/lit/ - Literature

>>4319222
I know, seriously!

>>4319222

Your flabby potion is a mixture of the lies of Liberalism, the poor froth blown off the decadent Nineties, the wardrobe-leavings of a vulgar bohemianism…. You are concentrated, highly-organised barley water; there is nothing in the universe to be said for you: any efficient state would confiscate your property, burn your wardrobe – that old hat and the rest – as infectious, and prohibit you from propagating.

A breed of mild pervasive cabbages has set up a wide and creeping rot in the West… that any resolute power will be able to wipe up over night with its eyes shut. Your kind meantime make it indirectly a period of tribulation for live things to remain in your neighbourhood. You are systemis-ing the vulgarising the individual: you are the advance copy of communism, a false millennial middle-class communism. You are not an individual: you have. I repeat, no right to that hair and to that hat: you are trying to have the apple and eat it too You should be in uniform and at work. NOT uniformly OUT OF UNIFORM and libelling the Artist by your idleness. Are you idle? The only justification of your slovenly appearance it is true is that it’s perfectly emblematic.

There are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who leave a space before punctuation.

There are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW

Fuck off Fabian scum. Democratic socialism always devolves into social democracy.

Nationaliat socialdemocrat here.

>>4319230
EUPHORIA INTENSIFIES

>>4319243

>Nationalist

>not supporting Obama 100%
enjoy the dark ages, racist.

>the Mensheviks will never beat the Bolsheviks

why do things even happen the way they do

Why would you be a socialist? Do you believe that people deserve to get things they haven't worked for? I don't believe in materialism and I don't believe that having things makes you happier. That's why I'm a capitalist. I understand that there is nothing wrong with having nothing as ultimately it's one's choice. I'm content with not having anything and I don't think anyone owes me anything.

>>4319248
Nothing wrong if its positive nationalism.

>>4319257
Just like with positive racism, right?

>>4319259
Anti-Colonial Nationalism can be ok.

>>4319253
b-b-but then who will support me if I don't?

>>4319222
I'm not mediocre enough, sorry.

>>4319252
The Kadets were the only hope for Russia becoming a stable, Western democracy.

>>4319257

Nationalism in all forms and shape are bad.

>>4319274
sure convinced me

>THERE ARE PERSONS IN /lit/ NOW, WHO LIKE FREEDOM, LIBERTY, AND REASON.

WHAT IS "WRONG" WITH YOU?

>>4319253
But I dint do nuffin wrong! where dem food stamps at crackas? das racist

>Orwell with a sword looks really cool.
> Will totally justify my arbitrary political alliance

>>4319222

No artist can ever love Democracy.

Democracy is hostility to artistic excellence, and fosters box office and library subscription standards. Art is timeless, classical.

Democracy hates and victimises the intellectual because the ‘mind’ is aristocratic and offensive to the masses.

>>4319276
But he is right. It's silly to differentiate people by anything but their personal character. Ultimately we're all just people muddling through the shit bowl that is life.

>>4319286

Fuck off Fascist.

THEY WILL NOT PASS!

>>4319286

The dissemination and increased availability of technologies which allow the individual to learn at a rapid pace, the increase of intellectualism in the public sphere, and the popularization of science has gradually changed the "mind" from something esoteric and aristocratic to something accessible and proletarian.

Hence thousands of people conversing anonymously simultaneously across the planet about GodKnowsWhat.

>>4319306
But this very landscape of the public dialogue is owned and operated by huge corporations.

>>4319306

Conjoined with democracy is industrialisation, both representing the masses against the solitary genius. The result is the herding of people into enormous mechanised masses. The mass mind is required to gravitate to a standard size to receive the standard idea.

Democracy and the advertisement are part and parcel of this debasement and behind it all stands money, including the “millionaire bohemians” who control the arts.

The intellect is more removed from the crowd than is anything: but it is not a snobbish withdrawal, but a going aside for the purposes of work, of work not without its utility for the crowd… More than the prophet or the religious teacher, (the leader) represents… the great unworldly element in the world, and that is the guarantee of his usefulness. And he should be relieved of the futile competition in all sorts of minor fields, so that his purest faculties could be free for the major tasks of intelligent creatio

>>4319253

Socialism is predicated on the idea that workers shouldn't have surplus value extracted from their labour by capitalist vultures i.e people getting more of what they worked for. Read a book sometime scrub.

>>4319259
>>4319274
The French republicans operated under nationalism for example, to create a nation state based on freedom and equality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_nationalism

>>4319302

It's silly to differentiate people as individual entities. They're obviously just communities of cells with a pretend, neurally-programmed personality that exists solely for daily cross-colony ("interpersonal") communicatory convenience and existential comfort.

