/lit/ - Literature

Abraham, or whoever wrote that shit

marx is certainly up there. no workers paradise, just mass death and suffering on unimaginable scales, totalitarianism, and a door opened to all sorts of degenerate self destruction

>>17733756
You don’t know what you’re talking about, Donny.

>>17733661
Marx and Luther. There's no one else in that league I think.

>>17733814
t. Catholic-authoritarian
>we had it nice and sweet till doez guys

Nietzsche.

>>17733782
i know exactly what I am talking about

>>17733863

>>17733661
Plato ruined western civilization forever, it all went downhill from there.

Out of the way, here come the real contenders

>>17733897

>>17733878
wow you sure showed me lol

>>17733848
I don't blame them in totality, clearly there were broad historical developments in motion, but if you had to select individual authors in whose footsteps catastrophic carnage followed it's those guys. Where I'm from half the people died as a result of the reformation wars. Communism almost ended life on this earth and in its effects on human societies can only be compared to the great plagues. Without these authors it is imaginable that these things wouldn't have happened. You could argue that protestantism created idiosyncratic goods and that's possible but I don't see it. The relations between formerly united cultures became utterly poisoned. In my country this was the case into the 1970s or so, creating divisions even within villages.

>>17733907
Marx was a German. He wasn’t alive when Lenin was screwing up. Couldn’t give his advice.
How about a picture of the mass death and suffering the capitalists caused? Oh. Wasn’t real capitalism, right.
I’m not even a Marxist and I know more than you.

>>17733904
This mf right here

me, as a result of my diary desu senpai

>>17733915
Redpill me on Catholicism vs Protestantism. Why should I convert to Catholicism?

>>17733661
Karl Marx
Frederich Engels
GWF Hegel
Immanuel Kant
Baruch Spinoza
Michel de Montaigne
Gilles Deleuze
Michel Foucault
W.E.B. Du Bois
William James
John Dewey
Charles Sanders Peirce
Alfred North Whitehead
Maurice Merleau-Ponty
Gyorgy Lukacs
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Theodor Adorno
Max Horkheimer
Walter Benjamin
Ernst Bloch
Isaak Illich Rubin
Moishe Postone
Michael Heinrich

>>17733915
Following the invention of the printing press people took to literacy and discovered the church was full of shit (really it was the books) and the questioning was inevitable.
The advanced state-capitalist system was already killing people when Marx and others attempted to figure out why the world was becoming so hellish. Without Marx may e other revolutionaries would have made a better Eastern European socialism, but it wasn’t Marx that did any of it. It certainly wasn’t communism

>>17733661

>>17733924
haha holy fuck are you genuinely retarded? the red army was not only inspired but directly enabled and thrust into power via marx's writings, and then proceeded to move across the heartland of russia village to village confiscating all food down to the last grain to fuel the revolution causing mass starvation and cannibalism, thats a pretty horrible impact for a writer to have, hence why he certainly belongs in this thread. can you actually give asingle argument as to why he doesn't deserve to be mentioned here? you certainly have balls to say "I know more than you" while showing yourself to be completely and utterly ignorant. im a little bit confused why you would make yourself look retarded in a failed attempt to defend communists if you arent even a marxist lol

>>17733952
>Michel de Montaigne
waht

>>17733924
Capitalism is just a term to describe spontaneous economic rationalization. It doesn't really make sense to talk about it causing suffering, it's societies becoming more efficient which I guess can empower them to cause suffering but it's not like this is fundamentally avoidable under any system. We've been doing that since the dawn of time.

Marx can be credited with packaging socialist taught in a manner that allowed it to become convincing. It's not clear if another thinker would've been able to do that before the revolutionary classes became fat through capitalism. We're talking just a few decades here. I really think he's responsible for the largest unnecessary destruction of human life in history.

>>17733948
Sorry I'm not the right person for this. I'm limiting my argument here in terms of unnecessary division.

