the left has become a soul-sucking intellectually bankrupt abomination (transgender ideology etc.)

>>12130511
Like the semantics of justice or some other vase you keep your wilted flowers in, friend?

>>12130394
Where to start with Dulooz?

>>12130531
I've never exactly concerned myself with justice, but I've also never tried to obscure my agenda by pointing to academic definitions of Marxism.

>>12130316
his talk at cambridge is among his best, and i've listened to like a hundred zizek talks

>In another repost to Peterson, Zizek asserted that the problem with political correctness is not that it’s “too fanatically marxist” rather “it's precisely that it's not marxist.”
As an exercise, let's find out who were the most prominent advocates of what we call "political correctness". How many of them were in CPUSA, DSA, or a closely related organization? How many would consider their political affiliation as Marxist?

>>12130510
I'm a brainlet can you spoonfeed me the joke?

>>12130602
>marxists can't do non-marxist things

>>12130630
>it wasn't real Communism
Not this shit again.

>>12130632
>it wasn't real Communism
I didn't implied that though. My contention is the idea that whatever marxists do is pure 100% marxism, as if they can't do anything else.

>>12130642
If you have a bunch of people in Marxist groups, doing Marxist organization in elite institutions, and reading Marx for further inspiration, and then going and implementing informal speech codes (as in, political correctness), I think it's a safe bet to call it Marxist. I'm sure you can find some Marxists who consider political correctness non-Marxist but you can get Marxists to produce multiple incompatible views on just about any topic.

>>12130648
To be fair, being a socialist isn't the same as being a Marxist.

>>12130648
>I think it's a safe bet to call it Marxist
It isn't though and you have yet to prove otherwise. Using that logic, environmentalism and strands of liberalism would be considered marxism as well.

>>12130668
>It isn't though and you have yet to prove otherwise

Fucking lmao. It is a completely legitimate form of meaning-making to call what Marxists do "marxist". Countless words through history have been formed this way. Like "spartan". This is just bullshit word policing like the left has done for over a century to achieve particular emotional import into their terminology.

>>12130668
>environmentalism and strands of liberalism would be considered marxism as well.
Almost, the correct answer is:
>environmentalism (in its current form) and Marxism would be considered strands of liberalism

>>12130681
>It is a completely legitimate form of meaning-making to call what Marxists do "marxist"
Sure if you can make the connection from the ideology of marxism to the action of said marxists. Which you haven't at all. People can have more than just one ideologies (as long as it is not mutually exclusive) and can make actions accordingly to another ideology, in which case liberalism.

>>12130697
>Sure if you can make the connection from the ideology of marxism to the action of said marxists

That's the great thing, I actually don't. If this activity finds its highest expression in groups with heavy influence from Marx (it does btw), it is legitimate to call it Marxist. This is a formulation by association. I don't need a formal connection.

>>12130694
Exactly! The ideology of liberalism justifies environmentalism and Marxism, However that person is clamoring as whatever card-carrying marxists do is marxism when it could just fall under the bigger umbrella of liberalism.

>>12130316

What three living personalities should be added to this trio in order to create a hilarious argument among six? I struggle to think of any as the big memes are dead (Derrida, Foucault) and another (Chomsky) is too old and depressed about (((global warming))) to make a funny argument.

>>12130704
Well, Marxists like to consider themselves as anti-liberals. Never mind that liberal elites provide the funding and institutional support for their activities so that they can destroy society in the name of Equality, they're selling us the rope with which to hang them!

>>12130702
>This is a formulation by association. I don't need a formal connection.
Which as I already said, it is not an argument that you can use. I even offered a counter point, that using your logic, environmentalism and strands of liberalism would be called marxism to point out how absurd your lining of reasoning is.

>>12130316
Oh my f god!!!!!!
Thanks God i have a gf so i couldnt care less abouttwo idiots draama drag queens

>>12130711
>Well, Marxists like to consider themselves as anti-liberals
They don't? Marxists essentially see liberalism as a flawed project to improve not reject

>Never mind that liberal elites provide the funding and institutional support for their activities
>what is COINTELPRO and School of Death?

>>12130316
>that Zizek video
Wow, he's really gotten old. He almost sounds demented honestly, nothing he said had any substance at all but he raved for 10 minutes to himself.

>>12130316

Zizek>>>Peterson>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pinker

>>12130715
>it is not an argument that you can use
>it's not an argument to use a associative formulation even though humans have used them for thousands of years

Also, why do you think it's absurd to call environmentalism or strands of liberalism as Marxist? Frankly it seems reasonable to me. But what's great is you still cannot get over your preconceived notion of how you think words and meaning must be formed. You are intentionally adopting a particularity narrow form of legitimacy in what can only be an attempt to police the emotionalism of language.

>>12130726
Zizek is right on all accounts

>>12130376
>>Žižek is strawmanning like a faggot. The only good point is his critique of the "cultural Marxism" meme.
Even that's a strawman since no-one, and especially not Peterson, ever suggested it was some kind of concerted effort by Marxists with any central authority or even a goal, but rather a reactionary manifestation of ressentiment.

>>12130731
He completely misunderstands Pinker.

>>12130733
BUT IT WASN'T REAL MARXISM.

>>12130723
Marxists alternate between proclaiming their antiliberaism and proclaiming themselves to be its true fulfillment.

>>12130723
Your mistake is to view these activities as anti-Communist rather than anti-Russian. The Cold War was a conflict between two Communist powers.

>>12130729
>it's not an argument to use a associative formulation even though humans have used them for thousands of years
>appealing to tradition is now an argument as well

>Frankly it seems reasonable to me.
No it isn't? Environmentalism had its roots in other places, and although Marxists have taken up its cause, other non-marxists have done it too. Same for liberalism. If marxists supported gun rights, would gun rights be marxist?

>But what's great is you still cannot get over your preconceived notion of how you think words and meaning must be formed
Because you haven't made an argument let alone an effective one to convince me otherwise.

>>12130742
>The Cold War was a conflict between two Communist powers.
pic related

>Marxists alternate between proclaiming their antiliberaism
Show proof of marxists saying they are anti-liberalism

>>12130743
>No it isn't?
Yes it is?1/1?!?!? Your idea of meaning-making requires one to draw logical lines of descent into the word in question, which is simply not how language is used. Words take on the meanings they are used to express. The whole "santorum" event was used to express this.

>because you haven't made an argument let alone an effective one to convince me otherwise

The argument is you are simply wrong. Use of language does not follow your strict interpretation of inheritance.

>>12130316
Everyone looks so uncomfortable in that video, especially the interviewer. Why did Zizek open with a rape joke, holy shit. I bet he was thanking god for Peterson that day as the lobster jab was the only laugh he could get from the crowd, never mind it's totally untrue.

>>12130743
>If marxists supported gun rights, would gun rights be marxist?
If it was overwhelmingly the case that gun right support originated from Marxists, yes.

>>12130756
Okay so either I am right that language does follow your strict interpretation of inheritance or environmentalism, liberalism and even gun rights are marxist.

>>12130777
>environmentalism, liberalism and even gun rights are marxist

It would be legitimate and traditional is some ways to say so, yes.

>>12130774
>overwhelmingly
Ah so can you prove that identity politics originated from Marxists as well?

>>12130715
You do realize you're posting this in a Zizek thread, right? Slavoj Zizek...the self proclaimed marxist who sells books, public speeches, and television appearances? If anyone or anything was formal or real Marxism it'd be vehemently opposed to western liberalism. Instead of lodging within its rotted carcass perfectly content to be warm and fed by the aforementioned.

>>12130783
And the fact that non-marxists support these issues too would not change its nature of being marxist?

>>12130790
He lives in a capitalist society so he earns money in a capitalist way. That's how it works.

>>12130790
>If anyone or anything was formal or real Marxism it'd be vehemently opposed to western liberalism
Can you explain why using marxism?

>>12130793
Not necessarily no. If you're trying to get me to elucidate an entire system of meaning making, I'll tell you right now I can't do it. Society and language are capricious.

