Intersectionality

[Anonymous No.12061181]

Has intersectionality really become a new religion?

[Anonymous No.12061265]

It's one component of the dominant Western religion without a name.

[Anonymous No.12061279]

>>12061265
equalism

[Anonymous No.12061290]

>>12061265
>without a name
humanist universalism

[Anonymous No.12061748]

>>12061265
materialism

[Anonymous No.12061759]

>>12061265
Misandry

[Anonymous No.12062035]

>>12061265
feelings

[Anonymous No.12062042]

>>12061748
if only. materialism is heartless, which is preferable to bleeding-heart retardation.

[Anonymous No.12062123]

Yes, it's the framework of sociology, and it's the precursor to something I don't know. I've known some good people that have been convinced by it, but it just sounds like the most efficient way to victimize yourself in order to give power to a group. Also this fucking guy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWD6g9CV_sc

[Anonymous No.12062182]

>>12061181
Where is it all going to lead?

[Anonymous No.12062226]

>>12061265
frankism

[Anonymous No.12062232]

>>12062123
>but it just sounds like the most efficient way to victimize yourself in order to give power to a group

What the hell does that mean?

Also intersectionality is just a name for the obvious idea that people from different backgrounds have different experiences navigating society.

[Anonymous No.12062237]

I think a lot of mainstream progressives/liberals pay lip service to intersectionality but don't actually practice it in their thought. See how the cis white hetero male has become a sort of totem- the cis white hetero female can make a performance of hating them, while not stopping to think all that they share- the cisness, the whiteness, the herteroness. Further, class never even becomes a point of analysis for many of these people. So no, I wouldn't say so.

[Anonymous No.12062239]

i really hope in some years we will look back and see this craze for what it really is

[Anonymous No.12062249]

>>12061181
It's basically what resulted from Arts students discovering multivariate analysis but not knowing that it already had a name nor how to do it.

[Anonymous No.12062859]

>>12062239
I thought the wheel would break by now, but this seems like just the beginning

[Anonymous No.12062869]

It has the symptoms of one, especially the concept of original sin.

And yes I know it wasn’t originally part of the faith.

[Anonymous No.12062949]

>>12061181
Social sciences are pseudo-sciences, completely baseless on account of the myriad unfalsifiable claims put forward by rainbow fagged professors. Even if you don't like a scientific approach to theory, Intersectionalists are just fag marxists that use inductive arguments to back up their bullshit. Anyone who has taken a formal logic class understands that induction creates a whole myriad of problems. All of it is just lunacy. Become a transhumanist, kill the rainbow church and embrace the singularity. Markov chains and binary is sexier than the cult of the feminist.
Deleuze is dope though.

>01010111 01110010 01101001 01110100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110011 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01101111 00100000 01110111 01101001 01110100 01101000 00100000 01110011 01101001 01100111 01101110 01101001 01100110 01111001 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101110 00100000 01001001 01110100 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01101111 00100000 01110111 01101001 01110100 01101000 00100000 01110011 01110101 01110010 01110110 01100101 01111001 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101100 00100000 01101101 01100001 01110000 01110000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101100 00100000 01100101 01110110 01100101 01101110 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 01101101 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01111001 01100101 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01100101 00101110 00100000 00101101 01000100 01100101 01101100 01100101 01110101 01111010 01100101 00100000 01000111 01110101 01100001 01110100 01110100 01100001 01110010 01101001 00100000

[Anonymous No.12062956]

>>12062182
To a joke that went on for much too long.

[Anonymous No.12062960]

>>12062239
god hears you. i feel the same way about "sex reassignment surgeries". fucking carnage and our children will think we were literal cavemen

[Anonymous No.12062961]

i hate roasties too bros

[Anonymous No.12062987]

When I talk to people about this and they just think it means a kind of analysis or even the concept of equality it’s literally like talking to Christians 15 years ago about the sins of their faith. Like uhm dude are you even awake?

If this lasts a few more centuries maybe there will be chaste female priests of the feminist faith raping little altar boys just like the Catholics lol

[Anonymous No.12062999]

It has nothing of which one typically calls religion. It has no parallel notion of sacrament, ritual, liturgy, church, worship etc.

You're being hysterical and lazy in even framing the question this way.

True enough, it is a kind of half-thought fad in academia with obvious parallels to the political strategy of the Democratic Party, which expanded the more profound and serious idea of religious cooperation in the name of justice (see Abraham Joshua Heschels writing on Civil Rights), coopted MLKs observation that militarism, racism and poverty were inter-related, and then bastardized it in the expansion of such ideas to sexual liberation and the LGBT movements, becoming an obvious strategy by the time of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition, and reached its zenith in Barack Obama's wholesale embrace of any given minority/partisan interest in order to create a loosely aligned voting block surpassing 50% but devoid of ideological cohesion, which is now in a state of internecine collapse.

