/lit/ - Literature

>>7092428
can anyone summarize what this guy is about. i listen to some lectures but it just seems like hes all over the place with his philosophy

>unironically ignoring [insert x intellectual] just because you dislike his politics

Why do people on either "side" of the political spectrum do this to such an aggressive degree?

>>7092443
Also, as a caveat, it's in the interest of capitalists to take communists seriously. Why?

Because communists take themselves and their ideology seriously. To paraphrase Tropico 4, you should think reaaaaaaally carefully about the phrase "better dead than Red"

>>7092439

He's a self-identifying Jacobin ( euphemism for Terror supporting scum ).
He's more like a popularizer of basic Marxist deconstruction with a reference to Lacan here and there. He's actually more of a Hegelian than a Marxist, but still loves collective uprisings taking power and installing gulags.
Nothing really profound for anyone familiar with Marxist ideas, but he sells his easily snortable fix of radical leftism nicely with his silly but somewhat charismatic persona.

He has no real solutions because "my gott, weeh neett to thienk!" and then goes on to say philosophers shouldn't actually answer questions but ask the 'right' questions.
So it's a comfy position to remain contrarian without actually offering any solid solutions to our predicaments.

>>7092439
ek ek ek *shnuff shnuff* ek ek ek ek *shnuff* shtarbux coffay ek ek ek *shnuff*

>>7092465

So basically he's just a leftist hipster who gets away with it because he's old and ethnic?

>>7092428
Le undergrad meme. I wish undergrads read zizek. You're lucky if they've read Camus.

>Unironically Xing Y to a Z that As B Cly
MODICUMS OF CONVERSATIONAL PARALYSIS

>>7092472

Sort of, some of his ideas and interpretations about culture aren't that bad. What he does with the ideas of Lacan and Freud is pretty good. Politically he's just all over the place, but it's fair to say that the guy is a philosopher and psychologist, not a politician.

>>7092472

Not so much because he's old and ethnic, but because there's still this faction among undergrads who don't want to engage in identity politics, not because it's retarded tribalism necessarily but mainly because they suffer from sehnsucht for the 19th century.

>unironically paying attention to a guy who doesn't take Mao seriously

We know why class enemies do this.

>>7092478

You're not smart and witty, you're just a pretentious dickhole with a bad taste of humor.

>>7092489

Mao, the guy who considered giving his citizens numbers instead of names.

Why do you guys crave this loss of ego so much?

>>7092493
It what sense "pretentious"?
When have I affected greater importance or merit than I actually possess?

>>7092496
>Mao, the guy who considered giving his citizens numbers instead of names.
Gonna need a citation for that.

>>7092496
nice thing you just made up

>>7092514
Maoism was a Nationalist phenomenon and Zedong admired Hitler and Napoleon.
The CCP were not Stalinist, unlike Vietnam.
The PRC fought the Vietcong at times.
At one point there was an idea of merging with the Kuomingtang,
which was the closest thing to the NSDAP in the central kingdom at the time.
They fought together, even.

>>7092514

I wonder if it really matters to give ideologues sources anyways.
Whenever you do, either the source is shitty, or they need another source. And if not that, they need audiovisual material. Which, if confirming the claim, might be tampered with.

And if anything else fails, capitalism killed more people or this was all necessary for some fucked up reason.

But here you go: http://eandt.theiet.org/magazine/2008/17/ruled-by-engineers.cfm

i claim

>>7092531
that article doesnt source its claim dude

>>7092530

>it wasn't this ism but that ism and it can't be communist because they fought communists

Stop this ridiculous bullshit.
Communists fighting eachother is hardly new. They can't even agree on messageboards, so it's no surprise they end up shooting bullets at eachother over theoretical differences.

youre using an engineering website that just made that up as a historical source

nice troll

>>7092537
>>7092535

Lol, just as I said: "Whenever you do, either the source is shitty, or they need another source."

>>7092536
>Communism
Maoism is not communism.
Stalinism is not communism.
They are national socialist ideologies.
Stalinism was industrialist and Maoism is agrarian.
Their symptom is Famine.

>>7092545
im not a marxist you retard your source is just awful. the thing you claimed happenned didnt happen

>>7092530
>Maoism was a Nationalist phenomenon and Zedong admired Hitler and Napoleon.
Bye, tripfag.

>>7092531
>absolutely no source, the same empty ahistorical rhetoric about Mao strangling 15 quadrillion babbies that's been debunked since time immemorial
Bye, shitposter.

>>7092545
The source isn't just "shitty" you dumb cunt, it's non-existent.

>>7092555
Why do you come here if you can not handle dissent and people posting things that are true as a response to what ever it is you are trying to do here?
It's paralytic.

>>7092550
>>7092555

I'm not gonna go through all the effort to see where they got this claim from. I heard a friend mention it and googling it now, I found that on the firt page. So I'm sure this is coming from somewhere.

