/lit/ - Literature

well, first off, i'm not a Marxist, and second off, your characterization of Marx and politics is kind of totally wrong.

although it's broadly true that the idea of a dialectic progress can justify terrorism and atrocity, that doesn't mean that all marxists use a dialectic to justify atrocities, or that a lot of people in the US government who couldn't remotely be described as marxists are doing it

but w/e

>>3964058
Entity, please, we started with the Greeks. There would have to be other consciousness in the universe for social equity and its philosophy to exist. I swear, it's like I'm talking to myself.

I think it'd be best for everyone if you went back to /pol/ and never came back.

>2013
>not knowing marxism is just a narrative that justifies political violence
/pol/ told me /lit/ was full of social justice warriors

>>3964077
It's not. We probably have less SJWs per capita than /pol/. This board is for literature discussion, not a battleground where /pol/ users and tumblr morons can circlejerk each other.

>>3964072
/pol/ never does raid, they hate everyone else too much to stablish communication; i heard there that there is a troll pretending to be a /pol/ack and shitposting in other boards
false flag attack yo
/pol/ was right again

>>3964077
/pol/ told you lots of shit that wasn't true. i'm sure it's one of the boards with a fiction warning

>>3964058

>secret elite
>>>/pol/

also, that video is literally fucking nonsense

>>3964090
It doesn't. /pol/ was also entirely right about syria.


>>3964103
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

>>3964110
>It doesn't. /pol/ was also entirely right about syria.
And /b/ saves cats; your point is?

>>3964113
They were right about a geopolitical issue.

>>3964058
gb2pol

>>3964120
/b/ has saved at least two cats

pretty sure regular posting on /pol/ can be established as a sign of mental illness, same like with /b/ and /mlp/

DON'T REPLY

LET IT ROT

Okay let me hijack this thread for a while.

Something I've noticed with the modern left is that they are reactionary as fuck, to the same point that conservatives are, yet they don't seem to actually have any real philosophical underpinnings in their critique. Much of the modern left is about social justice stuff, yet they don't actually do a philosophical analysis of the contradiction and relations that cause such antagonisms to exist. They just bitch and whine, often over the stupidest things like someone calling a transgender person a tranny or someone saying Zimmerman wasn't racist, he would followed have shot any teenager that night. He was a psychotic wannabe-cop.

I'm a Communist, I've studied Marx, Engels, Mao, Lenin, Kollentai, Zetkin, Gramsci, Goldman and yet in discussion with braindead "liberal leftists" I often get called "ignorant" or "prejudiced" or "misogynist" for essentially no reason aside from the fact I'm calling out their reactionary views that are very shallow.

So I have to really ask, what is the philosophy of the modern left? Who is behind this social justice bullshit movement?

I can understand people ignoring Marx after the USSR became what it became, but I am really struggling to identify with the modern left. In fact, Libertarians and Neocons are probably the only people that piss me off more than the "Liberal left"

>>3964152
>Okay let me hijack this thread for a while.
>Something I've noticed with the modern left is that they are reactionary as fuck, to the same point that conservatives are, yet they don't seem to actually have any real philosophical underpinnings in their critique. Much of the modern left is about social justice stuff, yet they don't actually do a philosophical analysis of the contradiction and relations that cause such antagonisms to exist. They just bitch and whine, often over the stupidest things like someone calling a transgender person a tranny or someone saying Zimmerman wasn't racist, he would followed have shot any teenager that night. He was a psychotic wannabe-cop.
>I'm a Communist, I've studied Marx, Engels, Mao, Lenin, Kollentai, Zetkin, Gramsci, Goldman and yet in discussion with braindead "liberal leftists" I often get called "ignorant" or "prejudiced" or "misogynist" for essentially no reason aside from the fact I'm calling out their reactionary views that are very shallow.
>So I have to really ask, what is the philosophy of the modern left? Who is behind this social justice bullshit movement?

liberal? murrican? mcdonalds? libertarian? conservative? it's all the same fast-food slave-morality, egalitarian bullshit. does not make you tinfoils any less annoying, however.