It's silly to differentiate communities of cells as organisms because they're ultimately just collections of proteins performing some functions that trade matter and energy with the surrounding environment.

It's silly to differentiate these molecules of proteins as individual structures because each molecule is just a collection of atoms.

It's silly to differentiate atoms because they're just soup bowls of subatomic particles.

It's silly to differentiate subatomic particles because hooray reductionism: Driving communities of cells mad since the beginning of time.

Swap the words "democratic socialists" with "absolutist monarchists" and I agree with you 100% OP.

>>4319320

my edge detector just went off the charts

>>4319253
>Why would you be a socialist?
>Do you believe that people deserve to get things they haven't worked for?
>That's why I'm a capitalist.

Now THAT'S doublespeak.

>>4319309

You enjoy a higher standard of living than egyptian pharoes. The average person, running into a word they don't know can by the simple act of reaching into their pocket acess a vast network of knowledge as though praying to a digital God, learning instantaneously and on-the-go knew ideas and ways of communicating the very moment they reach an intellectual hurdle.

All because of cell phones.

Piracy allows me to have a whole library of music, books, films etc. in my pocket.

"The corporations," (as vague an entity as "The government" which includes everything from postal workers to secret service) though often practicing despicable, lazy and selfish behavior at the behest of some of the individuals running them, ultimately provide a means of living and expressing talent for millions of people.

It ain't that bad. It's not quite hell.

>>4319253
>Do you believe that people deserve to get things they haven't worked for
That's the definition of capitalism, fatcat bosses living off the labor of others.

>>4319246
>doesn't enjoy someone else's opinion
>make some euphoria/fedora joke as rebuttal

/lit/'s modus operandi, v. 2013.2

>>4319327

*knew for new

*acess for access

wtf is wrong with me

>>4319329
Cute, but that's not capitalism. I suggest you take an introductory course in economics.

>>4319349
>economics
Extreme bourgeoisie pseudoscience

>>4319349
>Cute, but that's not capitalism.
No, it is.

What about Social Democracy? How does that compare to Democratic Socialism? Is it worse, better, or indifferent? What?

>>4319326

Capitalism has nothing to do with materialism - that would be inherent to a consumerist culture, something we happen to live in.

> Ha, faggot, consumerism is essential to capitalism. Le machines would stop working if people stopped buying futile toys!
Nope. What would happen in a situation like this is a shift of industrial power to other areas and a greater focus in the services sector. If people suddenly decided to stop buying unnecessary things, this wouldn't mean the end of our capitalist paradigm, just a great modification of it.

Why do pseudo-intellectuals worship Orwell so much? He had an interesting life and could write pretty well, but their interest borders on obsession.

>>4319349

cap·i·tal·ism
ˈkapətlˌizəm/Submit
noun
1.
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
prof·it
ˈpräfit/Submit
noun
1.
a financial gain, esp. the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.

>>4319398
Listen, you said socialism is the idea that people deserve to get what they don't work for and you support capitalism because you think people shouldn't get what they don't work for. You've mixed up socialism and capitalism. It's doublespeak.

>>4319442

Sorry, I answered to the wrong post. Also, I'm not the anon you are referring to

>>4319286
>Unaware of Athens or trolling
Ignorance or deceitfulness. Hardly matters.

>>4319474

You simply can't compare today democracy to fucking hellenic Greece democracy. I think that other anon has made a good point.

>there are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who have opinions on politics (and these are just what they are: opinions) without ever having read a paragraph of worthwhile, scientific, analytic ethics

>>4319493
That democracy is hostile to art.
Seriously?

The art of today suffers pretty much from the hyper-capitalist marketplace. Are we also taking into account that (the US) is a democratic republic?
My point is the full (though exclusionary) democracy of Athens encouraged their arts. It was a bullshit post from a fascist and I don't see the point panning out in the real world.

>>4319541
>scientific, analytic ethics
wat
I'm genuinely curious about what you are talking about. Do you mean psichology?

>>4319574
>My point is the full (though exclusionary) democracy of Athens encouraged their arts
No, it didn't. Maybe in your imagination Greece was a utopia with educated, virile man discussing how to progress humanity 24/7, but that is REALLY far from the actual facts. It was a country of harsh inequality, continually suffocated with the pressure of political and military conflicts. The greek hoi poloi wasn't an astronomer, an philosopher, it was probably an farmer or potter with his head deep down in his ass.
I can understand how the classical depiction s of hellenism made people fetishize their lifestyle, but in reality it was similar to today: only a minor, wealthy elite would deviate into the realms of the arts.
Also, why do you keep trying to argue with fallacies?
>It was a bullshit post from a fascist
>That democracy is hostile to art.
Seriously?

>>4319574
>that (the US)

wat

There are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who are not anarchists.

