/lit/ - Literature

More like the ME!ME!ME! Generation ;)

>>6363631

>le millennial worst generation :v(

Who cares. Secondly, why are you even using that shallow time cover as an example of what you're specifying.

>>6363639

It signifies how nobody who came before us wants to be culpable.

>"le entitled narcissists!!!" narrative
>dey somehow became dis way ex nihilo

What failed '60s experiments do you mean?

>>6363638

More like the dank meme generation.

>>6363652

The sexual revolution for starters. ( hence my reference to Houellebecq )

>>6363647

The only generation I can call truly terrible are the Baby Boomers, sure.

Can we specify what exactly the problem is before we talk about it here?

>people who think generational conflicts are a thing
>people who don't think every generation before and after is or will be exactly the same as theirs

>>6363662

Well let me illustrate it with this quote as to what went wrong and how we're the result of what started with your (grand)mom/dad deciding it'd be a good idea to emulate tribal people:

“It is interesting to note that the "sexual revolution" was sometimes portrayed as a communal utopia, whereas in fact it was simply another stage in the historical rise of individualism. As the lovely word "household" suggests, the couple and the family would be the last bastion of primitive communism in liberal society. The sexual revolution was to destroy these intermediary communities, the last to separate the individual from the market. The destruction continues to this day.”
― Michel Houellebecq, The Elementary Particles

>>6363631

protip: the experiments of the 60s are all dying

- SJWs are now advocating for gender segregated dorms and black-only schools now, in direct opposition to integration
- academia is now rapidly becoming filled with old, no-fun-allowed types again as it was before the 60s
- women want to wear more clothes (headscarves and long socks are now hip) and be more sexually conservative (see CA's yes means yes law, various attempts to purge sexual content from various websites) in defiance of the sexual revolution
- women want to go back to being homemakers, because working a job sucks. This is the direct result of hispanic immigration causing a shift in overall US cultural values.
- gun control is rapidly being defeated in most parts of the US
- "religious freedom" laws are now on the rise, allowing companies to exclude customers on the basis of religious values
- the internet destroyed any attempt at universalism, instead fostering the rise of muliculturalism (aka different groups of people with different values coexisting separate of each other)
- globalism is dying, mostly because it makes western countries poorer while making third world countries more unstable
- global democracy is dying, a direct contrast to 60s predictions that democracy is the inevitable end-state for all societies
- on that line of thought, western democracy itself is waning in direct contrast to 60s era democratic movements
- overall respect for figures of authority, especially in science and the government, are waning as people become sceptical of science's and the government's ability to effectively solve problems
- the middle class, aka the great Silent Majority of the 20th century, is dying and as a result politics becomes more volatile and confrontational between business interests, dixiecrats and socialists
- the UN is useless and everyone hates it

essentially, culturally we're going back to before a large middle class dominated society and we're probably better off for it

>>6363716
>SJWs are now advocating for gender segregated dorms and black-only schools now, in direct opposition to integration
That is because they are contrarian and what ever is status quo is "oppressive".

>>6363716
>the experiments of the 60s are all dying
whose fault is that?

>>6363689
this assumes individualism is bad

>>6363738

Probably white people, hu?

>>6363682

Boomers are unique though, economically speaking the prosperity they were born into and grew up in was unprecedented. Same for anyone born between 1850 and 1950. Even though technology will continue to evolve and grow, we'll likely never see the explosive growth of a middle class again in our lifetimes.

>>6363745
>the last to separate the individual from the market

what is he getting at

>>6363732

true, but my point still stands

>>6363738

you can't really pin it on a single "thing", but really it's the decline of the middle class. There are many reasons for this, more than can fit within 2000 words.

>>6363748
>what is he getting at
idk

>>6363745

This Stirner fad on here needs to fucking die, I swear to god..
Yes, it is bad. And I say this as a dude who likes his own space ( inb4 durrr shut-in loser ).
It's absolutely detrimental to a species that is intrinsically social.

>>6363747
this

>>6363716

>middle class is shrinking
>this is a good thing

By the way globalism is not dying

>>6363747

pt 2

And as a result of these unique economic traits, they have unique cultural traits. Boomers grew up in a world where pensions were guaranteed and where the government's ability to solve problems was never questioned.

for some reason, it kept thinking my post was spam

>>6363652
>>6363658

i thought he was talking about mk ultra

>>6363748
Nothing particularly profound, I presume.

>>6363755
>implying the species is my responsibility
sorry, I refuse to be used-up by a species

>>6363755
>It's absolutely detrimental to a species that is intrinsically social

I mean yeah sure, on a biological level we are programmed to work together because it meant that we could hunt, gather, and survive in groups that helped protect us from predators. In a world where we are the apex predator, and we need people to solve problems and create ideas and technology individualism works best. If one odd person can work and be different, and invents something that helps millions then individualism works out. I'd rather have a bunch of different people who can all contribute in different ways than have a mindless homogeneous group of people that can't innovate.

>>6363755
>thinking the species holds predominance over the individual
>thinking you can know some thing to be intrinsically "social"
Seems overly speculative.
I take care of my source,
then I take care of my extension.
That being said, doing any thing takes an eternity,
so only my source holds any use.

>>6363769
>on a biological level we are programmed to work together
No, we are not.
Noone "programmed" us.
We do not need to work together nor is there any indication that we need to.
It is just blatant misinformation.

Although I agree with your post as a whole.
That first part just seems like misinformation I hear a lot.

>>6363769

The 'world' you described isn't biological.
It's an economic system that requires atomization for it to function. And that very system is as destructive as it is creative.
So it says little in its favour and is basically a tautological argument. "Individualism is good because it serves the system, which is a good system because it does good things to further individualize us."

>>6363759

The middle class gave us things like self-destructive leftism and hyperconsumerism.

Globalism is dying, slowly. The EU project is objectively a failure and China can't compete with the rest of the third world as they slide into a depression. The idea of an "international, universal brotherhood" is mostly dead now, as banks falter and people become more extreme due to poverty. While the world is more connected via the Internet, it's rapidly coming apart as people liberate themselves using information derived from the Internet. This doesn't mean they'll be an end to international trade, that's impossible, but that people overall less trusting of each other, and as a result inflexible political structures will find it increasingly difficult to run a government when each of their states want different things.

>>6363773

Are we seriously going to debate the fact humans aren't social creatures?
How is that even 'speculative'?

>>6363755

So you're saying that individualism=NEET shut in?

I don't think you know what individualism means...

>>6363716
interesting perspective

>>6363745

Fuck individualism though. Sorry.

>>6363794
>Fuck individualism
said the tripfag

>>6363799

Why don't you follow my example, then?

>>6363782

Even as the middle class shrinks hyper-consumerism continues to grow; people just have less money and go further into debt. Living in relative comfort doesn't necessarily need to lead to hyper-consumerism and leftism, the West has simply stopped encouraging its traditional values. Some of the strongest reactionaries and conservatives have come from places of great wealth and comfort, however they were raised to appreciate things such as faith and tradition over materialism

And listen I agree, the EU is a failure and the whole "global citizen" and "universal brotherhood" theory is nonsense. However while I believe that the data is on our side, I still think the majority of people believe that globalism is achievable. I doubt I could find a handful of students at my local colleges that think otherwise and considering that most people are now going to college that tells us something.