>>12130789
Are you suggesting equality of outcome isn't blatantly Marxist in nature?

>>12130316
When I read the title, I was hoping this was an actual physical fight.

>>12130816
"Each according to his contribution"

>>12130803
Have you not read Marx's thoughts on the Declaration of the Rights of Man?
>The right of property is, therefore, the right to enjoy one's fortune and to dispose of it as one will; without regard for other men and independently of society. It is the right of self-interest. This individual liberty, and its application, form the basis of civil society. It leads every man to see in other men, not the realization, but rather the limitation of his own liberty. It declares above all the right "to enjoy and to dispose as one will, one's goods and revenues, the fruits of one's work and industry."
>There remain the other rights of man, equality and security.
>The term "equality" has here no political significance. It is only the equal right to liberty as defined above; namely that every man is equally regarded as a self-sufficient monad. The constitution of 1795 defines the concept of liberty in this sense.

>>12130816
No my nigga, now answer my fucking question.

>>12130810
Well okay then agree to disagree

>>12130520
I'm pretty far right and the constitution, rights, freedom are all empty false and gay gods. Rights aren't real, freedom doesn't real.

Some say 'might is right.' I prefer to shorten that a little: Might is.

>>12130845
>critiquing something means you are vehemently opposed to it
By that logic there would be no marxists in this world since they critique each other all the time in even worse language than this

>>12130822
*redistributes your wealth arbitrarily from the top down*
Is your point that Marxism is full of nonsense and people who contradict themselves? Or are the things Marxists do somehow distinct from what they say? Because then you're just back to shrieking reeee it wasn't real communism!

I mean look at the very wording of your reply. To each. It's inherently something given, not something earned.

>>12130648
woahh bro my teacher is totally a marxist brooo so woke

>>12130867
A Marxist would say, if there were such a thing, that there are no "real Marxists" in the world, yes. Of course they all say that anyway, so... Congrats, you've realized Communists are morons without any internal consistency or logic.

>>12130856
>Might is.
This is a good way of looking at philosophy. Take something like Marxism. Which elements of society are providing patronage for Marxist thinkers, institutional support for Marxist organization, and so on? We note that it is almost always liberals, so Marxism should be properly considered a branch of liberalism.

The whole point of providing patronage for Marxists is to promote:
>the right to enjoy one's fortune and to dispose of it as one will; without regard for other men and independently of society.
by way of dissolving obstructions to liberal power.

>>12130867
When your critique is that it's fundamentally at odds with your proposed superior political system, uh, yeah. It does.

>>12130870
>it wasn't real communism
if I keep saying it as a joke it's gonna be troo

>>12130870
>I mean look at the very wording of your reply. To each. It's inherently something given, not something earned.
What defines something earned then?

>>12130889
>he says while posting a non reply with a wojak

>>12130878
>A Marxist would say, if there were such a thing, that there are no "real Marxists" in the world, yes. Of course they all say that anyway,
But they don't? Simply coz they just like Marx critique stuff without being vehemently opposed to it

>>12130891
oh shit yeah I totally couldn't reply to your amazing arguments

>>12130883
>fundamentally at odds with your proposed superior political system, uh, yeah. It does.
But it isn't?

>>12130896
>he says while continuing not to reply

>>12130903
epic win

>>12130898
What else do you suggest Marx is saying in said article? It couldn't be any clearer, it's literally one of the foundation ideas of his historical materialism. Why do people feel the need to talk about Marx without having read him, I swear, these threads are always such a crapshoot.

>>12130386
>/g/ decides to pick up a book

>>12130878
We have so much to learn from the Mahmoudians.

>>12130882
>Marxism should be properly considered a branch of liberalism
Well it is, broadly speaking. Stirner's genealogy of the left holds is as so and I tend to agree with his assessment.

The concerted goal of the left is effectively to deepen the dominance of market values into every aspect and relation in our lives. I say this as a former anarchist communist. Ive seen it.

These people want to have communism when we don't even have communities. And in fact any values which might lead to the existence of communities they attack vociferously. Customs of marriage, in group preference, common understanding about the nature of man, gender etc. They want it all torn down so that they can put in its place Perfected Man a tabula rasa onto which they can inscribe their pet ideologies. Unfortunately capitalism/liberalism is much more well heeled than anarcho-deathcults and transgender leninism USA so it is the values of capitalism which fill the void.

>>12130911
Declaration of Man kinda sucks in providing what it wants to provide in terms of rights of equality and security coz of its right of property?

It doesn't mean he is vehemently opposed to equality of security though

>>12130870
>To each. It's inherently something given, not something earned.

No, it isn't just "given." It's earned based on work rather than on bullshit like rent, private equity, interest and all that other faggotry. The way labor is rewarded is different (and more fair to all) than under capitalism or feudalism.

>>12130917
>These people want to have communism when we don't even have communities
Aren't they the ones creating communes and protecting unions and shit?

>>12130917
>The concerted goal of the left is effectively to deepen the dominance of market values into every aspect and relation in our lives.
The way this works is, you pay radical leftists to go after something that promotes anything but market values in the name of equality. Once this is accomplished, cut funding and say it was the leftists' idea all along.

>Unfortunately capitalism/liberalism is much more well heeled than anarcho-deathcults and transgender leninism USA so it is the values of capitalism which fill the void.
There's no contradiction between trans-leninism and capitalism.

>>12130919
>It doesn't mean he is vehemently opposed to equality of security though
No-one said that.

>Declaration of Man kinda sucks in providing what it wants to provide in terms of rights of equality and security coz of its right of property?
God, who am I arguing with. I hate myself for actually having taken the time to reply to some asshole middle schooler with an internet connection.

>>12130917
The urge to destroy is a creative urge. You can't build a new world on the shaky foundations of the old, we need a complete restart.

>>12130733
You're very wrong. Never see /pol/ post that Russian guy with the glasses who lays it all out in that old interview. Since where Zizek is coming from, you actually have anti-Soros posters as political ads on the street, he's fond of reflecting /pol/ type rationals.

>>12130366
>Can we not just have a war already and drowned these people out with the sounds of godly bombs and whimpering children. I'm soo bored right now.
cringe but still very redpilled

>>12130932
>No-one said that.
So what are you trying to say?

>God, who am I arguing with. I hate myself for actually having taken the time to reply to some asshole middle schooler with an internet connection.
Not an argument senpai

>>12130882
It's about redirecting and controlling energies, liberals were afraid of McCarthyism primarily because they were smart enough to understand you can't destroy an ideology in a frontal assault.

>>12130917
Wrong, throughout the 20th century to today the right has been the prime promoters of market values whereas the left has been promoting whatever populist-nationalist regimes that spout anti-market rhetoric. Conservatives have promoted polices which long-run has been more conducive to social liberalism while they keep espousing traditionalism.

>What did i do? Rape your mother in public?
He really doesnt care anymore, unless he actually thinks hes being funny.

>>12130953
There is no right in the Anglosphere, the coalition is liberals financing Progressives vs. Progressives from 50 years ago (conservatives). Since the US is the world empire, by necessity this extends to all our client states.

>>12130938

I understand your sentiment and yes we all love Bakunin, but the cultural void that remains after these assaults isn't filled by Raul Vaneigem and Alfredo Bonanno. It is filled by Google and Facebook. Market values.

You share the goal with the capitalists of complete atomization. You do it so that on the other side people will come together in groups of affinity more conducive to your ideology. The capitalists prefer it so that they have a liquid, rootless population of workers who they are free to move across borders and keep wages down. The less people are attached to land the less they object to real environmental travesties. It works out quite well for them. Good luck though.

>>12130931
>There's no contradiction between trans-leninism and capitalism.
Well if you were to axe the Leninists they would prefer that there was.

>>12130929
If they are, good for them. But I don't see it. They support the mass scabbing of national workforces from what I see.

When I got into the left in about '98-99, it was all about globalization. And one fo the major arguments against it was that the dropping of border and trade protections would induce a global are to the bottom. This critique is no less true today. Ask any carpenter. Although, you (presumably) being a communist you likely do not know any one who belongs to the working classes.