>>4319329
>That's the definition of capitalism, fatcat bosses living off the labor of others.
The fatcat boss who inherits all of his wealth and sits on his ass doing nothing is a myth, and you are a retard.

>>4319586
>only a minor, wealthy elite would deviate into the realms of the arts.
Yeah, I said that.
>the full (though exclusionary) democracy of Athens
Not fetishizing it. Pointing out that art did well. Under democracy.
"Full" but not the whole place. I KNOW that already.

>Fallacy
I'm calling that guy out as a fascist. We'll never know if he was or just if he was just trolling or whatever, he's gone now, just an anonymous crack, and my pot shot at him.

>>4319601
>>4319590

>that (the US) is

wat

>>4319590
Just thought I'd clarify which country I was talking about. I could have been talking to a guy from the UK or something.

>>4319597
Corporate executives are the most corrupt, unethical and un-meritorious bunch bunch you can find. No one with even a little knowledge of economics believes that corporate compensation schemes even a little bit represent actual economic value.

And yeah right, trust fund babies don't exist. The Waltons don't exist. The Kochs don't exist. And they don't exert and wildly disproportionate amount of political influence.

>>4319607
why not just
>"that the US is. . . a bloo bloo blah"

>mfw voting soc dem erry time

>>4319613
>pic
did you crop out the grapes?

>>4319610
>Corporate executives are the most corrupt, unethical and un-meritorious bunch bunch you can find.
>Corporate executives
that's a funny way of spelling "politicians"

>>4319627
Politicians are corrupt BECAUSE of corporate executives.

>>4319636
Oh yes the corporate executives just force them to take their money and vote in their favor. Those poor politicians, victims of the evil businessmen. They obviously have no choice, they can't disclose their donors or vote according to principle instead of corporate interest or anything.

>>4319625
Already ate them bruv, they were delicious.

>>4319643
Nae money taking is nae campaign funds. You'll never even get close to a position of power that way. The only way to change anything is to play the game, and to play the game is to be filthy and corrupted.

>>4319327
Nice post. There really is something deeply human that tells that self-serving rulers are evil but it always ends up benefitting everyone, and we should always remember this.
Where would pyramids and cellphones be without greed.

>>4319636
perhaps, but politicians are far more unethical and un-meritorious.

>>4319654
>Where would pyramids and cellphones be without greed.
calm down jaden

>>4319643
>Introduce representative republic
>people elect their representatives from among themselves (city, county, state, etc)
>introduce monopolies, megacorporations, et cetera capitalism
>capitalists manage to buy out a small number of representatives, who work hard to manipulate the political process into the capitalists' favor
>capitalists fund own media, necessary for elections wrt information
>capitalists fund the ouster of all representatives that don't tow their line
>fast forward and all politicians are corporate sponsored

Is that better?

>>4319654

Thanks. Didn't expect agreement.

Your post even does a better job at summing up what I was trying to say.

Ideally of course I'd like the comforts and benefits of modern society without the paranoia or corruption.

But I'd also like to have my cake and eat it too.

>>4319671
>introduce monopolies, megacorporations, et cetera capitalism
Monopolies do not occur in pure capitalism. I can count on one hand the monopolies that have sustained monopoly status without being supported or established by a government. This is state capitalism, and it should be referred to as such.

This is why we don't just stop at a representative republic, we establish constitutional republics. Problems only arise when we start disregarding the constitution.

>>4319678
>Monopolies do not occur in pure capitalism.
Of course they do.

>>4319688
OK. Well argued. I concede.

No, they do not. Especially not exploitative (hurr all capitalism is exploitative) ones. An exploitative monopoly is an invitation to foreign entrepreneurs. Dow is the typical example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Henry_Dow#Breaking_a_Monopoly

>>4319696
I should correct my original statement, actually. A monopoly that operated around market prices could sustain itself, but that isn't really a problem.

>>4319678
>Problems only arise when we start disregarding the constitution.
"We" the people like a good constitution, but the corporate beast, that unthinking profit machine, knows damn well constitutions can be reinterpreted and subverted.

Most of the radical, revolutionary innovations that have fuelled the dynamics of capitalism - from railroads to the Internet, to modern-day nanotechnology and pharmaceuticals - trace the most courageous, early and capital intensive 'entrepreneurial' investments back to the State. All of the technologies that make Jobs' iPhone so 'smart' were government funded (Internet, GPS, touch-screen display and the recent SIRI voice activated personal assistant).
Such radical investments - which embedded extreme uncertainty - did not come about due to the presence of venture capitalists, nor of 'garage tinkerers'.

It was the visible hand of the State which made these innovations happen.

>>4319696
You realize that it was governments that broke up the old monopolies, right? Still laughing at "pure capitalism" btw. Are you one of those types that cries when leftists say the USSR and other socialist countries are not and were not communist?