>>6363786

>u implied something didnt ya

Now I wanna beat DiCaprio in the face.

No I didn't.
But if anything my shut-in life is a perfect example of how individualism can make that possible. I can just live all by myself in the middle of a megalopolis without any group looking over my shoulder.

I don't mind my current condition at all, but I know many others do.

>>6363801
I don't desire recognition on an anonymous imageboard

>>6363801
done

>>6363809

>But if anything my shut-in life is a perfect example of how individualism can make that possible. I can just live all by myself in the middle of a megalopolis without any group looking over my shoulder.

What's the problem with this? As long as your not crookedly collecting welfare and taking disability who cares if you live alone in a big city?

>>6363818

*you're

My bad, little tired.

>>6363809
Mr. Individualist who pays the bills?

>>6363818
>As long as your not crookedly collecting welfare and taking disability
An individualist wouldn't feel discouraged from this, I would certainly do it if it would let me live comfortably.

>>6363818

A lot of people don't want to live a life like that, fucker.

>yo dog im ok with it stop bein a pussy ass faggot hhahhaha man up

Another thing wrong with millennials perhaps.

>>6363783
Have you heard of hermits?
What creature is not social, any way?
Humans have the capability to be individuals more so than any other animal,
how then is it social in comparison to any other creature?

>>6363825

Well I'm not an individualist.
Read motherfucker, read
You're on /lit/, you're supposed to have mastered that skill.

>>6363782

>While the world is more connected via the Internet, it's rapidly coming apart as people liberate themselves using information derived from the Internet. This doesn't mean they'll be an end to international trade, that's impossible, but that people overall less trusting of each other, and as a result inflexible political structures will find it increasingly difficult to run a government when each of their states want different things.

Food for thought: 40 years ago, if someone wanted the CIA's manual on guerrilla warfare, or improvised weapons, or gunsmithing, they'd have to ask them directly. Likewise, civilian books on similar subject matter (like the anarchist's cookbook) would have to be physically imported in order to be read. Nowadays, all you need is an internet connection to read, distribute and print any of these materials. With the rise of CNC machines and 3d printers, you can run a fabrication shop/factory with much less people.

The Information Age is inherently anarchical, as free information is liberating to otherwise ignorant people. This has huge consequences, and it means politically that people now have a larger outlet for their frustrations (the internet, with sites like slate on the left or infowars or stormfront on the right) as well as a place to organize. This doesn't bode well for large, hierarchical 20th century institutions that try to use one-size-fits all type policy on everyone.

sorry for bad english, not a native speaker

>>6363831

>using hermits as an example to illustrate humans aren't social creatures

The fact they started hallucinating presences should tell you something.

Also, cenobitism? Heard of that?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pascal-vrticka/human-social-development_b_3921942.html

>>6363828

>An individualist wouldn't feel discouraged from this, I would certainly do it if it would let me live comfortably.

Well then that is an extreme version of individualism I would not subscribe to. I've always believed that individualism at its core relied somewhat on self-reliance and independence. Most of the self-described "individualists" I meet get ill at the sight of a welfare check.

>>6363818
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1377100/The-2million-baby-boomers-facing-lonely-old-age.html

>>6363807

>I still think the majority of people believe that globalism is achievable.

only if you live amongst people coddled by a nanny state, even in the US the left is mad at the most recent attempt at globalization, the TPP, as is the right

the only people who want globalization, are old people and boomers in power

>I doubt I could find a handful of students at my local colleges that think otherwise and considering that most people are now going to college that tells us something.

most people are going to college for no reason other than that their parents told them to, and many will graduate with a worthless degree only to discover that their job is easily taken by someone without a degree who learned X trade on their own. Many already have, and the college industry only gets by due to government funded speculation via sallie mae. This isn't sustainable in the long term, as the student debt crisis helps destroy whatever was left of the middle class

or at least that's my view

>>6363841
>I've always believed that individualism at its core relied somewhat on self-reliance and independence
I figure it's self-interest above all-else.

Is it safe to say that the rate of change, and difference between generations is the largest it has ever been today? And that it will only continue to grow larger?

With the way technology is moving the lives that people live today are vastly different than their parents, and their children will be even more estranged. As time goes on empirics seemingly will be less and less useful because the landscape people live in changes so quickly.

>>6363779
Evolution programmed us. Read a fucking biology textbook

>>6363738
>whose fault is that?
An experiment doesn't fail due to its subjects but due to its model.

>>6363843

JUSTICE_SERVED.PNG

>>6363846

What would you call a person who is a border-line hermit, lives alone in a big city but supports himself without taking from the state?

Just curious.

>>6363830

>>6363858
An individual? Why does that person need to fall under a single label?

>>6363779
If you were right hominids wouldn't have evolved language.

>>6363848

>Is it safe to say that the rate of change, and difference between generations is the largest it has ever been today?

No, compare someone who was born in 1850 to someone born in 1900. The rate of change there is so massive it's probably not possible to any of us to conceive of it. In the space of a single generation, humanity went from mostly dirt farmers living with 1500s-era tech to a mostly urban world with interior plumbing, early skyscrapers, railroads, self-powered wagons (automobiles), steamships, primitive aircraft as well as the telephone and the radio (along with very early primitive computers). Someone who lived to be 100 would also get to see both world wars, and early jets, spacecraft, computers, nuclear power and atomic bombs.

From 1950 to 2000, all you have is the Internet. Hugely important and life changing, but not nearly as the same as the Industrial Revolution.

>>6363816

>>6363874

Internet and smartphones are significant though. They've decimated our culture.

>>6363885
>They've decimated our culture
No, they've only changed it.

>>6363894

I meant what I said :)

>>6363885

>They've decimated our culture.

no, they've enhanced it unless you're a rich suburban kid living in a gated community that has never had to work for anything

TV did far worse to culture as it put a handful of Hollywood studios in control of society. Now, everyone is left to fend for themselves like it was before the middle class era. I've yet to see why having a pocket computer is detrimental to the average person.

>>6363844

>the only people who want globalization, are old people and boomers in power

And young Marxists that believe in a border-less world.

>>6363874
collapse of capitalism when? who will be the first to fall into civil war? china?

>>6363896
So it's only been ruined according to your personal thoughts and ideals of what culture is and should be.

>>6363858
what is wrong with using the state to furnish an idle lifestyle full of self indulgence and isolation?

someone who prioritizes independence over convenience is just high on ideology

you can't remove the government, so make use of it

if you want to live a lazy lifestyle why should the means concern you?

why should you uphold some idea of independence if it stands in your way of being a lazy bastard?

>>6363902
Not him but, look architecture.

>>6363902

Yup. I'd give just about anything to go get rid of the smartphone. It used to be nice walking into a room and striking up a conversation instead of seeing pic related. In fact that's all the boomers are good for now, a good chat on the subway or bus.