I don't think it's that hard to believe a Party that saw its population as a faceless production force and didn't flinch when millions died of hunger ( while sending food to its allies in Albania for fuck sake ) could consider giving its citizens digits instead of names.
Especially since Marxists think we're all just cogs of a greater structure and replacable.

>>7092566
>>7092569
>I'm not gonna go through all the effort to see where they got this claim from. I heard a friend mention it
Factually kill yourselves.

>>7092569
please dont make claims you cant support

>>7092577
I never said that,
I got my information from "A history of modern china" by Johnathan Fenby.
The information is there in any history book.

>>7092487
>sehnsucht
Got anyone I could look into to learn more about this term? inb4 googlit

>>7092428
As a moderate rightist with a vested interest in the status quo, I actually like Ziz; He's the perfect foil for a powerful right wing.
>venerates power in all forms
>spends more time bashing SJW's
>puts the individual below ideological structures

One could easily take his work and use it to bolster existing and emergent anti-populist power-structures

>>7092579

I don't actually need to have a source for everything I hear, learn or know, autist.

>>7092501
memeposting about how some post is just a meme and dismissing it, and doing so with the slightest of subtlety, and then calling it stupid in a roundabout way, is pretty much the height of 4chan pretentiousness

>>7092602
I don't know where you came from, but you this isn't the board you're looking for. Make up shit, get it.
>can't handle the banter

>>7092612
>r3kt

>>7092577
>>7092579

http://historiek.net/1-oktober/18634/

I got it on a Dutch history website too. Maybe learn the language and then get back to me.

>>7092612
>memeposting about how some post is just a meme and dismissing it
Only I am not aware it is a meme,
as I can not remember seeing the words MODICUMS OF CONVERSATIONAL PARALYSIS being posted any where on the internet before.

Respond only if you have some thing interesting to say.

>>7092593
>The information is there in any history book.
Where did Fenby get this information? What's his source?

>>7092569
>Marxists think we're all just cogs of a greater structure and replacable
get a load of this guy

>>7092623
>Volgens sommige bronnen zou hij zelfs gespeeld hebben met de gedachte om de namen van de Chinezen te vervangen door nummers
>Volgens sommige bronnen zou
>Volgens sommige
>sommige

You have to be at least 18 years old to post on here you giant idiot

>>7092649

Nooit goed hé, kutaap?

>>7092647
Anticommiefags are the worst shitposters, bar none. There hasn't been one in all these years that even seems to be familiar with what it's supposedly against.

>>7092627
>MODICUMS OF CONVERSATIONAL PARALYSIS
this part of the post is
>calling it stupid in a roundabout way
the memeposting was doing this
>>Unironically Xing Y to a Z that As B Cly

>>7092630
I am not aware.
If those are the prerequisites for stating historical facts then perhaps I am not qualified,
although one would have to wonder whether any one in this thread is.
As far as I am aware based on my supposedly incomplete knowledge of the PRC, the Qing dynasty and the Kuomintang years,
Maoism was a Nationalist phenomenon and the other things I had said in the original post you are, I presume, referring to.

>>7092658
It seems spurious on your part.
Either way,
it was never my intention.
Aside from that,
I did not mind it being a meme,
but rather that it was uninteresting.

>>7092651
>My uncle works at Nintendo.

>>7092668
well the op is a shitpost.
in any case, i didn't mind you shitposting in kind,
just that you afterward took the shitpost you made seriously.

>>7092501
In both of your posts.

>>7092657
Did you know that when you say some thing of this nature it is quite obvious that it is insincere?
When you make generalisations in this way and use rhetoric there is a very basic level of insight that is needed in order to identify its insincere nature.

Therefore, there is no point in you typing out such posts,
my suggestion is that you refrain from doing so,
but it is your own choice.
If you wish to support doctrines containing non sequitur, do so,
it is fun to read about the history of radical, misinformed political ideologies,
but not boring posts like these.

>>7092680
>just that you afterward took the shitpost you made seriously
Interesting "good cop" routine.

>>7092661
>If those are the prerequisites for stating historical facts then perhaps I am not qualified
Then please refrain from posting.

>>7092675

Listen here you massive shitfaggot, the study of history rarely leads to 100% sure conclusions about anything. Maybe your STEM master race spergbrain can't handle that, but that's how it is.

So maybe email them and ask for the sources, because I'm not bothering with this issue anymore.

It was communist China. During my parents' youth little was known about what was going on in the PRC. Sure we don't even know the full truth of what went down there still.

>>7092683
You seem to have unnecessarily inferred that.
I suggest you only reply if you have some thing interesting to say.

>>7092695
I am not aware they are the prerequisites,
however,
and if they are no one in this thread have proven themselves to be capable.