>>17733963
Derrida's influence has mostly been a facile nuisance, and Deleuze was only able to enter into the current tableau of tranny-on-the-internet through the inroads of his contemporaries and predecessors, even if he had contentions contradicting many of theirs. Foucault was one such contemporary, and has actually been the cause of a lot of damage.

>>17734007
Fair enough

>paved the way for modern YA

▶
>>17733991
You are an idiot. Maybe worse than that other idiot talking to me above. Stop making excuses for this monstrous system that’s been killing people to this day, you flipping buffoon

>>17733661
The Book of Reddit

>>17733907
Based

>>17734036
why wont you explain why marx does not belong in this thread despite the fact that his writings were directly used to justify the worst atrocities in human history? you're calling me an idiot for citing him, so it should be pretty easy for you to explain why it is so wrong if only an idiot would make the mistake

>>17734036
Moralizing, not very Marxian of you.

>>17733961
I did mention the broader developments but the person of Luther had relevance in this. You call Catholic tradition bullshit but this included things like toleration of Jews and not burning witches. It is entirely rational to think that reform could've been the outcome of mass education instead we got sectarian wars and an epidemic of biblical 'literalism' and the origin of these developments were highly focused around the person of Luther.

>>17733991
>Capitalism is just a term to describe spontaneous economic rationalization. It doesn't really make sense to talk about it causing suffering, it's societies becoming more efficient
More efficient at what? For whom? Although I (and, notably, Marx -- he considered capitalism the most rapid progressive force in human history) would agree with this characterisation in a general sense, there is no single objective metric of efficiency, but only things that are effective in light of some certain desired end -- in this case, the profit motive and self-interest. There are other forms of social organisation, based on other value judgements. The industrial revolution consigned giant swathes of the population to unrelenting pauperism. And the world is headed toward all kinds of upheavals and disasters as a result of human industrial and economic activity. I don't know why you don't think it makes sense to talk about capitalism causing suffering (unless you mean, it doesn't make sense to talk about it in terms of moral blame). The agricultural revolution caused suffering, tangibly -- doesn't it make sense to say that?

>>17734036
You don't have to write anything if you can't formulate an argument, I just perceive impotent rage in this. That you have some conspiracy theory view of what capitalism constitutes is nothing new to me.

>>17733961
>IT WASN'T REAL COMMUNISM
its all so tiresome

Marx, Nietzsche, Bentham, Voltaire, maybe Kant or Schopenhauer

>>17734103
It’s as plan as the the Japanese bombing Perl Harbor. “Tiresome” my ass. Grow a brain cell for it

>>17734114
have you ever put together a single cohesive argument in your life? jesus christ...

>>17733749
Why do you think Abraham is responsible for things people did a thousand years after the teachings of a random Jew who lived a thousand years after Abraham? Atheists are truly the most low IQ people on the internet.

>>17733961
>Following the invention of the printing press people took to literacy and discovered the church was full of shit
It's funny to see this sort of liberal baggage in leftism, it's why leftists can never have the sort of hard and competent outlook that other extremists may hold. Rational people woke up etc. The truth is the majority of literate people were Christians up until maybe 30 or 40 years ago. What swept it away was the growing opposition between Christianity and the dictates of a capitalist state, not some Great Librard Awakening in which the people did what they had never done before and calmly and rationally dissected their own true beliefs.

>>17734114
>plan
Plain

>>17734127
Yeah. They’re ignored.
Not in the mood for the idiocy levels ITT so I’m tapping out. Not a defeat.