But that analysis was hard one whereas "muh intersectionality" is a cheap rehashing of the current sloganearing of the reactionist movement presently unfolding among young white males of the 4chan dwelling variety, itself not based on any principled commitment to anything but an opposition to the most obvious excesses of political liberalism.

[Anonymous No.12063003]

>>12062123
>You aren't free, and that's a good thing :^)
How can people still take TEDx seriously?

[Anonymous No.12063012]

>>12062999
You know lots of words faggot

[Anonymous No.12063021]

>>12062999
Based upside down satan

[Anonymous No.12063045]

>>12062999
>It has no parallel notion of sacrament, ritual, liturgy, church, worship etc.

>sacrament
Pills. Typically psych meds

>ritual
Therapy, Rehab, protest

>liturgy
See >ritual, Reassignment Surgery, HRT, coming out and coming out parties, pride parades (straight allies are part of this, and the format is shared by racial and other niche groups like disabled)

>church
College, bars, concerts and of course, the psychologist's office and the rehab meetings and centers

>worship
See >ritual, >liturgy, >church

[Anonymous No.12063066]

>>12061181
>impact as a verb
Stopped reading there. Fucking homos.

[Anonymous No.12063080]

>>12063045
You're an idiot and you can't think. I am baffled by your suggestion that psychiatry is of direct relevance to the term "intersectionality" which you seem to presume is somehow synonymous with "liberalism." It is as if your brain went, "intersectionality is the thing SJWs refer to, and SJWs argue in favor of the transgender movement, and the transgender movement is related to modern psychiatry, so HRT must have something to do with Intersectionality." One might as well think along the lines of "conservatives are racist, and racism is practiced by the KKK, and the KKK burned crosses, so cross burning is a ritual performed by Trump supporters."

Ann Coulter wrote a book some years ago called "Godless" which attempts to draw parallels between church forms and liberalism, much as you're doing here. It was a lazy, hysterical piece of red meat. But you would probably enjoy it.

The description of disabled people as "niche" is funny.

[Anonymous No.12063092]

>>12062999
Your writing is so fucking choppy.

Please take this advice. You don’t want people to feel like they are doing laps on a treadmill when they are reading your comments.

[Anonymous No.12063105]

>>12063092

I was just being a smartass

[Anonymous No.12063194]

>>12063080
That's a whole lotta nonargument.

You tell your Priest/Therapist/Auditor your Sins/Behaviors/Abberations so you can get the Demon/Trauma/Engrams out and be Absolved/Healthy/Clear.

Psychoanalysis is the primary foundation of Gender Theory (Judith Butler et c).
Intersectionality is the application of Gender Theory analysis to other minority/marginalized statuses.

Ya bitch

[Anonymous No.12063214]

>>12062232
The categories for which intersectionality wants you put yourself in will almost always lead you to some sort of victimhood. By doing so, you are then asked implicitly to cooperate with those also victimized by whatever.
But I agree with you; it's common sense packaged in bullshit. It's ultimate realization would be -and is- individualism, but it's being steered by other forces not natural to other forms of analysis. Professors peddle it as a step towards tolerance and unity, but its effect will be close to the opposite.
The psuedoscience behind some sociology theories is pretty wild too.

[Anonymous No.12063217]

>>12063194
Do yourself a favor and stop using politics as your entry point into studying. The world is much more interesting, inviting and rewarding when you approach it with an unbounded curiosity.

Dont you yearn to know things beyond politics? Aren't you troubled by questions like "what is all this for" or "why am I alive"? Go about your learning with those questions in mind instead. Dont let them get too far.

I'm sorry I called you an idiot, you're probably just young.

[Anonymous No.12063244]

>>12063217
I'm 35 and I've read more books than you've even seen covers of.

You should get over the fact that some people aren't always going to be overwhelmed by your bullshitting skills.

[Anonymous No.12063303]

>>12063244
I have a pretty honest sense of my abilities and my knowledge, it's nothing terribly impressive, Mr. Big Reader.

I hope you're not 35 because you have some very immature thought habits. For example, it seems from your post that you only bothered Googling "gender theory" one day because you felt it provided some context for the contemporary political controversy regarding transgenderism. It seems you got as far as the name "judith Butler." I havent read Judith Butler either, shes not exactly on my radar, but I also didn't name drop her. You did. Why? Are you trying to convince me you know what you're talking about, or yourself?

Please explain more about the relationship between psychoanalysis and transgenderism. As far as I know (which is not a lot, I admit) Freuds first major work predates the first gender reassignment surgery by about 70 or 80 years, he never used the term "transgender" as it did not exist in his lifetime, and neither he nor his prominent successors (Jung namely) had a word to say about it.

Also explain this:

>"Gender Trouble" by Judith Butler, her most famous work, was published in 1990
>the term intersectionality was first used in 1989 in a paper about black women

[Anonymous No.12063356]

>>12063303
Go on Libgen and get some Judith Butler books, then spend some time with liberals and leftists and then, only then try this stupid shit with me.