>>3964152
I wouldn't call it reactionary, but they're definitely counter-revolutionaries
its pretty much just replaced the catch-all "worker" with a million petty labels: all that tumblr cis and pan sexual feminist bullshit
personally I blame the hippies

>>3964152
>Zimmerman was a psychotic wannabe cop
You've watched a few too many Hollywood movies. John Goy was completely disconnected from reality.

>>3964168
How isn't it reactionary?
They see something, they react without thinking usually with inflammatory insults and scapegoating.

The modern left is the definition of paper tiger reactionaries.

>>3964188
no you dangus reactionary is wanting to revert to a prior time, like most of /pol/
a better word would be emotional

>>3964192
>reactionary is wanting to revert to a prior time
I think you should maybe look up "reactionary" in a dictionary.

>>3964193
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary

>>3964194
Ah that is surprising. I always thought it was someone who reacted without thinking and was easily susceptible to emotional and jingoistic bullshit without doing actual analysis of the situation.

>>3964198
Same. That is the definition I was taught in school (Europe).

>>3964198
>easily susceptible to emotional and jingoistic bullshit without doing actual analysis of the situation.
but that part is correct
I can understand the confusion though, like a 'knee-jerk reaction'

>>3964152
They are disconnected from the working class and the social justice they promote is very anti worker.
When the workers say what they realy want the leftie elit just becomes more and more insloted.

That is why I become a distributist. Wish I could invite you.

>>3964224
>the working class
>2013

>>3964152
m8, the far left has always had more in common with the far right than the lazy centre.

that social justice bullshit is a hindrance. It's like if Christ came to Earth today to get save us from our sins and spent his entire time complaining that we were drinking alcohol and watching pornography - which is what some Christians do. See, if anybody had a decent conception of sin and how deep sin is they wouldn't waste a second attacking the most surface, trivial sins like that, he would attack the heart of the problem that is the cause of all these outer, obvious sins. These social justice people are filling public discourse with so much shit that the actual problem is being obscured - they are doing their own enemy's work.

>>3964198
this contempt for "emotional nationalism" or whatever is one of the worst things about the left.
if you really want to say that you are on the side of the people then you have to realize that most people favour their own country over others. You should want to make the people revolt because they love their country and want to heal and restore it, not because they hate it and what to tear it to shreds. It's not the countries that needs to be destroyed, it's the false rulers of them.

>>3964058
I don't know about that, I just know that Marx was a great thinker and you're fascist scum. So who am I going to side with?

The future is brown and concepts such as race, nationalities and sex will die off. Deal with it.

>>3964247
some dem phrases sound like /pol/ talk ta me

mfw conspiracy theorists take on hegel

I have no idea how someone can adopt a political ideology in their youth and remain clinging to it as they grow up. I'm not just talking about Marxism, it's the same for most ideologies.

It's the same thing with vegans; they adopt veganism in their teens and continue saying "eating meat is evil" right into middle age. Instead of looking at reality, assessing, learning, they adopt some pre-packaged view from someone else and continue inflating it.

Everybody should read this short play by an old French playwright, Molière
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2992
"The Bourgeois Gentilhomme", "The Middle-Class Gentleman" --- it's an oxymoron, because one cannot be both middle-class and a gentleman (a gentleman used to refer to someone of the aristocracy).

There's all sorts of literature from around that period that talks about the conflict between the landed-interests of the aristocrats and the moneyed-interests of the middle-class, the bourgeois. There's an obvious reason why - it's because they were seeing the gradual disappearance of the aristocracy of the landed folk and the rise to power of the bourgeois millionaires.

The play mocks the Bourgeois main character, it shows how pathetic the values of what we now call the "middle-class" are. I'm not in love with aristocracy, but I think it's infinitely superior to the bourgeois class. The thing about the aristocracy is that they insisted on cultivating philosophy, virtue, honour, nobility, etc. So even if they had too much money, you could at least say that they made an effort to prove that they deserved it. The problem with the rich bourgeois of today (there is no "upper-class", in terms of values the upper-class is just the bourgeois middle-class persons that happen to have more wealth) is that they most certainly DON'T deserve their wealth, and don't even make the effort to show to the lower classes that they deserve it.