>>17734142
>I just rolled up and insulted everyone then completely and utterly failed to back up my position like i always do
>Not a defeat though i swear
you must be really damn insecure to feel the need to add that cherry on top of it all lol

>>17734142
I still never got a response to why you think IQ tests are a pseudoscience

>>17734076
Technology aside what is developed is efficiency and extent of human cooperation. It's the story of civilization. 'Capitalism' is really a somewhat irrational snapshot view of this process.
The industrial revolution created these people in the first place, before it they wouldn't have been born, there were no surplus resources. 'Pauperization' is a fundamental misinterpretation of that period of time which btw goes back to British aristocrats lying about it so they could keep their laborers. Obviously these people suffered horribly but the alternative was non-existence.
Concerning the end game of human development; sure, it might all end in catastrophe. But aside from maybe resource depletion that's not really avoidable and doesn't have anything to do with a particular system, we will continue to develop just like that was the case with the Soviet Union or Communist China. And you could just as well make the speculation that if we do not rapidly develop then at some point a planet killer from outer space will destroy us all and unlike the concerns you put forth that's pretty much a statistical certainty. I think given the average something of that magnitude is already overdue.

>>17734187
I don't think it's irrational to single out 'capitalism' as a unique phenomena in the same way you would single out feudalism, and describe their differentiating characteristics (obviously there's a lot of complexity and nuance though).
>Obviously these people suffered horribly but the alternative was non-existence.
That implies there's something to be lost by not existing in the first place. We breed trillions of animals in abject conditions for the purpose of eating them. I doubt we would think it a net positive if aliens came and bred trillions of humans for that purpose, just because more people got to experience life.
Human society is, presumably, made for humans, and we have, or would like to have, some kind of agency over its characteristics and how we live inside it. This is the point of social democracy, mitigating the rougher edges of capitalism through social security and redistributive efforts.
>that's not really avoidable and doesn't have anything to do with a particular system
A 'system' is just a way of describing human activity though. And the human activity we call capitalism is a major causal influence on climate change. So is communism, which also emphasises mass industry. That doesn't mean these things are simply "bad" but I think it's dishonest to say that environmental destruction has "nothing to do with them". If we still lived as Catholic agrarians, we wouldn't have these problems. That doesn't mean we *should* be living like that, but that's the reality.

>>17733756
Not Lenin?

>>17734142
Jesus fucking christ, fake butterfag is even worse than actual butterfag

>>1773374
Epicurus, Stirner, Nietzsche.

The fucking bible

>>17733661
karl marx
adolf hitler
ernest becker
richard dawkins but only for "the god delusion", selfish gene is a net benefit
ayn rand

muhammad

God

>>17733848
t. Luther
>le nail le wall le le le le
faggot

>>17734128
He literally thinks that because he saw the term 'abrahamic religions' for the first time on this very image board and immediately took to rampant speculation upon his discovery

>>17734264
Lenin had a brain, Marx was a retard gorilla nigger

If we're going by individual books, not people who inspired the writer of said book, Luther, Karl Marx, Muhammad; in that order.

>>17734526
>>17734513
>>17734449
I second these

>>17734539
Na na na na.
t. Atheist. Faggot.

>>17734049
does Jesus also belong in this thread then?

>>17733661

>>17735330
how so?

>>17735333
Complacency of the patrimonial classes and acceptance of the ignorance of the labor base to the detriment of Western society is directly inspired by his framing of labor in the Protestant ethic.

>>17733924
Not him, but Marx belongs in this thread because his ideas predictably (even to his peers at the time and based on the words of many revolutionaries over the course of the 19th century far before the Russian revolution) led to bloody conflict. The European revolutions of the 19th century were already rarely bloodless and in some cases VERY bloody. This was at the hands of the comparatively civilized capitalist class overtaking autocracies. Imagine, then, the unrestrained, uneducated masses taking power from the developed capitalist systems. More anger, less reason, less control, and less to lose. The reason the Bolsheviks won was because communist revolution necessitates harnessing uneducated peoples, most of whom will sooner respond to force than reason, like dogs. This is why every single revolution, without fail, resulted in a hardhanded autocrat or military power controlling the state. People predicted this when Marx was writing, but he conveniently ignores this danger in his writings, focusing on the unproven ability of people to survive in industrial society communally. Obviously he didn't say "form death squads and starve Ukrainians for bonus points," but the logical conclusion of a Marxist revolution is military junta or strongman autocracy. That is why in the 1980s, when even the Soviets didn't want to keep on with the same tired communist strategy, African warlords were starting up communist parties. It was practically a handbook to getting power by force with the support of the people.