>>6363915
how have smartphones effected architecture? Besides, even if they had a dramatic effect on it, it would only be good or bad according to your opinion.

>>6363901

Russia.
They're doing everything to make it happen (I for one support Putinism).
But that will backfire like a motherfucker.
I predict the 22nd century will be Russian.
Too bad no one will believe this. But we'll see who is right.

>>6363918
Same shit, different year

>>6363918

>>6363926
>>6363927

HIVEMIND

>>6363927
>>6363926
praise the lord

>>6363926

>newspaper same thing as smartphone
>device that keeps you constantly connected to your circle of friends and associates

Reading a book or the paper on a train is entirely different than being on Facebook or snap chatting.

>>6363935
It's not really, idle entertainment is idle entertainment. Talk to somebody on the bus, whether they're on phone or reading, it doesn't make a difference, in fact you'll probably annoy the reader more.

>>6363935

Nigga you missed the day of dudes walking around with their walkman everywhere?

>>6363939

Smartphones are like movable bubbles. You keep your circle around you at all times and can easily escape from the outside world anywhere. Moreover you can just pop in headphones and tune out from the whole world.

The paper was practically an invitation for discussion. I still borrow certain sections of the paper from people on the train and discuss the headlines as well. Phones and print are totally different.

>>6363901

Capitalism can't collapse, it's a defining trait of human civilization (aka people will trade goods for other goods or services). Then again, this is a pretty liberal definition of "capitalism".

However, global capitalism, aka neoliberalism, is dying mostly because the people operating it now (boomers) are doing a pretty piss poor job of it.

Anyway, China is obviously the first to go given that the Chinese government has been complete garbage for the past 300 years, and that China itself had massive famines in the 20th century due to mismanagement. This century, they face huge problems as fore gin firms look elsewhere for cheap labor (mostly because it's expensive to do business in China now), meanwhile the PRC spent all of their money building ghost towns to maintain double-digit growth during the 2008 recession. The boom will bust within a few years, just as Droughts in Africa and the US (mostly California) mean higher food prices (which is a problem because the PRC is a huge food importer). Net result is that a collapse of the PRC regime is likely, especially as western rural provinces rise against richer eastern coastal cities.

In the west, the EU project is coming apart because the EU let in southern europeans and then let them borrow fuckhuge sums of money. The idea of a Greek bankruptcy is slowly becoming accepted, just as Euroskeptic parties gain traction in western europe. The US is marginally better off, mostly because it's political system is so flexible and the US is self sufficient when it comes to food, and is an oil exporter. The latter point, the fact that the US is an oil exporter, kills OPEC which itself exists as a globalist NGO. The UN, the champion of 20th century globalism/universalism, is useless, and this is a fact that everyone accepts.

These predictions are unproven though, and they're taken from Stratfor, a US think tank.

>>6363935
>It used to be nice walking into a room and striking up a conversation instead of seeing pic related

it's the same for purposes of keeping to oneself, not interacting with other's in your immediate environment

do you disagree?

>>6363946

Both reading the paper and being fixated with a smartphone will keep the reader/user in their own environment and out of other people's environment. But once again, it easier to engage with the reader of a paper than the user of a smartphone in my opinion.

see >>6363943

>>6363945

Also, it needs to be said that other NGOs like the WHO are useless, just look at the recent Ebola rampage. Same for international trade organizations like the Organization of American States, that face increasing internal pressure due to it's members having conflicting agendas especially when it comes to trading oil. Stagnant economic growth is a huge driver of this, which results in a resurgence of nationalism. Other international trade groups fail as well, just look at how the TPP has fallen apart despite all of them coming together two years ago to negotiate it. Net result is that these organizations are ineffective. The only globalist success story is NAFTA, but then again Mexico is a borderline failed state in it's northern provinces that are being wrecked by cartel violence. Right now, the Mexican military has replaced the local police in an attempt to stop cartels, with minimal success. If a country, especially one that is effectively a satellite state of the US, can't even control gangsters in it's own backyard then an NGO is not going to be able to implement policy amongst it's member states.

>>6363945

>mfw a burrito is $9.00 now

>>6363943

>being this much of a sperglord

not everyone is in highschool/college, people in general aren't sociable towards strangers (especially in diverse, non-homogenous societies) and phones don't really change that

it mostly depends where you live, a white person living in a 95% white community is going to have an easier time getting along there than if they were living in a 30% white community

>>6363943
>get rid of distractions so people have no choice but to talk to me!

>>6363973

I'd really like to see the source on that data. I live in very diverse town and people are very sociable. From my experience age has more to do with it than diversity. Older people seem to be more willing to have a discussion than 20 and 30 year olds.

>>6363761
yes we will never see it again because the people at the top have become incredibly powerful and rich and greedy, and because the people have multiplied to the point that our individualities struggle to count or mean anything

>>6363984

>people have multiplied to the point that our individualities struggle to count or mean anything

I think every generation had this. People have always felt small.

>>6363984

so? That's what life was before 1950 and for the most part everyone got along fine. Not everyone can keep up with the Jones', not that anyone ever should have.

>>6363964

look at how useless the imf and ecb is too lol, they gave greece shitloads of money and now the buggers aren't going to pay any of it back

>>6363979

Let me guess, you're Canadian?

>>6364011
usa detected

>>6364011

American actually.

>>6364011
Canadians are only considered polite in contrast to those monkeys in America

>>6364020
canadian =american

>>6364023

Canadians, especially the Toronto ones, love to pride themselves in the fact they have Paki's and Chinks for neighbours.

>>6364023
>those monkeys in America
Gee, I'm so offended

>>6364024

Fine, I'm from the United States.

>>6364027

I don't support multicult either, it's just a fact that I live in a diverse town.

>>6364027
just the outspoken liberals you get anywhere

>>6363995
>got along fine

as in submitted to continued injustice because duped by misused religious ideas and unfair rigidity of society. if the future holds new kings and new peasants is no reason to be all philosophical about it. we failed.

>>6363631
I think that anything that goes into the entertainment industry becomes a cliché and if anything, it is no longer relevant to the present state of affair.

>>6363945
>Capitalism can't collapse,
>it's a defining trait of human civilization
>(aka people will trade goods for other goods or services)
STOP
STOP
STOP

>>6364038

prove me wrong then, given that every civilization required specialization of labor, which requires people to exchange a given service or good in exchange for another given service or good

I get that it's a very liberal definition, but it works.

>>6363747
>the explosive growth of a middle class again in our lifetimes.
well the whole story is the creation of this middle class. So if you wish to see anew its creation, you must kill it first.

I do not think that the working/middle class will disappear now.

>>6363870
>If you were right hominids wouldn't have evolved language.
NO HI, BUT WE CAN evolve again, to something else.
and we do not like promiscuity much, it is good to be together but to close is detrimental.

>>6364035

> if the future holds new kings and new peasants is no reason to be all philosophical about it. we failed.