>>3964269
>is that they most certainly DON'T deserve their wealth
>deserve
>and don't even make the effort to show to the lower classes that they deserve it.
10/10

>>3964265


you're pretending like you're "open-minded" or whatever, but this open-mindedness is exactly the values of the bourgeoisie. It's the typical, generic middle-class way.

the fact that you don't even know that your convictions are indeed convictions show how popular they are in society. Only popular convictions can be unconscious.

>>3964271
they don't

the aristocrats showed, or tried to show, that they deserved all of their luxuries by showing, or by trying to show, that they were virtuous men who wouldn't let their luxuries become the object of their lives and wouldn't waste away in luxury.

the bourgeois openly wallow in their own narcissistic love affair with luxury, and don't even make an effort to conceal it, for they are that smug.

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/fowlerjh/chap1.htm

>>3964272
>you're pretending like you're "open-minded" or whatever, but this open-mindedness is exactly the values of the bourgeoisie.

Oh, give it a rest. "bourgeoisie", seriously? It's not the 1800's any more.

All I'm saying is that as no ideology is correct, the people who have adopted one will remain clinging it to long into their life because of the amount of time invested in it. This is absurd. Yes, it's sometimes convenient to adopt an ideology, but it's hard to shake it once you have; and it will distort your abstracted perception of reality as you view everything through the lens of your ideology.

>>3964271
yeah, the aristocrats had at least some respect for the lower classes. They at least pitied them for their plight. They at least had (or at least, they some times had, when ever they were at their best) the consistency to show that if you have all the power in the world you better be a good enough man to wield it.

the bourgeois, the billionaires rulers of today, are the most effeminate rulers to have ever ruled. Truly the worst.

>>3964280
>All I'm saying is that as no ideology is correct

the ideology that no ideology is correct is the typical middle-class (seeing as you can't handle, "bourgeois") ideology.

>>3964278
>the bourgeois openly wallow...
Does the guy in this OP pic 'deserve' money (>>3959752), or is he unworthy too? Because that's a contemporary capitalist.

>>3964284
>the ideology that no ideology is correct is the typical middle-class ideology
*Scepticism is the typical middle-class ideology.

Really? I thought they went for some form of capitalism.

>>3964285
All I can tell from that is that he is shrewd. Shrewdness can be a virtue, and it can often be a vice. Generally I would say this though - people that worship money don't deserve it. The old ruling class had a contempt for money and luxury, and love of virtue, and so you could excuse them for their money and luxury.

>>3964152
That's good, but I have a feeling you're still a 20-something white suburbanite talking about championing workers and the worker class while still being a part of organizations and communities that do nothing but fuck it all up for the actual worker class (who have little opportunity to white flight their way from the Detroitification) all the while insulting them for not being enlightened with education. It's the same way in Europe. The leftists are bigoted champagne socialists in their all-white ivory towers far away from the decay, raining curse and condemnation down upon the filth, the "brown goo." The majority of the actual workers here vote toward the right and it's not surprising at all.

Left - elites
Right - worker filth

You admit this yourselves on a daily basis.

>>3964291
Scepticism suits Capitalism's needs perfectly. You can sell anything to sceptics.

>>3964291
Scepticism would fall more towards Marxism. Relativism would be re-branded as equality of ideas.

Either way, capitalism and Marxism are equally dogmatic.

After all the pining and romanticizing the left has done over the worker and the guillotine, will you protest when the worker takes your elitist ass out to the public square? You are the "enlightened" elite aristocracy oppressing the actual people holding down real lower end jobs. It's about far more than money. We're not serfs in 19th century Russia.

>>3964307
>will you protest when the worker takes your elitist ass out to the public square?

this kind of stuff is fit for poetry
people in suits being dragged to the guillotine shouting, "b-but I'm on your side!" It's the kind of irony that would have made Socrates giggle.

