/lit/ - Literature

>>18145863
Why is 90% of your post GT? Don't you have thoughts on your own?

>>18145863
Read specters of Marx lol

Ask yourself what does leftism consist of. It's holding out a hope or a desire for a radically different world even when you can't formulate what that world would consist of. A historical break with the present would be necessary for this to come about. So leftists can't willfully accept the end of history as Fukuyama formulated it, even though they embody the belief in their actual lives. It's a very strong cognitive dissonance and must have been a contributing factor in Fisher's suicide.

Because when Fukuyama says this, they interpret him as status quo apology, but when Fisher says this they interpret it as a status quo critique. Leftist texts always have this underlying function: to deligitimize status quo and all of the discourses about it.

>>18146146
but that's the thing, Fukuyama doesn't make an apology, he's simply describing the reality. his evaluations aren't moralistic, they're pragmatic, just as you would say that a Jaguar drives better than a ford
>>18145881
because i'm not stating anything but trying to make a question you retarf

>>18145863
you didn't read the book, anon.

>“The end of history will be a very sad time,” he wrote, “I have the most ambivalent feelings about it." He lamented the passing of the heroic age of mankind: “The struggle for recognition, the willingness to risk one’s life for a purely abstract goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth daring, courage, imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by. . . the satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands.” History had ended in the prefabricated, conformist lanes of suburbia. “In the post-historical period there will be neither art nor philosophy, just the perpetual caretaking of the museum of human history.”

https://youtu.be/ojpN6PjRcQc?t=3506

>>18147927
>‘It leads an age into a dangerous mood of irony in regard to itself, he wrote in Untimely Meditations, ‘and subsequently into the even more dangerous mood of cynicism’, in which ‘cosmopolitan fingering’, a detached spectatorialism, replaces engagement and involvement.

https://youtu.be/jOIPtWoVyRU

https://youtu.be/Ipnu3bugPOE

>>18147994
>“This malaise, the feeling that there is nothing new, is itself nothing new of course. We find ourselves at the notorious ‘end of history’ trumpeted by Francis Fukuyama after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Fukuyama’s thesis that history has climaxed with liberal capitalism may have been widely derided, but it is accepted, even assumed, at the level of the cultural unconscious.
https://youtu.be/0hIMfJs5s8E

>>18147927
>>18147994
>>18148073
?

>>18145863
>So why do leftoids still reject The End of History and the Last Man?
I’m a marxist-leninist. I reject this because both fukuyama and fisher are being overly dramatic. There will be no end of history. The processes of historical materialism are playing out regardless of what anybody thinks or wants, the material forces of society often act independently of ideology and human activity.

>>18145924
Why? What does it say?

>>18148700
>the material forces of society often act independently of ideology and human activity.
So you're approach is to just do nothing because muh material forces are inevitable?
Lmao what an impotent and stupid ideology kys

>>18148739
>So you're approach is to just do nothing because muh material forces are inevitable?
No. But you’re surely an incredible basketball player with that long of a reach. You have clearly never read much of anything that wasn’t in greentext format, so I’ll just stop replying.

>>18148700
>I’m a marxist-leninist.
day of the ice pick soon

>>18145863
Fisher sucks. Check out Heinrich, Postone, and Rubin.

>>18148700
>The processes of historical materialism are playing out regardless of what anybody thinks or wants,
This is hilarious. Marx never asserted that teleology was real, nor that the "end stage" of human material development was by any means inevitable. This would imply a real teleology which would (further, irreparably) break his entire overarching system of materialism and anti-metaphysics. The stupidity of your type never ceases to amaze me. Marx actually specifically states that it's possible human society will stagnate in a late capitalist stage if workers do not unite and take action. He of course gave no advice on what they should in fact unite to do.

>>18148797
>Marx never asserted that teleology was real, nor that the "end stage" of human material development was by any means inevitable
Neither did I. I just said that society will always be changed by material developments of the productive forces (continuing history) regardless of what anybody wants. Never said communism or any end to the class struggle was inevitable, I'm not retarded.
> Marx actually specifically states that it's possible human society will stagnate in a late capitalist stage
Proof? Never heard or read this anywhere. This is simply impossible anyways. Eventually, either the rate of profit will fall to the point of forcing capitalism to fundamentally be altered or all the resources will be depleted to such a point that society will be forced to fundamentally alter capitalism. In any outcome the end is the same, capitalism must and will be altered. What will result from this? It's impossible to say. I only hope it will be socialism and I strive for that every day.

>>18149004
>the rate of profit will fall
The biggest meme in Marxism. I propose an alternative law that all Marxist thought falls in substance until there is nothing left except the pure faith in a falling rate of profit.
>capitalism to fundamentally be altered
It's already fundamentally altered 20 times since Marx has died. Capitalism thrives on instability and change.

