/lit/ - Literature

pic related is an article by the far left journal "Libération" that came out in the 70's.
The caption reads 'let's teach love to our children", this picture has been censored, the original wasn't.

>>16069908
whoops

If a child can be responsible for a crime, why can't I have sex with them?

T. Greatest thinkers of 20th c

>>16069904
A child's development is shaped by their surrounding. If their environment requires them to be a self sufficient individual early, there's no problem in marriage if the parents are involved and the child has the right to refuse. But now, even 21 year olds are taken advantage of because of the stifled mental development that obviously has it's own pros and cons, but I assume it's a necessity by which our culture operates. The idea of age of consent during the 70's was a new concept, therefore oppositions are not strange and are not "pedophilic" in nature unless the author specifically prays upon the innocence and the weakness and fragility of children.

They're middle to upperclass deviants probably attended elite pedo events. They're also trend-driven and oversocialised, naturally they fall into fanatically supporting whatever becomes popular in academia. They have no values or principles outside of their feeling of authority and the joy of others seeing them as such. Maybe a lot of them aren't pedos or dislike it, but it pays to be trendy especially when sensational.

>>16069915
.....

I now believe God exists and punished Deleuze and Foucault with suffering in death. Although they should have suffered much more, like bleeding slowly to death while being impaled

>>16069957
this but unironically
Reich got it right

>>16069997
>still parotting Mccarthyist Unaboomer sophistry
Nice try projecting pseud.

>>16070710
Firstly they wanted to legalize sex with children since birth so none of their arguments have ANY merit, logic or reason and they are rotting in hell right now, literally or metaphorically. Second, Reich is a jew

Funny how anglos perspective of french intellectuals is in 100% accordance with the CIA declassified paper called deflection of french intellectuals. Mmmh, turns out anglos are pathetic brainwashed creatures incapable of free will? Surprising

>>16069904
There’s literally nothing wrong with it.

>>16070743
I am not an Anglo or Am*Rican, and I hate all Frenchoids after the enlightenment and French revolution

>>16070743
>angloids are pathetic brainwashed creatures
>the village retard should be able to rape 10 year old girls in a field

french fries have some interesting ideas

>massive jewish-anglo pedophile ring, child traficking mafia about to be brought to light
>its the french pedophiles!!!!
"french" in this case means undercover german agents like Sartre, and the hordes of jewish intellectuals who France was kind enough to provide shelter to.

>>16070769
I don't give a shit what you are, you hate all "frenchoids" because you are knee deep in anglo propaganda.

>>16070819
Address my point: how come what anglos think represent the french intellectual landscape is actually the judeo-protestant minority that the CIA sponsored? Here, let me help you:

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP86S00588R000300380001-5.PDF

>french intellectuals are pedophiles
>france kindly shelters pedophiles
>this is somehow the anglos fault

>>16069904
What was their justification?

>>16069904
>Not Camus, Merleau-Ponty or Baudrillard

Ahh thanks god the guys I like aren’t pedos

>>16069904
why why?

>>16070744
you did not answer the question why, faggot.

>>16069977
and why is this?

>>16069904
http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Foucault_on_anti-pedophile_hysteria

>...There will then emerge a society of dangers made up of those in danger and those who bear danger. And sexuality will no longer be a form of behavior with certain precise prohibitions but rather a kind of danger that lingers, an omnipresent phantom that lightly passes among men and women, children and adults, and finally simply among adults. Sexuality will become the threat looming above all social bonds, relations among generations as among individuals; On this shadow, on this phantom, on this fear the power structure will assume control by means of a seemingly generous and blanket legislation thanks largely to a series of timely interventions that will probably involve judicial institutions supported by the medical profession. And there will arise a new order of sexual control: in the second half of the twentieth century sex will be decriminalized only to reappear as a danger, and a universal one at that. There lies the real danger.

He thought society in an effort to protect the vulnerable was in a process of becoming increasingly totalitarian... "sexual assault", "child abuse", etc, etc would just be the Trojan horse to institutionalize new forms of social control worse than the older cruder ones.

>>16071079
There was none, they were just literal child molester sodomites.

>>16071121
Its why I only read the philosophy of those three from modern France, thank God they held their own and didn't get sucked into their circles

>>16071185
Foucualt's whole philosophy was just him trying to justify his degeneracy, impose it on society and make it legal, going against all of nature and reality itself. Its poetic how he died of AIDS in the end like a faggot

A reminder that LGBT movement included stuff like NAMBLA until they were forced to kick them out under threat of no funding.

>>16071185
>anti cp internet measures being used to censor viewpoints and turn people into cybernetic models that are sold in bulk
Again he was right

>>16071176
Oh my b. BECAUSE there’s nothing wrong with it, nigger.

>>16070719
>gets triggered over one word and his mind goes blank
it's a good descriptor. mr. i have an identity crisis if anyone doesn't prostrate before my technocrats.

>>16070833
>>16070819
this paper never implied CIA sponsored anything. you dont read a shit. its bascially a somewhat essay of the mid 80´s french political climate.
they explain how france goes from full communist to disillusion with marxism and USSR. but like it was a natural flow not like something sponsored or orchestrated.
something like how the hippies transformed into burgoise yuppies in the 80´s. again, you dont read shit.

>>16071319
why?

>reads lolita
>gets filtered by all the french
"fucking french pedos fucking faggots frogs reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"

Stop making this thread.

</thread>

>>16070826
>>16070833
>knee deep in anglo propaganda
you seem to think we just think they are pedos. No, I think many here have read D&G, Sartre, Foucault, etc, and know that they said many usefull things, but it is true that they supported the acts of know pedophiles, people that today are viewed with extreme shame by the french themselves.

>>16071181
School system. Food surplus. Longer lifespan. Medical researchers. Overbearing parents.

>>16071467
>this paper never implied CIA sponsored anything
It's literally called "deflection of the french intellectuals". What does the CIA do? They spend millions doing write ups on competitor countries? for fun? You've clearly haven't read the paper though, because they in fact explicitly talk about subversion of marxist intellectuals. It's not like we have millions of documented case of the CIA doing exactly this. Kys glowie.

>but like it was a natural flow not like something sponsored or orchestrated.
Yes, that's the entire point of intelligence agencies and cybernetics. Why does the CIA sponsor every side of every conflict? Because they've read Hegel unlike the illiterates on this board.

>>16071526
>Why does the CIA sponsor every side of every conflict? Because they've read Hegel unlike the illiterates on this board.
go back to twitter, you'd feel more comfortable there with schizo faggots like Kantbot, nigger

>>16071526
>Thinks the CIA made up the pedo french thing

>>16071532
? You should do some homework and read up on the development of russian and american cybernetics, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about haha why even bother replying to my post to share your own narcissistic opinion of what the CIA ought to do?

>>16071556
>incapable of reading and understanding a two sentence post
corn syrup'd

>>16071526
>they in fact explicitly talk about subversion of marxist intellectuals.
show me. you are implying CIA subvert it, and that is just a plain and stupid lie when everybody can read the fucking paper.

>Why does the CIA sponsor every side of every conflict?
ok. maybe. but, again, that paper is not a prove of that. that paper dont shows or explain a shady orchestration of CIA to "deflect french intellectuals". they are talking about how, in the flows of time, french intelectuals become anti-USSR. more or less. they talk from a historical side more than a "how we can manipulate this french bastards" side.
the prove you search maybe is in another paper but definitively not in that.

>>16071121
>Not Camus, Merleau-Ponty
It's not like they had much of a choice.