/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12547331]

What did he mean by this? Is this why modern Western culture still revolves around the Holocaust and the cult of guilt it gave birth to?

[Anonymous No.12547338]

what makes you think adorno shaped "modern western culture?"

[Anonymous No.12547360]

You should read "After Liberalism", by Paul Gottfried, who was a student of Herbert Marcuse and formerly a "right-wing critical theorist". In that work he discusses Adorno quite a bit and why his work was sponsered by the American Jewish Committee.

Here is a good article by Gottfried relating to that

https://www.unz.com/pgottfried/yes-virginia-dare-there-is-a-cultural-marxism-and-its-taking-over-conservatism-inc/

[Anonymous No.12547361]

>>12547338
>adorno shaped "modern western culture?"
Can't remember saying that. Do you think the Frankfurt School had absolutely no influence on Western culture and its education system?

[Anonymous No.12547371]

>>12547361
yes

[Anonymous No.12547376]

>>12547338
>strawmanning this obviously
You seem irritated, what gives?

[Anonymous No.12547379]

>>12547371
Plesse read After Liberalism, by Paul Gottfried. Adorno had a significant impact

[Anonymous No.12547398]

>>12547371
I'm sorry, you need to be 18 to post here.
>>12547360
Will definitely check it out, thanks.

[Anonymous No.12547436]

>>12547360
The root of Marxism is ressentiment. Marxists are a set of people who simply cannot deal with the fact that they dont have the same political and economic power as the dominant in hierarchy. This is what distinguishes them from Christians who too can be politically powerless and poor but not only accept this condition, they even think it is a badge of honor. Marxists, unlike Christians are not concerned with changing the world into a better place. They are merely interested in re-arranging the power hierarchy so that they themselves can be at the top. Since Marxists typically do not possess the means or competence to rise in the power hierarchy the conventional way, their only recourse is violent revolution. To this end they employ the rabble which might momentarily even believe that at the root of the revolution is indeed the desire for a better tomorrow. This rabble is then equally cut off from any hierarchical positions who are taken by the small circle of revolutionaries who did not hold such delusions from the start. Marxisms and ideologies stemming from Marxism are the true flagships of slave morality and ressentiment.

[Anonymous No.12547446]

>>12547436
In marxist or communist countries who did not cut away their communist elite in the process to capitalism this is the most apparent. In those countries, the most ruthless capitalists today are the most staunch marxists of yesterday.

[Anonymous No.12547448]

>>12547436
>The root of Marxism is ressentiment. Marxists are a set of people who simply cannot deal with the fact that they dont have the same political and economic power as the dominant in hierarchy.
Marxism is pretty open about this, the very point of leftism is that it sees all nondemocratic hierarchy as unecessary and/or wrong.

[Anonymous No.12547483]

>>12547331

Isn't this exactly the kind of thing Jews should try to avoid? It is integral to Hitleric Antisemitism that the Jew thinks himself better than everyone else combined and of their issues only as they affect him.

[Anonymous No.12547499]

>>12547371
Even proponents of Critical Theory will disagree:

Look out for this paper by Tyrus Miller on Libgen:
Modernism and the Frankfurt School
Tyrus Miller
ABSTRACT
The Frankfurt School theoretical tendency and the individual thinkers connected with it have exercised an enormous influence across a broad spectrum of contemporary cultural scholarship. Modernist studies have been no exception in this regard. The more that modernist studies in recent years have taken shape as a distinct field of inquiry, the more intensely have contemporary scholars looked to the Frankfurt School legacy to explain key problems that arise in their research and teaching. In the specific case of modernism, however, there exists an even stronger motivation for the interest and influence of Frankfurt School critical theory: the close, multifaceted attention the Frankfurt School thinkers gave to the nature of modernity and the social, political, and aesthetic implications of it. Arguably, there is an “elective affinity” between the culture of artistic modernism, which responds to and artistically reshapes typical experiences of modernity, and Frankfurt School critical theory, which takes modern experience and its transformations as a primary object of critical reflection. Just as modernist artists responded to new modern experiences by reconceiving the style, form, and criteria of value for works of art, so too the key figures of the Frankfurt School developed daringly innovative, interdisciplinary critical approaches to the emerging phenomena of modern life. Coming out of and responding to the same matrix of problems, modernism and Frankfurt School theory exhibit parallel, complementary styles of thought in their respective figural and theoretical idioms.

[Anonymous No.12547511]

It's the ultimate example of evil that comes with advanced consciousness. It doesn't really matter who was involved as much as it happened.

[Anonymous No.12547562]

>>12547331

I think you’re focusing to much on the specifics of the event. The Holocaust here is an abstraction, a possibility of an event like itself. Adorno speaks not in defense of jewish people, but of humans in general. An event like the Holocaust should not happen to any group or people. At least, it shouldn’t if you subscribe to some humanistic moral system. If you already believe in some dehumanizing ideology that reduces people to obstacles or whatever the way Nazism did then you wouldn’t get it. Adorno is promoting a cultural battle but it’s not founded on guilt, but on the maxim of the value of human life.

[Anonymous No.12547572]

>>12547562
Have you read The Authoritarian Personality? Antisemitism is a major theme for him, arguably THE theme at that point

[Anonymous No.12547583]

>>12547572

Cause it’s the most relevant example after WW2. Like, how every still can’t shut up about 9/11. Events like this are useful rhetorical and theoretical material.

[Anonymous No.12547595]

>>12547583
No, I mean as a sort of pathology

[Anonymous No.12547598]

>>12547562
>Adorno speaks not in defense of jewish people, but of humans in general. An event like the Holocaust should not happen to any group or people.
This type of intellectual dishonesty is one of the many reasons why the left is facing more and more resistance, keep it up.