Aside from that,
this seems to reek of silencing others through technicalities as opposed to argument,
where the latter has failed.

>>7092708
*has, not have

>>7092559
Not the same guy, but I tried. Not Mao, but some other chinese communist, Zhou Enlai:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhou_Enlai#Early_political_activities
>In some ways, the Awakening Society resembled the clandestine Marxist study group at Peking University headed by Li Dazhao, with the group members using numbers instead of names for "secrecy". (Zhou was "Number Five", a pseudonym which he continued to use in later years.)[37
> Lee 137

>>7092696
>the study of history rarely leads to 100% sure conclusions about anything
How in the fuck did you get this information about changing names to numbers if there is no record of Mao or anyone in the Party actually writing about it, you gigantic moron?

>Sure we don't even know the full truth of what went down there still.
We actually do because people who were actually there, as opposed to foreign commentators, wrote about it. Read Mobo Gao, Dongping Han, Hinton, etc. You don't know because you just go off what you "hear" from your "friends".

ITT: "u got a source for dat"-deflection

>>7092727

>if there is no record of Mao or anyone in the Party actually writing about it

Maybe because not every source is written down, you massive dumbass? Maybe historiography also works with oral sources?

>>7092720
At least that's something, but it's 100% not at all what that anon was claiming. But we can see how propagandists would distort this information and spread it to make plebs think teh gommies wanted to eliminate names.

>>7092733
Some of the claims here have been fairly bizarre though, Mao Zedong wanting to use numbers instead of names in his communist utopia? It is reasonable to ask for a source on that kind of statement.

>>7092740
>Maybe historiography also works with oral sources?
An oral source is still given and is then verified, dumbass.

>>7092733
>getting this BTFO

>>7092754
>>7092748

I think it's just because you're spoiled millennial assholes who have nothing going in their life and therefore vent frustrations about their unexciting life on the internet by acting like derailing dicks on the internet.
Irrelevant maybe. Just feel like that needed to be addressed.

But besides that, yeah, it's a claim, it's not solidified 100%. I choose to believe it. Tough luck.

>>7092754

I.e, an oral source is a record. It may be an actual record, in which case I suppose it's a record record. With really old ones you could also talk about record record records. And, obviously, if the record is about a record one would have a record record record record.

>>7092773

How is that BTFO?
I got references to the claim, it's just not valuable enough.

If I made it up and got called out for it, then I'd be le BTFO-maymay.

>>7092779

He was talking about WRITTEN records. Not just records.

You gotta be more specific bro. I can't read the nuances you supposedly implied there.

>>7092708
>I am not aware that when I make up incredible claims like a notably anti-fascist/anti-nazi person admired the most notable leader of fascism/nazism that I have to back it up with evidence.
>I'm allowed to shitpost
Leave.

>>7092775
You don't need to believe every piece of anti-communist propaganda to be anti-communist. Can't we leave it to the communists to delude themselves? Pic. related, it's a spot example of how the two sides engage topics in respect to communism and capitalism. There is no better anti-communist propaganda than communists themselves, lets keep it like that.

>>7092775
projection

>>7092800

Got a source for that?

Well Mao was undisputed ruler of the most populous country in the world, made pretty sweeping and monumental reforms of it that affected its future massively and the country is now a major rising power due in part to his rule. I would say no matter your personal feelings on him, he should at least be taken "seriously."

>>7092795
That image is hilarious by the way.

>>7092775
You got caught swindling third-hand information backed up only by completely vague, unsourced popular material. You made an amazing claim and couldn't verify it. This has been a standard since long before millennials, friendo.
>Actually saying you believe bullshit despite no reason to
Scary tbh

>>7092795
>capitalists actually think that bottom left box is at all informed or intelligent

>>7092795
>Hey guys I haven't even read a summary of Capital but aren't gommies so silyl xD LMFAO

>>7092803
My Uncle works at Nintendo

>>7092775
>being this BTFO

>>7092487
I like tyou

We don't know for sure if Mao wanted to give his citizens numbers instead of names, but we do know other commies did:

In one of his visions of the future Gastev suggests that the
children of the proletariat will no longer need names, but will be given numbers instead:
As in the maternity ward, they will be designated by numbers: 1,2, and so on. There will be no possibibility of confusing them: they will be born, so to speak, according to a predetermined estimate, not as in our present-day Mother Russia, where parents can say "God blessed us with children, but neglected to give us any money".

https://biopolitics.memoryoftheworld.org/Kurt%20Johansson/Aleksej%20Gastev_%20Proletarian%20Bard%20of%20the%20Machine%20Age%20(1)/Aleksej%20Gastev_%20Proletarian%20Bard%20of%20the%20Ma%20-%20Kurt%20Johansson.pdf

>>7092820

Your mom just worked my sack.