How would you even know if I superficially googled if you never read the material yourself.

I have known people in the lgbt movement for 15+ Years. My friend that worked for London Pride told me to read Butler and I did.
The fact of psychology being the basis of Identity ideology is obvious to anyone that talks to them. They are obsessed with psychological concepts like "trauma", "microaggression", "internalization", "triggers" and "dysmorphia" "(gender/genital) dysphoria" et c

Why are you incapable of dealing with losing face in public this way? You are wrong, and you have reading to do.

[Anonymous No.12063373]

>>12063356

Mr Big Reader, answer the questions I asked you please. You should not have a hard time given your strong background in the subject.

[Anonymous No.12063380]

>>12063356

I'll make it easy for you

You said:

"Psychoanalysis is the primary foundation of Gender Theory (Judith Butler et c).
Intersectionality is the application of Gender Theory analysis to other minority/marginalized statuses"

So I asked:


Please explain more about the relationship between psychoanalysis and transgenderism. As far as I know (which is not a lot, I admit) Freuds first major work predates the first gender reassignment surgery by about 70 or 80 years, he never used the term "transgender" as it did not exist in his lifetime, and neither he nor his prominent successors (Jung namely) had a word to say about it.

Also explain this:

>"Gender Trouble" by Judith Butler, her most famous work, was published in 1990
>the term intersectionality was first used in 1989 in a paper about black women

[Anonymous No.12063402]

>>12063380

For shits and gigs I looked at the Wikipedia article, pic related blows out your whole asshole in bloody rags.

Go read Butler and up that troll game, because it's bitch tier at this point

[Anonymous No.12063407]

>>12063380
As for question two, its not coherent. Intersectionality is the application of gender analysis to race et c. Butler did not invent gender theory, she simply popularized it in the 90s & 00s uni set

[Anonymous No.12063415]

>>12063402

I didn't make an argument I was just hoping you could explains a few questions with your voluminous reading and familiarity with Judith Butler. It seems you looked her up on Wikipedia instead, surely to edit the article, as someone with your background in reading her work wouldn't have anything to gain from reading the basics.

Also why are you recommending I read Judith Butler when you consider her work to have enabled a political ideology you dont endorse. Just in the spirit of open mindedness and having an informed opinion? I can dig that anon.

[Anonymous No.12063430]

>>12063402

If the screenshot from Wiki sufficed to "blow out my whole asshole in bloody rags" why are you still posting? Can I expect another post in 15 minutes after you've had time to Google --err, I mean, organize your thoughts-- on psychoanalysis and its relationship to intersectionality? You may need a little longer. I can check back tomorrow if you would like.

[Anonymous No.12063432]

>>12063430
You're shit at this, the screenshot shows her influences and her interests.

The answer you seek is right there.

[Anonymous No.12063440]

>>12063432

We both know what we both know.

[Anonymous No.12063455]

>>12063430
Here is a nice article on Butler and Lacan.

>The main aim of this essay is to examine Judith Butler's reading of Jacques. Lacan's theory..


https://www.google.com/url?q=https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bitstream/10086/18857/1/gensha0000404500.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiZv9C038veAhWL7oMKHckGC64QFjAHegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1clq2BzE3oiN3s5niAc96G

[Anonymous No.12063466]

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1010137922835

>Judith Butler and Psychoanalysis

[Anonymous No.12063472]

>>12063466
From the abstract:

>For Butler, psychoanalysis is a crucial theoretical tool for providing such an account of the subject. This essay considers Butler's Foucauldian rereading of psychoanalytic theory through an analysis of her theory of the formation of the subject. In particular, the essay examines Butler's appropriation of psychoanalysis for her theory of subjectivity. The author argues that while Butler's theorising of “the psychic life of power” represents an important linking of Foucauldian and psychoanalytic theories, nevertheless, her use of psychoanalysis does not fully engage with the complexity of its theory of the subject nor with the implications of that theory for her political project.

[Anonymous No.12063479]

The mind boggles

[Anonymous No.12063487]

the point of reading i think is so you can show your political opponents that they are epic fail online

[Anonymous No.12063489]

>The psyche and the social: Judith Butler's politicizing of psychoanalytical theory

http://www.academia.edu/504751/The_psyche_and_the_social_Judith_Butlers_politicizing_of_psychoanalytical_theory

[Anonymous No.12063505]

>>12063487
>scoffs at assertion despite zero experience of the subject
>proceeds to complain that it is in fact everyone else that is wrong
>states that he wants PROOFS
>PROOFS appear
>moves goalposts
>pretends that he in fact never wanted to argue and was not arguing despite the fact of his own posts
>takes a smug aloof posture of "got no dogs in this fight, ABOVE THE FRAY OVER HERE GUISE'

haha ok kid

[Anonymous No.12063515]

>>12063505
pwned for great justice

[Anonymous No.12063520]

this whole thread is like t3h internetz...
ful of epic win

[Anonymous No.12063523]

>>12063505
Wrekt

[Anonymous No.12063528]

>A bait thread has been derailed by a couple mental midgets arguing over semantics, which has degenerated to gish galloping from 0 to 60.
Welp, I'm out!