>>17733661
Marx

>>17733967
>>17737225
please dont embarass yourself and read article called "THE MARXIST VIEW OF RUSSIAN SOCIETY AND REVOLUTION" (its in libgen). Some excerpts:
>Marx and Engels had fitted Russia into a concept of universal development built primarily upon Fourier' sequence of social epochs: savagery, patriarchalism, barbarism, and civilization.4 In i848 Engels described Russia as a "patriarchal-feudal barbarism,"5 and Germany as a "civilized" nation at an early stage of bourgeois prominence
>At the close of i848 Marx viewed the "West" as representing "civilization" and the "East" (mainly Russia) as representing "barbarism
>In i877 in a letter to the editors of the magazine Otechestvennye Zapiski, Marx admonished his Russian readers to remember that the socio-historical development described in Das Kapital pertained only to Western Europe. He warned them against attempting "to transform my historical sketch of the genesis of capitalism in Western Europe into a historicophilosophic theory of the marche generate imposed by fate upon every people, whatever the historic circumstances in which it finds itself
>In i88i Marx repeated this warning in a letter to Vera Zasulich. He again described the isolated village communities as "always" constituting the basis for a "centralized despotism

>>17733952
>Baruch Spinoza
Only through incorrect interpretation. People like to quite Spinoza for all his pro-freedom lines, but his idea of “freedom” was nothing like any liberal ideology

>>17733782
Gimme a guy that didn't chuck worker corpses in the streets within 10 years? Oh right, it usually took less than 5

>>17733967
Based and retardpilled

>>17733963
>They did it all for the pusi

>>17737930

>>17737417
>bro its invalid because i didnt mean for his writings to be used in such a way

youre the only one embarrassing yourself here

>>17735221
lol you completely and utterly failed to back up any statement you made in this thread, why are you even still here?

>>17733848
>we had it nice and sweet till doez guys

Literally did.

>>17733782
>who would win?
>thousands dead, countries destroyed, and despots empowered in repeated and infamous examples of abusing the hopes of the naive and impoverished
>a tripfag who says “nuh-uh”

Told you before, I’ll tell you again: you’re as morally repugnant as you are mentally bereft, and latching on to the oldest meme of false virtue in modern society only changes that in your own addled mind.

>>17733814
>Luther
Can someone explain to me why the Orthodox and Catholics hate protestantism and blame it for leading to the decadence in the west we see today? Is it just going against the traditional churches or something deeper? I'm not a Christian obviously

>>17739276
>Describes capitalism again.
>Tries to anchor me with Lenin’s gang

Told you many times, but you refuse to accept new information or go research it for yourself, but I am not a Marxist, not a Leninist, not liberal, not statist of any kind. And the USSR, —China, now, are not communism. They’re run by parties calling themselves communist. Give you another example of this: The Democratic part does not approve of democracy in the slightest. Write that down. Try to remember. And do try to read more than liberal disinformation and propaganda. Listen to some Chomsky or something (although he’s shot hid credibility some by endorsing fucknut Biden. He’s still been a decent source of truth telling)

>>17733897
Did this book have any actual consequences in the real world?

Edward Bernays. He is mostly to blame for the shitshow that consumerism and advertisement are.

George orwell. The nigga created fascism.

>>17733782
Neither do you, you dumb midwit. You're the least qualified person there is to talk about anything.

Have you ever worked in academia or the public sector? Ever worked in publishing or politics? Have you ever done research work? Have you ever been published? Do you have a degree in any of the fields that you constantly run your mouth about? No, I didn't think so. Shut the fuck up.

>>17737225
>This is why every single revolution, without fail, resulted in a hardhanded autocrat or military power controlling the state. People predicted this when Marx was writing, but he conveniently ignores this danger in his writings
Can you name a few of those people who predicted this?