>(hurr all capitalism is exploitative)
Right

>>4319688
Note how he said 'pure capitalism', which is the mythical holy grail of lolbertarians, their 'true communism', and allows for every subsequent argument to be scotsman'd.

I love how threads without the least bit of literature relevance are fine when the "right" side is chosen.

Meanwhile, screams of /pol/ can be heard in any thread that wishes to discuss Evola or right wing literature.

>>4319757
>>>/pol/

>>4319757
pls respomd

>>4319696
>No, they do not.
well argued

yes they do. in anything other than the ideal, theoretical, impossible Walrusian model, monopolies are always a consequence.

>>4319785
>Walrusian
lol
I meant Walras obv

>>4319757
well yeah
your kind are poisonous to this community
i actually watched this place get worse as rightists started posting here

>>4319790

>hurr durr community gets worse because people with opinions contrary to my own start having discussions

Take the stick out of your ass, turn off the computer, and go outside.

i'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a pussycat.

>>4319794
It's not so much the opinions themselves, but the way they are disseminated. The last thing we need are more boards to degenerate into /pol/ style discussions.

inb4 liberal tears

>>4319764
>>4319767
So you see the boards general cognitive dissonance in regard to certain literature discussion as fine?

Are you really going to defend this bullshit while circle jerks containing nothing but leftist politics receive little to no resent?

>>4319803
/pol/ style discussion is /lit/ driven, legit posts get discarded with "go back to /pol/" stop being hypocritical

>>4319794
>Take the stick out of your ass, turn off the computer, and go outside.
no, y'all just don't read any fucking books
like, come the fuck on, y'all are all still stuck in the fucking 1800s

y'all are just stupider, no way around it, you rely on rhetoric from thinkers whose ideas, while once revolutionary, are grossly outdated, hardly any of y'all have even engaged with the ideas of any serious thinkers from the late twentieth century

>>4319810
>y'all are just stupider, no way around it, you rely on rhetoric from thinkers whose ideas, while once revolutionary, are grossly outdated

Like Marx?

>>4319812
yes. like Marx.
all of them 19th century people are outdated.
except for Stirner, obviously

>>4319812
yeah, there's a reason people have refining his work and building on it

it wasn't the final step

good job

you got it

>>4319806
>thread opens with democratic socialism
>very little agreement in the thread
>capitalists present and adding to disagreement
>rightist starts crying about being persecuted and the thread being a circle-jerk the second bullshit about 'pure capitalism' is questioned

THIS is why no one likes /pol/. Self-victimizing charlatans.

>>4319817
>THIS is why no one likes /pol/. Self-victimizing charlatans.
well, my problem is still that they don't read, and the only reason they post here is because they want to convince themselves they're smart

>>4319803
It's not that there is never right wing shitposting, but when similar shitposting is done by a liberal not a single eyebrow is raised.

The reactionary literature threads a month ago weren't particularly virulent in their spread. They contained enough discussion of right wing literature that it continued across 7 or so threads. The Spengler and Evola threads are no different.

>>4319817
The thing is this has nothing to do with literature, and if a similar thread were started that was fascist instead you can be sure that reports, sages, and "go back to /pol/" would be among the first five posts.

Just because he posted an image of an author doesn't make it literature related

>>4319222
So you want us to run your country even though you think there's something mentally wrong with us?

>>4319574
>It was a bullshit post from a fascist

You don't even know what I stand for.

As a Fascist I stand for the small trader against the chain store; for the peasant against the usurer: for the nation, great or small, against the super-state; for personal business against Big Business; for the craftsman against the Machine; for the creator against the middleman; for all that prospers by individual effort and creative toil, against all that prospers in the abstract air of High Finance or of the theoretic ballyhoo of internationalisms.

There are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who are not Marxist-Leninists.
What is wrong with you?

>>4320879
How do you stand for those things?

>>4319696
I bet you guys never heard of the term natural monopolies, right?

Let me tell you guys something: in the electric sector, you have 4 types of agents: generators, transmissors, distributors and "sellers"

the T segment is a natural monopoly because if you open to more than one company, both will go bankrupt, won't go into details here

there're a lot of things called natural monopolies for a reason, kid

>>4319838
This.

>>4320879

So tell me, on a scale from /pol/ to Adolf Hitler, how much do you hate Jews and other non whites and blame all your problems on them?

There are people on /lit/ RIGHT NOW who are not Stalinists.
What is wrong with you?

National Socialism reporting in

>>4319410
>ˈkapətlˌizəm/Submit
All this time I've bee saying capitalismpersubmit the wrong way!

>>4321182

This kid is slowly turning into a legend.

>>4319358
>Everything I agree with is true and just being held back from the public in a conspiracy.
>Everything I disagree with is pseudoscience.