[Anonymous No.12063533]

>>12063528
That's where you're wrong. It was one mental midget and one just slightly short of average.

[Anonymous No.12063546]

>>12062999
>But that analysis was hard one whereas "muh intersectionality" is a cheap rehashing of the current sloganearing of the reactionist movement presently unfolding among young white males of the 4chan dwelling variety, itself not based on any principled commitment to anything but an opposition to the most obvious excesses of political liberalism.
The rhetoric developed through intersectional thought essentially forces the creation of a new strategic essentialism among white males.

[Anonymous No.12063588]

>>12063546
Have you even read Judith Butler?

[Anonymous No.12063617]

>>12063588
I've read about her work. I'm not really interested in dealing with such a poor writer. Why do you ask?

[Anonymous No.12063652]

>>12062123
Based Burnettposter.

>>12062123
I agree with you on intersectionality vs individualism, I've been thinking this for years and this is the first time I've heard anyone else say it. Intersectionality just seems like an intentional regression from individual consideration for the sake of simplicity, and it has a similar dumbing-down effect that any simple model has (like a lot of economic models, that are so dumbed-down that they become nearly useless).

[Anonymous No.12063658]

>>12063652
Sorry, the second reply was supposed to go to this comment
>>12063214

[Anonymous No.12063661]

>>12063617
His implication is that right wing thought is a result of poor education and lack of exposure to culture.
The term "reactionary" implies absence of rationality in itself.

Of course, when he is confronted with evidence that right wingers HAVE read the material and still found it unimpressive, he has an emotional fit and resorts to immature non-sequitur retorts.

[Anonymous No.12063664]

>>12063661
It was actually just a shitpost referencing an argument in this thread.

[Anonymous No.12063674]

>>12062123
>everything is absolutely shaped by society
>unidimensional thinking that is a grotesque oversimplification of reality

Gotta love the universities ;)
That's the price we pay for not establishing a aristocratic state in which the dumbfucks that don't have the wit to become true intellectuals i.e. philosopher kings flood our education systems with their bullshit agendas based on nothing but affective resonances.

[Anonymous No.12063905]

>>12061265
It is called paganism anon. It seems the nature gods sure are pissed off at california huh?
:^)

>>12062042
A heart in the wrong place can be saved, when a soul is so cut off from the light it can only see the material you get someone who is capable of true atrocities

[Anonymous No.12063941]

Intersectionality is just the logic of capitalist individualism taken one step further.

[Anonymous No.12064514]

>>12062123
>it's the framework of sociology
you're reaching

[Anonymous No.12064517]

>>12062949
marxists loathe identity politics

[Anonymous No.12064531]

>>12064517
Yet they failed to refute them, and will always begrudgingly admit.that they demonstrate the limitations of Marxism.

[Anonymous No.12064551]

>>12064531
>Yet they failed to refute them
??????

[Anonymous No.12064556]

>>12064551
Marxism fails to meaningfully account for difference. And every marxist will admit to it when pressed. Opposing identity politics from the left is a futile endeavor.

[Anonymous No.12064563]

>>12064556
>Marxism fails to meaningfully account for difference
is your understanding of marxism "DAE everyone should get the same pay bcoz we all equal?"

[Anonymous No.12064570]

>>12062249
kek, saved

[Anonymous No.12064577]

>>12064556
>Marxism fails to meaningfully account for difference.
That's like, the entire theory of Marxism, explaining the social differences between people and why they exist. How far through Capital did you get before getting bored and looking at memes?

[Anonymous No.12064591]

>>12064563
Marxism as a mode if critique is inherently reductionist. There's a reason that so many different schools of thought have formed to fill in the gaps.

[Anonymous No.12064609]

>>12061181
how is this different from holism, besides >muh poc ?

[Anonymous No.12064610]

>>12064591
if you keep spouting empty one-liners instead of actually making an argument this conversation won't get anywhere

[Anonymous No.12064679]