>>12130953
>the right has been the prime promoters of market values
Yes this has historically been the case, I will agree, with some exceptions (Evola and his ilk). The pro-market right is the bottom of the dung hill, in my estimation.

>>12130988
>And one fo the major arguments against it was that the dropping of border and trade protections would induce a global are to the bottom.
And people on the left still make the same arguments? And fuck off with your browbeating, I have seen how immigration undercuts my trade just like everyone else.

>>12130946
>Peterson is /pol/
You're the one who is wrong, laughably so. The two have nothing in common.

>>12130316
>FIGHT OF PHILOSOPHERS
More like fight of meme philosopher and two pop psychologists

>>12130938
>>12130917
>The urge to destroy is a creative urge. You can't build a new world on the shaky foundations of the old, we need a complete restart.
>These people want to have communism when we don't even have communities. And in fact any values which might lead to the existence of communities they attack vociferously. Customs of marriage, in group preference, common understanding about the nature of man, gender etc. They want it all torn down so that they can put in its place Perfected Man a tabula rasa onto which they can inscribe their pet ideologies. Unfortunately capitalism/liberalism is much more well heeled than anarcho-deathcults and transgender leninism USA so it is the values of capitalism which fill the void.

>>12131112
>Marx wanted to tear down social relations!
actually Marx thought capitalism was the ultimate destroyer of social relations. you haven't even read the manifesto have you?

>>12130735
What is there to understand? Pinker is plain wrong, complete pseudery symptomatic of current day academia and scientism

>>12131124
But that's liberalism, of which capitalism and marxism are subsets.

>>12131180
How can marxism be a subset of liberalism if its elements are not compatible with liberalism?

>>12130316
Steven Pinker? More like Steven Stinker!

>>12131056
>>Peterson is /pol/
That's not at all what I said. What I replyied to was
> especially not Peterson, ever suggested it was some kind of concerted effort by Marxists with any central authority or even a goal,

Namely that /pol/ types indeed think it was all planned out, e.g. as in
https://youtu.be/bX3EZCVj2XA

>>12131279
And what does that have to do with Peterson, who was the subject/topic here?

>>12131294
how old are you to give me a comeback to this, I'm just informing you what this was about

>>12131352
>reply to post that says no-one and especially not peterson says X
>say but /pol/ says x!
>wtf why are you saying my reply is irrelevant!
Newsflash, pol are nobodies. Obviously what's being discussed are serious circles, no-one outside of paranoid fringe lunatics makes this claim.

>>12130395

Americans really have ruined any definition of Marxism. Thanks, yanks, you continue to make the world worse.

>>12130520

There is no American left. You're all too stupid to know that, though. American left is far right everywhere else. Mongoloids.

>>12130343
kek

>cultural marxism is only just a conspiracy theory

>>12131395
Look, another retard fell for the "left-liberals aren't leftists" meme.

>>12131432
Which they literally aren't. Liberals are per definition not leftist.

>>12131411
it is, yeah

>>12131454
your mom is gay, yeah.

>>12131432

They're not. I swear, burgers are a meme. Morons all.

>>12131451
Lest liberals are. The ideology has has a range of followers that prevents it from cleanly fitting into the left-right paradigm but for some reason communists and anarchists get embarrassed when someone points out the reasons why these groups inevitably ally those liberals.

I can’t imagine passionately defending any of these names associated here. Even Zizek (debatably the most “profound” of the three) is still not taken super seriously in his wierd spin-off division of thought e.g., most Marxists aren’t willing Stalinists and most psychoanalysts (the few seriously left) are not Lacanians (especially after D&G). To see the branch of thought this man sits on in relation to the tree makes him seem quite odd.

>>12131473

If you want capitalism to continue in any way you are both a cuck and rightist. Congratulations.

>>12131486
>Doesn't actually understand what the left-right paradigm describes or how it was established.
How are Euros so ignorant of their own history?

>>12131052
>And people on the left still make the same arguments?
I am sure some do. But consider how well that Nagle woman was received when she made a leftist argument against open borders.

Has Peterson ever mentioned the Frankfurt school?
Zizek can criticize Peterson for using terms very loosely (maybe even in a postmodern way...) but not for believing in the "conspiracy theory" that certain fringe right-groups believe in.
Peterson basically believe that marxist postmodernists went from class struggle to group and identity struggle. That's it.

>>12131384
>pol
>nobodies
1. spell it right
2. Do you not know anything about what /pol/ has done

>>12131486

Anticapitalist rightist checking in.

>>12131486
Tell me again, what is capitalism?

>>12130386
based /glit/ poster

>>12131546
>>2. Do you not know anything about what /pol/ has done

Huh didnt know europistan was this leftist paradise. You guys fell for the liberal meme just as hard and continue to do so

>>12131573
capitalism could be ur fat ass mom and her insatiable hunger for all that question matters, the point is that food is finite

>>12130752
>Show proof of marxists saying they are anti-liberalism
https://themarxistminx.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/marxs-critique-of-liberalism/
How do you not know that the Marxists despise the libs?

>>12130752
They are against everything liberalism stands for. Free speech, tolerance of conflicting viewpoints, equal opportunities instead of equal outcomes, free market capitalism, presumption of innocence. Generally individualism vs collectivism. They are inherently incompatible except for their opposition to right wing collectivism. Liberalism isn't opposed to social programs as long as they are universal so they are allies in that regard. That's how marxists weasel their way into liberal movements.

>>12130752

>>12131608
Do you have any fucking proof at all that it's finite?

>i-it w-will collapse any minute now

the virgin liberal

the chad communist

>>12131608
>food is finite

Perhaps in communism

>>12131607
Who do you think invented it in the first place? It's not as if it just sprang forth from Britain one day.

so basically peterson is telling a noble lie to elongate business as usual and zizek is like thats totally less than human go get your life turnt upside down

>>12130316
why would anyone attack Steven Pinker?

wow nice spooks nerd.

>>12130316
I want to listen to him but as soon as Zizek speaks I just want to throw my headphones off

>>12131670
>>12131679
it’s finite because ur mom is only getting fatter

>>12131944
Zizek is a smelly marxist who wants to make revolutionary marxism work in the 21st century. Of course he is opposed to Pinker and Peterson.

>>12131944
Because he's a fucking idiot

>>12130316
I'll back "Sniff and So On" against "Wash your Penis Bucko" and "Ass" any day

>>12130316
Slavoj stated himself that the frankfurts made no sense in that they criticized fascists (not as a return to primal barbarism but as a fact of modernity) but did not do so for communism. Seemed to ignore it. In his estimation this is a mere oversight, those who believe in the conspiracy of cultural marxism see this as willful.

>>12132146

Schniff your penish and scho on and scho on

>>12130316
I hope they both die

>>12132369
You mean all three?

>>12130386
Zizek and Stallman really feel like they are the same person sometimes

>>12130394
"Crypto-fascist" must be the funniest of all the stupid terms used by retarded leftists by far

>>12130316
Pinker and Peterson aren't philosophers.

>>12130316
None of them are philosophers, not even intellectuals.

>>12132230
The Frankfurts leaned Communist, I wouldn't expect them to go that far in criticizing Communists.

>>12130520
Transgender ideology? What's ideological about it? It's a medical issue. Its been that way for decades

>>12132512
>gender is a social construct
>gender and sexuality vary independently
>pronouns are used to describe gender rather than sex
>not using preferred pronouns is a hate crime
>you can be genderfluid
>there are 30+ genders
>a psychological conditions should be treated by adapting the body according to the delusion
>not agreeing with the above is hate speech

>>12130435
Haha, good one anon, I see what you did there

ZIZEK BTFO two ZIONIST KIKES

>>12130366
>man this is SOOO boring, could just get killed already
I too love being a dull well off kid who gets to request the excitement of others being massacred. If it's boring then why don't you fight?