We have new kings and new peasants today. In 1880, Leeland Stanford's Central Pacific Railroad owned more land in California than the state government, and collected more in fees than the government in taxes. Same for other conglomerates like Standard Oil and AT&T who virtually controlled the world at their peaks. And yet, people were happy during all those years and rapid technological advancement happened. People's lives improved, even if it didn't mean they were making more money. In fact, many people lost money moving from farms into urban cities, given that many were giving up a stable job and income in exchange for urban life (often inside crampt apartments, even).

A smaller middle class does not inherently mean mass ignorance or mass poverty. It was unusual for Boomers to have such a large middle class, and we're returning to the mean. And we're probably better off, and the 20th century will be remembered as a cultural wasteland where people lived isolated lives inside their suburban homes hypnotized by television.

>>6364046
That's a ludicrously broad definition of capitalism. That's closer to a definition of economy. Any definition of capitalism that doesn't deal with privatization is not a definition of capitalism.

Did someone say MeMeMe?

>>6364046
Look where you are, faggot. I'm not going to waste my time properly proving my point. I'm just going to fire off glib, barely coherent greentext and attach a photo and shitpost that motherfucker dick-first straight through your eyeballs so it can get in your mind and rape that swaddled mess all over. That's how it all appears to me.

The smug satisfaction of having the last word but never actually providing any content is fucking glorious.

Look, you want proof capitalism can collapse? I'm fucking lonely, okay. The sexual free market means I'm a fucking virgin at 35. I can't get any pussy because of this goddamn shit. someone needs to step in and tell these girls to throw me a pity (communismo) fuck.

>>6364046
That is not how feudal economies work you miseducated pleb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#History

>>6364082

I think I get what you're trying to say, but this honestly reads like copypasta.

Also this faggot >>6364074 provided a better refutation to my point than you did, so eat shit.

>>6364082

>someone needs to step in and tell these girls to throw me a pity (communismo) fuck.

Funny how leftists will see this as THE sign of patheticness and not as something that should cause a sense of empathy in them.
Sexual paupers they will give libertarian tier advice: "Just man up and get to work."

>>6364096
there isn't a liberal way to force girls to fuck ugly nerds

>>6364096
pls be joking

>>6364100

Fascism once again proves to be superior.

It redistributes wealth and pussy.

Leftists just give a bunch of handouts and in the meantime have an orgy thinking everyone partakes while there are sex hungry proles behind the fence.

>>6364100

Tell them for every ugly nerd they fuck another inner city kid gets a scholarship to yale!

>>6364113
You'd still die a virgin.

>>6364113
but that would be rape

>>6364107

No I'm not.
Leftists like to believe they're reviving the Eden of the Paleolithic ( Engels saw these societies as the first examples of practical communism, and his The Origin of the Family is basically a precedent of Sixties sexual liberty/breakdown of the family unit crap

In the end they created a Hobbesian hell for the uglies in which there are clear gatekeepers of sex who keep a bunch behind the fence like a border patrol.

"In the history of mankind as a species, an average of 40% of men successfully passed their genes to future generations, compared to an average of 80% for women. Today's human population is descended from twice as many women as men. This is (widely acknowledged) proof that women function as sexual selectors, and that men evolved risk-taking and ambition behaviours to compete for mating rights."
Studies:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.6231.pdf
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/11/2047.long

>>6364129
>there are clear gatekeepers of sex
kek, your autism

>>6363755
>Respect for all humans as individuals means one can never work together

>This Stirner fad needs to die

Sorry, but I'm not going to be a sycophant to your "proletariat" or the "masses" or the "community", you Marxist tosser.

>>6364129

>In the end they created a Hobbesian hell for the uglies in which there are clear gatekeepers of sex who keep a bunch behind the fence like a border patrol.

or, you know, you could just grow up and fuck fatties like your dad probably did

I don't even mean to be hostile here, I'm serious. Women, especially fat women, get desperate for mates when they hit their late twenties. Sex is easy if you're willing to drop your standards to a more reasonable level. Hence why the vast majority of humanity is ugly, because ugly people are the vast majority of mates that reproduce successfully.

>>6363833
>sorry for bad english, not a native speaker
Your English is perfect.

>>6364140
in the communism-sex analogy men who fuck fat women are like scabs.

>>6364127
I know you're joking and we're probably on the same side here, but I think reaction that making any kind of move on a girl is "rapey" is one of the big roadblocks more people (not necessarily you) need to get over. Men are expected to put themselves out there and women typically resent men who don't make the first move if the chick has a crush on them. In the US we have a bunch of women (especially feminists) who are wondering what happened to all the "good" men who were confident, strong, etc. while they perpetuate harmful attitudes in society that block boys from gaining the experience necessary to become confident. Obviously, some men figure this shit out and gain that confidence, but a LOT of guys I've met over the last 7 years are stunted because of this and it sucks. They aren't going to find a mate that they really want to be with and who they can satisfy unless they have that confidence and the resolve gained in pursuing women.

I'll let myself out the back.

>>6364133

I'm surprised it's not a hat joke.

>>6364140

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about, you guys turn into grumpy libertarians telling everyone to just enjoy the crumbs (or man the fuck up).

You just demonstrated where your loyalties lie ( and always lie with leftists ): with themselves and not with some imagined class/group of rejects.
When they meet them, they hate the hostility against their own privileged group more than trying to understand the position these people are coming from.
Somehow they managed to turn off the defense when it involves "fuck whitey" from ethnic minorities, but not with any other group ( like white trash ). Then they take it personal and launch vicious counterattacks.

>>6364145

and the vast majority of humanity are scabs

>>6363631
>failed 60's experiments.
>failed
hahaahahahaa, hahahahaahahahahahahah , haaahahahahahahahahahaha
you have no idea.

>>6364153

>See, this is exactly what I'm talking about, you guys turn into grumpy libertarians telling everyone to just enjoy the crumbs

but I am a Libertarian, if you want a hot wife you have to literally pay for it, because hot girls know that they be vapid cunts and get away with it for good sex

I don't even know what you're talking about in your second paragraph.

>>6364150
>but I think reaction that making any kind of move on a girl is "rapey"

This is literally the reason I never hit on women, and I never will. I've read too many horror stories, and I have 2 male friends who have been wrongfully accused of rape.

Women freak me the fuck out in this culture.

>>6364170

>being this beta

/r9k/ please

>>6364153
>See, this is exactly what I'm talking about, you guys turn into grumpy libertarians telling everyone to just enjoy the crumbs
let's hear a suggestion from you then? how will a liberal society make women fuck you?

>>6364169

So you support the current sexual impoverishment of some.
At least you're being consistent, but not moral.

And I was addressing leftists.
If you were one you'd understand.
But you have no loyalties or empathy for that matter. So it's not a surprise you come from that angle.

>>6364177

A liberal one?
Well, it will not, that's my point.
If anything they have shown that in their society you have no right to monogamy unless you make it so.

>>6364181

I honestly couldn't care less about morality, people can die virgins if they chose to do so.