Before attending university, I tended to consider this brand of leftism/critical theory we're all referring to (let's call it Slam-Leftism for now) as a simple political ideology that was highly popular at the moment. I saw it as belonging to the same set of all other standard political alignments. I didn't agree with it and really didn't like it, but I respected it as a coherent body of ideas.
Within my first week of college I started to suspect that simply wasn't the case.
It's a given that multiple people who both subscribe to the same ideology will probably make similar arguments and bring up similar points in any kind of relevant discussion. Nothing out of the ordinary there. What I started noticing about Slam-Leftism, however, was that its proponents actually speak in near-identical sentences and phrases, and when asked for elaboration on any given claim, will all take you down an identical series of sentences and terms to explain their reasoning.
I don't just mean that they have a set of specialized terminologies to describe concepts there was no good term for beforehand. I mean even ideas that you'd expect to be rephrased or reasoned in any number of ways are always arrived at with the exact same set of memes.
The specific terms used are always highly emotive and I assume were derived from slam poetry over time. "bodies" instead of "people" is a major example. "Spaces" is another. These are words that get you claps from the audience when you say them on stage, and my working theory is that oral performances played a crucial part in sculpting Slam-Leftism. Emotive terms that the audience responded well to became more frequently used as a consequence, creating a positive feedback that crystallized key phrases, sentences, and terms and eventually spilled out into a general world-view. Slam-Leftism is not an ideology, it is a memetic oral ritual born out of capitalistic optimization to get the most retweets, most reblogs, most applause in the fewest words. Slam-Leftists do not actually think deeply about the ideas they espouse, they are just ritualistically communicating a preset of signage.

tl;dr at the least, a large component of university leftism is a memetic virus born out of the incentivization of powerful language on social media and within poetry circles

[Anonymous No.12064684]

>>12064679
>Before attending university...

Stopped reading. Has mommy sent you a care package yet?

[Anonymous No.12064688]

>>12064684
I cover all of that in the rest of the post

[Anonymous No.12064718]

>>12064679
>was that its proponents actually speak in near-identical sentences and phrases,
It's seriously fucking weird. I think the comparison to New England Puritans makes a lot of sense

[Anonymous No.12064801]

>>12063546
Can someone explain why there are people who argue against essentialism when it's obviously true?

[Anonymous No.12064812]

>>12064679
>they are just ritualistically communicating a preset of signage
Interesting. If you're curious to know about the language of bodies and spaces, its essentially a bastardisation of situationist theory from the mid to late 20th century. The idea is that capitalism permeates every possible aspect of life, society and culture to the point that social participation is reduced to a form of commodity fetishism, an exchange of shiny objects in stratified or organised spaces. In order to resist the omnipotency of the spectacle, you have to hijack spaces and bodies in order to deliberately invent a "situation" that reawakens some feeling of resistance or revolutionary spirit in its audience.

The problem isn't in the ideas though, its purely a practical issue. The scenes or situations occurring in slam poetry events don't have any lasting impact or benefit to the outside world. It isn't a call-to-arms, its a process of therapy, the "talking" cure of psychoanalysis. Situationist theory inspired groups like the Angry Brigade into full-on acts of terrorism and property damage. You think your little performance in a local community centre is gonna have the same impact?

[Anonymous No.12064816]

>>12064679
An interesting point, but the weird part is I could swear this was old pasta.

[Anonymous No.12064820]

>>12064816
It's a repost but I'm the original author
If I'm gonna write these autistic walls of text for /lit/ I may as well get my money's worth

[Anonymous No.12064826]

>>12064812
>The idea is that capitalism permeates every possible aspect of life, society and culture to the point that social participation is reduced to a form of commodity fetishism, an exchange of shiny objects in stratified or organised spaces
i question whether the people who develop these theories had friends

[Anonymous No.12064837]

>>12064820
Ok, if you say so. But you see how your argument turns against itself when you do that, right? You might want to quote or greentext it.

[Anonymous No.12064856]

This doesn't seem like a unique or even new idea.

It's basically trying to make the marginalized feel special with a du jour phrase to give them identity as the "oppressed."

Just call it examining prejudice and be done.

[Anonymous No.12064865]

>>12064826
Don't hate the player, hate the game that was spoiled by intersectional feminism. Guy Debord is actually one of the better wanky continental writers, Society of the Spectacle is very coherent on why the contemporary spirit of egalitarianism is nothing but a farce.

[Anonymous No.12064870]

>>12064837
>But you see how your argument turns against itself when you do that, right?
Only superficially. I can still rephrase every argument there and respond to any questions or critiques. The fact of the matter is still that most people won't recognize the post and may not have heard the argument I make in it, which can't be said for intersectionality-speak

[Anonymous No.12064872]

>>12064865
What im saying is i think theyre projecting a bit. A lot of people have meaningufl social relations. Atomized upper middle class bugmen in academia maybe dont understand this

[Anonymous No.12064899]

>>12064679
I think it developed out of the fracturing of third-wave feminism, and now the momentum of the movement derives from whoever yells loud enough for 15 minutes, because there's no longer any clear ideological core, and like you said even the terminology is ever-changing and meaningless because it as a movement is ultimately without direction, clear institutions, or clear leaders.
>>12064718
I don't think a comparison with Puritanism is appropriate, because New England Puritanism had local authorities, and a clear ideological core (Reformed Theology). It wasn't really as restrictive as it is made out to be now, and offered in its understanding of God a deep repentance and forgiveness for sin; such a mechanism does not exist now in our permanent-data society where you are made to feel guilty forever for even a minor slip-up.

[Anonymous No.12064905]

>>12064826
Wouldn't the argument be, you can't have friends, only platonic prostitutes.

