/lit/ - Literature

>>15875950
>steer

Pinker is kind of a cunt, but I must say I do agree with you.

>>15875950
>t. butthurt Jazz aficionado

Does anyone else find it a strange coincidence that the only guys arguing like this also happen to be at the absolute top of the pyramid?

>>15875950
Read more russian literature.

>>15876036
I'm sure these people aren't in any way profiting by defending the status quo with le rational centrist argument

>>15876036
Being at the top allows us to look further, anon. To see more.

>>15875950
Your post reeks of low intelligence.
How smart people and midwits read:
>pick a topic they're interested in. Formulate the questions they want answers to. Pick a shitton of books on the subject. Read them, take notes until you get a clear picture of what kind of information is out there and hopefully answer your questions. For every book arguing one way, read a counterpart which argues the other way. Formulate your own synthesis or conclude that one of them is a retard who doesn't know what he's talking about.
How retards read:
>Hear someone namedrop a personality.
>Want to keep up with their peers, decide to read up on them.
>Read just one book which covers tons of different topics and questions by that person.
>Don't even bother looking up whether or not there is anyone that disagrees and to understand the general consensus on these questions from other authors.
>Formulate your own conclusions on the topic and questions based on one book.
>move on to another book on completely different topics
There is no need to ignore anyone, if you're not a retard. To the contrary, you should get your hands on everyone you can, especially if there are people telling you to ignore them.
Perhaps you're just young and that's why you think in such an immature way. I hope that's the case.
>inb4 people who misunderstood y Gasset start shouting at me for being a mass-man who thinks only experts are allowed to have an opinion on a topic
Never said you need to be an expert. That's a gross exaggeration. The experts have already done the work for you, all you have to do is to read what they have written. No one is asking you to perform original research. Everyone should be able to synthesize a number of books and article on a subject to form their own opinion, especially in this day and age.

Also, this obviously does not apply to fiction. That's completely different, although you should still strive to at least understand the work in its proper context.

>>15875950
No, anon. One must fight. Don't run from anything. Strategic retreats and flee to fight another die.

>>15875950
Elite technocratic rule can work, but only if you have the trust of the masses. And the trust of the masses has been broken as a result of the absolute trainwreck that elite-approved global capitalism has turned out to be. The plebs may not be able to articulate it, but they do know that their jobs are gone (sent overseas), that trillions were wasted creating a terrorist breeding ground in Iraq, that trillions more have been wasted bailing out the bankers (who continue to give themselves lavish bonuses). Now they're on opioids just watching the neighborhood around them morph into an culturally alien favela in front of their eyes. Until that trust is repaired, the masses will keep voting for demagogues who feed off their resentments.

If the technocrats ever get the ball again, I hope they strive to avoid fucking up quite so spectacularly.

>>15876063
>To see more.
Whoah, is this why the eye is at the top as well?

>>15875950
>our civilization is not at the brink of collapse

"If I pretend the apocalypse isn't happening it doesn't happen"

>>15876153
Why, anon?

>>15876036
Well duh, it's not like Trump's actually going to kill America. What are you going to do after?

>>15876058
Golly anon you sure sound smart. Tell me more about profiting by defending the status quo with le rational centrist argument! And I mean in specific terms, obviously- who, how, etc. You know the drill, you're a smart person.
...By the way,
>le rational centrist argument
Why does everyone call you a hate group? Why is it that whenever someone asks an alt righter to explain how they're actually not evil they go quiet? You try that shit on a liberal and they'd laugh in your fucking face. Evil is a pretty excessive term.

>>15875950
Social Democracy is a mainstream mode of government that has consistently delivered stable, reasonably harmonious societies. That's why the stormniggers, lolbies, commies and antifa likes to pretend they're the only dish on offer, so they wont come off quite as insane as they actually are.

>>15876150
Good post, but they can just move to another country and probably still maintain some level of influence over the countries they fled while raping kids. Our elites aren't people that can be reasoned with, persuaded, protested, or made policy for.

>>15875950
Fuck. I hate this so much, but the older I get and the more books I read, the more I start to think that this is true

>>15876182
>Social Democracy is a mainstream mode of government that has consistently delivered stable, reasonably harmonious societies
While bombing the fuck out of other societies and maintaining fresh child meat for its politicians and financiers.

>>15876199
See, you're reduced to not taking your meds to even come up with arguments against it that looks viable, to yourself. The only reason it's not universally practiced is because rich kikes want to pay less taxes.

You sound like a jazz apologist OP
Hand over the discs and nobody gets hurt

>>15875950
>robust redistributive policies
Um yeah. They kind of forgot about that part for the past 40 or so years.