No mention of pic-related? I can't be the only one...

Hayek, Rothbard, Friedman

>>17739451
Forgot to add Rand

>>17733756
You’re out of your element Donny

>>17739409
>You an ivory tower academic? No? You can’t talk to me about what you know!
Fuck off.

>>17739422
B A K U N I N

>>17733661
ockham. nominalism is the font of all materialist antihuman liberalism

>>17733756
Read Marx

>>17733952
>John Dewey
yeah. means aren't ends. democracy and education might be the worst book of the 20th century.

>>17733952
>He put Spinoza on the list

>>17739338
>is Marxist until sufficiently called out
>muh not real etc etc
We’ve done this before as well. You really suffer from poor self-reflection— like, this shit happens DAILY, are you just here to be humiliated or do you actually believe there is some semblage of cohesion behind your thoughts?

>>17733991
This is a very terrible take on Capitalism

>>17739403
>orwell created fascism
nigga what?

>>17739223
if he clearly said not to use his writing in the way they were used and you still blame ebil Marxism for shit that happened in its name then youre beyond retarded

>>17733661
Marx lol

>>17739492
bro you just got filtered by butterfly of all people

>>17739525
>bro like wow man you’re not entertaining the delusions of an out of touch tripfag to win a 4chan argument?? filtered!
don’t breed

>>17739513
>thread is about writers who had a negative impact on society
>writer clearly has a significant negative impact on society whether he wanted to or not
>he didn't intend to though bro it doesn't count
are you actually retarded?

>>17739459
how is it that you made several posts in this thread getting butthurt about people mentioning marx but you have yet to even begin to back up your butthurt by explaining why marx does not belong in this thread

>>17733661
J. Butler
J. Gardner

really makes you think

>>17739570
dilate

>>17739667
lol I knew you were a fucking retard

>>17739641
bro are you fucking stupid, look what posts I'm replying to
>People predicted this when Marx was writing, but he conveniently ignores this danger in his writings, focusing on the unproven ability of people to survive in industrial society communally.
and I show that he didnt ignore it you stupid moron
>the red army was not only inspired but directly enabled and thrust into power via marx's writings
no it wasnt directly enabled who the fuck wrote this one. Why youre on lit and commenting on stuff you dont know shit about

Leo Strauss
Ayn Rand
Sartre
Marx
Nietzsche
Latour
JS Mill
Thomas Carlyle
Milton Friedman

>>17739713
>the red army was in no way enabled by the communist manifesto and marxs other writings which fueled revolutionary fervor in russia
>the bolsheviks were in no way inspired by marxs writings or enabled by using marxs writing as propaganda
why would you even post something this stupid? did you actually believe you wouldn't instantly be called out?

>>17739764
>the red army was in no way enabled by the communist manifesto
show me what parts of the communist manifesto call for a revolution which aims at communism in asiatic modes of production
>the bolsheviks were in no way inspired by marxs writings
now youre just moving goalposts, at first it was "directly enabled" now its more vague "inspired by" and "enabled by propaganda"
please tone down on Peterson's videos I beg you

>>17739800
>in societies that are defined by asiatic modes of production*

>>17739800
>at first it was "directly enabled" now its more vague "inspired by" and "enabled by propaganda"
what do you think directly using writings to enter and hold power entails?

>>17733661
Marx and Hegel

>>17739826
look, if I used the parts in the bible about stoning to kill some woman who cheated on her husband every christian would call me retrarded rightfully so. It would be retarded to say that "the bible directly enabled me to kill the woman", no, I just would be retarded moron. The same is with ruskies who edited out all of the important parts about russia in marx's writings and used those that fueled their already formed sentiments. The fault is with retarded ruskies and not with Marx. So there is no direct causation between marxism and soviets. Just like there is no direct causation between a schizo who kills in the name of god and the holy scriptures.

>>17733952
>Montaigne
>Whitehead
>Adorno
How?