>>4323621
Economics is bourgeoisie pseudoscience.
>invisible hand
>trickle down
>crises

Truly idiotic.

>>4323652
>2013
>still saying "bourgeoisie"

shill harder pls

>>4319230
This post is so cute. You're trying to be a big author but you're wearing a college contrarian's pants. Your metaphor sucks and your tone is too abrasive.

Not OP, but Social Democratic master race reporting in. My greatest hope for America in this century is that we'll shuck the yolk of big business and take care of our own through collective voting. It's lofty, but I expect nothing less of a generation forged by the Internet.

Of course I also love 4chan which seems to stand in contrast to these ideals.

>>4323652
>>4323669
I prefer to label it as a faith based system. A pseudo-religion if you like.

>>4323547
More than just Jews run this Ba'al worshiping cult, ya ignorant nazi.

>>4323686
america is already a social democracy

>>4319253
>Why would you be a socialist?
Because Capitalism cannot exist without exploitation. Socialist principles seek to reclaim some of those lost profits and right the unfair pyramid structure that Capitalism inherently births.

>Do you believe that people deserve to get things they haven't worked for?
I believe that people deserve basic human necessities like food, shelter, health care, etc. If you want to interpret that as muh welfares, then that's your choice. I personally fond it callous not to provide those things, and not vice versa (ie: society suffers more when we have people starving to death and starving in the streets more than it does giving benefits to people who may or may not deserve them. Either way they're used.)
>I don't believe in materialism and I don't believe that having things makes you happier.

I don't see what that has to do with anything. In fact I find this contradictory since Marx proved long ago that Capitalism leads to object fetishization.

>That's why I'm a capitalist.
Fair enough, and there are strengths in the Capitalist model, but profits at the expense of suffering, especially en masse, are not acceptable. The current system of global Capitalism which we live under is deeply flawed and should be reevaluated.
>I understand that there is nothing wrong with having nothing as ultimately it's one's choice.
lolwut? You think poor people choose to be poor? If that was the case then everyone would choose to be wealthy.

>I'm content with not having anything and I don't think anyone owes me anything

Good for you. My guess is that you're probably not starving and most of your needs are actually wants rather than necessary for survival. That's not the case for most of the world's underclass. They could use benefits to have a fair shake at life and Capitalism promises that they won't have those opportunities, so long as it never profits the structures above them. Think about someone other than yourself for a change.

>>4323717
No it isn't. But it's moving in that direction, which is a good thing for the majority of Americans.

Capitalism is the reason why we rich(compared to the 1800's) bourgeoisie can sit here and be pseudo-intellectuals... Corporatism is the reason why we pseudo-intellectuals for some reason think capitalism is evil. There should be no state intervention in the market.

>>4323686
>yfw 4chan literally changed the world and raised a counter culture.
>tfw you've been a part of it.

>>4323738
>Capitalism is the reason why we rich
You? Rich?
http://profit.ndtv.com/news/economy/article-46-per-cent-global-wealth-owned-by-richest-1-per-cent-credit-suisse-369109

>There should be no state intervention in the market.
Yeah. Because the only problem with capitalism is the state, right?

>>4323744

>>4323744
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9WyFlr2CEY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vshXpQGbwEw

This is what you're part of

>>4323744
I seriously love 4chan

it's changed my life in so many ways

>>4323747
>what you said
You? Poor? Look at africa!

>Yeah. Because the only problem with capitalism is the state, right?

Of course not, everything has problems inherently. State intervention in capitalism just makes it a lot more ugly, and generally, strengthens the inherent bad qualities of capitalism. However, any system has good and bad qualities, and capitalism is the one with the net good.

>>4323747
If you live in the first world, you are rich compared to the second and third world, even if you are a welfare recipient.....

I love how the only two boards I browse are /pol/ and /lit/. Mainly because they're the same in argumentation style, but only differ in content.

>>4323751
>>4323757
>>4323759
Thinking I meant underage and b is 4chan culture. C'mon now.

>>4323766
Second world....Wut?

>>4323772
go back to /pol/

>>4323766
You do realize nobody has referred to those countries as "second world" since the fall of the USSR? It's "developing" now.

>>4319230

>>4323652
>crises

It's called business cycles.

>>4319232
>not being French
>deux-mille treize

>>4319318
That metaphor was dumb and you're dumb.

ITT welfare leeches who've never done an honest day's work in their life whine about how exploited they are.

>>4324509
>implying Marxism is about how exploited you personally are
Typical bourgeois incomprehension of something as simple as human altruism.

>>4319643
No, because in a free market, power is for sale.

>>4324513
>human altruism

Inform me of other beings that use altruism...

>>4324524
sea slugs

>>4324524
You're mom was very altruist to my dick.