>>12061181
>>12064865
My problem with it is the silence on class. Yes, race, gender, whatever affect your options, but that is minuscule compared to class. Who thinks a trans-bian Oprah really needs society's support more than an unemployed white guy?

>>12064870
Probably, but you literally aren't, which makes it funny.

[Anonymous No.12064914]

It's victim mentality incarnate. Basically it's a way for plebeian idiots to feel important and like they deserve better (in reality they reap exactly what they sow, but being bad losers they can't accept this fact). Only it's cleverly veiled as concern for unfair discrimination against specific groups in order to silence those who disagree. Notice how easy it's to belong in these protected groups. If you're feeling down because of your own incompetence then just claim you're a homosexual or transgender and all the sudden it's the evil white man's fault and not yours.

[Anonymous No.12064923]

>>12064905
>is the silence on class
It's funny how things worked out like that. I'm sure it's just a coincidence. . .

[Anonymous No.12064935]

>>12064872
No one is arguing that meaningful experiences can't happen, just that all actions and statements are contextualised within an environment of competition and struggle. Minute and large parts of everyday life are inevitably going to participate in this framework, whether we want them to or not, and whether we even notice these unseen forces operating through us. A "meaningful" relationship can still carry social, political or economic baggage.

[Anonymous No.12064936]

>>12064923
its almost like people aren't all equal or something.

[Anonymous No.12064949]

>>12064899
idk if you are really 'made to feel guilty forever'. Like Mel Gibson is still operating in hollywood, and went about as far out as you can go

obviously he has a lot of pull because he's Mel Gibson and he is a fountain of money but still

[Anonymous No.12064951]

>>12064872
the overarching argument isn't really about meaningful relations between individuals in particular cases, or about intimacy. it's more about civic life generally. and it's precisely because there exists meaning/sense in commodity exchange for those involved that commodified society becomes actual. the logic of commodity exchange is nothing more than a reflection of concrete, real material relations of production so of course it has a tangibility to it. it's not like the ideological propagation of capitalism comes out of thin air or random academics who manage to gaslight the masses

[Anonymous No.12064958]

>>12064935
>just that all actions and statements are contextualised within an environment of competition and struggle.
this is why i question if they have friends. your work life is mostly(but not completely there are the 'humane' aspects of modern regulations on working) framed by that, but your friendships are not

it seems like they simply assert that capitalism has infected everything when it hasnt. There are people who act like that and treat everything as a commodity and competition, but that is hardly everybody.

[Anonymous No.12064963]

>>12064905
>Who thinks a trans-bian Oprah really needs society's support more than an unemployed white guy?
What is really absurd is that classical leftist thought is actually radically opposed to intersectionality. The idea is that if you break up society into slices or intersections of identity, then you lose the fortified proletariat base from which to draw revolutionary power. Everyone fights for their own ground, no matter how small or tenuous it might be. It literally makes left-wing people behave like ideological capitalists because identity is reduced to nothing more than property.
>"MY body, MY choice!".

[Anonymous No.12064971]

>>12064963
That's why leftism came up with progressive stack

[Anonymous No.12064978]

>>12064958
Why is concept of friendship incompatible with capitalism infecting everything? Why can't these thinkers have friends and recognize that there is capitalism within their friendships?

[Anonymous No.12065002]

>>12064958
>your work life is mostly(but not completely there are the 'humane' aspects of modern regulations on working) framed by that, but your friendships are not
the division between commercial and personal spaces is disintegrating, mostly stemming from technological developments in mass and instant communication.

Plenty of bosses will actively avoid the presentation of an aggressive, dominating or cruel employer, and instead adopt a pretence of being a peer or even an equal simply because it brings about better results. It also makes it much harder to resist demands you might feel to be excessive or unfair, or point out instances of genuinely inappropriate behaviour.

Chances are if someone like Philip Green is denying charges of racism and sexual abuse as "banter", he's doing it in the spirit of a sociable and relaxed workplace where crude insults or predatory behaviour can be easily tossed aside as gestures of playfulness.

[Anonymous No.12065008]

>>12064923
>>12064936
>>12064963
I was just reading some 'world workers forum' (or whatever it was) complaining about that very thing. "identity politics is the zero-sum politics of the petite bourgeoisie" or such.
I'm not a commie, but they seemed correct about that.

>>12064971
The progressive stack seems like it was designed to make a group completely ineffective.

[Anonymous No.12065010]

>>12064978
>there is capitalism within their friendships?
because to me, and I dont want to be a dick, but this is just how i see it, this is abstracting what capitalism is into a set of memes like competition and then stating a mechanism by which they would 'infect' all of our social reality. I simply don,t see reality like this, there are a number of different influences at play in an individual's life, capitalism, its effects on material and cultural reality, is just one part of this, and the origins of something like competition may completely predate capitalism in many cultures as a normal social tenet.