>>17733749
>>17733924
epic contradiction, you puddle-drinking spastic

>>17733904
This all of modern marketing hell is his fault

>>17733756
try reading marx first

>>17739856
marx literally wrote extensively about how a communist revolution as a logical and natural next step for humanity and what that might look like and what would cause it, and his writings were directly cited and used to fuel a revolution. the revolutionary government literally went on to put "marxist" in the name of their ideology, which once again, directly cited marxs writings about revolution and communism.

im sorry but marx had a catastrophic negative impact on society whether he intended to or not, and thus belongs in this thread beyond any doubt. this insane degree of cope is just getting bizarre

>>17734264
Lenin just used Marxism to kill the opposition and assume control of russia. Stalin used Leninism to kill the opposition and assume control of russia

>>17739965
>how a communist revolution as a logical and natural next step for humanity
literally wrong. Only for civilized western countries. He was explicitly against "barbarian" ruskies and other asians trying to implement his ideas. To write such a sentence you have to have peterson level of knowledge on marxism. Literally go read wikipedia, thats all I can say. Unless youre trolling and act in bad faith.
>and his writings were directly cited and used to fuel a revolution. the revolutionary government literally went on to put "marxist" in the name of their ideology
doesnt mean shit, current china also does that, but its far from communist

>>17739998
for the last time dude this thread isnt "writers who were comic book villains intentionally plotting the downfall of humanity" its "writers who had a negative impact on society"

why are you struggling so much with this concept? it doesn't matter if if marx didnt think it would work for russians, it happened anyway and his writings had a huge impact on the process, its a stone cold historical fact

why are you completely ignoring the topic of this thread and just sperging out like someone insulted your religion?

>>17740065
I was reacting to the comments that outline direct causation between marxism and bolshevism and not to the op's comment. You just got btfo and backpedaled into the more vague "I-I meant not direct causation, but inspiration you know like influence ermmmm negative impact even!"

>>17740099
the fact that they did not follow his writings down to the letter does not in any way mean his writings didnt have a huge impact on the movement and were not directly utilized by the movemet, how could you possibly claim something like this lol? the idea that marx had no impact on the russian revolution is so completely and utterly far fetched and disconnected from reality that I feel like you must be trolling.

I didn't back pedal at any point, I stated from the get go that the revolutionaries directly used marxs writings to fuel their revolution and have never at any point backed away from that position

>>17740126
posts I was replying to said "marxism directly caused/enabled" you now say "directly utilized by" "had impact" "revolutionaries directly used". If that is not backpedaling, then I dont know what is. Marxism did not directly cause bolshevism. Marx's theory was edited out, cherypicked and distorted. It influenced, inspired, but this is different from "direct cause". Its boring at this point, I rape you tomorrow.

>>17739764
Most of the bolsheviks didn’t really care much about Marx they were primarily young men just looking to shoot people and fight in a war, Lenin just provided the framework

>>17740176
what exactly is the difference between marxs writings enabling the revolution and marxs writings being utilized to fuel the revolution?

what the fuck even is this post lmao

>>17740192
and that framework involved a pretty critical ideological cornerstone to get working class people riled up and united behind a specific cause, more specifically, one that talked specifically about the inevitability of working class uprising and how clearly justified it was which would give both an intellectual and moral foundation for that framework to rest on and carry out its function despite the atrocities that were resulting from their actions

>>17733848
I mean at least the old catholic priesthood tried to be discreet about the child raping and kept it at a respectable level while the new woke cultural marxist priesthood(lgbt) is trying to brainwash us into thinking it is normal and progressive. First they started telling us they were normal people just like you and me who just wanted to be left alone but experience has shown the slippery slope is real they want anything but to be left alone what they are getting away with would have been unimaginable just 10 years ago, imagine where we will be in 10 years if action is not taken to stop them.

>>17739743
>Milton
easily the number one of the modern era

>>17733756
just wait for based china to take over

>>17740455
I won't to pretend I'm going cry about the liberal world order losing its dominance