>>12132536
>gender is a social construct
You believe that gender (roles and such) isn't mediated by local culture? Surely you can't think that every aspect of how we think about gender is universal across all cultures
>gender and sexuality vary independently
masculine gay men and feminine gay women don't exist then?
>pronouns are used to describe gender rather than sex
The map isn't the territory
>not using preferred pronouns is a hate crime
I'm not a lawyer, but I can imagine a situation in which that might be the case
>you can be genderfluid
You are saying that it's impossible to be gender non conforming?
>there are 30+ genders
No one believes this
>a psychological conditions should be treated by adapting the body according to the delusion
If it's more efficacious than the alternatives. You don't think that insurance providers would shell out money for transitions if a cheaper option existed?
>not agreeing with the above is hate speech
Factually incorrect

>let's pretend the liberal left is the true accomplishment of Marxism

Fuck off and read Lenin, pseuds. As a rule of thumb, any "Marxist" which hasn't contributed to the actual communist movement can be safely disregarded and put under suspicion as a liberal hack.

>>12132503
Yes they leaned communist, socialist, whatever you want to call it. However they set themselves against the 'authoritarian' personality as it were. Now I am only speaking from Zizek's perspective but he remarked that what was peculiar about the Frankfurt school was their obsession with fascism as a dimension of modernity (as opposed to a callback to primitive barbarity) and their lacking critique of communism. Yet he also states that 'cultural marxism' is conspiracy. So he assumes that their lack of critique of Stalin (not necessarily the ideals of communism but Stalinism specifically) was due to oversight or a simple failing and not a conspiracy.

He is a brainlet and I know that will trigger people here. He is essentially a philosopher for those on the left who perpetually need to feel as though they are rebels even when they are the ruling culture. Very sad, incapable of growing up for completely different reasons of those on the right.

>>12132602
So all of them??!!


BOOM FUGGIN ROASTED

>it's another commies and leftists gaslight /lit/ thread where they pretend that they don't support social justice, identity politics, open borders, and various other society-destroying crisis-making vanguardist acts

>>12132594
"Gender roles" (using the academic definition of gender, which is a recent invention) evolved on the basis of biological differences between the sexes and are deeply informed by those differences except some few insignificant exceptions (e.g. pink/blue dress colors).

The idea that you could just invent another gender besides "man" and "woman" that would be on equal footing with the genders have evolved over millions of years in our societies along biological lines and that such a gender should deserve equal respect is a joke in itself and requires a special level of delusion.

Masculinity and femininity are deeply informed by biological differences between the sexes, few outliers don't disprove the general norm and the overwhelming correlation between masculinity and the male sex and femininity and the female sex. Especially in the light of the physiological effects of hormones.

The vast majority of males identify as straight men (gender) and the vast majority of females identify as straight women (gender). This is not a social construction, but a function of the continued evolutionary survival of the species. So no sex and gender do not vary independently.

There are 30+ genders legally recognized in New York and univserity gender studies departments have lists that are even longer.

Regarding legality, just some examples
>The NYCHRL [New York City Human Rights Law] requires employers[, landlords, and all businesses and professionals] to use an [employee’s, tenant’s, customer’s, or client’s] preferred name, pronoun and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs.) regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification.
>California health care workers who “willfully and repeatedly” decline to use a senior transgender patient's “preferred name or pronouns” could face punishments ranging from a fine to jail time under a newly signed law.
>> The Ontario Human Rights Commission, for example, in their Policy on Preventing Discrimination Because of Gender Identity and Expression states that gender harassment should include “ Refusing to refer to a person by their self-identified name and proper personal pronoun”.

My post is getting too long, but if you actually believe all of the stuff you posted then you are an intellectual zombie of that ideology you can't even recognize

>>12132629
>However they set themselves against the 'authoritarian' personality as it were.
lmao, no they didn't. Go read Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" essay. Or go read about the concept of "militant democracy".

Why do /lit/ sois constantly cry about others not understanding the critical theorists, but their own understanding of them is fucking pitiful?

>>12132629
Most of the Frankfurts were a) socially conservative, and b) traitors who abandonded the socialist project and don't deserve to wield the Marxist banner.

Daily reminder that commies were doing social justice and identity politics way before the 60s. They backed gay activism like Harry Hay, and other things like militant black nationalism. They also took over various religious and student groups across the globe. This was before the 60s new left. McCarthy was right.

The whole idea that social justice and identity politics is a liberal thing is bullshit. It's roots are in communist activism.

>>12132662
I'm not going to read it desu, I have too many other things I want to read. Again, I am simply relating what Zizek has said in recent interviews on this topic. I have little interest in this thread besides shitting on him, Peterson, and Pinker at the same time. My own aside, the so-called F-scale was an early preoccupation of these theorists in "The Authoritarian Personality" idk why you're acting like it wasn't.
>>12132670
No one cares about your banner.

>>12132650
"Gender roles" (using the academic definition of gender, which is a recent invention) evolved on the basis of biological differences between the sexes and are deeply informed by those differences except some few insignificant exceptions (e.g. pink/blue dress colors).
> I don't disagree

The idea that you could just invent another gender besides "man" and "woman" that would be on equal footing with the genders have evolved over millions of years in our societies along biological lines and that such a gender should deserve equal respect is a joke in itself and requires a special level of delusion.
>Nothing in my post would indicate that I believe this, which I don't

Masculinity and femininity are deeply informed by biological differences between the sexes, few outliers don't disprove the general norm and the overwhelming correlation between masculinity and the male sex and femininity and the female sex. Especially in the light of the physiological effects of hormones.
> Don't you determine the bounds of a concept by examining the edge cases? I don't disagree that most people identify with their natal sex and gender. But we aren't discussing that. General norms don't matter in this specific case that we are discussing

The vast majority of males identify as straight men (gender) and the vast majority of females identify as straight women (gender). This is not a social construction, but a function of the continued evolutionary survival of the species. So no sex and gender do not vary independently.
>Except in the case of gender dysphoric individuals. Do you deny that this condition exists? I hope that you have evidence to back that up, I'd be hard pressed to find that even if I wanted to

There are 30+ genders legally recognized in New York and univserity gender studies departments have lists that are even longer.
>
Scientology is a legally recognized religion. Doesn't mean it's true. Government authority doesn't determine ground truth as I'm sure that you recognize. Did you ever read the list? "Cross-dresser" how is that a gender? Butch? Drag Queen? Not even the most ardent transactivist would claim these as actual genders. Just because some politically correct bureaucrat wants to cover their ass by listing all possible variations on a theme in the law does it make it true

Regarding legality, just some examples-
> How is this qualitatively different from any other form of harrassment?

Maybe you should stop getting your ideas about the subject from SJW compilation videos on youtube and actually talk to people you disagree with

>>12132650
Transsexuality is clearly based on observed brain differences, and your fake posturing "common sense" position isn't fooling anyone who's actually looked into it.

Once we establish that dysphoria is a serious phenomenon and not jewish propaganda/a joke/whatever your preferred right-wing safespace believes at the moment ; we're left with the simple practical question of how to treat it. Shockingly, transitioning has proven to be the best option and allowes a large number of people suffering from dysphoria to integrate harmlessly into society. Until we find a magic cure which somehow removes the underlying brain chemistry causing this phenomenon, it's basically a non-issue by this point.

I admit, the stubborn insistence of right-wingers to pick opposing basic decency (pronouns) as the battlefield on which they wish die on, is very humorous to me. God forbid we would worry about actual political-economic issues that define the crumbling global consensus today.

>>12131540
Peterson is a pop self help meme.
His engagement with actual minds like Adorno and Benjamin would be an embarrassment.

ITT: retarded semantic arguments running in circles

>>12132735
>I admit, the stubborn insistence of right-wingers to pick opposing basic decency (pronouns) as ...