[Anonymous No.12065022]

>>12064978
because it is clearly that capitalism, commodification, whatever you wish to call it is eroding friendship. Friendship being an interaction with an Other. Friendships are becoming positivist, without negativity, and are compartmentalized as the self is given compartments (sexuality, politic beliefs, ie labels) with which to adorn oneself and consume. Negativity is the signifier for the Other, and is passing away in our society under the demands of a pure-pleasure experience ("enjoy! Be happy!").
I hear quite often "I would never be friends with a democrat/republican", "X believes in Y opinion, I don't want to involve myself with him", and so on. That is because we are shunning ourselves from the negativity that good friendships must have. We are two selves enjoying our sameness, in our modern friendships, rather than enjoying the Other, difference, and being radically changed by said friendship (two-scene).
It is not wholly gone, but long-lasting friendships are fading away in out modern day due to our postive-ization of life which is tied to capitalist processes.

[Anonymous No.12065044]

>>12065010
i don't really know about debord but the more developed argument isn't in the form of taking abstract concepts as a stand-in for "capitalism" and postulating that these concepts have infected life, the fleshed out argument connects the ideology that regulates daily life with the material relations of production that compose the entirety of the social order. And 'relations of production' here is not as simple as vulgar marxists would have you believe, it's not merely about workers and bossess; it refers to the social relations that reproduce, as said, the entirety of the existing order, so for example the child labor camps in bangladesh and the like, the sexual trade in the third world, the family in all its incarnations, the political/academical institutions, etc.

[Anonymous No.12065053]

>>12065044
>he material relations of production that compose the entirety of the social order.
voila our disagreement. I see it as one element of many that contribute to the totality of culture

im aware ths sort of thing is heresy for Marxists but whatever

[Anonymous No.12065311]

>>12063003
For real, I thought The 2070 Paradigm Shift proved that TEDx is complete and utter bullshit and to not be given a second thought

[Anonymous No.12065316]

are FEMINAZIS the rEAL NAZIS???

[Anonymous No.12065771]

>>12063905
How do I get a qt orthodox gf?

[Anonymous No.12066027]

>>12063402
>tfw peterson was right about the postmodernists

/lit/ btfo

[Anonymous No.12066073]

intesectionality is the best weapong sjws and the new left has against their enemies (white males) and they´re using it rather efficiently as society buy up their packages of lies, i don´t intersect is an ideology on itself but an useful tool for real ideologues (sjws, new left, corporate culture and the government oddly enough)

[Anonymous No.12066086]

>>12065053
>im aware ths sort of thing is heresy for Marxists but whatever
Maybe for the ones who've read The Communist Manifesto and stopped there without reading the Grundrisse and Das Kapital.

[Anonymous No.12066154]

>>12061181
I'm convinced this shit, and other things of its ilk, were made to delimit and box intellectual inquiry into a strict set of a baseless nonsense so as to keep prying eyes away from the establishment and dictate preferred trends and topics. Basically a playpen for retards to amuse themselves while the world occurs around them. Perhaps the entirety of Social Sciences are like this because they seem to be directly derived from and chained to social ongoings and politics for several centuries. It also has the convenient effect of producing (manufactured) identity-obsessed losers, self-segregating the population. Muh nonsensical slight that is really just an impression-based misunderstanding is more important than critically looking into ongoing economic realities that actually affect the whole world.

[Anonymous No.12066161]

>>12066154
the only reproducible stuff in the social sciences is the stuff that gets called pseudoscience by plebs. IQ being the obvious big one.

[Anonymous No.12066514]

Bump

[Anonymous No.12066546]

>>12066086
Nobody reads Capital. Nobody.

[Anonymous No.12066605]

>>12062999
Trips confirmed for truth

[Anonymous No.12066620]

>>12063080
It's really obvious from the outside dude
Especially at those protests where they chant the same thing over and over

it's a shitty unorganized religion that makes its adherents miserable, but it is clearly a religion

[Anonymous No.12066679]

>>12066546
And there lies the problem. Self proclaimed marxists reduce Marxism to 'muh class struggle' when the reality of Capital is far more horrifying than those plebs can imagine. Marx was saying Capital is sentient long before it became a meme.

[Anonymous No.12066736]

>>12066620
I'm not into the fad whereby anything vaguely emic/esoteric/other is considered a "religion."

>omg they have their own terms they're like a cult omg
>they have a leader and their own uniforms they're a religion wow
>they have meetings on Tuesdays and have shared beliefs omg it's a RELIGION!!

stop doing this

[Anonymous No.12066763]

>>12066736
it fulfills the psycho-social role of a religion

[Anonymous No.12066794]

>>12066763
No, it fulfills your need to describe something you disagree with in the strongest terms available while avoiding the necessity of carefully developing a non rhetorical critique.

Everyone knows that groups have their own sort of psychological forms including warm-and-fuzzies. That applies to all groups.

