/lit/ - Literature

>retailer stops selling something they don't want to sell

>Is it justifiable?
Yes

>>12860023
>buying books
(lol

>>12860023
Yes, it's pseudoscientific trash. Jewish threat should be taken seriously, with proper rigour.

>>12860023
no

>>12860028
>>12860051
cringe<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F602;</div>

Who gives a fuck you virgins lmfao

>>12860023
it doesn't really matter, it's a good book though

the jews will soon come to regret their arrogance<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/skeletons/13.gif"></div>

>>12860051
Oh, you poor, lonely Jew getting upset every time someone posts this book here. :)

>>12860023
Go to bed, Kevin.

>>12860023
Yes. Amazon is a private company. They have no obligation to sell books they don't want to sell. If they were a publicly funded company then it would be wrong.

>>12860023
Check the archive

>>12860028
>retailed which effectively monopolized the market
>LMAO LET EM DO WHATEVER

>>12861168
That's called capitalism, mate.

>>12861168
your'e dumb

>>12860028
>>12861173
>>12861175
Guess I don't have to sell my product to blacks... you know cuz capitalism n shit.

Justifiable in what sense?

Is it legal: Yes, as far as I know.
Should they have the right to do it?: I'm not sure.
Is it the right thing to do, ethically speaking?: No.<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F603;</div>

>>12861187
It's not a question of to whom you sell but of what you're selling.

>>12860023
Entirely. We don't have things like Classical education to stop people being plebs anymore, so anything that keeps the level of public taste up is a positive. Now they need to ban litRPGs, Minecraft ""books"", and werewolf erotica also.

>>12861234
What if amazon decided not to stock books written by ethnic minority authors?

>>12860023
No it's just more proof of the ZOG normie feminist s*y cucks trying to keep us down!

>>12860023
[Opinion that is vague and displeases everyone in this thread]

Please don't forget to "like," "comment," and "subscribe."

Buying shit off Amazon has never been justifiable.

>>12861290
Sales would plummet and their reputation would be destroyed.

>>12861300
what's wrong with Amazon?

>>12861293
This but unironically

>>12861187
>Become an alternate competitor of Amazon.
>Sell shit that Amazon is too corrupt to sell.
>People invest in you.

>>12861330
>start growing
>a larger company comes and absorbs you
thanks free market

>>12861187
Companies are ran by individuals and individuals should be able to make whatever deals they please.

>>12861315
Everything, including its apologists

>>12861342
not an answer.

>>12861337
>Never mentioned selling stock.
Keep it locked.

>>12861349
I suggest you look up the word "answer" in a dictionary.

It feels good to my liberal sensibilities and can ignore all the heinous shit amazon does!

What the fuck is this? I leave 4chin for a weekend and it turns to Reddit? We got karma now?

>>12861369
Check the date.

>>12861373
Shit. Thanks, mate. I knew I was retarded.

>>12861306
What I was implying is that refusing to sell minority-authored books would expose amazon to a bunch of lawsuits. This won't happen with Macdonald's book - so its clearly not enough to just say amazon is a private company and can do refuse to do business with whomever they want.

>>12861330
Subscribestar tried to do this to Patreon. A bunch of payment processors refused to do business with them.

What we are dealing with are not 'private corporations' in any classically-liberal, Adam Smithian sense. Due to years of anti-discrimination legislation these companies have been effectively conquered by their HR departments - and therefore are choosing to *not profit maximize* (ie, the very thing a company is meant to do) for ideological reasons.

I'd love it if genuine private property and free association returned, but until then these 'companies' are best understood as semi-detached arms of the state

>>12861407
>What I was implying is that refusing to sell minority-authored books would expose amazon to a bunch of lawsuits.
But they'd never do that because it would be unprofittable and hurt their brand and, more importantly, it's a stupid scenario and a poor attempt at drawing a false equivalence. .
>This won't happen with Macdonald's book
Of course not, because, legally, it's not the same to have your book pulled because of vague racial motives (which would have actual grounds for a lawsuit) as opposed to having something pulled because a company thinks it'd hurt their brand (which is something that retailers do all the time, no matter how small or big they're).

>>12861173
>it's okay to circumvent antidiscrimination laws as long as it protects (((certain groups)))
>DID CHRISTIAN BAKERY JUST REFUSE TO SERVE A HOMOSEXUAL WEDDING???? GETEEEEEEM

>>12861168
>amazon monopolised anything
are you simply too lazy to walk to the store?

>>12860028
Individualist bs
>if a retard consents to having their money taken away then it's fine and moral because muh consent

>>12862105
>if a retard consents to having their money taken away then it's fine and moral because muh consent
literally what is wrong with this?

>>12860023
Within the contemporary American liberal framework, yes, because we cannot tolerate intolerance and Amazon is a private company.

>>12862162
That opens the door to any car shop manipulating you for payments your whole life. Western nations half understand this and place laws to prevent full tier China autistic capitalism but won't expound on that. It's retarded to its core famalam

Amazon is on their way of basically monopolizing commerce itself yet you still have idiots parroting the "they're a private company ;-DDDDDDD"

>>12862190
if they try to do that they're simply going to go bust because no one would want a service like that and would instead find another service provider. that's how competition in the free market works.

>>12862190
>That opens the door to any car shop manipulating you for payments your whole life.
What the fuck are you even talking about? You're acting like we should defend retards and their retarded behavior. Non-retarded people don't get manipulated by car mechanics, if you're being manipulated by a mechanic, the solution is to be less retarded. You're acting like the government's supposed to legislate away all of life's sharp corners because you, a fully grown adult, can't be trusted to take care of themselves.

China isn't capitalist. If you were even SLIGHTLY familiar with Chinese politics, you would know this. Just having no intellectual property laws doesn't make you capitalist you fucking idiot.

>>12862202
ahahah nigga just walk to the store hahaha literally just get up and take a stroll to the store kek

>>12862206
>n-no that's not real capitlaism! real capitalism has never been tried before!

>>12862218
Not an argument.

>>12862220
Don't you ever fucking respond to my posts ever again.<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" style="position:absolute;margin-left:-30px;pointer-events:none;" width="80" height="80" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/partyhat.gif"></div>

>>12862206
Are you claiming there is no private capital ownership in China?

>>12861187
Businesses can still reserve the right to not serve someone. Just not on the basis of race. So you're half right.

But you know, if his money's green I don't care what he looks like.

>>12862255
No, I claimed that China isn't capitalist, you know, because of all the government regulations on the economy, heavy taxes, wealth redistribution, censorship of information, restriction on association, and such that gets in the way of the market. I didn't say that people didn't have private property.

>>12862244
Be less dumb.

>>12860023
Whatever it takes to get you one track mind autists talking about something else. We get it, you don’t like the Jews. Does that mean you have to post 15 /pol/ threads a day masquerading as /lit/ content?