>>7092844
Who cares?
It is hardly the matter.
The people in this thread have been insistent on imposing conversational paralysis through technicalities and spreading bad vibrations.
No one cares about some stupid numbers.
It is hardly any thing to do with what actually matters.

I refuse.

>>7092858

>I refuse

Stop sounding like you're in some sort of world historical event, you dickwad. With your stupid art school fag imagery to visually accompany you on your shitty avant-garde mission to be special.

>>7092844

And all the commies will be quiet now.

>>7092844
That's interesting, but Gastev's machinism is also entirely speculative and not prescriptive, such that he thinks machinism would be a (beneficial) development of socialism but not something to be imposed, if I'm reading this correctly.

>>7092795
this whole image is just filled with misunderstandings.

>>7092877
As you've already shown, you can't read, as it doesn't do anything to prove your claim that Mao wanted to make everyone have numbers instead of names, dumbass.

>>7092886

Exactly as predicted in the anon's post: >>7092531

>source is shitty source
>give source for claim commies do think this way
>"yeah but it's still good to ascribe them numbers for some fucked up reason"

Commies are scary tautologists.

>>7092871
you sound spooked as hell bro

>>7092844
Where does this "communism sounds good on paper" meme come from?

Every time I read about implementations of a communist society it sounds fucking terrifying.

>>7092892

It might not be a solid source for what Mao thought, but it's sure what some voices in precious communism thought would be a great idea.

Now get lost and go maymay someone else's day.

>>7092893
>>"yeah but it's still good to ascribe them numbers for some fucked up reason"
get a load of this guy

>>7092886
Apparently Gastev was also an anti-Communist Anarchist, albeit he had some early associations with the Bolshevik. This makes sense, I don't see something like Machinism lining up with Communism's humanist program. Even in the above book Gastev realizes machinism could be used to suppress the working class or by the working class.

>>7092893
I am under the impression that there are people who just go to these threads for fun and defend things for little to no reason.

>>7092899

You have to be a rudderless cuck to see it as such.
Most leftists think like this.
They hate the ego and love self-oblivion for some reason. All these things equal death to me.

>>7092893
>>"yeah but it's still good to ascribe them numbers for some fucked up reason"
1) What? I made no effort to say machinism is good. All I did was qualify what he actually said, which doesn't support your early claim.
2) Commie, and not even. See:>>7092909

>>7092900
>It might not be a solid source for what Mao thought
Don't flatter yourself, it's not at all a source for Mao. But, to you, anything goes to preserve your ideology.
>it's sure what some voices in precious communism thought would be a great idea.
It isn't.

Jesus Christ, lad, read the posts you're responding to.

>>7092922

What is my ideology?

>>7092925
Anticommunism.

>>7092925
Didn't you know? Anyone who isn't a marxist is a stupid moron blinded by ideology, whereas marxist are enlightened souls untainted by any ideology whatsoever.

Le spook meemee XD

>>7092925
anticommunism of some sort

>>7092472
>ethnic
He's from fucking Slovenia...

>>7092925
Sounds like some spooked-up liberalism tbh

>>7092940
Who are you quoting?

>>7092940
stop posting any time

>>7092940
>>7092944
kek, right on point

>>7092950
>can't handle the banter
>still trying to ignore that he hasn't produced evidence for his claims
>still spooked and loving it
>"b-b-but memes, so i'm r-r-right"

>>7092937
>>7092941
>>7092944

Is anticommunism an ideology? Seems more like a sentiment.

>>7092891
That's the norm for all discussion.

>>7092813
What works by authors favouring capitalism have you read, how many books on micro and macro economics?

>>7092809
It is informed in that it reflects what many people who call themselves communists will actually believe. The fact that many communists are actively misinforming people, is something you'll have to live with.

>>7092957
I'm not that guy, I was making a casual observation that it's ironic you braindead marxists quote Stirner whenever you encounter a contrary opinion, dismissing your opponent with a variation of "le spook meme", when marxism is BY FAR the most purely ideological economic/political system, the fantasies of an unemployed 19th century jew.

>b-but it's scientific! muh das kapital
Kill yourself.

>>7092775
Look, it's one thing to make up or get wrong minor historical facts, things like "this figure was at this cafe" when he was actually not even at a cafe but a bar. However, to claim Mao wanted to give every single Chinese citizen a number instead of a name is a big claim, particularly when you realise that this is recent history of the single biggest country by population on Earth. It would be very significant if it was true also. The fact that you cannot, and now "choose to believe it" despite being unable to, just shows that you are a lazy thinker. I am saying this as somebody that finds Maoism ridiculous.

>>7092974

There are many things you choose to believe too. Unless you're full-on autist, in that case I'm sorry. Belief is not a matter of proof. That's the whole point of belief.