It's just as easy for liberals to go on about Trump supporters being a religion, which is equally stupid and lazy.

We get that you dislike the activist left. We get it anon.

[Anonymous No.12066798]

>>12062232
>society
Urbanites are scum.

[Anonymous No.12066866]

>>12066794
>Trump supporters being a religion
Trump's rallies do have a tinge of democratic fervour, or fascist fervour, that could be called religious

Trumpism doesnt have an entire network of insitutions that support it, a huge theoretical frameweork developed over centuries, or any of the other things that progressives have

liking Trump is not an imperative that infiltrates the deepest core of his followers, the way that the need to be antiracist, antisexist, etc. does for the progressive

[Anonymous No.12066936]

>>12066866

>the bad guys are the worst, they are simply so bad, they are awful, uniquely awful

Brainlet please go

[Anonymous No.12066941]

>>12066936
I dont think progressives are bad people, my entire family are progressives. I dont even try to change them anymore than id try to deconvert a Christian i knew.

[Anonymous No.12066942]

>>12066794
Fuck off and read that Judith Butler, fag.

Your sole argument is
>NO-HUH!

[Anonymous No.12066961]

>>12066942

NO-HUH, YOU fuck off, Fag

[Anonymous No.12066969]

>>12066763
A community maybe, but not a religion

>>12066942
Yours is YAH HUH

[Anonymous No.12066988]

>>12066969
it has explicit tenets though. Everybody is equal. If we only recognize this fact, oppression can disappear and we will live in harmony.

The everybody is equal bit in my book counts for a metaphysical proposition. They dont arrive at that by measuring pêople's abiltiies empirically. The second bit about 'progress' is Hegel style philosophy of history which is also metaphysical.

Look at their art, it's almost all about this stuff, it's almost all they talk about

[Anonymous No.12066996]

Trumpism and Social Justice both fit these categories. Only a fool or a member of such cults would deny this.

>The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.

>Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

>Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).

>The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry, or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).

>The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members (for example, the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an "avatar" or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).

>The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.

>The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).

>The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (for example, lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).

>The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt iin order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

>Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.

>The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.

>The group is preoccupied with making money.

>Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.

>Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.

>The most loyal members (the "true believers") feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

[Anonymous No.12067027]

>>12066988
>everybody is equal

This is a gross oversimplification of leftist social ideology. It was already a gross oversimplification of Communism and Marxism when it was applied to them, and it just shows you how lazy everyone is getting that the popular criticism of an economic ideology was simply grafted onto a social ideology. But I digress. You cant even square "Everybody is equal" with intersectionality. If that's the anthem of the left, why do they give more floor space to gay women of color? Why do activists insist on "black lives matter" as opposed to "all lives matter"? Isnt your own criticism of the left that they fail to grasp a kind of fundamental human equality across race/gender/class?

If the theory dont work, toss it out anon. It's much more complicated than that.

[Anonymous No.12067030]

>>12066996
Im ok with calling Trumpism a cult, but it's an incoherent and ephemeral mess compared with the progressives, who have been around for centuries and developed many insitutitons and customs based around their faith.

Conservatives never really understand what theyre doing, and half their memes come from the progressives of yesterday. Voting is an equalist idea in the first place, and thats what theyre enthusing abuot. What is the core tenet of their ideals? They have no idea.

COmpare this to say real White Nationalists, who think of whiteness in mystical terms and literally isolate themsleves into little areas for decades. That,s also less of a religion than progressivism, but it qualifies more.

[Anonymous No.12067039]

>>12066988

see
>>12063045
and
>>12063194
and perhaps
>>12063472

That other anon is just incapable of admitting he has no idea what's going on

[Anonymous No.12067056]

>>12067027
My criticism of the left is that i dnt think everyone is equal. Races, sexes, classe, etc. I think democracy is a retarded idea. Anyway my criticism doesnt matter

The way the Left square their praxis is with the notion of 'privilege'. History has accidentally made some people privileged, so to correct this unfair situation, we have to give the 'marginalized' people a leg up, so that when everyone is on even ground, equality will spontaneously emerge.

Note that this goes two ways, you get to shit on yourself for your sin(look how pious i am) and you get to hit whoever is above you on the privilege stack(everybody loves feeling righteous)

[Anonymous No.12067072]

>>12067027
You should read Bookchin's Ecology of Freedom, he goes into detail on the opposing concepts of Inequality of Equals (equality of outcome) vs Equality of Unequals (equality of opportunity)

[Anonymous No.12067076]

>>12067039
Why are you still here, Mr. Big Reader? Dont yo have more books to read?

[Anonymous No.12067084]

>>12067076
>Mr Big Reader

how will I ever recover

[Anonymous No.12067098]

>>12067084
Go look in the mirror and say "I have read Judith Butler, and I know the differrence between Lacanian Psychoanalysis and Psychoanalysis."

[Anonymous No.12067143]

>>12062987
KKKRISTIANS BTFO!!!!!!