>>15876231
>my ideology is so shit that forcibly drugging people up to keep them docile is required to even attempt it

>>15876231
>come up with arguments against it that looks viable
The constant wars by democracies and the periodic nature of pedophiles among our elites are a clear refutation against stability and "reasonable" harmony. Both of these examples are widely known. Arguments aren't needed for common knowledge, but it is a refutation.

Also, I want to address some of the words you've used:

>rich kikes
>stormnigger
>taking your meds
Your posts are becoming more and more noticeable in multiple threads. There was an anon last night that pointed out your posting style (the cyberpunk threads from memory?), and now I've noticed you as well. So he was right. Your posting style is this: You make a claim, usually with some highly emotional language, then when questioned you flip to the opposite emotional side (I'm not sure why, do you think you are persuading me by saying "rich kikes"? I'm not a /pol/lack), while at the same time saying the poster you are disagreeing with is mentally ill. Hopefully other anons will start noticing your bullshit more and we can up with a name for you as a poster as you seem like an aggravating idiot.

>>15876335
Sounds like you got btfo by this anon in multiple threads to the point where it has left a permanent mark in your psyche. How embarrassing for you.

>Pinker was born in Montreal, Quebec, in 1954, to a middle-class Jewish family.
The only useful function of wikipedia these days is having subsersives revealed instantly.

>>15876388
Yes, this guy is a complete horseshit, but the idea of saving the project of modernity is good

>>15876369
>How embarrassing for you.
Less embarrassing than someone who has to shift his arguments by trying to appeal emotionally with polar opposite views, because he has no way to rationally persuade people. Very interesting that the poster count didn't change with your post btw.

>>15876274
Olanzapine comes in three exciting flavors!

Liberalism does not know its enemy and you cannot maintain it with funkopops. It is known.

>>15876231
>If I deny what's been happening for the past 30+ years in American foreign policy, then I can just call people I don't like crazy
Retard

Does anyone still believe in "liberal democracy" as even existent at this moment in time? I think it's been shown that you can engineer a belief in pretty much anything, so why is "popular will" important? If you can get men to cut their penises off, what CAN'T you get them to believe?

>>15876447
I, being the anon writing about Social Democracy, am very flattered that you think I have a recognizable posting style and I agree I do: an artful and highly intelligent posting style which also exhibits I believe the great pleasure I derive from making anonymous posts on this website.

Nevertheless, some details in your description of your proposed anonymous nemesis makes me surmise that He is not really Me, but most likely an amalgam of different posters. In other words he is anon.

>>15876036
This isn't true, it's generally middle of the spectrum type of people who argue like this.

>>15875950
Oh yeah everything's just great lol cough

>>15876750
>I think it's been shown that you can engineer a belief in pretty much anything, so why is "popular will" important

Thank you for very succinctly illustrating that the argument against democracy is usually sprung from conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories about the hidden undemocratic nature of our nominally democratic societies become an argument in favor of tyranny. And true to form, Stalinist Russia and Hitlerite Germany were indeed infested with various conspiracy theories and superstitions which the PTB conveniently could exploit to manipulate the populace, see e.g. The Doctors Plot, etcetera.

The Better Angels of Our Nature.

>>15875950
Incredibly based.

A successful project for whom? The liberal enlightenment hasn't been good for anyone except capitalists and the petit-bourgeoisie, which is like maybe 15% of the world population, but probably closer to like 10%.

>>15875950
>robust redistributive policies
>environmental protection
>liberal democracy

My god anon, you better not be an American.

>>15877399
Poverty in the 3rd world has declined greatly the last 30 years

>>15875950
Also whether or not it deserves continuation, the enlightenment model that you speak of no longer exists. And no, a book written by Adorno ~70 years ago didn’t kill it off. The market drives any kind of scientific research, and even In the social sciences more and more these days.

>>15875950
>as a matter of fact there's never been times as good as ours
Behold, the Last Man
I know this is bait but on the off chance it’s not, who the fuck cares? Why not aspire for more or for something different anyways? Don’t be so ready to pull the wool over your own eyes because it’s slightly more comforting than having to think

>>15877432
Yeah, and nobody denies that capitalist mass production reduces poverty and gives people access to goods and services they otherwise wouldn't have, but the cost of that is WAY larger than the average liberal is willing to admit.

Literally 2000 people own more wealth than the next 4.6 billion people, this kind of wealth inequality could never happen under feudalism, and liberals don't realize that the implications of this for the future is that the wealthy will eventually own everything, including governments, and there's literally nothing anyone can do about it.

>>15877432
Anecdotal, not representative of over all increase in quality of life. There’s absolutely a brickwall of corruption, cyclical poverty, and systematic breakdown that cannot be overcome in these countries, mostly due to how much the rest of the world benefits from having stunted their potential. Really, take that “it’s getting better all the time” shit to Yemen or Venezuela or Sudan and see what they have to say about it.