And it's not laziness, it's an assumption I'd like to keep based on the fact other commies think there's merit to being a nameless face called "nr.5677"
If multiple 'shitty sources' claim Mao did, well, I give those the benefit of doubt.
Sorry that confuses your sperg.

>>7092970
pure ideology

>>7092962
The image is not so much 'Here's what capitalists and socialists think of capitalism/socialism' but 'Here's what American neoliberal idiot capitalists think capitalists and socialists think of capitalism/socialism'
They don't even get their capitalism right.

>>7092978
>There are many things you choose to believe too.
yes, but saying this is just pure cop-out.
and actually believing that strawman of a claim is just pure ideology tbh lad

>>7092985
You know what is pure ideology?

Any form of leftism. Marxism, communism, anarchism, etc..

>>7092995

It's not a cop-out. I choose to believe it from the beginning and I still do.
Commies love killing people. If not for real, for sure their personality, which is so bourgeois.

And pure ideology is bad why?

>>7092428

I just love him I can't help it. Part of it is definitely his rock star appeal.

>>7092472
when did hipster become a term meaning somone who appears to know more than you but your afraid that if they do you look stupid so you pretend theyre lying. He's not a hipster, its just the people on japanese cartoon forums are arrogant idiots. But i'm probably just being edgy

>>7092978
I heard from a friend of mine that your mom is a monster in the sack and gets gangbanged probably every night. I have no way to verify this but it's an assumption I'd like to keep based on the fact other anons say they heard her screaming "I love it in all of my holes at once" while pounding her.

Fucking typos

>>7093004
>>7092999
>‘Ideology’ can designate anything from a contemplative attitude that misrecognises its dependence on social reality to an action-orientated set of beliefs, from the indispensible medium through which individuals live out their relations to a social structure to false ideas which legitimate a dominant political power
t. zizek

>>7093004
>It's not a cop-out.
Nigga, you can't "just believe" random shit about historical facts, there has to be evidence. Do you even fucking know what you're saying? Do you "just believe" that Hitler was a robot alien from Mars? Do you "just believe" that FDR was a transexual werewolf? This is honestly embarrassing. I suggest you flounce and don't come back for a year.

>>7093018
>b-but marxism is totally not ideology! It is the truth, look here it's written in this book!

>>7093014

I see you're starting to get the concept of rumors people choose to believe no matter what. One day you'll be a big boy in the big adult world with actual real friends and learn all about it even more.

>>7092465
someone doesn't understand a single word of zizek

>>7093023

>Hitler was a robot alien from Mars
>FDR was a transexual werewolf

And yet they might be.

>>7093028
I never said I was a Marxist -- I'm not by the way.

>>7092439
a lot of his work deals with the problem toward reaching a marxist utopia, he says the left endlessly tries to justify marxist and dwells on the failures of the past in order to keep a position that seems moral

>>7093023

Most of the world believes in an unverifiable claim with which they go about their day.
The "lost civilization" crowd for example is huge, mind you, with little smoking guns.
Most live with the idea there's something after death. Others don't.

You must be really really frustrated about this sad state of affairs where people just decide "I'm gonn go with this" and not have many friends ( or choose to ignore it in their case, which makes you a hypocrite ).

>>7093062
Deflection. Red herring. Projection. Equivocation.
>inb4 buzzwords
This was a completely worthless response tbh.

>>7093072

This is the difference between you and me.
You can't entertain a thought.
You just can't. Because that would mean a level of uncertainty which you can't process.
You are unable to even tinker around with a claim of any kind and stick with it against all odds, just because the claim sounds like it might be true.

>>7093083
whoa like look at dis nigga drop the mic like he's an OG

>>7092978
Well in that case I believe that Thatcher intended to firebomb Liverpool during the riots there. It's fucking not true but I am sure I could find a shoddy leftist blog claiming something similar.

You sound like a retard. Find a single good source. Otherwise it is simply not worth believing. I am not saying that as a communist, I am saying it as a person who likes to know that things are true before claiming they happened.

>>7093101
stop posting any time

>>7093004
You sound like a fucking moron.

>>7093105
nuh bruh i think i'll stick around i like this board. i just need to terraform it and make it more like /tv/ and i'll be right at home.

>>7093104

You can go ahead and believe that.
If it's a belief, it's harmless.
When a belief becomes a certainty, it's another story.
Beliefs are by definition not based on facts.

Read some Kierkegaard.

>>7093110
I've read fucking Kierkegaard. It didn't make me want to go around saying shit happened that didn't.

>>7093104
>>7093118

Aren't you just admitting people belief stuff with little to base it on?
When were you diagnosed with autism?

>>7093122
It's just weird that you are still defending it when you have no basis for these thoughts. Do you really pride yourself on being a dumbass?

>>7093134

Someone with a belief is a dumbass?