>>12862190
>Its wrong to allow easily tricked people to be easily tricked
It's literally impossible to prevent idiots from giving their money to the wrong people. How would you solve this?

nice to know leftists are corporate bootlickers

>>12862277
>all the government regulations on the economy, heavy taxes, wealth redistribution, censorship of information, restriction on association, and such that gets in the way of the market
which sounds just like state capitalism, which might be somewhat related to capitalism, i guess? anyway, only my own idealized version of capitalism is capitalism.

>>12862294
They still hate Chick-Fil-A though.

>>12862294
If Amazon had done something else I might be angry at them, but this doesn't outrage me. I really don't care that Amazon had some sort of corporate PR basis for not selling this book.
Big companies and booksellers do that all the time with better works for less justifiable reasons, and I'm supposed to be outraged by this Jewish question tripe in particular? I'm not sucking up to Jeff Bezos, this just isn't one of my priorities.

>>12861463
>But they'd never do that
Yeah you stupid faggot, the fact that they'd never do that outlines exactly the double standard he's referring to. If Amazon chose to not sell certain products in this scenario they'd be open to lawsuits, yet they've already just chose to not sell certain products and they are not open to lawsuits. Clearly it's more simple than "they can choose to not sell certain products".

>Of course not, because, legally, it's not the same
Yes, this is what he was getting at. The law does not simply enforce the principle "a business can do business with whoever the choose". If a business chooses to not do business as he' outlined, they're going to have legal recourse taken against them. The principle being used to justify the legitimacy of their actions is not in fact active here at all, as you've demonstrated.

>>12862294
Leftists are far from corporate bootlickers. It's more that they're saying to the capitalists... well, you got what you asked for. I personally enjoy seeing the right-wing capitalists argue against the free market orthodoxy they usually hold sacrosanct. Capitalism, like liberalism, always devours itself.

>>12860023
Yes this book is very antisemitic, which is now a crime in many European countries. Also private businesses can do whatever they like, if you don't like it go make your own internet. Go play more video games and watch more porn you incel, and don't you ever say anything about Jews again unless it is explicitly pro-Israel. Your far-right extremist white nationalist/supremacist fascist views will no longer be tolerated.

>>12862299
>Ask for a glass of tap water
>Get a glass of bog water with a whole bunch of shit floating in it
>"What the fuck, I can't drink this!"
>"Are you claiming that you did not ask for water?"
>"I asked for tap water to drink, this is bog water and it's undrinkable."
>"It's all water anyway, and why is your definition of what's drinkable superior to mine?"
It's like you're intentionally being obtuse. If I were to take your house and set it on fire, it is no longer a house. It doesn't become house + fire, it becomes a pile of ash. In the same way, if you take a free market and add regulations, it is no longer a free market. It doesn't become free market + regulations, it becomes a regulated market. If it's a regulated market, it's not capitalist, that's the distinction.

This is not some "that wasn't real socialism" bullshit because we all know where the line in the sand is. You're pretending we don't so your argument is easier to make.

>>12862335
Exactly.
>Big mainstream corporation
>Makes PR move as an appeal to mainstream politics
>Right-wingers frame this as an affront to free speech
This is how capitalism works. If it doesn't make money, cut it. "Justifiable" has nothing to do with it.

>>12862346
In a truly free market, the more heavily armed salesman would set your house on fire so that he could sell you a new one.

>>12862346
How do you enforce property rights without government intervention?

>>12862363
The same way I do everything else without government intervention, pay someone or do it myself.

>>12862328
>530
Can you make dinosaurs?

>>12862335
I mean if leftists had their way I wouldnt be able to access this book either lmao. Dont pretend otherwise

>>12862384
How does this not devolve into tribalism where warlords can burn my house down and enslave me at will.

>>12862419
It is in everyone's best interest to deal fairly and non-violently. If you're known as unreliable or untrustworthy then no one else would want to negotiate with you. Clearly the use of force is out of question.

>>12862401
I'll admit, I take some satisfaction from Amazon's choice to pull it. I wouldn't want you to read it, and I would hope there'd be a cultural consensus against it, but I also don't believe in the state banning books. I'd prefer it if this thing faded into obscurity, but I wouldn't suggest that anyone should be totally unable to access it, or even Mein Kampf for that matter. That's just a different kind of white-washing.

>>12862431
>It is in everyone's best interest to deal fairly and non-violently
It turned out to be in Macbeth's best interest but look how that turned out. People get ambitious, they aspire to power, they kill or assassinate the competition, or at least the uncooperative. This sounds like we'd just get a bunch of mafia families carving up the globe like mini-Napoleons

>>12862419
Firstly, I'm arguing that the government shouldn't regulate the free market because it causes hundreds of problems for every one it claims to solve. The world is imperfect, and a state government very well may still be necessary for the foreseeable future. That said, a government is simply a company whom you can't choose not to patronize because of their monopoly on force. In the civilized world, de-monopolizing force does not result in rampant tribalism. Hell, the second amendment to the constitution was based around de-monopolizing force.

People can not use force against those capable of equal force because every forceful interaction would be mutually assured destruction. If the power to use physical force is de-monopolized (by, say, deregulating weapons), the use of force gradually becomes obsolete. There would be no warlords because war would be obsolete.

>>12862335
>I personally enjoy seeing the right-wing capitalists argue against the free market orthodoxy they usually hold sacrosanct.
No, you're seeing a bunch of butthurt national socialists and other people in the authoritarian right shitting on free market principles like they always do. People in the libertarian right are smart enough to know that your rights as a human being don't just magically become invalid when it's inconvenient for us.

>>12862460
>People can not use force against those of equal force
Yes, we know. That's why the US was in Vietnam and not Russia or China. What makes you presume you would somehow be affiliated with a more powerful group? If weapons were totally deregulated, some groups would have more weapons than the other groups. These would become warlords, aka, the new government, and we'd basically have another dirty colonialist situation. Deregulating weapons wouldn't stop people from using them, it would do the opposite.

Muh capitalicuck values aside, I'm more interested in the ideological/moralistic side of the idea of banning disagreeable literature and personae. To what end can it possibly serve, other than totalitarian?
By banning the idea you hate, you admit that the idea has merit and convincing force, which makes the idea all the more desirable. You also admit that ideas you agree with cannot provide enough counter-force to the such idea. Which makes it appear like a preemptive capitulation. So in the free market of ideas, banning something you dislike would be the dumbest thing ever, since you personally put the high value tag on the product you don't own. Therefore, we must conclude that the free market of ideas doesn't exist, and instead banning serves as a battleground of ideological supression, and anyone who does not appreciate the state of being a disposable pawn of the regime must fight against it, personal morality regardless.