Also, I seriously think you should try starting a redpill thread about this on /pol/, because you'd get better responses than what I'm giving you.

>>6364174
>male shaming tactics

Not going to work in me faggot. Have fun with your unfair divorce courts, be robbed of half your property, and never seeing your children except on holidays.

What the fuck is going on in this thread?

Lets drop the labels for a minute. Is some faggot really saying that it's not HIS fault that beautiful women won't have sex with him?

Have you tried getting better at conversational skills? Working out? Looking for women that appreciate intelligence over dick size?

>>6364046
specialization of labour has nothing to do with the division of labour and dead labour in mechanization.

>>6364187
>all women are out to get me!
are you by any chance a paranoid schizophrenic?

>>6364192
>Is some faggot really saying that it's not HIS fault that beautiful women won't have sex with him?

Pretty much, but there is a cultural aspect to this that he is right about. When traditional marriage was done away with, it really did mean that all the good looking men, and all the good looking women flocked together, as opposed to in the past.

It will inevitably leave a large portion of men single and unwanted just by sheer "market forces".

>>6364185

>I honestly couldn't care less about morality

Well there the conversations end.
Enjoy your immoralism, or at least your pretense to be thatsince society basically dictates it to be considered a 'winner': http://www.amazon.com/Why-Love-Sociopaths-Capitalist-Television/dp/178099091X..
You sure demonstrated to be one in the current climate. Kudo's.

>>6364192
>Looking for women that appreciate intelligence over dick size?

Intelligence has absolutely zero impact on attracting women by itself. If you use your intelligence to attain status you can get laid, but it's the status that is doing it, not the intelligence. Women don't give a shit how smart a man is, a man has two things he can use to get laid, physical attractiveness and social status.

>>6364187
>I-I'm single because I choose to be!
Embarrassing

>>6364196
>All women are out to get me

Where have I ever said or implied such a thing? With all the SJW shit going on at universities, and false rape accusations going on, I'm being cautious as fuck.

You should as well if you value your life.

>>6364187

My grandfather and grandmother were married for almost 60 years and were deeply in love for almost all the marriage. This idea that ALL women are whores and "out to get men" is bullshit.

>>6364192
"women that appreciate intelligence over dick size?"

>>6364200
And you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Shouldn't you leave the gender relations discussions to people who have interacted with women other than their moms in the last three years?

>>6364192

When are we going to get over the idea that having fantasy sexual relationships with anime cartoon characters or Benedict Cumberbatch is somehow illegitimate or detrimental and every bit as valid as heterosexual marriage?

Once that's done away with, everyone will be happy.

>>6364206
>were married for almost 60 years

Which means they got married in a totally different era. Very few people who get married this year will be married for 60 years.

>>6364187

But I am married, I'm 35 years old with kids.

Honestly all this modern "fuck cismales/fuck women who won't give me sex" is mostly just an Angelo thing, and will fall by the wayside as Hispanic/southern european culture becomes more prevalent in the US and northern europe. Really, the goal of having sex is obtaining offspring, something which apparently everyone except for middle class americans and northern europeans don't really seem to get and think it's all about hendonism. I guess it's just a cultural thing, but this type of thinking probably stems from the fact that northern europeans don't live with their extended families under one roof, and they're all latchkey kids who's parents mostly ignored them, hence why they're so starved for attention.

Either way, you'll grow out of those opinions eventually, and settle for someone less than pretty or you'll die alone. Considering how shitty the latter option is, I'd reckon your tune will change by your early 30s at the latest.

>>6364216
divorce rates actually have been going down for the last 20 years, m8. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

>>6363926
>>6363927
You can only read a newspaper so much.

A smartphone is effectively limitless.

>>6364209

If intelligence really was primary to women fucking you, /sci/ would be drenched in pussy juice.

Some people need to get some common sense again.
If your intelligence doesn't go attached with a handsome face/status, it's not a deal.

>>6364205
>I'm being cautious as fuck
Over something stupid. You don't get laid because you're afraid you might be accused of rape. It's just silly.

>>6363653
>dank meme generation
I'm a member of internet surfing and aesthetics clubs online, this seems to be the case.

No previous generation possesses such a parlance.

>>6364209
Whatever success you had with women was because of how you looked or your status, you can be sure your smarts had nothing to do with it.

>>6364219

>something which apparently everyone except for middle class americans and northern europeans don't really seem to get and think it's all about hendonism

*something which apparently middle class americans and northern europeans don't really seem to get and think it's all about hendonism

>>6364219
>think it's all about hedonism

I don't. But the culture does.

>>6364223
Not the anon you're replying to, but the divorce rates have been going down because the marriage rates are plummeting you fucktard.

>>6363716
>academia is now rapidly becoming filled with old, no-fun-allowed types again as it was before the 60s

Haven't really seen evidence of this.

>>6364205

>being this disassociated from reality

go outside m80, seriously loosen up a bit

if you've never experienced life, then I guess you'd be afraid of it

>>6364219

From a purely biological point of view, sure. But sex among humans is also, and mostly, social, and not solely aimed at procreation. Same for dolphins and bonobo's.

>>6364233

>status
>not determined chiefly by intelligence

>>6364197

There are still women in the US and in the west that appreciate traditional marriage. You just won't find them at liberal arts schools.

>>6364200
I can tell you from experience this is not true. I'm an average looking male that cannot boast about social status (uni drop out). I'm pretty fucking sure my first girlfriend only stayed with me due to the fact that I could stay up all night with her talking about politics and philosophy. She was much better looking than me....

>>6364223
50% of marriages end in divorce according to a fast Google search.

I sincerely doubt it was as high as 50% 60 years ago when you're grandparents married.

>You don't get laid because you're afraid you might be accused of rape. It's just silly.

It might be silly for you, but I'm not going to spend years in jail, and have my reputation ruined over some batshit whore who files false charges.

>>6364225

Not the other guy, but getting late is a matter of balancing good looks, social skills, raw intelligence, and social capital. If you can max out all of these, you can pretty much fuck anyone/thing at will, and this will always be the case.

>>6364244

true, but generally speaking the most successful mates only have one or two partners during their lives. An individual who procreates with many other people is generally looked down on as slutty, which is a defense mechanism against contracting STDs

>>6364242
>Go outside
>You're just a beta
>Muh shaming
>Paranoid schizophrenic

People really don't have any arguments, even though I can supply ample evidence that this culture is fucked.

>>6364255

>An individual who procreates with many other people is generally looked down on as slutty

Well we're seeing a cultural shift that will stop that soon.

>>6364246
Of course it isn't. You can use your intelligence to get status, become some sort of artist, make money, etc. But just because you're smart doesn't mean you'll get any relevant social status and just because someone has social status doesn't mean he's smart. Plenty of rather dull people are charismatic and popular.

>>6364239

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-10-27-what-they-are-saying-20141027-story.html

this obviously isn't the case at *every* school, but it's fair to say that many high-profile schools were unusually lenient when it came to sex, drugs and free speech from the mid 70s to about 2010 or so

granted, nowadays things are banned because of "sexism" or "racism" instead of muh "tradition", but the end result is the same: schools go back to being anal retentive about speech, sex and drugs

>>6364254

And the secret ingredient of being himself, right?