>>7093148
>>7093109
stop posting any time

>>7093157

Nice maymay. Maybe you should force it in all threads.

>>7093148
If it is founded on nothing yeah. I mean going around saying shit happened that didn't is something a dumbass would do. It just shows a lack of knowledge about the topic.

>>7093157
stop stopping me from posting broski

>>7093167

So all muslims are dumbasses?
That's very intolerant. You should check your priv.

>>7093181
There's a different between religious faith and pretending that a real person planned to do something without any evidence. It's just a cheap swipe at Mao when there are already countless real events that you could use to discredit him.

this thread went to shit and you all should be ashamed of yourselves

This thread is the final nail in anticommunism's coffin.

>actually saying you know what you believe is factually wrong but you believe it anyway

>>7093197
>>7093187

How is it factually wrong? I didn't pull it out of my ass. I made references. You guys just choose to call it shitty references.

>>7093189


this could have been an interesting pro vs con zizek thread, but instead got derailed because someone wanted a source and one couldn't provide and remained stubborn in the fact maoists are actually shit.

>>7093197
Is it bad that I am anti-communist because it is a far easier life getting by on welfare in a rich Western country than working hard without access to any of the capital gained from exploitation of the Third World. I mean everybody knows that living in a Western country is life on easy mode and I would prefer it to stay that way while I live here.

>>7093206
Well they were shitty references. It's the intellectual equivalent of those holocaust denial books.

>>7093220

That's a far stretch buddy and you know it.

>>7093212
Yeah that's bad, brah.

This thread is trash from all sides.
I suggest we burn it.

>>7093224
Not really. Going around posting "Mao wanted every Chinese citizen to change their name to a number" is intellectually dishonest if you cannot back that post up. You are basically just making shit up. There are better arguments against Mao, ones based on things that he actually did and said.

>>7093224
>Claim Mao wanted to give everyone numbers instead of names; claim that Mao admired Hitler
>"Wait, how can you say that when there's no evidence that he wanted people's names to be numbered, and that he was an anti-Naziist/anti-Fascist?"
>Produce articles that don't make references and rely on conjecture from unnnamed persons
>"Anon, that's not eviden--"
>"I JUST BELIEVE IT OKAY GOD YOUR A FAGGET"

>Claim the Holocaust didn't happen
>Produce articles that don't make references and rely on conjecture from unnnamed persons
>"Anon, that's not eviden--"
>"I JUST BELIEVE IT OKAY GOD YOUR A FAGGET"

Seems roughly the same to me fam.

>>7093256
1. You are conflating 2 points from 2 people.
2. The point was not based on an unnamed person,
you simply did not like the source.
3. Your counterarguments rest on unbeatable tautologies, there is never an answer, because no source is good enough.
4. You use unnecessary rhetoric.
5. You are defending someone who is already generally believed to be a genocidal maniac, and considering know sources need to be of an indefinably high quality, we may as well just go with our gut feeling considering the only thing both sides except for me has said has been entirely rhetorical.

Paralysis.

Expected response:
1. Parts of my posts which do not take in to account the point of the whole post are posted.
2a. Ad Hominem.
2b. "Ad Hominem is justified if the intelligence of the opponent is important to the argument".
3. "BTFO"

>>7093004
Can you please start using a trip so I can block you?

Seriously retarded.

>>7093253

All of this doesn't change the fact you're probably a dick in real life.
Which is of greater importance nowadays than anything Mao did or didn't do.

>>7093282
*know before sources was not necessary.

>>7093285
>shitposting
nice

>>7093253

why are you even making such a fuss about it? it's nit that improbable a claim, yet you go obsessively sperg over a source.

>>7093062
I've never seen one Anon make such an embarrassment of themselves.

>>7093282
Well, at least this retard is using a trip.

Blocked.

>>7093282
Addressing two points isn't conflation, but the two claims were both unsubstantiated. You know this but for some reason want to save face in any way but admitting that you're wrong.
>doesn't know what a tautology is
>ad hominem
>still special pleading, claiming you are magically above the need for facts

Has there ever been a tripfag that wasn't cancerous? Welcome to filter.

>>7093307
>2a. Ad Hominem.

Where does Zizek approvingly quote or reference Mao? I've read and watched a fair amount of his stuff but I've never seen him do this.

>>7093318
You misunderstand that fallacy but I respect you.

>>7093297
>it's nit that improbable a claim

Maybe because you literally believe anything convenient you're told, like a child?

>>7093297
>He's still posting

>>7093319

http://www.amazon.com/Practice-Contradiction-Revolutions-Mao-Tse-Tung/dp/1844675874

>>7093315
A rhetorical tautology.
I provided a source,
Johnathan Fenby,
you simply did not like the source.