>>12862473
>Your rights as a human don't become invalid when its convenient for us.
That's the entire purpose of the racial/genetic hierarchy though.

>>12862432
Well often banning has the opposite effect and wont just fade into obscurity like you said. Hell I bought a copy just out of curiousity not long after this happend.

>>12862485
Nevermind. Missed the word "libertarian." Oops

>>12860023
“Hey guys I posted it again lol”

>>12862488
I agree, but this isn't a "ban." Its a removal. Amazon can't ban you, personally, from getting it, they can only pull it from their own shelves.

>>12862477
You could've read the first few sentences of my first paragraph before replying, you know. I could tell you that a potential warlord or any of his underlings would be placing themselves at severe unnecessary risk for resources that could be more easily and safely acquired through peaceful means, but like I said, I'm not arguing for anarchy in today's society.

>>12862496
By "removing" the book from the largest book-selling platform in the world, you deprive 99% of potential readers from ever discovering it. So yeah, fuck semantics, it's effectively a ban.

>>12862519
Only presuming that %99 of the people who might read it only would've discovered it or bought it on Amazon, which I don't believe. They've certainly decreased the books disability, but not by %99 worldwide

>>12862432
>t. tranny

>>12862283
Natsoc

>>12862205
>>12862206
I triggered you because I'm right and you have no fundamental response, also suck my dicc

>>12862519
You're like those faggots that claim they have a right to upload whatever they want to YouTube because it's popular enough to overshadow it's competitors. The book isn't banned just because you can't get free shipping, stupid, go to eBay.

>>12860023
OMG, Amazon took all of the copies out of the warehouses and shelves and burned them!

>>12862488
based and upboated
>>12862567
cringe and downboated

>>12860051
Pls name more rigorous responses to the Jewish question

>>12862270
What makes the domain of race forbidden?

>>12862270
>Just not on the basis of race
Oh really

ITT: a bunch of gaping-asshole faggots with no life experience argue that they want the free market except it can't be a totally free market because then warlords would exist so maybe it shouldn't be totally free but we can't have any regulation so ummmm...

>>12861330
can't wait too attract investors with my business model "selling Culture of Critique"

>>12862191
Libertarianism fails because you can't reconcile it with closed borders or a strong immigration policy. The only weapon you have is the abolishment of the welfare state with the accompanying hope that will discourage people from trying to get in - or it will eugenically push out those who can't succeed in society. But no guarantees on that. And no, "go read these two lengthy chapters" does not invalidate this argument, neither does calling it "highly technical and complex", and neither does it change the fact that most libertarians outside of /pol/ are pro-open borders and free immigration.

>>12862328
>>12862386
Please make dinosaurs if yes.

>>12863155
>you can't reconcile it with closed borders or a strong immigration policy
Huh? Why not?

>>12861690
who is being descriminated against

>>12863211
Because the philosophical underpinnings of libertarianism state that all humans are endowed with certain freedoms including freedom of movement. Moreover a strong immigration policy requires a strong state which, although technically 'allowed' in libertarianism, isn't recommended.

>>12863211
>libertarian
>nationalist
cringe

>>12863211
Based
>>12863265
Bluepilled

>>12863197
>>12862386<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F438;</div>

>>12863235
I'm no authority on the manner and can't speak for anyone else, but from where I'm standing, the citizens of a nation always take priority over non-citizens. It is immoral for a government to use tax money taken from citizens to their detriment or for the exclusive benefit of non-citizens. It is, therefor, immoral for a government to grant non-citizens the privilege of citizenship when the individual potential citizen in question is even somewhat at risk of lowering quality of life for pre-existing citizens.

>Moreover a strong immigration policy requires a strong state
I think we have different understandings of the word "strong". Strong doesn't mean intrusive. A state could let people smoke weed, drive without a seat belt, and broadcast obscenities on television while still having the military power necessary to protect itself from foreign invasion.

>>12860028
like gay cakes right

>>12863279

Wrong

Censorship is underrated.

The current tactic of large companies banning certain ideas is a good balance between avoiding government censorship and practically diminishing access.

>>12863293
Is he a froggy or a dinosaur? ily either way

>>12863197<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" width="451" height="75" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/temp/dinosaur.gif"></div>

Mein Kampf isn't banned. How does it make sense? Is Kevin Macdonald worse than Hitler in the eyes of Amazon? If you're going to go full plutocrat, at least be fucking consistent about your tyranny.

>>12863441
DINOSAUR!!!!!!
RÀAÀAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWRRRRRRR
YOU'RE THE BEST ANONSAMA, VALID USE OF LIKES

>>12860023<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F603;</div>

>>12863446
>A dead larper's personal diary vs
>a well-researched academic text with propositions supported by actual evidence
I wonder which one could be more damning.

>>12863446
sean is so annoying with his shill even amazon couldn't take it.

>>12860023
Ok Amazon+this thread, I'm convinced. Can someine link the pdf?

>>12863338
not him, but no, since gay cakes was an issue since that was based on discrimination against customers. Amazon has chosen to not sell this book, so nobody gets it, so whatever; the baker makes cakes and offers them to everyone except gay couples, so it's discriminatory. if the baker just chose to not sell cakes to anyone, then it would be comparable, but that's not what happened

>>12863569
The truth awaits
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion2/goyim/je1.pdf

>>12863580
>"The truth awaits"
>links a pdf to Mein Kampf Parte Dos: Electric Boogaloo

>>12863580
i really thought that link was a joke

>>12863595
>I've never read Mein Kampf or Culture of Critique so I assume they're the same book because DA JUICE

Rolled 6 (1d6)

>>12863618

>>12863622
Nice get

>>12863622
Dice don't lie, anon

>>12863618
>I've never read Mein Kampf or Culture of Critique, but the titles are in different languages, of course they're different
the only difference is that MK accuses Judaism only of ruining Germany, while CoC accuses Judaism of ruining the entirety of """western culture"""
>>12863622
>dubs and a 6
sad to say, but this is based

>>12863638
>the only difference is that MK accuses Judaism only of ruining Germany, while CoC accuses Judaism of ruining the entirety of """western culture"""
Way to prove you have no clue about either of those two.

>>12863638
>the only difference is
that's just wrong, anon and you would know that if you actually fucking read the books you seem to hate so much

>>12863580
>>12863595
>>12863597
>>12863618
I don't get it. That seems to be the book. (Only read a bit of the preface) is it not?

How can everyone not find the subject a little fascinating? Whether the Jews actually did these things or not, it seems like reading a CIA handbook on infiltrating and subverting a country would be pretty interesting.

>>12863643
>>12863648
>still being purposefully obtuse
also please don't samefag thanks

>>12863654
CIA handbooks aren't supposed to be public information, anon.

imagine being jewish lol<div class="like-perk-cnt"><img alt="" src="//s.4cdn.org/image/skeletons/14.gif"></div>

>>12863663
>I DONT HAVE TO READ A BOOK TO NOT LIKE IT AND EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS THE SAME PERSON
check the times, lad.