>it's another motte-and-bailey argument
>"we're about basic decency"
>"it's about etiquette in pronouns"
>"please ignore us trying to fire anyone that merely disagrees with us. bake the cake bigot"
>"please ignore the fact that trans people are approx. one in a million statistically, but we'll make it out to be more than that in a vast media and corporate apparatus that agrees with our political positions"
>"please ignore this tiny matter that is part of a larger front in a multi-part cultural battle where our allies want you wiped out"
>"if you don't have trans education in schools you are hitler"
>"kids should chop of their dicks off and undergo massive biochemical changes. this will totally fix their mental illness and have no ramifications at all"

>>12132806
Pearl clutching: the post

>>12130921
>rent private equity and interest are all bullshit
>dude just should labor matter
Imagine being this dumb

>>12132735
>Shockingly, transitioning has proven to be the best option and allowes a large number of people suffering from dysphoria to integrate harmlessly into society.
Where's your evidence? Is it their staggeringly high suicide rates?

>Zizek walks into saloon wearing his duster and weapons holstered.
>Peterson goes to the bartender and orders a whisky while Pinker, wearing a monocle, smokes a cigarette with an extended filter quietly over a glass of Calvados that he swishes around in his hand quietly.
> Gripping his two guns in each holster, Zizek first glares at Pinker, but by the time he looks at Peterson he's already eying him.
>It ends here. Time appeared to slow as Zizek unholstered his hand cannon with a quick, natural snap of the wrist
>but lo, Pinker had a pump action shotgun under a pillow and tipped over the table for cover
>Peterson lifted his handgun just as Zizek leveled his at his chest
...to be continued.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPCLFtxpadE

All continental philosophers should be shot.

>>12132990
By far the most sensible post in this thread.

love reading retards talk about marxists say this then they say that as if marxists were a hivemind and not a collection of strains and tendencies that bicker and fight among themselves more than they do the enemy

>>12133023
Yes but Marx is the word of god for Marxists, and it is definitive what he said and was wrong about.

>>12131517
>But consider how well that Nagle woman was received when she made a leftist argument against open borders.
Where? And aren't they already doing what she said they should do anyway?

>>12131633
The title literally says "Marx’s Critique of Liberalism"

>>12131665
>hating liberals means you hate liberalism
Liberals are fucking insufferable desu.

>>12130394
I never knew Deleuze was so based. Where to start with him?

>>12133008
Whatever there is of false and disgraceful in Peterson's thinking can be attributed to his continental influences.

When he talks science, he sounds sensible, even though it may or may not be true that he misinterprets experiments or jumps to exaggerated conclusions from time to time. When he talks philosophy, however, he sounds like either a hack or a self-help author and nothing else.

Steven Pinker is the only one of those who should be taken really seriously, and even then you should read him very critically. All thinkers who write large books upon important subjects will inevitably commit many mistakes, but some are just outright irresponsible with their data - when they have any data, that is.

>>12133049
>What is revisionism?

>>12133049
Is he?

Anyway, all of these troubles would be avoided if only people were clearer with what they mean with the words they use.

Does a follower of Christianity have to obey every single commandment of Christ? So, if the person does not fast, does this mean they are not real Christians, even though they believe in Christ and pray for him?

What about a Romantic poet? Does the fact that Keats sometimes wrote quasi-poppian social satire mean he was not really a romantic after all, but only partially so?

And does it all mean that a Marxist should necessarily believe in every single thing Marx said, including those which were proven to be false? Because if so, then very few people are actual Marxists.

However, if 'Marxism' also includes modified versions of Marx, up to what extent can these modifications occur? Here we enter the age old-problem of vagueness, which is a very difficult philosophical question in itself. If we had a very precise definition of what Marxism is and isn't, then maybe we could avoid it, but giving precise definitions to words is not a continental thing, you know, so they'd rather just fight about it instead of settling the argument and starting a productive discussion.

A precise definition, I believe, would start by abstracting only the very essential components of Marx's thought, then analyze the degrees of Marxism of any given movement by 'checking the boxes' in terms of seeing which of those components were present and which ones were not. However, even this, of course, would lead to who libraries of useless argument, since interpreters would never be able to decide which of those components are truly essential and which ones are not.

And on it goes...

In the end, I think it would be much better if we just abandoned the term 'cultural Marxist' and substituted it for 'cultural leftism' or 'cultural progressivism'. Also, the fact that the left-wingers are so mad that someone uses the term 'cultural Marxism' probably means they actually believe in it to some extent, and that Peterson should keep using it in order to make his opponents curse him, which gives them a bad face in Peterson's supporters' views.

>>12130316
>imagine being canada and having peterson as a famous writter from canada
damn, i'm so sorry for canadians

>>12132146
Can someone explain the origins of the "ass" meme with respect to Pinker?

>>12133155
>Also, the fact that the left-wingers are so mad that someone uses the term 'cultural Marxism' probably means they actually believe in it to some extent, and that Peterson should keep using it in order to make his opponents curse him, which gives them a bad face in Peterson's supporters' views.
More because people who rant about cultural marxism use the same exact arguments as them in critiquing modern society that they accuse said cultural marxists for creating

I'm a huge JP fan and I hate communists, that being said I tried to see Zizek's point.

I still have zero idea about his third point. What the fuck was he trying to say?
>guys who give out wisdom are bad
isnt he giving out wisdom all the time


what am i missing

>>12133238
ironically /pol/ would probably like some of Adorno's writing
too bad they only read what the frogposting hivemind deems safe to consume

>>12132806
is this how the mind of a /pol/tard works?
this reads like a zoomer version of the deranged middle aged burgers rambling incoherently in the comment sections of news articles

*cocks gun*
You know he would win. Pinker wouldn't deign to argue with him on his level and Peterson is too much of a stiff to outwit the Ziz.

>>12133296
kek!

>>12133238
I am not very familiar with the writings of the Frankfurt school, but I have seen many Marxists criticizing the consumerist society before.

However, I believe Peterson and the Marxists are making different points: conservatives like capitalism, but despise the way the media makes it go (by influencing people badly, such as displaying hip-hop all the time, but paying zero attention to classical music*), and therefore they try to influence the culture to go in another direction, usually by writing about it or else by doing religious works (think of Evangelical pastors); meanwhile, Marxists hate capitalism, and perhaps (?) believe the consumerist society is a necessary consequence of it.

The reason I believe people such as Jordan Peterson call this phenomenon cultural Marxism is the fact that this 'cultural revolution' is often justified by the necessity of giving a voice to the oppressed, and thus its supporters often use the 'oppressor/oppressed' rhetoric which is typical of Marxists. Thus, Dickinson was a woman, so we should give preference to her over Manley Hopkins; hip-hop is 'black music,' so we should play it all the time, and so on.

It's undeniable that, behind the phenomenon of contemporary pop culture, there is both a capitalism element, in the sense that it wouldn't exist without capitalism (unless a communist society actively wanted it to exist and forced it upon its people), but also a Marxist (?) element in the arguments which are used by those who wish to justify it.

>>12133301
Steven "ass" Pinker thinks nothing of Zizek. He has appeared in speaking engagements with Peterson but both Pinker and Peterson think all self-avowed communists are brainlets.

However it would be amusing to see them debate especially since Peterson rails about how close minded and unwilling to engage in rational discussion the left is.

ass

>>12133301
Perhaps to his fandom, but Zizek is not a scientist. He's very silly, actually.

Remember his enthusiasm with that little movement of no real consequences called Occupy Wall Street? That should tell you all: the man cannot properly analyze the political situation around him, he cannot measure the importance of things.

>>12133346
Steven Stinker

>>12133349
Peterson is barely a scientist as I would have it. In my mind Pinker is the only one with real scientific credentials. I mean Peterson cites Jung for fucks sake...

Zizek is a clown but he makes sharp observations. He just doesn't build them into a system like Peterson does or articulate them as coherently and with a scientific foundation as Pinker.

>Exepct a nuanced critique of Peterson
>dhurfadefh Peterson believes in natural drives so his ideology ends in social darwinism
>quotes Pinker's retarded shit about life getting better globally so it must be getting better in any given country
Holy shit I had no idea Zizek was as dumb as Peterson. Actually, at least Peterson can juggle some stats.