Masses of humanity in a cosmopolitan society are always awful. The only path to take is the path that has always been there: to go into the deserts, those within and those outside society, and care for fruits that are to bear.

>>6364253
>"Why don't you hit on that girl?"
>"n-no, I don't want those darn essjaydubyas to throw me in jail on rape charges!"
is this you?

I seriously think you might be a homosexual.

>>6364260
Because we've nothing left to do but shame you. You're like a fat person who whines about fatshaming but never tries to lose any weight, except you're a beta who refuses to get game, or even try.

>>6364261

only if you live on a college campus, in the real world people tend to be more picky especially when they can figure out a person's entire sex history by looking them up on facebook

>>6363833
>as free information is liberating to otherwise ignorant people.
the thing is that information is very manipulable

and the flood of information is really not this relevant as you must know beforehand what to look for in order to make sense of this flood


people have had access to books for centuries and there is no significant changes in their behaviors

I hate this stupid world, and I hate our stupid future. I just want to read books, eke out a living, and maybe get laid every now and then, but everything seems to be conspiring to ruin my life. Also fuck you Time magazine I live with my parents because boomers (as in your fag editors) drove up rent and tuition.

>>6364261
Not likely. An STD is bound to always be revolting.

>>6364260

I never called you a schizo, just naive.

It's painfully obvious that you let internet clickbait determine your view on women, which is hilarious given that you're just as dumb as slutty college girls as a result.

>>6364274

Only in American culture do you see this craving need to live by yourself at age 20.

Most other cultures in the world are fine with young adults staying at home and there's no loser tag attached to that.

>>6363874
>From 1950 to 2000, all you have is the Internet. Hugely important and life changing, but not nearly as the same as the Industrial Revolution.
the next revolution is in the field of biology. internet pertains to the physics and the technology. The next boom is about health.

>>6364274

Time magazine went to shit years ago, it only gets by on the brand now. Time-Life publishing itself is owned by Comcast now too.

>>6364260

Yea the culture is shitty. But it sounds like you're using that as an excuse for not being able to find a single woman with whom you would be compatible with.

>>6364274
You live with your parents because you take no responsibility for your own life.

Probably also because you have no friends. A studio is about $500, but a 2-bed is $650. You get a friend and split the rent, $325. Get it?

>>6364269
>who refuses to get game, or even try.

Oh, I have tried, and failed. And succeeded. But that's beside the point.

This issue is become so huge that Rolling Stone Magazine even reports on rapes happening on campus, without even checking if actually happened, which it really didn't. Some fucking feminazi literally lies about someone raping her(a fucking serious crime), and everyone believes her axiomatically.

This culture is literally fucked.

So no. I'm not paranoid. I'm not beta. I'm not a hermit. I have a well-payed job, and decent friends. What I don't need however is raving mad harpies ruining my life.

>>6363716
>global democracy is dying
>western democracy itself is waning

These are a lot of unsubstantiated claims, but this scares me the most. I can't help but feel like I'm looking back out over something, at the end of something. It's a fin-de-siecle at the beginning of the century.

>>6363755
I've accepted that my nihilist individualism precludes me and nearly everyone else from collective action. I'm not happy about this, but I just can't do it man.

>>6363918
>In fact that's all the boomers are good for now, a good chat on the subway or bus

Agreed. Ooh, they get so angry if you don't want to talk about the fucking weather with them though.

>>6364295

>A studio is about $500, but a 2-bed is $650.

In what fucking country? Certainly not in the United States, at least not in the north east.... unless you plan on moving to Bridgeport Connecticut or Detroit.

>>6364284

that's definitely possible, but it remains to be seen how much of a change it'll bring

the most "realistic" view is that by 2050 we'll be able to clone organs and add 20-30 years onto our lives, and a cure for cancer could easily double human lifespans

that has a huge effect, but it's not as huge as the entire change in thought that occurred during the industrial revolution

>>6364287
>But it sounds like you're using that as an excuse for not being able to find a single woman with whom you would be compatible with.

Not using it as an excuse, but as I said earlier in the thread, I'm being cautious.

>>6364274
Baby boomers and the Gen X are greedy as fuck, they have had no values other than consumerism, the millenials may become relevant because we are aware of a lot of abuse that wasnt seen as such by others and we have more culture. But at the same time we are cowards, we dont even smoke crack.

>>6364295

>Get it?

Not that anon, but being on here is really fucking toxic with all this bloodthirsty wolf tier hostility against people who obviously have it bad ( let's say, stand weaker in life ).

>>6364296
>What I don't need however is raving mad harpies ruining my life
It's not an outcome you just base your sexlife around though. It's like never leaving your house because you might get murdered, it's something you just have to expect not to happen, because it probably won't.

>>6364308
>ut being on here is really fucking toxic with all this bloodthirsty wolf tier hostility against people who obviously have it bad

This is /lit/ after all. The dwelling of the pretentious.

>>6364303

move into a rural area, rent in a city like Sacramento or Reno isn't even half what it is in San Francisco or San Jose

apparently you suffer from a lack of imagination, unless you're just lying to yourself in order to hide your lack of ambition

life is cheap, especially if you're on welfare. You can steal wifi from a mcdonalds or a starbucks and get all the free movies, books and TV you could ever desire

>>6364307

Most normies haven't even felt feels.
Go figure.

>>6364265
>schools go back to being anal retentive about speech, sex and drugs

I suppose, but it's just a few journalists and 'cultural commentators' who remember the '90s stirring up this free speech shit (whilst coupling it with Millennial humiliation/degradation).

>>6364295
>You get a friend

Yes it's always so simple

>>6364308

git gud scrub

>>6364314

I'm not moving to a state that will be having a civil war over bottled water in two years.

>>6363918

sorry youre boring and nobody you know wants to talk to you lol.

>>6364317

true, but overall it's at least fashionable in the media to be paranoid about rape and sex, even with a liberal/uber leftist spin to it

all the people who had aggressive christian soccermom parents in the 90s are now aggressive atheist liberals, and they'll be anal retentive and sperg out over sex and drugs like their parents did

>You will never own land in South Dakota and live in peace with your cowgirl wife and children.

>>6364310
>It's like never leaving your house because you might get murdered, it's something you just have to expect not to happen, because it probably won't.

Well, I don't think they're analogous, but fine. I'll stop now, and you run a long now and live your perfect life.

>>6364326

protip: that war happened over a century ago, hence why the state endorsed monopoly PG&E exists

also my point still stands, move out of NYC if you want and affordable life, like Albany, Springfield or Augusta

>>6364342

given how cheap land is in the midwest, you could just buy some for table scraps and get a russian immigrant or illegal beaner as your wife

>>6363943

Fuck off dad there's a reason mom hasn't banged you in a decade

>>6364349

>bringing Slavic blood into the family line

>>6364275
>Not likely. An STD is bound to always be revolting.
I wonder why we develop drugs against STDs, I wonder why women demand contraceptives and abortions

>>6364349
>>6364360

/pol/ pick up your trash

>>6364275
an STD sure, but hardly is any at all sexual history

>>6364367
>/pol/ pick up your trash
>pastes picture of Stalin

A fascist is a fascist is a fascist.