>>12863663
>still purposefully acting stupid
also please don't be a faggot thanks

>>12863674
>>12863680
>he still thinks they're different, even though anyone with a fifth grade reading comprehension can tell they're spouting the same shit
you read the wrong book, anon
also, again, stop samefagging, it's absolutely embarrassing when someone feels the need to comment on both their computer and their phone at the same time

>>12863664
Part of why i'd liked to read them. Like obviously?

It's inconsequential in itself imo, it's a stupid book and no one should regret the loss of it (it isn't lost yet anyway), but it's a sign of bad things to come.

I get the impression that most of the people itt thread defending amazon are basic bitch leftists who don't think of themselves as, but are in reality, bourgeois liberals. The fact of the matter is that any excuse to censure a company like amazon is good enough, and they generally agree on that point when it suits them. But as long as "le ebil fash" boogeyman disturbs their tarddreams, corporations will have an easy scapegoat.

>>12863682
ok

>>12863682
This is my phone faggot

>>12863682
>THEYRE OBVIOUSLY THE SAME BECAUSE I WOULD KNOW BECAUSE I HAVENT READ THEM HAHA
and this is my computer, now fuck off

>>12863705
>>12863708
>he finally admits to samefagging
thank you, now leave my board

>>12863723
>have been responding to 2 people the entire time
>sperg out and call both of them samefag when they point out that your larger point is nonsense
>3 people reply with 2 claiming to be the same
>HURRRRR I COT U RED HANDED HAHAHA NOW SHUT UP AND GO AWAY OBVIOUSLY I AM RITE BECAUSE I DONT READ!1!!!!11!
lad it might be time to turn off the computer

>>12863737
>I've been responding to two people
>they suddenly decide to pretend to be the same person to no personal gain
or
>I've been arguing with one person pretending to be two
>he stopped pretending when I called him out
Occam's Razor, anon

lmao this hysterical kike. Just say nothing retard. Your posts are worse for your position than nothing. You look like a ridiculous retard. People are reading culture of critique.

>>12863746
you stupid kike look at these replies there are 3 of them
>>12863702
>>12863705
>>12863708
idk if you're so kvetchy that you're just ignoring it and hoping I don't notice? the 1st reply is not me.

>>12863757
I assume that two people are responding to me, with one samefagging two lines of comments and the third just now joining to call me a Jew. since I am not a Jew and since the question of my heritage is irrelevant, I decided to leave that poster alone to sperg out

>>12863776
>say something stupid about books you've never read
>get called out for it
>"EVERYONE CALLING ME OUT IS SAMEFAGGING!"
>immediately get shown it's not samefagging
>"WELL OBVIOUSLY THEY WEREN'T SAMEFAGGING RIGHT THERE BUT EVER OTHER POST MUST HAVE BEEN 1 PERSON EXCEPT WHEN THEY INTENTIONALLY TRIED TO PROVE ME WRONG!"
Holy shit if this is the mental state of the person trying to stop people from reading it then I don't think much else has to be said.

>>12863796
you know, I usually don't like doing the good old "I was only pretending to be retarded," but I'm doing it here because holy shit, this fucking comment is cringier than all the bait I've posted up to here

>>12863846
>still trying to derail and dodge
Read Culture of Critique

>>12863880
I probably will eventually, but I really can't get past the fact that purports cultural Marxism. unless that's incorrect and I heard wrong, in which case please tell me what the book is actually about

>>12863751
>m-maybe if I say it enough it will be true!!
No one outside of your fringe internet subculture is reading or cares about this book.

>>12863903
>m-m-muh cultural marxism!
>still bitching about being labeled
>go back to bole you racist bigoted anti-semitic reactionary incel nazi XYZs!
>don't you know my peers and who are all identical are too complex to be described in any terms someone might percieve as negatice ;_;
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Why are soiboi bugmen cucks such pathetic retards (^:

>>12863917
The biggest retailer in the world evidently cares about this book you dishonest, hysterical, kike :) do you know what words mean or you just repeat your catch phrases and hope someone will give you reddit gold?

>>12863924
can always rely on /pol/tards for unhinged incoherent rambling

>>12863937
>buzzword buzzword buzzword buzzword buzzword
lol this is unreadable. Terrible post anon. Maybe you should go back to >>>/pol/

>>12863574
by that logic we are discriminating against certain writers by allowing other authors books to be sold :^)

>>12863929
lol keep lying to yourself if it'll soothe you

>>12863924
I don't dislike the theory of cultural Marxism because of its relation to race, I dislike it because it's incorrect. why are you immediately calling anyone you disagree with something along the lines of sjw libtard redditing tumblr-using söyboy buggmen cucks? what about these buzzwords helps your argument?

>>12863949
This guy doesn't even know how to speak english lmfao how embarrassing. Do you need help reading the OP little guy? Google maybe has an audio tool to help you understand :(

>>12863946
>anon makes an unhinged, incoherent post
>call it unhinged and incoherent
>le buzzword meme
ok

>>12863903
I'm not entirely sure what it is you're trying to say? I think the name "Cultural Marxism" is a bit...misleading, especially for people who would consider themselves followers/students/etc of Marx. But I think the phenomenon that Cultural Marxism tries to explain is a very real phenomenon and it is something that needs to be explained.

>>12863952
dishonesty is unbecoming anon. It's time to go back and dilate

>>12863959
seething

>>12863963
>it's just another meaningless pile of buzzwords
Who hurt you? Seek therapy.

>>12863971
why are you mad tho? You'll get better at english anon! Its okay!

>>12861173
thats like a christian justifying anything they do in the name of the bible

>>12863964
I wouldn't entirely consider it a misleading name, since the entire idea is
>le Jews have subverted western society through our academia and mass media and turned the majority of people into sjw who will be easily pushed into full on Marxist revolution!!1!!11!!11one!!!1!
>>12863975
the anon you're responding to is kind of stupid, but you're actually sperging out harder, sorry anon

>>12861690
Nazis are not a protected class, you fucking retard. Antidiscrimination laws are laws which pertain to discrimination against protected classes; no 'circumvention' is happening. In fact, I'm pretty sure the majority of people would support rounding up and killing all Nazis.

>>12860051
> This awareness raiser is fucking trash we should only talk about sources that have proper rigour
> No I wont mention any of them, Im not here to contribute anything I just want to be a smarter-than-you retard

>>12862105
You clearly don't know what informed consent is.

>>12863993
>da JOOOOOOOS lol 1!!11!!11one!!!1!
>trying to dehumanize jewish individuals
>mocking the disabled
incel alert. Please have sex.