>>3964307
Right wing populism is even more anti intellectual, and there is a difference between dictatorship and pure communism.

>>3964322
Yes, yes. Let's just disregard it as simple populism. Nothing can ever be wrong with our attitudes and policies. Those filthy workers, I do say.

>>3964322
>Right wing populism is even more anti intellectual

there's nothing more intellectual today than some of these intellectuals
modern academia is filled with intellectuals that are determined not to do any thinking.
What is Derrida's "deconstruction" for example, other than an attempt to ridicule any thought one might have about a piece of literature?

>>3964198
now imagine this retard having posted in every marxist thread this year
without knowing what reactionary means

/lit/

>>3964307
Where did this bullshit "the working class votes right-wing!!!" narrative come from? Check any reputable poll; the working class votes for the center-left as often as it always has

>>3964335
Post-modernism is mostly associated with modern liberalism, the political extremes on the authoritarian side are mostly reactionary and favor realism.
But tell me what declassifies post-modernism as a school of thought? It is supposed to break boundaries and favor alternative thought, not destroy thought.

>>3964356
> destroy thought

this seems to be a pretty apt summary of postmodernism to me

>>3964367
I can give you that things sometimes go a bit too far.

>/pol/ calling any other place a circlejerk

That is goddamn brilliant.

>>3964385
But they both are. /lit/ more so, it is locked within a single ideology.

>>3964391
isn't /pol/ about never believing what you're told, or at least something to that extent?

>>3964391
/pol/ is a board about ideologies. /lit/ is a board about literature. /pol/tards can't seem to comprehend that there are other paradigms and interests than theirs. There are plenty of people on /lit/ of other "ideologies", it's just that they're not stuck in the mental adolescence of /pol/ so you can't recognise them. They've evolved past your petty shite.

>>3964399
Are you talking about Alex Jones nutters? They're a small minority. However, /pol/ isn't about anything in specific. It's a political free for all. Seems to me to be about 70% anti-left or right and 30% left or anti-right.

>>3964394
Ah, yes. You've "evolved," you're "enlightened." Please evolve a sense of irony and then listen to yourself.

>>3964409
Calling yourself superior to /pol/ is not much of a boast

>>3964409
I like to use "quotation" "marxks" to appear more "intelligensocialist" than the "oppojewsition"

on second thought, *tips fedora would have been a better response

>>3964411
How big is your ear stretcher, bad boy? Tell me how hard you're fingering your Das Kapital right now. Together we will enlighten the world.

>>3964420
>what is quoting, with quotation marks.

>>3964427
Badass political argument

>>3964427
are all stormtards this easy to upset?
also it's nearly 7, you kids should still be asleep, no?

>>3964427
In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony capitalist wealth. But because, I am enlightened by my Das Kapital.

>>3964430
It all started going downhill after you guys "evolved" yourself to a higher vibrational frequency. Strange thing!

>>3964434
>>3964435
So your whole argument is based on taking an unrepresentative subject of a collective and putting him as a shameful example?
How does a board even consent to this blatant strawman argument with tones of anti intellectualism?

>>3964438
Are you talking about /pol/ or /lit/

>>3964434
In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any free market freedom. But because, I am enlightened by the shackles of my manifesto.

>>3964443
Actually, most of 4chan.

>>3964438
There's that lacking sense of irony again. Read the thread.

>>3964447
And what if I was ironically pretentious?

>>3964058
>to keep the masses stupid and fearful.
Masses are always stupid and fearful. They don't need any suppsoedly jewish help with that.

>>3964447
You do know that "How ironic!" isn't an argument, right? I mean, it sounds a bit like a tu quoque but it's not.
It's a spectacular failure at being a even logical fallacy.

>>3964449
So then they get exploited by the new right populism?
Not many options there.

>>3964451
>new right
oh my, is this a term now?

>>3964453
The New Right has been a term for several decades now. Includes figures like Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and their descendants

>>3964391
>it is locked within a single ideology
no, lurk moar faggot, you don't know shit about /lit/

ever seen a religion thread?