>>12133364
>ith a scientific foundation as Pinker.
>Pinker is scientific
lmfao, your family my have opium but this south american family got richer stop complaining. You lost your job but this dirtworker's children are richer than him, stop complaining prole

>>12130386
Based effortposter

>>12133364
Sometimes he is scientific, but then again I've never read any of his books. Apparently his magnum opus is Maps of Meaning, which, judging from the synopsis, doesn't look very scientific.

His science comes from his study of experimental psychology and biology, but the rest of it is all babble, including some disgraceful tweets about Godel.

>218 posts
>80 UIDs
Are we being raided by reddit sjws? Looks like it.

>>12130742
Genuinely curious about what you mean by Cold-war being between two Communist powers

>>12133345
>both Pinker and Peterson think all self-avowed communists are brainlets.
Is this the boomerest of boomer views or is this baste?

>>12133406

>>12133427
Yes he's a clinical psychologist specializing in cognitive behavioral therapy and his own stylized take on humanistic psychotherapy. The former has a solid scientific basis but the other stuff is a bit more fluffy.

>>12133364
>has no problem with lacanian psychoanalysis
>has a problem with jungian psychoanalysis
Admit it, the only reason you hate Dr Bucko is because he speaks out against your favorite hivemind.

>>12133265
>>12133265
One of Zizeks repeated messages is that his goal is to focus on asking the right questions, rather than coming up with answers that other people should agree with/follow. He sees Peterson as someone dispensing answers (aka wisdom) and thinks that’s not the right way to go about things. [I took him to be making a joke when he said people who give out wisdom are bad, it seemed like he was being sarcastic, as he often is]

>>12133502
If that is his metaphilosophy why are Zizek's moron followers the exact opposite? Instead of being question generators, they dispense Zizek as an answer to be agreed with.

>>12133502
thanks anon
i get it now

oddly enough isnt that exactly what therapists are suppose to do?

>>12133346
PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS MEME

>>12133482
I never said I hated mr. clean your room.I like that he's helping lost man children and sticking the finger to the left. He's just a bit too big for his britches judging by the quality of what he says.

I could care less about lacanian analysis, it's just a bunch of amusing anecdotes same as jungian. Neither of them stand up scientifically.

>>12130386
Based.

>>12133520
It's inexplicable. A meme that lives in an unexplainable void. Someone on /s4s/ of all places just one day posted a thread simply showing that portrait of Pinker and the word ass. Later, others would post photos of other prominent intellectuals with a photo of a vulgar term for a certain genitalia .

>>12130386
>deterritorializing
go fuck yourself

>A new challenger joins the fray

>>12133542
>with a vulgar term for a certain genitalia

>>12133514
Well, I don’t think it’s just a coincidence that one if his biggest influences is Lacan, who was a psychoanalyst and clinical psychiatrist. But I do think that Zizek would balk at any suggestionthat he served a similar role to a therapist. He has a quotation along the lines of ‘the first role of the philosopher is to help you understand what deep shit you are in.’

>>12133510
I love to listen to his talks and read his politically oriented books, but I honestly can’t imagine what answers someone could get from him in this regard. He is quite open about the fact that he doesn’t have solutions/answers.

In terms of actual philosophical theory, it seems he has concrete ideas one could build upon, but I unfortunately not read him that far yet.

>>12132723
So it is an ideology that:
-exists
-is wrong
-is legally enforced in several non-obscure places

Also, gender is
-not purely a social construct, but is strongly informed by biology
-does not vary independently of biological sex
I made my case and you agreed with it.

> How is this qualitatively different from any other form of harrassment?
Harassment is a repeated unwanted interaction. If you are trying to force me to use certain language that I think is based on falsehoods, then it is not harassment for me to refuse.

>Maybe you should stop getting your ideas about the subject from SJW compilation videos on youtube and actually talk to people you disagree with
You did not disagree with me in any significant point, so what is the reason for this insult?

>Do you deny this condition exists?
No, I disagree with the way we treat it medically. And I disagree with the idea that we should adapt reality to humor the delusion, both legally and medically. But this is off-topic.

>>12130348
>fresh off the release of his seminal work
>irrelevant

if theres philosopher fight why are there no boxers in a philosophical argument haha

>>12130733
>>12130376
>The only good point is his critique of the "cultural Marxism" meme.
except Peterson may be academically retarded, but he is not socially retarded and knows how bad "cultural marxism" sounds (because of who started the meme), so he uses instead the meme word "postmodernism", and he never claimed it was a conspiracy, just a bunch of people acting retarded together

>>12130386
based, and dare i say gnupilled

Slavoj Zizek DESTROYS right wing pseud

>>12131388
>Americans really have ruined any definition of Marxism.
and still leftists everywhere fall for the same meme and copy/paste american racial dynamic analysis into their countries because they are too retarded to come up with anything of their own that doesn't come pre-packaged

>>12130790
Zizek is a communist because he knows it's not going to happen and still gets the intellectual cool points

when shit was on the line he ran as the Liberal presidential candidate in Slovenia, it's fun to play commie games but only as long as you know it won't happen

>>12133399
Zizek can only grandstand and confuse, he hasn't slapped together a coherent argument ever in his life

>>12133565
p-zombie begone pls

>>12130384
Cultural Marxism dates back to before even the Nazis with their Kulturbolschewismus conspiracy.

>>12132688
So abolitionism and suffragism was a commie plot aswell?

Because that's where the roots of those things lie.

>>12134379

>>12134327
his talks do precisely that, the whole point is to get people to buy his books. He’d probably be the first to admit that says he says the same thing about Lacan whom he loves. His books on the other hand are quite “”rigorous””

>>12130316
>those three
>philosophers
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>12130376
I cringe every time Peterson mentions "cultural Marxism" and have doubts to his understanding of the school of Frankfurt, let alone Marx. Peterson is correct in pointing out that a lot of people of the left adapt Marxism, but I think they have a superficial understanding hereof which Zizek points out. The people who are fanatical with political correctness have zero understanding of Marxism and are just confused capitalists.
I think Zizek is wrong in regards to Peterson's lobster fascination and its implications implying concepts of freedom, liberties and so on wouldn't be attainable given our naturalistic limitations. Though we have naturalistic limitations we are not "only" animals as I think Peterson is quite clear about. We can create something "beyond" this - civilization (meaning an area ruled by reason) (see natality coined by Hannah Arendt).

>>12130386
Can someone give me a breakdown of the Deleuzian and Frankfurt school?

>>12133099
Abécédaire, but you need to speak French.

>>12132512
It would be a medical issue without the ideology.

>>12133364
>as coherently and with a scientific foundation as Pinker.

>>12134436
>His books on the other hand are quite “”rigorous””
it isn't, it's just a bunch of incoherent ideas slapped together, even he admits it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y79-t7-j4M

>>12134443
>I cringe every time Peterson mentions "cultural Marxism"
name 1 time when he has, i'll wait

>>12134619
based arab

All communists needs to be gassed it is an absolute necessity.

>>12134321
And yet people still respect him, invite him to talk on the BBC or whatever.

>>12135042
>And yet people still respect him, invite him to talk on the BBC
because he is an inoffensive liberal larping about communism and his revolutionary violence fetish, as long as it's kept far away from him and he gets to pay his academic games in peace

>Philosopher fight: Slavoj Zizek attacks Jordan Peterson and Steven Pinker at Cambridge Union
not even the best leninist on the Cambridge Union address this year
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AtOw-xyMo8

Kek can leftists and marxists ever fucking admit liberals have them by the fucking balls? These nerds turn social democrat real fucking quick.

>>12130774
Marxist groups universally support gun ownership you dweeb. Please shut the fuck up trying to read through this thread makes me feel very embarrassed for you.

>>12135052
It's interesting. He's been complaining about how people see him as a joke rather than a genuine subversive.