>>4324509
>ITT welfare leeches who've never done an honest day's work in their life whine about how exploited they are.

What is College students.

>>4324527

Man, you don't know what just did to yourself.

I pity you if my mom's munching on your tally wacker.

>>4319222
9 in 10 persons are really fucking stupid.

>>4319278
You like Ayn Rand too, so there's that.

>>4319278
Can someone explain to me why REI puts quotation marks in every fucking post he does? Also why he always speaks in ALLCAPS?

>>4324509
I've worked for like six weeks, man.

>>4324541
>I've worked for like six weeks, man.

I've worked for 14 years...

I'm 28.

>Socialists
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>4324546
>I have wasted my life and time for longer than you have, I deserve more possessions!

In reality you deserve a boot to the arse and a fist to the cheek for being so fucking unbelievable stupid.

Read "in praise of idleness" by Russell.

>>4324507
Wow, you sure convinced him with those hot opinions.

>>4324556
>In reality you deserve a boot to the arse and a fist to the cheek for being so fucking unbelievable stupid.

Never asked for your acceptance of what I've done with my life.

Also, I was able to buy my own Sega Genesis without my parents and pay for my own sega channel subscription.

I never once was given or asked for an allowance.

I bought my own toys as a child, paid for my own education and bought my own clothes.

So someone complaining about how 'hard' work is, merely comes off as a mewling idiot cat to me.

>>4319222
Max Stirner taught me to believe in the spook of not believing in any spook -- one of it being socialism!

>>4324563
>Also, I was able to buy my own Sega Genesis without my parents and pay for my own sega channel subscription.

I bought my own ps1 as a kid?

>I never once was given or asked for an allowance.

Do you think money is sacred or something?

>I bought my own toys as a child, paid for my own education and bought my own clothes.

So? How is this different from someone whose parents gave it to them? Is it worth more or more useful if you pay for it by your employers compensation for your time?

>So someone complaining about how 'hard' work is, merely comes off as a mewling idiot cat to me.

Who complains about work? The disabled?

Orwell was a hack:
http://samkriss.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/forget-orwell/

>>4324587
Atlantis is real

http://www.atlantisevidence.com

I'm technically a Fascist because of the following:

>I don't believe in parliamentary politics
>I believe in individuals as the source of anything
>thus I believe individuals should be put in charge
>individuals with duties and responsibilities
>if someone fails his sole duty, he gets fired
>etc

I'm neither racist nor antisemitic but the herd makes a mediocre leader.

>>4319274

This is what the banksters want you to believe, and since you're their little whore, you do.

In numbers we win, as individuals, we fail. Learn from history.

>>4324587
/lit/ is a quality board

http://www.based-/lit/.com

>>4319574

Fascism was against Cubism and the ensuing nonsense.

Cubism and the ensuing nonsense just about killed the arts.

Nobody knows a living painter that is both relevant and known by the masses in the second half of the 20th century, our years included.

Thanks, Cubism, you killed it all.

>>4324696

Damien Hurst.

>>4324688
>Learn from history.

Materialist dialectical history?

>>4324696
Do you honestly think the majority of people alive during the Renaissance, even in Italy, knew who Da Vinci was? Artists become significant in retrospect.

I am honestly just waiting for some kind of sea change to sweep fascist thought back into the mainstream. Anyone else feel this way? In the meantime I am politically apathetic and will vote Conservative like a robot, but on the day of the glorious fascist revolution I will be marching in the streets next to my brown-shirted brothers.

Sigh. I just hope this happens in my lifetime.

>>4324715

The majority of people who mattered did.

Nowadays, everyone knows Picasso or Dali but nobody since then. Case in point.

>>4324716

Everything I see nowadays is nothing except making the bed for a grand new Fascism of epic proportions.

Newer generations don't feel ashamed of things like slavery because:

1. they get it that this is what "they" want them to think and feel bad about

2. they get it that history is written with blood

Liberal brainwashing is losing its grip more and more.

You can only lie to people for so long.

Remember Plato: Fascism is always preceded by democracy, always.

>>4324509
>welfare recipients
>leeches on society

cant into fiat currency regimes

government spend money into existence, government spending is not funded by tax dollars under a fiat currency. more people should go on welfare and not work. they would stop driving down wages but still do the one thing unskilled people can do to help the economy: consume.

>>4324696
>rightists gut all funding for arts and arts education
>it's art's fault we don't know about art!!!!!!

Graet jb

>>4324696
Cubism came much before fascism and inspired futurism which inspired fascism
why would you complain about the state of the arts when you don't know art history

>>4324752
Rightist doesn't have any zing to it because it's nothing to be ashamed of like leftism.

Leftist or liberal are offensive words.