>You know this but for some reason want to save face in any way but admitting that you're wrong.
How do you mean wrong?
I provided information based on an historical book I read.
If you can not handle someone providing that,
then why do you reply?
If you do not like my source, then fine.
Don't respond.

Again, Ad hominem and all the things I posted in the post I just posted.

This isn't a dialectic exchange or a fun argument,
its paralytic trash.

>>7093334
btw, nameafgging and avatarfagging are against the rules

>>7093321
True, it is a stretch to call it that,
but it certainly is an unnecessary attack on my integrity for making a point with a source that has not yet been refuted and based on nothing but this magical "retard" word.

>>7093282
The issue isn't that the source doesn't meet some unknown standard, but that the source for this claim is as-of-yet unverifiable. We don't know where it comes from.

And I'd love to know where you get point five. Do we just go with our gut feelings on historical figures once we've established an opinion on them? That's lazy and a very poor methodology.

Also:
>starvation
>genocide

>>7093342
Okay.
Report me for that or email whoever needs be.
I find posting without an identity incredibly dull.

>>7093344
>And I'd love to know where you get point five. Do we just go with our gut feelings on historical figures once we've established an opinion on them? That's lazy and a very poor methodology.
That is not what I am saying.
1. I provided a source, it simply was not satisfactory per the prerequisites which I still don't understand, nor I think are understandable, considering there is no reason to think they will ever be attainable.
2. The point was this is the only thing that one can do if sources can not claim any thing since there are none that are sufficient (per the counterargument).
3. I am saying with out the source, my PERSONAL OPINION, would remain the same, with or with out it, until some one provided some other source, which, per the counterargument, is never sufficient. My opinion is based on the source I provided, namely an historical book by Johnathan Fenby. If I read another source and change my mind, then I will, but that has not been made available to me.

>>7092465
Sounds like an ENTP

>>7093342
they're not doing which you'd know if you were paying attention
>>7093343
the 'shitty source' was either >>7092531 or >>7092623.

>>7093364
B I G
I
G
F I V E
I
V
E

>>7093344
yeah
there are a lot of these people around ~20 years old. they often have a soft spot for conspiracy theories, etc...
they will latch on to random revisionist ideas and claim that 'the victors' have vindicated themselves by removing all the worthwhile evidence while they entirely unsubstantiated claims. oh well

>>7093369
I was referring to my source, "History of Modern China" by Johnathan Fenby, not the other person's.

>>7093369
>>7093343
shit I glossed over how people were calling out the Hitler thing.
yeah. well you sourced it, i guess.

>>7092545
dude that isn't a source you dumb shit

>>7093333
I haven't read it, but what makes you conclude this is entirely approving? Zizek talks about Stalin a lot too, but as an example of what went wrong

>>7093104
I'm so sad that the one guy in this thread who believes in objective reality is getting shit on.
All these insane people yelling
>muh belief
as if that justified anything? What happened to this generation? We literally don't "believe" in critical thinking and just turn over what we get bored with ( trending ) to play contrarian to it next week ( oh i hated her, she was a terrible singer ).

How can you lie to yourself every day and still not hate yourself?...

>>7093452

Why would anyone hate themselves over silly shit like the truth?

>>7092668
>spurious
You a wanka mate.
You showed the skeltal of the meme as it this was new knowledge
anyone who can make that meme obvious follows the skeltal
so your rattle is the rattle of all memers
you are the undead like us, but you say I AM BORD
WE R ALL BORD M8
THE MEME RIDE NEVER ENDS

And that's why you're pretentious because you pretend you are better than the restofus.
#specialunique

>>7093467
fuck you mate

>>7093474
Apologies if I gave that impression,
but I do have a notion of "quality",
which is based on nothing in particular but a gut feeling.
I am leading a crusade against Ennui and one can not do that with out taking a sincere approach to humour and aesthetics in every thing, even some thing as trivial as a 4chan post.

>>7093506
i can't do anything about it

>>7092900
FFS
Early capitalists thought slavery was the shit, but can i now make a claim that this is what Obama thinks and get away with it, simply by association?

why do people think Zizek is a terror/Stalin apologist. he makes jokes and talks about Stalin all the time because he thinks Stalin was a nightmare

>>7093028
No one ever said that
This whole thread is jusr right wing strawman

>>7094033

Because he has a picture of Stalin in his appartment.

>hurr i jussh hang it here jussh to pissh peeple off n be edshy

>>7093083
>You can't entertain a thought.
says the guy who believes in bullshit. Honestly, it seems like you are the one who cannot step away from his anti-left position and then just starts thinking up random shit to discredit the left.

>>7094050
your greentext is literally true though

>>7093212
We dont care about your position, we are trying to validate your claim.

>>7093363
>I am willing to believe literally anything
>starts a serious debate
>Heiiimaaan , its just like , personal opinion

>>7094103
No, I am willing to believe some thing written in a book that has not been refuted in so far as I am aware, until I am aware it has been refuted.