>>12863993
Well yeah once you understand the the ideas behind Cultural Marxism you understand why it's called that but a lot of Marxists have a knee-jerk reaction to the term and dismiss it without actually understanding the ideas behind it. And especially when you're dealing with someone who's lower IQ, they automatically assume that Cultural Marxism is a conspiracy theory when in reality nobody in this new far right generation sees it as an Illuminati-esque conspiracy cabal.

>>12864006
Why do these classes need to be protected? Are they such obviously terrible groups of people you need laws to stop normal people from killing them or something? Weird. Why are they like that?

>>12864031
It's literally a conspiracy theory about the Frankfurt School.

>>12864021
I actually had my ass fucked last night, thanks
>>12864031
>Well yeah...behind it.
that was the point
>And especially...conspiracy cabal.
just because it's the most popular conspiracy theory doesn't mean it isn't one. see this anon >>12864045

>>12860031
This

>>12864040
They need protection because Nazi fuckheads like yourself want to inflict suffering and death upon them.

>>12864045
>wikipedia
that's not what most people mean when they talk about cultural marxism
browse /pol/ for a week and you'll notice that

>>12864047
>being such an incel you actually just give up entirely and accept a life of misery, AIDs and colostomy bags
yikes. Your family wishes you were dead instead of an embarrassing failure of a faggot. Sad.

>>12864062
>browse /pol/ for a week
no.

>>12864059
>They need protection because most of society wants to inflict suffering and death upon them.
Doesn't seem very democratic to me. If the army has to march you into a place so you don't get killed maybe you should just find another place??? lol

>>12864045
>>12864047
It's literally not a conspiracy theory at all, more closer to a stand-alone complex of disparate groups with different yet convergent interests, I guess you could say. That entire article is referring to the ~30 year old writings of some guy that no 20 year olds on /pol/ or Twitter have ever heard of or read. This reads like it was written by someone who's stuck in the 90s and has not interacted or interfaced with the new generation of the far right at all. If you think that /pol/ is referring to the ideas of this Lind guy when they talk about Cultural Marxism, then you're not just off target you're in a different ballpark. There's a reason why CoC is widely read on the far right while this Lind guy is only still relevant in the minds of SPLC boomers.

>>12864076
>I'll just take Israelpedia's word on it
you lack intellectual rigor

>>12863776
You,re being mocked because you're stating things about two books you've admitted you haven't read you actual retard. Just go back to whatever faggy hugbox you come from

>>12864077
>>most of society
imagine lying to yourself to this extent just so you don't feel bad about how irrevocably doomed your ideology is

>>12864108
/pol/ is so intellectual

>>12864111
Have you actually talked to white people outside university leftists any time recently? Things are changing rather rapidly

>>12864111
Buy its sure gonna suck being you for the rest of your life. You live in a city right xD oh man

>>12864139
Nope. small ~10,000 population midwestern town.
>>12864121
Yes I have. None of them want to inflict suffering and death on Jews, gays, or blacks.

>>12864121
Do you honestly think most white people are Nazis? How deep is your echo chamber?

Every time someone posts CoC some fucktard that obviously hasn't even read the preface manages to derail the thread by dropping meaningless buzzwords by script. Every fucking time.

It was actually in their own stock, not even a third party vendor. Mr moneybags really isn't about them shekels methinks.

>>12860028
This is your brain on (((ayn rand)))

>>12864191
>>12864160
If 'nazi' means 'doesn't want any more immigration, is tired of the media attacking whites, running out of sympathy for minorities', then there are a shitload of nazis in western countries today. And if you say the above in a public place you will be accused of being a Nazi.

Believe it or not white people don't want to be replaced, and not wanting to be replaced is now considered nazism

Everything is justifiable; you're just not paying your lawyer enough.

>>12864009
Reminds me of the retards that won't pay attention to any discussion that doesn't have rigurous scientific studies.

>>12861330
>have PayPal cancel your means of collecting purchases
>build competitor
>have the banks cancel spending privileges to your payment processor

I love jews and I love capitalism

>>12862335
Based opinion. Americans litterally took the jews love for money and turned it into a political system it was always going to fail

>>12864551
Other way around. They are the taste formers and curators (source Hollywoodism an empire of their own)and the American masses abide.

>>12861330
>Build an alternative to Amazon
>Also have to build alternative payment processor, bank and credit card company, search engine that doesn't censor you, etc. because Silicon Valley and other tech giants are all in cahoots and will shut you down physically and through propaganda
Yeah dude great idea

>>12864467
This tranny was acting a fool and wasn't interested in any sort of discussion from the beginning:
>>12863663
Too bad the other anon took the bait. Playing the "I don't understand, please explain it to me." game is common tactic.
Eventually it doesn't matter, though, because people are actually reading Culture of Critique and the left's paper tigers like Trannypoints and other corporate backed youtube ideologues cannot prevent public perception from changing. It just goes to show the establishment is desperate and going all out in terms of propaganda.

As someone who's old enough to be the average /lit/izen's father, I can only say the contrast between 2019 and 1999 is amazing. People are out there talking about the Great Replacement and White interest, which just wouldn't have been an option back then and even though some like to bash Trump for muh Zionism, him getting elected contributed a whole lot to that shift.

Good luxury shaving accessories should go next, that would rub salt in the wounds of all the identitarian hipsters left and right.

>>12864521
shit tier parroted talking points

>>12864655
Nice complete lack of refutation, enjoy what's coming

>>12862277
Capitalism is whatever it needs to be to flourish. It's mutatory, not rigid like you claim.

>>12864660
Just because you've heard something similar to it before doesn't mean it's not true.

>>12864671
Just because you say 'It's not true' doesn't mean you've made an argument.

>>12864671
was obviously meant for >>12864655 you sperg

>>12864617
Based. Just yesterday I went to the shooting range, and all the guys were talking about was the evolutionary roots of Jewish tribalism. There was a vigorous debate on the extent to which their hegemonic influence over American institutions was conscious or unconscious, though all agreed that Jews are systematically working against the interests of European-descended peoples. Looks like white people are finally waking up, brother!

>>12861290
A lot of tears ~20% revenue decrease.

>>12864664
Shut up faggot

>>12864707
Why haven't you had sex?

>>12864700
hilarious but really all that's necessary is racial identification. A sense of persecution from a coalition of minorities constantly attacking you is plenty for that

>>12863680
>15 seconds in Inspect Element is a proof of anything

>>12864716
>Why haven't you had sex?
Woman detected

>>12862191
Yeah but one inevitably falls into the other.