>>18145863
>implying History isn't about to restart soon with the obsolescence of pedophile blackmail networks and the collapse of the postwar consensus due to insufficient funding for Socialism
You will not make it.

>>18149424
>The biggest meme in Marxism.
picrel
> It's already fundamentally altered 20 times since Marx has died
Well. Somebody’s retarded

>>18148781
https://youtu.be/Y3RlalRV4S8

>>18149456
>A commietard posting from an iPhone
Kek you fags really are the ultimate memforms aren’t you?

>>18148684
I'm just being provocative. Fisher was a cultural critic and the OP quoted him echoing Fukuyama about history ending and liberal capitalism being triumphalist, with all the accompanying ennui and where no one is willing to sacrifice for anything, so here's a bunch of Chinese propaganda with a very different message from that. He just wasn't looking, and he didn't have a theory of value either, so it's easy to say we should return to Marx and class but unless you're actually concerned with how the economy works, then class just becomes an empty signifier like the identity politics he rails against. But he's even wrong about that, because whatever you think about BLM, the people on the hard edges of it were struggling for recognition and were willing to risk their lives for an abstract goal. He's talking about conformist suburbia, well, what happened to the Arby's down the street?

>>18149456
I think you can find similar charts in IMF reports in fact although they use different metrics like ROIC which is not the same but a reasonable proximity of falling investment in real production (because it ain't as profitable as speculation).

https://youtu.be/6BHTFm_9hhg?t=357

>>18149583
Imagine attributing any historical significance to American race riots IN AN ELECTION YEAR. How have people not noticed yet that most of America's major race riots happen in election years? I wonder why that could be.

>>18149456
>picrel
I thought wealth inequality was at all time highs? How is that congruent with falling rates of profit

>>18149566
Posting from an Iphone 5s. Sorry, I use technology omg. I’d use huawei if I could, does that make you happy?
>>18149631
This might be the single most retarded and economically illiterate ‘gotcha’ that I’ve ever heard. Jesus fucking christ. Read a basic economics book

>>18149004
>I just said that society will always be changed by material developments of the productive forces (continuing history) regardless of what anybody wants.
This is fundamentally wrong though, even according to Marx. Human history is dependent upon humans as conscious, intelligent actors. Ergo when you said,
>"regardless of what anybody thinks or wants" (which implies natural or external teleology, by the way, even if you deny it)
This is, according to Marx and anyone who gives human beings free agency, an unquestionably erroneous assertion. Marx had to assert this freedom of the individual (and thus fundamental freedom of societal alteration according to the desires of men) in order to remove Hegel's teleological diagnosis which ended in the Absolute State according to the natural progression of Spirit to its teleological end-stage. Marx's entire theory, while still valid under this assertion, is thus entirely contingent upon the particular consciousness of human beings as we know them ever since the Enlightenment and the rise of industrial capitalism, and it by no means gives you the right to say that his diagnosis is permanently valid or objectively applicable to human society at all times.

>>18149655
>This might be the single most retarded and economically illiterate ‘gotcha’ that I’ve ever heard. Jesus fucking christ. Read a basic economics book
If it's so simple, please give me the answer. It was not a gotcha, I want to know what the intelligent economists in this thread believe. If you can't answer it, then I will assume you're posturing or lying.

>>18149004
>What will result from this?

Neo-Feudalism

>>18149678
>I thought wealth inequality was at all time highs? How is that congruent with falling rates of profit
These things are not tied together in a way that forces income inequality to lower with the rates of profit. The question betrays an extreme level of economic illiteracy. Simple as.

>>18149708
>Neo-Feudalism
No, just the continuation of the trends of capitalism until it blows up. The neo-feudalism thing is stupid.

>>18149764
The high banking families are the global aristocracy.

Denying that reality is just burying your head in the sand.

>>18149760
>These things are not tied together in a way that forces income inequality to lower with the rates of profit.
If the rate of profit decreases, and the lower classes are still working the same jobs with the same rates of pay as per usual (if not more, as China's middle class and middle classes all over the world expand), then wealth inequality must necessarily decrease because the rich are not earning as much proportionally in comparison to the poor. And anhow, rates of profit are directly linked to wealth inequality. The rate of profit is the proportion of wealth capitalists generate per unit of investment. If this ratio lowers, then they generate less wealth and it would directly lead to wealth inequality (or at least its growth) lessoning, because the upper classes are now generating less wealth. When you consider the factors I just cited, one would even expect it to decrease.