>>6364374
>>6364367
>>6364360
>>6364349

Oh wow you guys really killed the thread fast

>moving to the midwest
>any year

i would literally rather live in Detroit than such a bland place like the Midwest.

>>6364374

>implying I'm even a stalinist

GR8 B8 M8

>>6364378

What thread?

>>6364381
For major northeastern cities Philadelphia is really very affordable.

>>6364305
>that has a huge effect, but it's not as huge as the entire change in thought that occurred during the industrial revolution
perhaps the change in thoughts will be about the environment and our place on earth. There will be the question of how to fill our spare time, just like there was the question of the childhood as the childhood was created.
There will no longer be technological advances in industries outside a broad sense of biology . Our planes will remain planes, our cars will remain cars and our oven will remain ovens.

It will be a strong change, but less concrete like the inventions of the plane, like you said. it will be more difficult to answer and understand the consequences of this change.

>>6364387

I'm finna move to a place where CSX doesn't own the railways

>>6364315
Nah, id say they feel normiefeels more than usual, you know, with shit songs by Katy Perry or moments in Breaking Bad, its like we are a more sensitive generation in a lot of ways that others werent.

>>6364342
Anon I hate to say it but you aren't living if you aren't living in SoCal.

>>6364399
>living in SoCal

Holy shit I knew it. /lit/ really is full of hipsters.

>>6364391

>it will be more difficult to answer and understand the consequences of this change.

well I'm of the opinion that we still haven't completely figured out the consequences of global industrialization either

but, then again, even things like the internet and the boom in biotech research are results of the industrial revolution, so my point is moot

>>6364403

I'm also in socal I hate to say it

>>6364399

>living in southern california
>ever

lol, no

also 209 masterrace

>>6364399

>SoCal

Yea, no. I'll take my weekly 10ft snow weather and shitty internet in Maine over SoCal.

>>6364410
>but, then again, even things like the internet and the boom in biotech research are results of the industrial revolution, so my point is moot
you need a beginning yes

>>6364307

>we are cowards, we dont even smoke crack.

speak for urself my man :^)

>>6364307

>millennial culture

>>6364424

nobody gives a shit you don't have any friends

>>6364414
>209 "Niggerville" California
>masterrace

hahahaha

>>6364424

you reap what you sow, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree etc etc

>>6364429

>being this jello

>>6364424

Wow, at first I thought they were standing like Muslims in prayer... Is this a sign?

>>6364295

>move out
>have to work to pay rent
>closer to the uni you get, the higher the rent
>spend all my time working or riding the bus
>do poorly in school, get no reading done, neglect health

the uni I got to is located in one of the most expensive areas of the city. Houses or condos on or near campus are astronomically expensive and the few dorms are reserved for international students whose parents failed to exploit their peasants extensively enough to amass the fortune required to buy them a place of their own. To make matters worse, city planners opted to preserve high house prices by building as few major thoroughfares as possible, with the result that transportation to or from school is essentially strangled. Or fucking anywhere for that matter. Our traffic congestion is on par with Los Angeles. I also have poor mental health (ie I'm a defective subhuman) so I lack the resiliency to deal with our strange, hard world. My episodes cost me the majority of my friends.

Basically though, I live the way I do because I'm a fragile person who loves solitude and comfort, and that's entirely my responsibility. I don't like living in my Asian anthill of a city where it's every man for himself, just like in Shanghai or Delhi I guess. Thanks boomers for radically altering the ethno-cultural makeup of my homeland, I'm sure it will be alright for you, you'll be dead already when the genocides start.

>>6364432

>yfw when Postman was 100% right

>>6364429

/pol/ go away. Go away

"And now, after having said so much about mutual aid and support which are practised by the tillers of the soil in "civilized" countries, I see that I might fill an octavo volume with illustrations taken from the life of the hundreds of millions of men who also live under the tutorship of more or less centralized States, but are out of touch with modern civilization and modern ideas. I might describe the inner life of a Turkish village and its network of admirable mutual-aid customs and habits. On turning over my leaflets covered with illustrations from peasant life in Caucasia, I come across touching facts of mutual support. I trace the same customs in the Arab djemmâa and the Afghan purra, in the villages of Persia, India, and Java, in the undivided family of the Chinese, in the encampments of the semi-nomads of Central Asia and the nomads of the far North. On consulting taken at random in the literature of Africa, I find them replete with similar facts – of aids convoked to take in the crops, of houses built by all inhabitants of the village – sometimes to repair the havoc done by civilized filibusters – of people aiding each other in case of accident, protecting the traveller, and so on. And when I peruse such works as Post's compendium of African customary law I understand why, notwithstanding all tyranny, oppression, robberies and raids, tribal wars, glutton kings, deceiving witches and priests, slave-hunters, and the like, these populations have not gone astray in the woods; why they have maintained a certain civilization, and have remained men, instead of dropping to the level of straggling families of decaying orang-outans. The fact is, that the slave-hunters, the ivory robbers, the fighting kings, the Matabele and the Madagascar "heroes" pass away, leaving their traces marked with blood and fire; but the nucleus of mutual-aid institutions, habits, and customs, grown up in the tribe and the village community, remains; and it keeps men united in societies, open to the progress of civilization, and ready to receive it when the day comes that they shall receive civilization instead of bullets."

>>6364442

>taking a cherrypicked photo seriously

>>6364450

>British people

Go. Out. No British allowed. Out with Britain.

>>6364450

>mfw he actually was
>mfw he described /pol/, tumblr, raid culture and e-activism before they all existed

pretty smart guy tbh

>>6364461

British Nationalists out. Out with Britain. No British people, go back home. Go home smelly!

>>6363833
At the same time the government can use the same system to easily spy on people. And an overload of information means less of it will be useful. A man who has access to a million books is less likely to read any given book than a man who has only 10.
Somebody reading the Anarchist cookbook in the 60 was likely to be an actual anarchist. Today it gets downloaded by teenagers and takes up space on their hard drives unused.

Technology won't make things better or worse, just faster.

>>6364448
same about the uni in Europe.

all the urbanisation is fucked up

>>6364455
>>6364471

You could have stopped it. But nope, now we got bloody smartphones as well as 3,000 channels of shit television.

>>6364479

>there are britons working in coal mines right now because they didn't have a TV license
>even then they will still defend it because muh superior british way of life

>>6364479

>not enough Belgium hate to be a decent Farage post

>>6364479

Maybe you should have thought about the blowback before you decided to make terrible food and conquer the world.

>>6364482

>superior british way of life

Yes, we are superior!

>>6364224
Before the internet, they used to publish newspapers every day, or sometimes even twice a day. For only a few dimes a day, you could have access to more information than you could ever hope to digest in your lifetime. By the time you finished reading the morning post, the evening post was coming off the presses.