>>12862335
>Leftists are far from corporate bootlickers. It's more that they're saying to the capitalists... well, you got what you asked for. I personally enjoy seeing the right-wing capitalists argue against the free market orthodoxy th
This is pure bullshit, the most capitalistic right wingers are all cheering this. Libertarian groups never even discuss this stuff, while neocons actively support it. What a load of bullshit "hehe we don't actually support censorship or anything, we're just giving you a taste of your own medicine teehee"

>>12862432
>I don't believe in the state banning things, but if it's a conspiratorial industry with global reach, more money and power than some small states, and holding control over the main mediums of communication, then it's a-ok
My almonds are so activated it's dangerous

>>12862432
>I'll admit, I take some satisfaction from Amazon's choice
This should be the banner for modern leftists

>there are still people who think communists/anarchists aren't the janissaries of liberalism in 2019

That Streisand effect is so real, I would have never heard of this book in a million years if they hadn't banned it. Now I know all about it despite having no interest at all in the topic.

>>12862519
Don't worry arguing, these are the same people that will complain about things like "trans visibility" because not every popular show has a resident tranny, or (rightfully) calling out the media for creating a narrative while leaving certain inconvenient facts uncomfortable, but only when it isn't them that control the media and do the exact same.
They are deceitful snakes and the only proper way to deal with them is a bullet to the head.

>>12861337
If you are a private company they can't buy you. I accidentally liked your post and it made me mad.

>>12865139
jajaja no like refunds up in this bitch lol

>>12860023
Amazon used to be super free speech. There was a pro-pedophile book that they kept selling even after outcry. They eventually caved. It sets a bad precedent, but I can't say that I'm losing sleep over them not selling pro-pedophile or anti-Jew books.

>>12863796
wot

>>12863880

>>12865033
Isn't it the other way around, Anon?

>>12865196
No. Young Communists become liberals, not the other way around.

Next on the chopping block.

>>12862277
>government regulations on the economy, heavy taxes, wealth redistribution, censorship of information, restriction on association, and such that gets in the way of the market.
wtf i love the united states now

>>12863903
Call it whatever you will; he starts (IIRC) with a deconstruction of the cult of Boas. Like it or hate it, that is the sort of work that it is.

>>12864076
Then you are arguing from a point of ignorance.

>>12860023
JEWstifiable

>>12864045
How is the claim about Frankfurt School's work towards destroying Western society by undermining tradiotionalist conservatism even considered conspirational, if Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse wrote that verbatim in numerous essays and books?

Oh no, /r9k/twitter/ won't be allowed get its postmodern fiction with free shipping! Oh woe, oh calamity! Whatever shall we do?

>>12864638
>that would rub salt in the wounds of
I never liked that axiom. Actually rubbing salt in an actual wound serves a purpose. The way the axiom is typically used implies that the function in question is pointless other than to induce pain.

>>12865780
Because the influence of the Frankfurt school has been radically blown or of protein by poltards

>>12865833
>or of protein
fuggin lost

>>12860023<div class="like-perk-cnt">&#x1F436;</div>

>>12861367
Underrated, it's literally just this, as well as making low IQ conspiracycels waste their time complaining about it, further bolstering amazon's legitimacy as a "woke" retailer, or simply principles for the multitudes of other people that find unironic antisemitism distasteful.

>>12865864
Are you unironically using "woke" as an accolade?
>stay woke, niggah!
>put a tampon in it!
>imma gettin' yous to da doctuh!
>freelz, yo!
>*dumps at curb*

>>12862615
In the age of globalist monopolies and encroaching absolute commodification of the internet it's as good of a equivalent as you can get.

>>12865833
If the influence of the Frankfurts is blown out of proportion, then explain why Critical Theory as the consensual method of choice to analyze text among all faculty of all universities to teach to their students?

>>12860023
Anybody who is going to read this book knows how to type the letters 'pdf' after the title into google

>>12865793
*hebraic screeching*

>>12866034
Was it Twitter or robot9000 that hit that nerve?

>>12865986
From the perspective of the average consumer, "wokeness" has replaced virtue.

>>12866040
was it hebraic or screeching that hit that nerve

>>12865806
>axiom

>>12866050
Well both Twitter and r9k are renowned for screeching, so you could presume I proceeded from that point.

>>12866055
He probably meant idiom

>>12866043
How many of them know the etymology?

>>12866080
>https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=axiom
It's a little obtuse, but it is still there. Perhaps idiom might be more clear.

>>12866114
It would be more clear in general circumstances also, but in the particular context of the thread, idiosyncratic use of axiom in particular is going to get people doubting one's comprehension.

>>12866108
That doesn't matter.

>>12866137
You are no fun.

>>12860023
This book really frightened me like no other did

>>12866043
It does manage to express their conflation of virtue with intellectualism while also having an opposite direct enough to encourage manichaean thinking.

>>12860023
Not really no, it's very obvious that it's a purely political move because they think it's offensive to jews.

Nobody has offered any kind of critique of CoC that amounts to more than calling MacDonald an anti-semite. In truth I think the theory side of CoC has a number of flaws (though the observational description of jewish activities remains irrefutable), but 99% of people simply have a knee-jerk reaction and dismiss it off hand the moment they read the tagline, without ever actually reading it and explaining WHY they disagree or don't like it.

In my opinion CoC is the best example of a litmus test for the idea of the subject/author being irrelevant to the content itself. The content is sourced, rational and descriptive and then seeks to devise a theory from the observations made therein. Regardless of what you think of jews or MacDonald or your political views this remains a scholarly work. MacDonald is not some neo-nazi skinhead. His work is not hateful no overly passionate; in fact it often comes across as a little too detached. The only reason it is not widely regarded as a scholarly work is because of the subject matter.

That old Voltaire quote about how if you want to know who rules your society then find out who you can't criticise holds very true for CoC.

Thankfully based BookDepository still sells it. No idea why anyone would use Amazon for books when BD exists desu.

Nope, it's a native Monopoly, it's like the trashman refusing to collect from one house on route due to political grounds because all other discriminable feature are protected.

https://youtu.be/GoWexZLmrgY?t=2618
go to 43:38, straight from the horse's mouth.

>>12867138
It's not because of the subject matter per se; it's how people (especially on the right) react to it. This kind of stuff has already led to genocide before.
It's like when people bring up the black crime statistic. The average person isn't going to be aware of the sociological causes behind black crime and so spouting off that statistic without any context can lead people to adopt problematic and racist views.
Similarly CoC will never be interpreted as a critique of Jewish culture by right wingers. They will undoubtedly use it as propaganda to make it seem like maybe kicking out/genociding Jews isn't such a bad idea.

>>12867209
So there are some groups who cannot be snitched on?
Most of his citations are Schlomos and Moshes communications with other Schlomos and Moshes.

>>12867228
Unironically, yes. Plato was right about philosopher-kings. The average pleb can't be trusted to accurately interpret information and make rational political decisions. Democracy is a meme.