>>4324760
>100% damage control

>>4324752

Why should art need funding? If art wasn't fucking DEAD it'd MAKE money by itself.

Naturally, you can't expect to sell millions of copies of your monochromes, fucktard.

>>4324760
>Tfw this isn't brilliant satire

>>4324757

>futurism inspired Fascism

Get the fuck off my planet. Fascism existed long before that; it was the other way around. Look it up.

>>4324772
>the free market will fix it!

>>4323738
>cherry-picking at its finest

>>4324780
yes I know that fascism comes from the Latin word for fag but Italian fascism and as a result fascism around Europe was largely inspired by the futurist movement
if you don't know art history and you don't know history what do you know

>>4323747
You know that if you're American, you're the global 1%, right?

>>4324781
State-sponsored "art" results in mediocrity across the board as artists fit their work to the guidelines and whims of a small group of centralized, all-powerful bureaucrats.

Alternatively it results in piles of trash, or pieces of plastic submerged in urine, ending up in national galleries.

>>4324816
All this buttmad because you don't understand or appreciate art.

Pro-tip: it's exactly art because plebs like you react in this way so that rich cultured people will buy it for obscene amounts of cash to distance themselves from plebs like you, this is the way it has always been.

Stay mad tho.

All art aside from social realism is objectively trash. Either it depicts bourgeoisie perversion or old feudal power fantasies.

Pic related, true, real, powerful art.

>>4324838

>Picture or Lenin
>Complains about bourgeoise
>Lenin was a lawyer

>>4324836
Art today:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

I can't wait until you degenerate scum are rounded up and gassed in camps.

>>4324850
>cherry picking

Go back to /pol/ and come back when you have done some research on contemporary art. Your ignorance is boring.

>>4324863

More contemporary "art":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lmvX00TLY&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DI9lmvX00TLY&has_verified=1

One day you disgusting Jews and your corrupting influence will be exterminated, like the vile cockroaches that you are.

>>4324869
what would a good piece of art look like today

>>4324874
I can't tell you if it doesn't exist. Let's gas the kikes and find out.

>>4324816
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Works_Progress_Administration_artists
in what way did these artists fit their work to government guidelines?

>>4324881
>doesn't matter, kill the jews lol
Fucking hell...

>>4324881
I guess it probably would be a weak nihilist being edgy on the internet to compensate for the fact that he will never produce anything meaningful in his life
God bless

?

>>4324874

>>4324812
Population of US 317,174,000
World 7,128,000,000

It's closer to five percent.
And then you're not even considering the wealthy of Europe, BRICS etc.

Basically, you're stupid.

And I'm a Eurofag anti-american.

>>4324893
In this corrupt and degenerate age, "meaningful" means a dildo stacked on a pile of bicycle tires.

God save me from creating anything "meaningful."

>>4324869
I enjoyed this, notice how it's reaction of the crowd more than the 'piece' itself that was recorded? Real art takes place within the skull.

>>4324889
Now you're getting it.

>implying that true socialism is possible without ousting the capitalist ruling class first
>implying that anything less than proletariat revolution is a valid path to freedom from wage slavery

Reformist scum.

>>4324912
Is that because it confuses you stormfags, that reason can't justify your a->b or why b is utopia like a socialist can? So it's more a religious thing to you, without the intellectual support of reason like modern religions has?

>>4324936
I honestly can't make out what you're trying to say, you'll have to express yourself more comprehensibly.

>>4324899
but I thought blaming one's failures on society was a leftist tactic

>>4324949
I haven't blamed any of my "failures" on society, nor do I credit it with my successes. However, I see clear flaws in society, and I blame /society's/ failures on the corrupting influence of Jewish ideology, such as cultural marxism.

>>4324919

This. There must be a dramatic shift and a tear in the fabric of society before it can congeal.

>>4324945
that's leftis speech. they throw together some "big" (and I use this word very liberally huehue) words together they've learned in their useless humanities major and think they've won the debate by obfuscating the issue. I know you faggots are all unemployed leeches, but just letting you know that kind of shit rhetoric doesn't fly in the real world.

>>4324919
what will you do with people who don't want a revolution. spooky control freaks you marxists

>>4324973
The only people who don't want a revolution are either using the state to protect their own self interests (capitalists, employers, bourgeoisie) or those who haven't read or understood State and Revolution yet.

>>4324980
the only people who want a revolution are loser manchild

>>4324945
I'm saying in a very forward way that you are stupid and just a supporter of vulgar populism

>>4324968
That's rightist demagogy to call words "big" as that was something bad, and accuse "big" words of being meaningless, anti intellectual vulgar populism. This is why we don't like plebs like you and your ilk here. Because if you read you would know.

>>4325001
>being meaningless, anti intellectual vulgar populism.

but that was your post in a nutshell. those leftist tears are delicious

>>4325001
>vulgar populism
>if a lot of people like it it must be bad!