>>3964460
>ever seen a religion thread?
That's different. The vast majority of people on /lit/ don't care, but half adopt the Christian and half adopt the Atheist, and they troll the shit out of each other.

It's worth keeping in mind that the average SJW is 16-22 years old and has no real presence outside the internet. Why you guys take everything a bunch of literal kids say at face value and turn every board into an off-topic turf war is beyond me.

It's probably because most of you are also 16-22 and have no offline influence, but still. Just let people talk about books/movies/video games without all this shit.

>tfw no qt marxist gf cos you're too foucauldian

This thread is oppressing me. As a white girl from the suburbs I have to sleep with black men because they are oppressed by society. They have rights too!

Obama 2016

>>3964058
>Why do you support such evil philosophy from Marx called the Dialectic?
> evil philosophy
>philosphy
> evil
Classic /pol/, yea.

>>3964058
>Dialectic
>Problem, Reaction, Solution

....... really... REALLY?!?!?!

Jesus christ the right are fucking morons, holy shit.
How in fuck do you get the concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis so fucking wrong? HOW?!? A FUCKING CHILD CAN UNDERSTAND THAT SHIT.

>>3964498
>Dated a hot Qt 3.14 Socialist girl for 3 years (She said she was Socialist, but she never really seemed to be that knowledgeable in Politics, she was Norwegian so I think she just said whatever she thought her home country was)
>Break up badly, stop speaking, get blocked on Social network sites
>The other day I google her name out of nostalgia
>She's in the newspaper arguing some far-right libertarian bullshit

I'm assuming her boyfriend after me was some fedora core libertarian fag. It broke my heart.

>>3964648
Fedora-core is communiss.

>>3964648
She grew up.

>>3964660
Oh please.
Commies are are made up of upper middle class hipsters and slutty nerd girls.
Fedora has always been ponyfag Paulfags.

>>3964662
oh sure hahahah heheh so right, right? 'cause she was inmature and then she grew up heheheh I'm so funny!! The Wiston Churchill's phrase heheheh the right wing if for mature people heheheh the supid left is for young stupid people heheh im so clever m8 hehehehe

>>3964675
It depends where you are.

American Fedoras are ponyfags, in the rest of the world they're middle class hipsters into Marx and social justice.

>>3964682
Jesus Christ, this is a literature board.

Take that shit to /b/.

>>3964687

>>3964687
Fedoras rarely exist outside of America.

>>3964700
They do, but they're called trilbies.

>>3964687
I don't really believe it.
Almost all Libertarians I have met have been angsty autistic people blaming the rest of the world for their shit social standing. On youtube, what is your average Libertarian? Teenagers and egotistical nerds.

Young Marxists are usually always Hipsters and Slutty Girls, but your average Marxist? Think more along the lines of 80 year old Grandpa who raises his fist to the Internationale and Las Barricadas and wants to go back and fight in Revolutionary Catalonia to live out the good days while screaming NO PARASAN!

>>3964741
YA BASTA!

>>3964675
That's a troll. You should be able to divine such things with your evolved intellect.

>>3964763
Marxists have always been hipsters and hippies, this has been the case since the goddamn 70s.

If you look at the full on Labor Marxist parties, they are filled with like 90 year old trade unionists.

Fedora's have always been autistic nerds who spite the rest of their social peers the same way Tomoko does in Watamote. There is no logical reason why Fedora's would be Marxists, because they typically HATE their peer group.

Lee Doren is almost exactly like every Libertarian I have met.
Libertarians have always been the fedoracore. The only reason people now claim its "Communists" is because that is /pol/ propganda. But that is not reality. The reality is the stereotype that the wider public knows. Marxists = Hipsters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68SjrvVRXwE
This is your typical Libertarian piece of shit.

>>3964741
>I have met
I don't think so. You cling to your inbred echo chambers where all dissent is crushed. At best you have seen 2-3 youtube videos of extreme outliers linked to you by fellow sniveling social justice activists in some totalitarian subreddit.

>>3964648

you should have stuck to foucault bro

>>3964805
Where's his fedora or MLP merchandise?