>>12867209
>It's not because of the subject matter per se; it's how people (especially on the right) react to it.
I mean, I understand what you're saying, but ultimately so what? It's a book that describes and attempts to explain the actions and behaviours of a group of people. It was not written to smear jews, merely to provide an account of their actions in the political/social sphere for the last century or so. Should The Satanic Verses not be sold because muslims get pissed about it?
>This kind of stuff has already led to genocide before.
Not really. What are you thinking of when you say this?
>It's like when people bring up the black crime statistic. The average person isn't going to be aware of the sociological causes behind black crime and so spouting off that statistic without any context can lead people to adopt problematic and racist views.
If showing someone a statistic about a group leads to that person holding negative views bout that group then again, so what? Are they allowed to take a negative view of blacks if you show them that the disproportionality of crime rates carries over even if the blacks are in higher socio-economic groupings? How about rape statistics? There is literally no economic explanation for rape, it is a purely evil action. Why should you try to hide the truth from people?
>Similarly CoC will never be interpreted as a critique of Jewish culture by right wingers. They will undoubtedly use it as propaganda to make it seem like maybe kicking out/genociding Jews isn't such a bad idea.
Full-exto people are derided on the far right as much as they are by everyone else. Believe me, those guys are HATED by far right groups for obvious reasons - wanting to genocide people is retarded.
The counter-semitic right (and left - the old/hard left don't look favourably upon jews either) want jews to not interfere with the politics and social order of their countries, they don't want to lynch them all by torchlight. This is something of a strawman.

This all seems to centre around the idea that a book shouldn't be published because the conclusions that some people reach after reading it doesn't fit the accepted, mainstream progressive narrative. It is hard to believe that someone who browses /lit/ and therefore (I assume) loves books and the idea of sharing knowledge by the written word, would be so against a book being published/sold simply because the subject matter offends others and is interpreted in a given way by various groups. Why not ban all books that concern themselves with politics or society or economics? CoC has hardly been the book to inspire the most bad in the world; why not ban books by Stalin or Mao or various religious texts?

If I were still ancap I'd say yes.
But I'm hypermodern rightist seeking to subvert entire system and implementing undemocratic leninist power structure in it so I say no. There will be no freedoms for our enemies, only pain and suffering.

>>12867209
So by that logic a white genocide could happen... but that notion is considered laughable no?

>>12865833
>>12866007
Also remember the Long March Through the Institutions

>>12867149
Nice

>>12867138
bookdepository is owned by amazon.

>>12867916
Fair enough, but they're clearly far enough detached from Amazon that they continue to sell CoC

>>12867209
>problematic
poor whites dont comit crime niggaaaa

>>12867965
strawman
nobody says that poor whites don't commit crime
what racially aware people say is that poor whites commit less crime compared to poor blacks, poor latinos and poor middle easterners (the three main non-white pluralities in white countries), who are all imported peoples
the question then naturally arises why should those people be imported in the first place if they drag the general fabric of society down more per person than the natives
of course crime is merely one aspect of society, but almost all other measurable metrics invariably show poorer results for these non-white, imported peoples as well
again this gives rise to the bigger overall question of what benefit does this bring to white people in white countries that they should so desperately want to import more of these people?

>>12867991
thats exactly what i said my nig

>>12867965
Black people experience a unique form of oppression. Multiple studies have shown that having a black name will lead to lower chance of getting accepted for a job, that blacks are disproportionately targeted by police (a stat that gets cited here often is the one that shows black people get arrested and imprisoned a lot more for weed possession despite the fact that white and black people smoke weed at the same rates), distrust of police due to violent history, social alienation, poverty, fatherlessness, anti-intellectualism, etc.
When Jews and Italians had similar status in America as black people do they also formed gangs and committed disproportionate amounts of crime. Newspapers used to run headlines such as: IS THE ITALIAN MORE PRONE TO VIOLENCE? yet as Italians were assimilated into white america their crime rates became negligible.
Once race is abolished and black people assimilate into the broader society they will experience the same effect.

I don't know about you guys, but every time one of these virtue-signalling megacorps bans a book, it just makes me want to read it.

>>12868021
>abolish race

Lmao, literally impossible and something blacks wouldnt even want to actually do

Okay but meanwhile, I can still buy Mein Kampf on Amazon.

>>12868021
>Once race is abolished
what does that even mean?
as the previous dude said rich blacks still commit more crime? https://archive.is/Smoxs
i think the smoking weed at the same rate is bullshit too if i recall correctly it was based on self reporting and when they tested blacks they found higher rates of drug usage but thats fairly neglegent. when talking about race and crime the main talking points are rape and murder wich are crimes that cant imo be forced on someone by bad upringing or eating lead paint. why would you expect a group with lower IQ and higher testosterone to have the same crime stats?

>>12868065
>i think the smoking weed at the same rate is bullshit
Also remember that naturally black neighborhoods are more heavily patrolled by police

>>12868021
To this day, Italians have assimilated poorly, and while their crime rates may have gone down, they’re still a disruptive presence in formerly healthy communities.

>>12868021
>Multiple studies have shown that having a black name will lead to lower chance of getting accepted for a job
True, however this is not because people hate black people because of the colour of their skin. Most HR departments are staffed by catladys who jump at increasing diversity as company policy. The excessive rejection rate for blacks is because as a hiring manager you know that the black is more likely to turn up late, not work hard, quit randomly, get into arguments/fights and maybe even steal from the workplace. Additionally, there are also studies which show that CVs with no mention of race and gender actually start to favour the hiring of white men - there was a recent call in Australia or New Zealand, can't remember which, for an end to so-called 'blank CVs' because they started to notice it was anti-diversity. Make of that what you wish.

>blacks are disproportionately targeted by police
Again because police, like most hiring managers, understand black people and know that they're more likely to be committing crimes. Moreover blacks are more likely to resist arrest, be in contempt of court (hence getting disproportionate first time sentences). Also, according to the FBI, the rates of whites being killed by police during stops is HIGHER for whites - police actually use less lethal force on blacks overall, because they know the shitfit waiting for them in the media if they do, even though I would argue that a decent number of police shootings are totally justified. Not all, but far more than the media allows for.

>When Jews and Italians had similar status in America as black people do they also formed gangs and committed disproportionate amounts of crime.
This I do not dispute. I fully recognise that cultural/societal pressure can push people towards certain types of crime. However, jewish (at least superficially) and italian immigrants HAVE fully integrated into the milieu of whites that made the bulk of america (I know jews aren't white, but lets skip that for the moment, they present white at least) despite being in the US for less time overall. Why hasn't the trend of 'oppressing' these ethnic groups continued like it does for blacks? The vast majority of people do not hate blacks, yet we are to believe that blacks are so oppressed, in spite of their preferential treatment from the government and charities, that they are somehow unable to break from this horrendous cycle of criminality. Maybe blacks cause problems for themselves more than evil whitey does for them?