>>18149770
They don’t have the same relation to the productive forces as the feudal nobility of yesteryear.
>>18149796
> If the rate of profit decreases, and the lower classes are still working the same jobs with the same rates of pay as per usual
Inflation makes it so that workers make far less now than they did just 30 years ago, and people 30 years ago earned less than 30 years prior. Essentially since the mid-late 70s stagflation, and later neoliberalism, the working class has made less money (relatively) than it did the decade previously pretty much every decade. The massive tax cuts to the wealthiest and extreme austerity (cutting/privatizing of social services/state industry) combined with stagnant wages created this situation where the ultra wealthy own everything and the working poor own less than they have for over a century. The rate of profit did not fall in a vacuum, the wealthy have been actively waging economic warfare on the working class to maintain and expand their wealth despite the falling rate of profit. Everybody but them suffers.

>>18149940
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.981.7895&rep=rep1&type=pdf

I only briefly skimmed this, but it mostly coincides with what I’ve said here and read elsewhere. Been a while since I’ve written any papers myself though haven’t researched this stuff in-depth since.

>>18149631
It's no longer profitable to invest in real production because labor is more socialized than ever (from all over the world) and has produced an incredible amount of stuff. However, it's more profitable to dump a lot of this stuff rather than build a system that would share it. Eventually there's a "crisis of overproduction" where too much stuff has been produced, and too much capital has been invested for the capitalists to lay claim to the diminishing profits, wages stagnate and then workers take out loans -- often on crippling terms -- which contributes to swelling credit bubbles, etc. etc. etc.

So capitalists wad their money up into a big ball and throw it at anything that smells like money no matter how stupid it is, like flipping assets like luxury real estate back and forth or meme stocks, or jewelry or fine art, or whatever. It's why everything seems like it's getting shittier and there are homeless people everywhere but there's more and more wealth at the top, but it's really people with too much money "making money with money" and not actually investing it in real things. It's a *decadent* society that is rotting from within and it's going to collapse unless the ruling class figures out some kind of solution. If they can't, then it's either barbarism or:

https://youtu.be/w3NtIiBjPsE?t=1060

>>18149708
no that would be way too based instead we will get neo liberalism with gay space communist characteristics

Why the fuck do brainlets praise this book so much? Multiple people I know base their entire fucking worldview off this book. If you actually sit down and read it, most of it is just a rant about how much this dude hates the british education system. Thanks, but I'll stick to pink floyd if I want to hear about the teachers in bongland.

>>18149583
Most of the people I know who support BLM are fat faggots who have never done a real day's work in their life. Trying to imagine them "risking their lives" is impossible; they are glued to PlayStations and constantly stuffing their fat faggot faces with garbage. The revolution would require them to work which is by nature something most of these people consider themselves far too good for.

>>18151327
You don't have to get so upset because you're not smart to get it.

>>18151362

> You don't have to get so upset because you're not smart to get it.

This book is peak midwit it's not difficult to understand at all, but it provides very limited insight

>>18149456
>posting the meme graph to prove it's not a meme
kek
>Somebody’s retarded
anon, I think it's you

>>18145863
Well, he was wrong on many things. The rise of authoritarian states like China makes his main statement hard to hold for example.

>>18145863
>Check out Capitalist Realism.. seems like there really is no alternative
this is literally the opposite of what Fisher was saying

>>18148781
stalin litearlly coined the term "Marxist leninism" retard

>>18145863
>1988 (before communism even fucking fell)

>>18151327
>I'll stick to pink floyd if I want to hear about the teachers in bongland

Fisher sucks, read these instead.

Pfffft

>FISHER IS ONE OF THE GREAT PHILOSOPHERS OF OUR TIME!!!

>>18152731
bait

>>18145863
because fukuyama was being a teleological dipshit and now, years after the fact- fisher's (dialectical) idea of 'the slow cancellation of the future' describes the modern condition way more acurately than fukuyama's

>>18149940
>They don’t have the same relation to the productive forces as the feudal nobility of yesteryear.
This is the problem. Their unpriced externalities will burn through the social capital until there is nothing left. Actual feudalism is preferable.
The closest historic parallel to the modern banker class is rise of the Roman latifundia.

>>18149940
>The rate of profit did not fall in a vacuum, the wealthy have been actively waging economic warfare on the working class to maintain and expand their wealth despite the falling rate of profit. Everybody but them suffers.

It's amazing how the amount of people under the umbrella of exploitation has expanded, but lamenting the sublimation of more bodies into the system is immediately disregarded -- either under the cliche cry of racism or the insipid cry of nationalism.

other day

>>18145863
not all leftists or anti-capitalists (yes i know) are communists.

>>18151333
not the anon you replied to but it can be both. ofc anyone with a brain will acknowledge that there are a bunch of softcock metropolitans hopping onto BLM, but that doesnt negate the existance of the people in the pic you replied to. do you see any fat people/coddled white metropolitans in that crowd standing in front of a once-police-station-turned-bonfire? no.

>>18145863
>Get butthurt on twitter
>Make cry-thread on /lit/
Why do you pol losers do this?