>>12135173
>Marxist groups universally support gun ownership you dweeb.
name 1 group with minimal relevance actually supporting guns

>>12135173
workers should have guns, but only the "right" type of worker, and actual workers never measure up to communist standards, so they have to be first socially engineered into the right type of worker by a small elite that knows what's up, and then at some point (which never arrives) given guns

>>12135173
>being THIS fucking stupid
While it's true most marxists support gun ownership, it's not true that most people who support gun ownership are marxists. Holy fucking shit, this guy talking about vicarious embarrassment can't even understand the most rudimentary logic. God, THESE are the people I share my mongolian basketweaving forum with...normally I'd tell you to kill yourself but likely living as you is a far greater punishment, the only problem is everyone suffers by association. Maybe we deserve to.

>>12134706
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLoG9zBvvLQ
Does this count? He rt an article mentioning cultural marxists on facebook too but 4chan wont let me post it coz it thinks it is spam

>>12135173
But how many guns rights activists are communists? Compared to the whole, almost none you dumbass.

>>12135211
that's a youtube title added by some guy, can you timestamp where Peterson literally says "cultural marxism"?

>>12135215
I literally can't be bothered to put in that effort so I am going to post the article that he rt on facebook

https://dailycaller.com/2016/09/29/cultural-marxism-is-destroying-america/

>>12135219
so he has never said it, just rt something once, and the whole argument by Zizek is about a term Memerson has never even used...

>>12135241
He has alluded to it in the video I linked, just repackaged as post-modernist marxism.

>>12135281
so he never mentioned the frankfurt school, nor said it was a conspiracy theory

just some memes about misreadings of "postmodernism" and the humanities being a joke, i'm not saying Peterson is not retarded, just that Zizek answer is not an answer at all, it's just random riffing on "cultural marxism" which Peterson never mentioned

>>12135297
>so he never mentioned the frankfurt school, nor said it was a conspiracy theory
So you only want labels of Cultural Marxism without mentioning its contents?

>>12135361
he names Derrida, Foucault, and different retarded memes coming out of academia. Nothing about the frankfurt school or conspiracy theories with anybody pulling the strings. I'm not saying Peterson actually knows anything about Derrida, Foucault or that he is not retarded. Just that Zizek's criticism has nothing to do with anything Peterson has actually said, just second hand accounts that have nothing to do with reality

>>12135407
He did talk about how marxism has failed and so marxists are taking a new form to hide themselves. Really the narrative and contents of this new form of marxism is the same.

>>12134431
Thr claim that communism erodes cultural values has been around as long as communism.

>>12135192
>Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.

Karl Marx is not a group, but he is pretty relavant.

>>12135429

>>12135419
a conspiracy theory is very different to people being intellectually dishonest and lazy

>>12134202
I would like to apologize for that quip, it was unfounded. Our disagreement has been bothering me all morning and I don't want to leave it on a bad note. This topic is very meaningful to me personally and I don't feel like I was able to properly put my position down to words. I'm a neophyte debater so I would also like to apologize for any jumps in logic I might have committed.

I do agree with you that there is "a transgender ideology" in the zeitgeist right now, and I do believe that it will eventually end and be ruthlessly criticized in the future. Pronoun laws and 30+ recognized genders have more to do with political correctness than actual science and I am just as alienated by them as I'm sure you are. However, at the end of the day after all of the "ideology" is over and the trenders have desisted many people will still have problems with dysphoria and the issue still remains.

I do agree with you that the issue is over politicized and wish just as much as you that it isn't. I do however still believe that medical transition is still the best practice . You said that treating it as a mental illness is preferable to treating it as an endocrinological, and I don't necessarily disagree, however I don't believe that that is possible to the degree that you think it is at this point in pharmalogical history and that you may overestimate the efficacy of such a course of treatment

>>12135520
>I do agree with you that there is "a transgender ideology" in the zeitgeist right now, and I do believe that it will eventually end and be ruthlessly criticized in the future.
not sure there's a going back from gender accelerationism

>>12130343
žižek gave up on the idea because he lost respect for peterson iirc

>>12130386
based and kekked

>/lit/ pretending to know shit

>>12135583
Could you write more on this? I'm not sure that I understand what you mean

>>12135619
>autist pretending to be above the rest

>>12135647
i was above your mum last night

>SO JUNG HAD THIS GREAT IDEA if every person ate their own shit -now here's the bloody thing about eating your own bloody shit IT'S CHAOS and that's bloody terrifying and that.. is the belly of the beast.. The consumption of one's own feces is representative of the cannibalistic chaos of post-modernism so then what do you do when you're face to face with this terrifying shit eating dragon? lobsters are well known autophagyists and we're like 90% lobster DNA so you know that really tells you something and that's the bloody thing about Sam Harris, that he has better hair than I do it.. it.. well depends first on what you mean by lobster it's like what solzhenitsyn always said “now Sam Harris is a jew, and they're cold blooded too just like lobsters” you see.. thats what Hitler got right, he wasn't crazy it also totaly depends on what you mean by crazy Not washing your penis? Now thats crazy. I have thought about this quandary for a long time, particularly in regards to Jung; for thirty years I've been ruminating on the best way to wash your penis and I haven't thought about anything else AND THE 20TH CENTURY TAUGHT US THAT LESSON PRETTY BLOODY WELL If you wanna conquer your shadow; really grind your heel into the bloody groin of the bitch. Clean your penis and respect the Chaos Lobster. It's in the book of Genesis. There's postmodernism to fight; and ya bloody better accept it. the jews are older than trees, man! like, god, it's so sad! It reminds me of Pinocchio *sniff* a-and how he just wanted t-*wheeze*to be a boy well that's just the bloody thing! So when we really get to explore these ideas we realize really... we arent the ones cleaning the penis... IT CLEANS US! AND THAT's the BLOODY THING, it's like, you don't KNOW anything for CERTAIN - DO YOU? Whaat do you think you are smarter than Socrates? It's like, YOU ARE NOT SMARTER THAN SOCRATES AND YOU DO NOT KNOW EVERYTHING, you might not even know ANYTHING. But people act like they know things all the time, and that's totalitarianism. It's like, wash your penis, read the Bible, YOU ARE NOT SMARTER THAN THE BIBLE, ok? So POSTCULTURAL NEOMODERNIST MARXISM IS KILLING US ALLL, we wuz lobstaz an shieeet CLEAN YOUR FUCKING ROOM AND THATS THE BLOODY THING RIGHT? YOU MUST SAVE YOUR RELATIONSHIPS FROM CHAOS LIKE PINNOCHIO SAVED HIS FATHER FROM THE DEEPS. GEPETTO IS IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAST AND THAT IS NOT A PLACE YOU WANT TO BE. SO WHEN YOU FINALLY TRIUMPH AND SLAY THE DRAGON OF CHAOS THEN YOU ASK YOURSELF “WELL WHAT NOW” AND ITS LIKE RIGHT TAHTS A BLOODY GOOD QUESTION. BUT YOU MUST NOT GIVE IN TO THE POSTMODERNNEOMARXISTS and furthermore THAT'S THE THING ABOUT DOMINANCE HIERARCHIES, THEY'RE BLOODY ROUGH, BUT THEY'RE NECESSARY, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE A CERTAIN PROCLIVITY TOWARDS DANGEROUSNESS WELL, SEE HOW FAR YOU GET WITH THAT BUCKO. (...)