The internet may be even bigger, but newspapers were already presenting us with more information than we could be bothered to read. It's just a slightly more efficient packaging and fancier graphics.

>>6364490

Wasn't my idea to let the Empire fall. It's all labour's fault.

The first half of this thread filled me with existential dread. When the second half devolved into tfw no gf, I was calmed. What a ride

>>6364495
>read newspapers on train
>nothing else to read
>gee nothing else to do, i'll probably strike up a conversation with the person sitting to my left

vs

>use smartphone on train
>never have to converse with anyone again

see where I'm getting at pal?

>>6364499

The empire deserved to fall though

>>6364082
>The sexual free market means I'm a fucking virgin at 35.

This is the result of the feministas who do not want the prostitution to be legal as it would devalue the cost of access to a woman.
The left is again hypocritical on this subject in wavering the spectre of the sex slaves and sex mafias...

>>6364505

we aim to please

>>6364082

>The sexual free market means I'm a fucking virgin at 35

>>6364511

Nothing as beautiful as the British Empire "deserves" to fall.

>>6364520

I'm an anarchocommunist so.........yikes............

The 21st century is fucking great piss off decrepit nihilists who hopelessly yearn for something fabricated in nostalgic wet dreams.

We're still living in the fallout of the great European civil war. It shook Western Civilization to the core, and things haven't recovered yet.

But if you're buying into generational conflict you're buying into a marketing tactic. They want your self-identified de-individuated self valuing whatever bit of tat they're promoting this month as somehow validating your unique world view by emulating some little 17 year old slut on the TV.

>>6364527
>21st century
its problem is that the middle class drags everything down

>>6364523

Oh I'm sorry to hear that. I wish you a speedy recovery.

>>6364510
>Read newspaper on train.
>Get off train, give paperboy a nickle and read another fucking newspaper.

Your idea of newspapers comes from the fact that the industry is mostly dead due to the internet. In it's heyday, you would not realistically run out of reading material as long as you could spare some change.
And city people have never enjoyed talking to each other. At least not since the industrial revolution. Strangers are scary, especially when there are so many of them and they are all different.

has anyone here actually read that Time article because I have and it's garbage.

let's not take anything in that adult picture book seriously, and let's take it as a sign that the concept is intellectually bankrupt if fucking TIME is peddling it

>>6364574

>let's not take anything in that adult picture book seriously

this sums up my thoughts about Time as well

>>6363631
What should I read by Houellebecq as an introduction to his thought/work?

>300 replies in 4 hours

you must've hit a sore spot

>>6363926
>>6363927
Waiting on a train/in line and reading a newspaper is much different than being on the phone around a group of friends. One is idle entertainment while doing something you aren't supposed to enjoy, one is actively seeking distraction when you're in a setting you should be enjoying.

>>6364613

This isn't a serious problem. Stop talking meaning like you know what the problems we face are, you're out of your element

>>6364618
no one cares about you

>>6364646

Wrong. You just cared by typing that out. Aw, thanks! :v)

>>6364595
>this sums up my thoughts about Time as well
the american time is shit

>>6363631

HOW DARE YOU CRITICISE ANYTHING RELATED TO WOMEN! THE MONETARY SYSTEM MUST BE NEO-LIBERAL WHILE THE SEXUAL SYSTEM MUST BE SOCIALIST!

NERD NECKBEARD WEIRDO VIRGIN FEDORA LOSER CREEP

>>6364668
why are you surprised people don't want to be told who they can fuck?

>>6364668
shut up you dumb gay dick

signed, a nerd neckbeard weirdo virgin fedora loser creep

>>6364668

/pol/ go away. shoo. back in your hole asshole!

>>6364668

Holy lol I got mixed up in my troll post. I was parodying you guys, so the corrected version is:

THE MONETARY SYSTEM MUST BE NEO-LIBERAL WHILE THE SEXUAL SYSTEM MUST BE A COMPLETELY FREE MARKET!

bare lolz that I have to spend taxes (i.e. money i.e. life) on wimmin but they aren't obliged to hand out sex.

>>6364668
go the fuck away /pol/

you're literally as bad as tumblr

>>6364689
stop spending money on women who aren't having sex with you

>>6364695

Or maybe you should stop hoarding your money and let go of the material

>>6364676

>you said something I don't like
>you must be from /pol/

>>6364701
so maybe you aren't from /pol/, but you'd fit right in

>>6364701

>british asshole

Fuck off British fucker. Away vermin. Nobody likes your smelly nationalist shithole island and they certainly don't like you. Go away shit smelling islander fuck off. Fuck way off.

You're out of your element.

>>6364664

and Time is an American magazine, so saying that "american time is shit" is saying that time in general is shit

>>6364705

Have you been to /britpol/?

I've campaigned for UKIP and I'm still too liberal for the /pol/ nazis. They should just go back to supporting the BNP, they only go for Nigel because the BNP has basically dissolved and gone to labour.

>>6364596
Platform

>>6364707

triggered?

>>6364737

No. Your entire island nation is an irrelevant shit shaped garbage dump past its prime. You have nothing to be proud of. There is no British pride.

>>6364713

that's because the "national socialists" on /pol/ are all faggots that read a few infographics and mspaint collages and take it as gospel

>>6364740

Irishman detected.

it is not because the left says that rape is wrong that it is actually wrong.

>>6364740

>No British pride

That's cute. I wake up to rule Britannia every morning and spend an hour each day reflecting on all the good the empire did for civilization.

>>6364740
you are right, the Britain is just a spook in reality, same with pride

>>6364745

I don't even live in Europe. I don't find you should be proud of any state, let alone a set of old accomplishments. You're above that.

>>6364748

You've proven my point you should not be proud of a rouge state of inbred sailors demanding land. You are all the chargers of all social spread of disease and death.

>>6364750
Sounds like some jelly continental rubbish to me.

>>6364750

I think it's time for someone to cool off.

>>6364752

Well an Anarcho-Communist so it's natural I'm opposed to what you represent. No offense. Not my cup of tea. :v)

>>6363631
>millenial
>wurst
kekenbur, X is the reason everything is terrible - the actual generation of the laziest, stupidest cunts on the planet

I think it's safe to say that worst generation was and always will be the first homo sapiens sapiens cursed with consciousness who thought procreating was a good idea. Nothing we or your offspring can do will ever compare because ultimately they're responsible for all of it.

>>6364809
you are the worst for thinking that it is not your fault, just like the babyboomers

>>6363945
>Capitalism can't collapse, it's a defining trait of human civilization (aka people will trade goods for other goods or services)

>Capitalism is trading goods for other goods or services

I dont think its physically possible for someone to stop reading something faster than I stopped reading that.

>>6363971
Where the fuck do you live.
In SoCal I can get an enormous lengua burrito for $6.

>>6364613
You know what those people are doing on their phones?

They are sending text messages to other friends. You are just freaking out because it looks like they are staring off into space if you aren't familiar with how a phone works.

Bump