If you would like to provide me with an alternative view of the events that is known to be "more true", with emphasis on the inverted commas, then do so, but what I said is what I gathered from the literature, which is what this board is there to discuss.
I never started a serious discussion,
I stated some thing I had read in a book and when some one asked me where I read it I told them. That is all.
If this wasn't the case, it would have been personal opinion,
this seems to be what you are conflating.

Aside from that,
I get the impression you do realise this but are dissenting because you have read Foucault and wish to twist words to change the stratum of the conversation to make yourself feel better,
but this may just be speculation.

I also find it unnecessary to offhandedly deny the integrity of rather famous English language book on the subject.

Again, this is quite obvious to anyone in the thread. It is a technicality, not an argument,
or rather, poking at a problem which you have propped up through quoting my posts only partially, without making any attempt at fully understanding my side.

>>7094139
*a rather famous, not "rather famous".

>>7092478
3/10, not schizophrenic enough

No longer watching this thread, in case I get responses.

Fuck, Zizek is such a qt. I want to stick him in my back pocket and take him on adventures. I want to feed him Slavoj snacks. I want to take him to a strip club and listen to him sniffle his way through a lecture about armed uprisings while 20 somethings with daddy issues take their clothes off.

>tfw no My Little Slavoj

How the fuck can you not take someone who pissed off the bourgeoisie so much they tell everyone he murdered 20 million people with a straight face?

mao > trump tbh

>>7092548
>and not the fact that he ended famine in China and jacked up life expectancy way up.

From all the lectures I've seen, I still can't tell

What sort of government does he actually endorse?

>>7095249
4chan being 4chan i really thought you were about to write some nasty gay shit like 'i want him to suck on my toes while i give myself a hair job with his luscious slovakian mane' but i was pleasantly surprised. squee'd tbh

>>7095308
he's a critic, not a politician
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgR6uaVqWsQ

>>7092594
in German a Sehnsucht is a longing or yearning for something, so I assume it has a similar meaning in the context of philosophy

I dated a Maoist once. Shit was so cash.

>>7092450
Do it faggot.

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-6/mswv6_32.htm

>>7095301
Strange,
as far as I know he began Famines until he was replaced.
He may have raised the life expectancy,
I am not sure,
but that is not what I was referring to.
As far as I am aware,
both China and Eastern Europe suffered from famines coincidentally around the same time Stalin and Mao introduced radical measures to the logistics of those areas.
That is what I am referring to.
I was also referring to how Maoism and Stalinism are diffractions of the Marxist conception of communism.
One particularly peculiar aspect to this is the nationalist nature of both their regimes.
Maoism was overtly nationalist, if the book I read means any thing.
Stalin was not, but he produced several pogroms on non-russian minorities, if the other books I have read mean any thing.
I am not conflating their regimes with Fascism, which was an italian conception which was born after the October Revolution, nor am I conflating them with an orthodox approach to the marxist conception of communism.

They were an ideology in abstract,
spuriously concocted,
if any thing I have read means any thing.

I am not a "rightist", I would say I'm "left-centre",
but that is overly vague,
but I wish to annoy radicals,
point out quite obvious inconsistencies and dissipate my ennui in the process.

>>7093212
Wealth is the command of poverty, dude.

>>7094139
You even use the same fonts, pathetic.

>>7095345
As Kevin?
True.
>>7095332
As I said:
>>7095247

>>7095332
Muh 20 millions is produced by comparing projected population w/ actual samples. He also introduced marriage reform that made people get married later and thus have fewer children, so there's that. It would be quite a feat to "begin" famines in a place such as China.

>>7092428

Zizek seems to be popular among grad students, though.

>>7095387
I never produced a number and you seem to insist on responding despite me now noting twice in this thread I am logging off.
This is the generally accepted line,
but if you wish to be tedious then okay,
I do not mind the possibility of what I read being untrue.
I have no reason not to hold the rest to have some modicum of truth,
nonetheless,
keeping in mind that you are the one who would hold an unpopular opinion outside of this very stuffy board, in so far as I can see.

As I said, I would like to stop posting in this thread and sleep so I would prefer if you abstained from replying.

>>7095407
Maoism has quite a following in Turkey, India, The Philippines, Nepal, and rural China.

The Left hates itself so much that people underestimate how large it actually is.

>>7095435
You have actually made me reconsider Mao,
I will have to reassess him in the future again,
I still have no reason to think the other things I have said are untrue and I still dislike radicals in general.

Again, I am logging off so I would prefer if you did not reply as I will not be able to answer you.

>>7095460
Don't both w/ Mao just read JMP tbh.

>>7095460
*true, not untrue.

>>7092773
>mon visage quand mon rare Pepe stalinniste se fait reposté