>>15877459
And eventually, they'll use that wealth and ownership to ensure nobody else owns anything, and in doing so, create a perpetually indebted society to them.

"We own this house, and you will work to live there; you will not earn enough to not work for any period of time. This is not slavery, though, because you have the choice to leave."

I find it incredibly disturbing, because we all know that people will never be able to pay their debt to the wealthy tyrants; the cost will *always* increase. It's loan sharking on a global scale.

>>15877480
They don't even have to do that; when they are rich enough to hire private armies, governments will become obsolete and we'll live under an anarcho-tyrannical corporate capitalist hellscape immediately which doesn't have to respect anyone's rights to anything.

The only way they could've been stopped was if someone actually used anti-trust powers against them 20 years ago, but now it's too late.

>>15877432
No thanks to free market capitalism, contrary to what Pangloss Pinker claims. Read Bad Samaritans.

>>15877507
>The only way they could've been stopped was if someone actually used anti-trust powers against them 20 years ago, but now it's too late.
Trust me, anon, they'll never need the hire private armies: governments of major world powers are already in on this deal. Nearly every time the UK parliament deliberates on issuing a contract to someone, a convenient number of politicians become substantially richer, not because of any bribes or what have you, but because they're financially invested in the companies they award contracts to.

>>15876150
>people don’t trust elites because elites are just as terrible (if not more stemming from their delusions of grandeur) than the rabble at running things.
>what we need are the better elites

>>15877459
>Literally 2000 people own more wealth than the next 4.6 billion people
This is a development that has a very specific cause - Maggie&Ronnies reanimation of libertardian voodoo trickle down economics anno ca 1975 - and an obvious remedy - do not ever vote for that stupid ass shit...
>>15877472
>There’s absolutely a brickwall of corruption, cyclical poverty, and systematic breakdown that cannot be overcome in these countries
See above. Literally all you have to do is to vote for higher taxes on the rich and strong Social Democratic government, but instead people flail in all kinds of retarded directions, e.g. fascism. I think this is mostly rightwingtards unable to face down the fact that libertarianism and trickle down are some mendacious soul-crushingly retarded bullshit.

>>15877507
so serfdom all over again. Which has been the goal since america made it cool to do away with monarchy's . has anyone on lit actually read the constitution at all?

>>15877533
>all you have to do is vote
>in countries where where there are literal tyrants
Oh, anon, I...

I bet you think Americans have free elections too right?

>civilization not on the brink of collapse
>what is the great replacement

>>15877521
That's true. The bourgeois state does capital's bidding, but one of the problems of a liberal democracy is that there's always a potential that the masses can vote in someone that actually makes it harder for capital to continue to accumulate and monopolize.

If, on the other hand, the state as an entity becomes obsolete, they'll never have to worry about that again.

>>15877553
If they actually were governed by literal tyrants you would be able to give us the name of those tyrants. Specific individuals. Not some vague faceless blob like "the jews". Things in real life is run by real humans with real names, and the more important the stuff they control, the harder for them to hide.

>>15876150
Nice, try, but it doesn't work like that.

>>15877432
1. Almost all of that has occurred in places like China and India, which are not liberal democracies by any stretch of the imagination.
2. If you take a closer look at the United States, you'll notice that there has been a serious trend towards disintegration and immiseration for at least the past fifty years. Refer to Charles Murray's Coming Apart, if you'd like to see what I mean.
3. Income and wealth are not good in and of themselves. There are other value systems according to which much that is important, including the human bonds that bring men genuine happiness and satisfaction in life, has been either lost or deliberately weakened as a result of the success of the liberal view of man. If we accept that this conception of man as a social creature who requires not material wealth, but spiritual and social nourishment to thrive, then it becomes difficult to accept the words of men like Pinker.

>>15877597
Do you mean in the context of America? Because I can give you a thorough list of policy makers who have made it their lives mission to fuck shit up who also happen to be unvote-outtable, or have at least simultaneously pushed policy that in turn secures their position for many more years to come. And you know this. This isn’t some secret knowledge. What the fuck do you think gerrymandering is about? You can google this yourself. As for the literal nations ruled by tyrants and oligarchs, you’re just being a retard. Yemen sentenced its own President to death for Christ’s sakes. You’re either baiting or purposefully naive.

>>15877597
>harder for them to hide
This is the perfect illustration of your binary mindset, that people will just recognize injustice and be able to do anything about it. Not all political actors are equal, that should be self-evident.