>And let me tell you, it was cold up in Canada (AND THAT'S THE BLOODY THING ABOUT WASHING YOUR PENIS, IT'S A BLOODY EXTERNALISATION OF YOUR INNER WORLD MAN, AND THAT'S SERIOUS. HOW CAN YOU EXPECT TO CHANGE THE WORLD IF YOU CAN'T GET YOUR OWN BLOODY PENIS INTO ORDER) So cold in fact that the nazis, in all their manical and pathological hatred wouldn't dare brave it. And *eyes begin to redden* I have been thinking, and trying to *pause while putting hand on left side of face* try to *ehem excuse me* trying to really sort things out in regards to a question I have been mulling over in my head for decades. *whipes a tear* If Nazi germany and Communist Russia just engaged in rough and tumble play instead of enveloping our world in chaos for those year, and the poor jews man, those bloody 6 million. who know what could have happend, its like, things might have gone a whole lot better. Beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and beef and water and salt the scientific literature is very clear about this. Now I want to be careful before wading into this quagmire because--and let's get one thing straight, bucko--I parse my words carefully. VERY carefully. Well, imagine something roughly approximating fully conscious paralysis for 8 hours every night and you'll have an idea what it's like to contend with apple cider. and thats the thing about parsing your words carefully man, thats the logos, and that's no bloody joke and believe me, it's no joke, the marxists taught us that bloody well in the 20th century And oh boy he was a tough cooky Well thats just it, you haven't watched my lectured so what could you possibly know? The only thing you damn well know for certain is that you really don't know anything at all, and thats BLOODY SCARY believe me, but its necessary because the... the absolute horrors that took place in the 20th century, that was orchestrated by the post modern neo marxist, and let me tell you, they thought they just knew everything, and its like, no you don't. YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING. You really have to look no further then the gulag archipelago to see the pathological mindset that the ignorance of your own ignorance entails. Its horrible, so then you ask, well how can I avoid being like that? Well you start by cleaning your room. Thats your chamber, and you can't let the dragon in and that dragon is chaos, and freud as troubled as he was makes this clear for us, chaos is disorder in our lives. So clean your damn room. (...)

>Next you say ok now what, should I try to clean the whole damned world now? Well its like no, you don't want to do that, well then what about my house? And now your getting somewhere, but then you have askyourself what about my penis, whens the last time I really tried to have a real connection with it and give a meaningful wash? And thats scary man, not enough young boys give their penis's rough and tumble cleanings and thats no joke, bloody well believe me. Which brings me to my next point- and i learnt this from jung, that you have to PROMULGATE YOUR BLOODY SHADOW, and everyone has a shadow man, you might think that you're a good guy and that you're harmless but YOUR WRONG. it's like, how you can bloody expect to climb the dominance hierarchies if you don't have a capacity for evil, i mean, the ancients figured this out OVER 1000 YEARS AGO I DECIDED TO WRITE THIS BOOK BECAUSE OF MY NUMEROUS AMOUNT OF QUORA UPVOTES.

>from "12 Rules for Life" by Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

>>12130316
>tfw no one cares unless about intellectual debates unless they turned it into EbIn WwE pRoFeSsIoNaL wReStLiNg ShOwDoWnS

>>12135654
Jokes on you I have two dads.

>>12130409
>embarrassingly sincere
delusional perspective

>>12135993
wait yeah on a second thought your mum did have a bit of a beard going on

>>12131160
It doesn't matter if Pinker is right or wrong about anything. failing to understand him is a flaw that falls solely on Zizek.

>>12135973
>>12135978
>>12135982
based

>>12135973
>>12135978
>>12135982
not enough crying/10

>>12133333
With all the amount of "I think" and "I believe" you just produced a even more retarded version of Adorno's ramblings on jazz.

>>12133333
it's a pity that you got quints for this stupid-ass post

>>12135442
Is it though?

>>12130343
>>12130343
https://youtube.com/watch?v=43vRoD8GnIY

>>12135297
I think you are missing the point. You are straining to hear dogwhistles, but JP isn't a secret believer in cultural bolshevism, he is an unwitting idiot pushing the same meme from another perspective. If you say that Marxists went underground by posing as another academic group to infiltrate western culture and continue imposing Marxist ideology. Watch that video starting at about 2:43 and tell me what he pitches isn't a conspiracy of Marxists infiltrating the west -- he just swaps the Frankfurt school for the even more nebulous "postmodernists".

>>12136194
adding on to this, Derrida and Foucault make up a very narrow contingent of Postmodernism, and the critiques JP levels at them would roll off the back of Deleuze or Baudrillard, who, ironically, were much closer to orthodox Marxists than Derrida or Foucault.

>>12136194
people being retarded and breaking things they don't understand is not a conspiracy, it's just incompetence and intellectual laziness

>I think you are missing the point. You are straining to hear dogwhistles
let's see
>, but JP isn't a secret believer in cultural bolshevism, he is an unwitting idiot pushing the same meme from another perspective.
lol, you are making exactly the same point as Peterson does, but in reverse. And the difference is that you unironically believe in the conspiracy theory from the right and believe that Peterson is inadvertently promoting it, while he doesn't believe in conspiracies and just thinks it's people being retarded in academia

>>12136216
He literally says in that video that post 60's, you could not operate in western academia as a Marxist, so they invented post-modernism and shifted economics out in favour of a discourse of power. He is literally saying they conspired. JP is a useful idiot but I don't think he invented his position to sneak cultural Bolshevism back into academia. I hope you see the difference there.

>>12136245
there's no difference, people being intellectually lazy and self-deluded in mass is not a conspiracy, it happens all the time everywhere. A conspiracy needs a somebody from the shadows pushing it for their own ends, not just a group of people deciding to go into it of their own minds open in the sun

>>12136272
>A conspiracy needs a somebody from the shadows pushing it for their own ends
all a conspiracy needs is two or more people trying to do something in secret, usually something harmful. he says Derrida and Foucault (who couldn't stand one another, by the way) invented a new term to hide the fact that they were Marxists doing Marxism. That fits the definition of a conspiracy like a glove, anon.

>>12133227
>A tripfag on [s4s] by the name of "Le Shit Nigger" kept posting it
>It caught on

>>12136296
again, how is two writers writing on the open and influencing people a conspiracy theory?

>he says Derrida and Foucault (who couldn't stand one another, by the way) invented a new term to hide the fact that they were Marxists doing Marxism.
so self-delusion and intellectual laziness as i said. Not saying that Peterson theory makes any sense or that he actually read any of those guys (he hasn't). Just that his retarded theory isn't a conspiracy theory, and that Zizek hasn't addressed any of his points, which should be easy to do either way because Peterson is retarded. But Zizek is too lazy and is only battling third hand accounts and stuff the guy never said

>>12136311
>But Zizek is too lazy and is only battling third hand accounts and stuff the guy never said
still better than Peterson though, that literally got into a fight with a Zizek quote bot on twitter

>>12136311
>writing on the open
the whole point Peterson makes is that they are not being open, because if they were, they would call themselves Marxists, but they couldn't, so they couched their Marxism in a "new" philosophical school to HIDE it. They are SECRET Marxists according to JP. Jesus lord, just watch the video he spells it all out, here's another one where he straight up says that post-modernism is "tightly wound up" with post-modernism and then struggles to understand how anyone under his definition of postmodernism could be a neo-Marxist -- it's like he's so close to seeing that his position is nonsense but can't quite make it out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih4avuHRUUc

>>12136370
>post-modernism is "tightly wound up" with *neo-Marxism

>>12136370
>>12136374
Neo-Marxism traditionally refers to the Frankfurt school, by the way.

>>12135441
Do you get paid by the hour?

>>12130706
i know just the right guy

>>12130790

>>12136370
really they're just liberals, JP is just speaking from a slightly different branch of liberalism

just lump ted kazcysnki into the mix just to btfo either of such group

leftards will jerk off towards zizek even though he´s dumb as a a rock

peterson only should speak from what he knows (his psychological insights of the human behavior)

pinker is a charlatan like sam harris, muh enlightenment

>>12133448
It's from moldbug. The gist of the idea is that post depression New Deal america represents a clear and delineated regime continuity break. The architects of this New Deal america were ideological compatriots of their contemporaries in the USSR. I'm really not going to be able to the idea justice in a 4chan post but if you're interested cheq out his blog "unqualified reservations".

>>12130316

Zizek is straight up making shit up.
He claims that Peterson’s view is that people need to follow animal hierchies, and brings up an non-existent video where supposedly Peterson opposes Pinker; whereas in reality, the only conversation in video they’ve had is one where they are in large agreement.

>>12136370
He's a retard

Cultural Marxism is real, but real leftist call it “Deconstructionst Materialism”. That Peterson doesn’t know this, is a tell that he hasn’t read those who he accuses of pushing cultural Marxism