You seem to be saying libertarian is "fedoracore" by definition. If that's the case then you won't get anywhere because I'll turn the thing around on you and all individuals even loosely affiliated with the left will be raging thundertrannies out to check your kid's privilege with dragon dildos.

>>3964834
Samefag. I think leftists are buttmad that they're bleeding bodies to the third way represented by libertarianism. It's against the left's totalitarianism and hatred of merit, yet it isn't crippled by religious fundies. Dangerous!

>>3964806
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td7f9RoY8nY
Yeah no. Libertarians have always been made up of Fedora core ponyfags. I've met Libertarians at Uni, they are all Aspie, Angry nerds.

Again, the "Fedoracore" doesn't even line up with Socialist ideology, because Socialists are for a extroverted community based society where Libertarians are for individuals being left alone on their own property. What would your typical Aspie Fedora wearer who hates all his social peers be for? A large community based initiative or being left the fuck alone?
Exactly.

In fact, considering /pol/, the most fucking Fedora core pieces of edgy shit in the world on goddamn 4chan are made up mostly of Libertarians, should be perfect evidence of what most Libertarians are.

If you believe that /pol/fags are extroverted popular people and not fedoracore aspie nerds, then there is something wrong with you.

>>3964849
>I've met Libertarians at Uni, they are all Aspie, Angry nerds.
Son, you're the aspie, angry nerd.

>What would your typical Aspie Fedora wearer who hates all his social peers be for?
Some bizarre leaps you're making here. Back this extraordinary claim up with extraordinary evidence.

Re: the rest, you proved me right. You desperately want us to accept the premise that "fedoracore" should belong by default to the ideology you hate. Unfortunately the real world shows a different story. And you're just a bitter, angry aspie bigot.

>>3964805
>look at this mildly irritated person of ideology X
>ideology X is now fedoracore and also aspie and they want to shoot up schools

>>3964303
Skepticism = no ideology is correct

Relativism = all ideologies are equally correct

Huge difference.

>>3964849
ok, so you've ascribed fedoras to libertarianism pretty fiercely, as if that somehow makes the ideology less valid. ok, a lot of neckbeards are attracted to libertarianism, so what.

Anything Marixts/Maoist/Communist/Trotskyist is pure fedoracore

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v52f86H_yZI

>>3964879
This is the biggest argument for National Socialism for me.

>>3964895
i would say most of the fedoras i met have been socialist or just read marx and think they're economic geniuses.

>>3964058
>I hear from /pol/
Stop posting any time.

>>3964895
Libertarians are exclusively fedoracore.

>>3964873
Not that guy, but in philosophy relativism naturally follows from scepticism.

To reject relativism, you have to adopt the stance that one position holds more weight than another. There is no way to do this without undermining scepticism at some level. It takes that 'leap of faith' to claim relativism is incorrect in a particular area, and you have lost the scepticism.

Sure, it's practical to say "well, this looks to be the most empirically sound view" but you are basing that on multiple layers of presuppositions and falsifiable axioms, which would be treated as equal if scepticism were there.

Scepticism isn't "being a little bit dubious;" if the scepticism is there it's because the data isn't objectively verifiable, and only partially verifiable within a specific system. The fact that there is externality to that system means that scepticism will always lead to relativism.

>>3964907
hey! im a fan of austrian economics and im not a fedora neckbeard. I have a job, gf, and am /fit/ as fuck.

your hypothesis = shattered

>>3964907
Marxists are exclusively fedoracore.

Every last individual in this thread who argued for any variant of the red mass murder ideology is pic related. By definition. Well, because I say so.

Going outside to enjoy the sun for a few hours. Toodles my gender confused friends.

This is what a Marxist looks like.

>>3964152
>or someone saying Zimmerman [...] would [...] have shot any teenager that night.

While possibly true, it doesn't show Zimmerman wasn't racist. On the other hand, he knew Martin was Black and he assumed Martin was a thief because he was Black, which is the definition of racism.

>>3964925
Absolutely disgusting.