>>4325001
>and accuse "big" words of being meaningless. This is anti intellectual vulgar populism*

I need to go to bed.

>>4325004
I'm not whining, you debate like you were on /pol/.

>>4325005
>a lot of people agree with me
It is clearly the people's will to do X and Y
>a lot if people disagree with me
They are clearly manipulated by the jews! Otherwise there is no reason to tolerate homosexuality, interracial marriages, social security for all etc.

>>4325011
you don't even debate

>>4325017
>Otherwise there is no reason to tolerate homosexuality, interracial marriages, social security for all etc.

As if you all degenerates do is "tolerate" those things.

Here's a question: what's the difference between tolerating something, and actively encouraging it as a good thing? Because the latter is what your ilk engages in.

>>4325005
Oh yes the masses are so enlightened. It's the guy who have done years of study that's wrong compared to the superior common sense of John Doe who pulled it out of his ass as it spontaneously appeared in his mind.

>>4325020
Again, non-argument.

>>4325026
More emotional logical fallacies. Boy, it sure must be nice to be so secure in your worldview that all you feel you need to do to defend it is appeal to authority!

>>4325031
>More emotional logical fallacies.

Elaborate please?

>>4325033
>appeal to authority

>>4325023
>missing the point completely
>trying to divert the discussion to the inane accusation that degenerates not only tolerate some social matters of fact but even propagandise them
>implying the fact that most people do not give a single fuck if a black and a white get married is not already encouraging interracial marriages in your eyes

>>4325031
>logical fallacies
INFORMAL fallacies, you fucking dolt; not logical.

>>4325037
>>4325037
I didn't state that a proposition was correct on the grounds of the authority of the proponent of said proposition.

If I made an appeal to authority I would have said

"I am a doctor that's why I know that the average person isn't as knowledgeable as someone who has spend his life researching the subject"

Appeal to authority is that my argument is poorly argued if my foundation rests upon my or some other proponents title

Also, the fallacy fallacy.

>the more you know

>>4325048
They are still /logical/ fallacies you fucking moron. You can distinguish between informal /logical/ fallacies and formal /logical/ fallacies, but they are all /logical/ fallacies.

Dear God you are a fucking retard.

>>4325037
And the "the people wants it" was an appeal to masses, so what ? The guy who actually knows what he is talking about is more likely to give a well reasoned plan of action than the average citizen, that's a fact. The decision if this plan should be put into action is another question. This whole debate in the last few posts was completely inane though.
This one anon said that the assessment by the populace is probably worse than by a person that is educated in that particular field. Then some other anon yells "appeal to authority", because he assumed that the person with the better judgment also decides the course of action.
Just because the populace is in favour of something doesn't mean it's good either by the way...

>>4325092
>Just because the populace is in favour of something doesn't mean it's good either by the way...

Point out where I claimed that.

>>4325058
There is no informal *logic* you humongous faggot. It's anything but logic. Just because "Informal Logic" comes up on SEP and Wiki when you Google it doesn't mean it's logic.

Fuck off back to youtube debating Creationists.

What an embarrassment.

>>4325124
It's a technical term you utter blockhead. No-one gives a shit where you think it makes sense or not.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/logifall.html

>>4325124
>>4325058
lol both of you are namecalling lol

>>4325104
You replied to a post that criticised that from a populist point of view, the expertise of an actual professional is naught when the people approve of something because of their gut instinct with "appeal to authority" as you explained in your following post. But this anon said nothing about who is to make the actual decision I'm assuming here that this anon thinks that the documents/studies/papers said professional produces actually provide the reasons to do X, and that the reason is not that because that professional says X, it must be done , which would make your accusation invalid, since he doesn't say anything about who should decide what to do.
I thought since you tried to undermine that anon's entire post instead of showing its limitations, that you agree with the populist post he replied to. And even if you are not populist, that statement, as you have acknowledged, still is correct.

>>4325130
>hueheuhue it's a technical term
The term is controversial you mewing fucking dimwit. There are many, many people who have problems with "Informal Logic" being actual "Logic" as it is perceived and practiced academically. You come off as someone that is no older than 18, failed his Formal Logic class--or better yet, hasn't taken any classes in it--and who dabbles with Informal "Logic" in Internet debates.

Again, there is no such thing as "Informal Logic".

Get off this board, and consider killing yourself.

>>4325159
No-one said there was any such as thing as "informal logic" you disgusting idiot, all I did was use the widely acknowledged technical term "logical fallacy." And again, no-one gives a fuck about whether or not you, personally, think that said /acknowledged technical term/ is appropriate, or makes sense.

I'm probably being rused, but congratulations, my blood is boiling right now.