>>15876114
I'm angry that a frogposter made such a correct post.

slave

>>15877649
>congressmen in gerrymandered districts are literally tyrants

Well I guess you had to either try to come up with some bullshit or else not respond at all, and at least you tried. The rest, about unelected policymakers amounts to either confusion or sophistry. The people who legislate policy or execute on the laws are elected. Running the US government takes a shitload of people, and you cant bloody well demand that they all be voted lest the country be declared a dictatorship. Fucking ridiculous. Kill yourself.

(This is not to say that there isnt deeply unethical shit in policymaking, e.g. legislators just putting their names on shit they got from some industry lobbyist.)

>>15876063
>Too understand the bottom I need to be at the top

>>15877753
>unironically working for the CIA
just kill yourself glownigger, your soul already belongs to Satan

>>15877649
>>15877657
You guys are arguing with a mentally ill troll. The post you are responding >>15877597 to says:
>Not some vague faceless blob like "the jews"
He's all the poster here >>15877533 arguing for social democratic government, yet the same poster arguing for social democracy with similar language and the same issue (taxes) says in this post >>15876231
>The only reason it's not universally practiced is because rich kikes want to pay less taxes.

He's shifting his language depending on who is he arguing with.

>>15875950
he gay

>>15877657
It's a simple question because I dont want to spend time discussing ghosts retardedly conjured by some proles brain on a bender.

If someone is running important shit - from the stage or from behind the scene - then that someone has a name. Let's hear it, and maybe we can actually hold some asshole responsible for some stupidity visited upon us for once.

ass

>>15877777
quints of truth

>>15877777
Hello, GET department?

>>15877774
>rich kikes
That's just standard /pol/ vernacular. To me it means the filthy rich, and nothing more. You're the weirdo, or at least the autismo, for reading more into it..

>>15877769
WRONG! I'm literally the reincarnated Terry Davis and what I'm offering you is nothing less than the true gospel.

The Devil already made you blind. Claw out your eyes - then at least you'll have a fighting chance.

>>15877797
>>15877817
everyone can see you for the deceptive gaslighting chameleon glownigger that you are
kill yourself

>>15877797
>That's just standard /pol/ vernacular.
What have you the ludicrous idea that you should post here?

>>15877797
Nah, I caught you out. You're tailoring your ""arguments"" to who you think you are arguing with and also doing the very things that you are accusing people of. You accused the other anon of sophistry, but that's what you are doing. To say this:
>To me it means the filthy rich, and nothing more
Together with this:
>Not some vague faceless blob like "the jews"
Is contradictory. Both "rich kikes" and "filthy rich" are still "vague faceless blobs." So you're not holding to the standards of your own argument. You're a sophist, a troll, and there's something wrong with you.

>>15877797
doesnt look that way
looks like you got busted

>>15877797
lol he got ya son

>>15877797
The standard /pol/ vernacular of someone who just spent several posts calling right wingers retards? You seem like an open minded chap to take on the language of your adversaries, lol.

>>15877829
take meds
>>15877839
to trigger you?
>>15877852
>Is contradictory. Both "rich kikes" and "filthy rich" are still "vague faceless blobs." So you're not holding to the standards of your own argument.
Maybe it looks that way to people with chromosomal deficiencies. Arguing that countries arent really democracies because vague faceless blobs run them by puppetmastery from behind the scene naturally leads to the question what the vague faceless blob is made up of. When there is never an answer forthcoming beyond "jews", or "lizards" on the most general level, then it really isnt worth wasting time on unless you are a stormnigger (and I concede that you probably are, so ymmv)

That many rich faggots would dearly like to pay less taxes and spend a lot of money to have that view given ample space in public discourse is uncontroversial, approaching a tautology.

>>15875950
>there's never been times as good as ours.
I dont think the orgy porgy compares to having artistic depth and merit. I do not enjoy living in a civilization of rap and mcdonalds, yes I can escape it, but not easily.

>>15875950
>ignore adorno
>embrace culture industry and capitalistic degeneration
yeah no thanks senpai

>>15876182
>Social Democracy is a mainstream mode of government that has consistently delivered stable, reasonably harmonious societies.
By what metric? Rome could go through multiple civil wars and regime changes over the course of a century, but the fundamental system and social order itself would usually continue with no major hiccups. Meanwhile modern democracies threaten to collapse under their own weight if everything doesn't go according to plan for even a second.

>>15876036
>this is the power of leftists
fucking retard. if you've heard about someone because they're known for their thinking or writing they're probably going to be well-off.

>>15876734
Basado

>>15877432
yeah and the number of niggers has exploded. surely that turns out well

>>15876036
It feeds on your complacency

>>15875950
>there's never been times as good as ours
>war is virtually impossible these days
Pick one and only one.

>>15878266
Whereas you consider civil war and literal motherfucking potentates mere hiccups w/r/t Rome you apparently consider them proofs of having already collapsed under ones own weight for democracies. The conclusion is that you are gay for centurions.