The difference is that blacks simply cannot en masse assimilate into a white nation. Equally a white plurality cannot fully assimilate into a black nation. No race can fully assimilate into another because differences between races exist, by definition, at the genetic level. This does not account for all differences, but it does account for a huge proportion of them.

>>12868084
sure isnt that a good thing? if i would live in a shithole community i would love more police involvement and the cops in mostly nonwhite cities will be mostly nonwhite too so the popo isnt even racist anymore

>>12868107
I didn't say it was bad, just that it's one factor that likely contributes a lot to them having higher incarceration rates for the same crimes. I'm not the guy to which you were replying.

>>12868021
yo yo yo yo yo
1234
also the callback rates between blacks and whites almost disapears when the employer asks for a criminal record(and the criminal records are the same)
Because blacks commit more crime its reasonable to assume that a black employe is more likely to be criminal, when given evidence(criminal record) they know whats up.
https:// sci-hub dot tw/10.2139/ssrn.2795795
page 45 table 1b
im reformating this post that is totally not spam my dude

>>12868021
Black American crime rates are in line with crime rates in Africa proper. They will always commit crime at vastly disproportionate rates.

>left or right the negro is always at the front of whities mind

GOD BLESS THE U.S. OF A.

Nigger is more than just race it is truly a metaphysical phenonomen

>>12860023
Mein kempf is still on amazon, why would they ban this?

>>12868044
Why should it be impossible? A lot of things that appeared insurmountable have fallen at the feet of reason (eg, monarchy, absolutist religion). Even the seemingly indefatigable nature of gender is now coming under question in the public sphere. I do admit that our society is still in its infancy on this regard but it would be foolish to think that progress cannot be made.
Pic related is a quote from Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics. It is a brilliant example of how conceptions of race change over time.

>>12868103
>there are also studies which show that CVs with no mention of race and gender actually start to favour the hiring of white men
I haven't seen these studies but I do not dispute that white men are, at present and on average, more educated and intelligent than black men, which of course means that they qualify for more jobs than black men. However I maintain that this is due to oppression.

>Also, according to the FBI, the rates of whites being killed by police during stops is HIGHER for whites - police actually use less lethal force on blacks overall
You seem to be contradicting yourself: of course more whites are killed by police OVERALL but, to my knowledge, the RATE of police fatalities skews more on the black side. "During stops" is also an arbitrary qualifier. I don't say that these fatalities were unjustified (though many were), in fact there is stronger evidence of racial bias when considering non-lethal police force. https://www.nber.org/papers/w22399
The fact is, the black community have a much tenser relationship with the police than the white community.

>Why hasn't the trend of 'oppressing' these ethnic groups continued like it does for blacks?
A multitude of reasons. One is the obvious point that black people are easily distinguishable from white people, whereas Jews and Italians aren't. Blacks also have a long history of oppression; a lot of black people alive today experienced redlining and Jim Crow. The parents of these people even experienced slavery. I think you're overestimating the timeline of black American history.

>No race can fully assimilate into another because differences between races exist, by definition, at the genetic level.
Race does not exist at the genetic level; it is entirely a social construction (as is every category). Why stop at skin colour? You can create races of people on the individual level, since everyone's DNA differs in some way. The fact is, race as it is conceived today serves absolutely no useful purpose for taxonomical categorisation, that's why race realism is not a popular belief among biologists.

>>12862294
Deplatforming nazi bullshit neither supports nor hurts Amazon's bottom line, this is good PR on their part but has no effect on my political views or my desire to confiscate their wealth

>>12868166
Proof?

>>12868212
They are the most significant and visible minority in the country, and the relationship between them and whites has been the cause of many of the social issues it faces. There’s no way to make them not relevant.

>>12868166
Are you trying to imply Africans weren't oppressed?

>>12867138
>I think the theory side of CoC has a number of flaws

Give me some examples not read the book. Before It was banned amazon wanted 20 quid it.

>>12868301
It was a hot enough commodity for in-house inventory. Not that it is devastating, it is counter-market.

>>12868300
>Race doesn't exist at a genetic level
>Every prominent biologist that disagrees (cough Watson) gets unpersoned to continue the narrative

Wasn't the book edited by a Jew, Seymour Itzkoff?

They are well within their rights to, but it doesn't seem very principled to me.

>>12868324
You're essentially making the creationist argument: "Scientists are really creationists, they're just too scared to admit it because the evolutionists will have them fired!"
It's pretty easy to explain away the lack of academic support of your belief by asserting that all the academics that would believe you are just being silenced.

>>12861168
>>12861187
>pro-capitalism pol hacks discovering the wonders of capitalism

I lol every time.

>>12862209
a lot of stores in my area are shutting down due to amazon lol

>>12867149
Interesting clip. I suggest that anyone that watches from your marker first watch the first several minutes of the clip to get the feel for the exchange.

>>12860031
Why do third worlders do this thing where they put a ( in front of their words?

>>12868385
Lmao, imagine being this deluded into thinking that expressing that race exists genetically doesn't get your fired even if you helped discover the structure of DNA and headed the Human Genome Project, even better than giving no evidence for the actual argument that race doesn't exist itself

>>12867991
You read his text versus greentext wrong.

>>12868385
Dude Watson was literally stripped from his titles, it's not just a case of not getting funding because you go against the mainstream consensus.

>>12868439
>giving no evidence for the actual argument that race doesn't exist itself
What do you mean by 'race doesn't exist itself'? Even race realists would admit that race is a social construct. The onus is on them to explain why racial categories are useful. Again, you can create any number of races you want because everybody differs biologically. Height, eye colour, hair colour, etc., are no less arbitrary traits by which you can categorise people than skin colour. Yet nobody believes in the green-eyed race...

>>12868492
no more arbitrary*

How is race not partly biological because of ethnicity?

>>12868492
So any actual arguments or is the idea that social constructs correspond to genetic constructs too hard to address?

>>12868300
>Pic related is a quote from Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics.
They also thought that bees spontaneously generated from the carcasses of dead horses. The Greeks are not without fault.

So do the people that say all this stuff about race not being real therefore reject their race? Oh do they still say theyre "white" or whatever? Is this all just a song and dance or do they actually stick to their guns?

>>12868300
>Race does not exist at the genetic level
What? Are you for real? Or are you just being obtuse in your reductionism a la "well it's all chemicals and neural impulses so love or other emotions don't actually exist"

>>12868492
Would you say the same about culture?

>>12868021
>>12867209
>This poster brings up niggers to short-circuit American brains and derail the discussion

You JIDF niggers GLOW IN THE FUCKING DARK

>>12869494
>blacks are uniquely oppressed
>problematic
It's like they don't even try to hide who they are.

>>12867138
>That old Voltaire quote
Can anyone give sauce on this? I was told that this attribution to Voltaire is bullshit; that the quote is actually of modern origin.