[Anonymous No.12547608]

>>12547598
What he is trying to say is that the left believes everyone is entitled to an ethnostate, not just Jews

[Anonymous No.12547610]

>>12547595

I don’t deny that, but as s jew, I would imagine seeing his people reduce, dehumanize, and slaughter in such a vile way would do that to you. Why do you think Africans haven’t stopped talking about slavery and colonialism. I imagine your white, so it is in fact very hard for an individual from such a background to escape that history. Especially when it as recent as it was when Adorno was writing.

[Anonymous No.12547620]

>>12547598
What is dishonest about it?

[Anonymous No.12547639]

>>12547610
Might be hard for Africans to accept, but they were enslaved by Africans, whites only bought them. Ironically slavery in Africa was mostly abolished due to colonialism

[Anonymous No.12547658]

>>12547639
again, It doesn't matter who is to blame but the fact that it happened.

[Anonymous No.12547666]

>>12547610
>I don’t deny that, but as s jew, I would imagine seeing his people reduce, dehumanize, and slaughter in such a vile way would do that to you.
Make you try to subvert the country that gave many Jews refuge by telling them their traditions are fascist and if you disagree you're antisemic?

[Anonymous No.12547674]

>>12547666
Source on any of that?

[Anonymous No.12547676]

>>12547639
And that may be true, but it doesn’t change the fact that white people had African slaves for hundreds of years andthat accompanied by a dehumizing ideollgy that consider black people as lower thatn whites and that That was followed by another hundred years of segregation and terrible treatment by whites and white law in America. Even if black people in America started to resent africans for the role in slavery, you shouldnt except that to change their resentment towards whites.

[Anonymous No.12547683]

>>12547674
After Liberalism, by Paul Gottfried

[Anonymous No.12547685]

>>12547620
The implication that Auschwitz is just a place holder for any sort of atrocity and not an instrument for the dismantlement of German identity which was one of the core aims of the Frankfurt School and the 68er movement.

[Anonymous No.12547686]

>>12547436
and what would you call a revolutionary praxis only teologically aligned with marxism for the sake of seeing the upper echelon of slave morality peddling pseudo-elites ousted? is any change in the status quo, regardless of ideological motivation, inherently ressentiment?

[Anonymous No.12547702]

>>12547676
Whites treated blacks better than blacks (who were the ones who introduced slavery into the colonies) did. Jefferson Davis once upbraided a man who called his slave "Jim" because he said the man's name was James, and it is disrespectful to use nicknames unless you were close friends

[Anonymous No.12547706]

>>12547666
I understand that this perspective and I sympathize with /pol/‘s feelings. In fact, this response is only natural. Their does appear to be a contemporary phenomenon attacking and reducing white people in the media and everytime I see it i get a pang of sympathy. Any group would respond in similar fashion. In fact this is the way Black freedom fighters felt during the civil rights era and earlier.
However, your narrative misplaces a lot of blame to a select group of jewish writers. You only need an awareness of Western philosophy to realize how the attack on western values is an ancient as Socrates and that that’s the general train of thought in its history. You just see Adorno and the Frankfurt school as responsible for kt because they’re jews. But look at their influences and you’ll find a long list white men as equally responsible.

[Anonymous No.12547720]

>>12547706
>But look at their influences and you’ll find a long list white men as equally responsible.
nobody in this thread is reducing cultural marxism to jews only.

[Anonymous No.12547728]

>>12547706
>However, your narrative misplaces a lot of blame to a select group of jewish writers. You only need an awareness of Western philosophy to realize how the attack on western values is an ancient as Socrates and that that’s the general train of thought in its history. You just see Adorno and the Frankfurt school as responsible for kt because they’re jews.
I see them as responsible because Paul Gottfried (a Jew) wrote a study on it published by Princeton.

[Anonymous No.12547731]

>>12547686
Yes

[Anonymous No.12547733]

>>12547685
And? If their aim waa to prevent another Holocaust and they thought dismantling German indentity would do that, then what’s the problem? If German identity has its own proponents then let them defend it. Wouldn’t it be rather impressive that a handful of thinkers could destroy an entire nation’s identity by writing books? I think the proposition is silly at best, but if that’s what you believe you should ask how strong is an identity that can’t survive ideas

[Anonymous No.12547741]

>>12547728
That seems like rather uncritical.

[Anonymous No.12547747]

>>12547733
They had major influence in social engineering programs and education, they didn't just print pamphlets lol

[Anonymous No.12547758]

>>12547747
In some areas

[Anonymous No.12547760]

>>12547747
Their influence is not their fault.

[Anonymous No.12547761]

>>12547741
Why?

[Anonymous No.12547766]

>>12547760
What are you talking about? I mean they held positions

[Anonymous No.12547773]

>>12547761
I was just refering to your phrasing. Who cares if it was released by princeton? I’m making not claims about the content itself. Im sure lots of content supporting Frankfurt writers and theor ideas has been relased by princeton as well. Means nothing.

[Anonymous No.12547779]

If you speak German, this fairly recent book by Josef Kraus (50 years of Re-Education) is a good treatise on how Critical Theory ruined education in Germany.

[Anonymous No.12547780]

>>12547766
No one can engineer their own influence. If people listen to you it is because they decided if for themselves. If the Frankfurt school writers have changed the course of history, it is because people have accepted them. All they did was write books and have ideas.

[Anonymous No.12547798]

He means beat people over the head about how bad these things obviously were so that theyll never happen again. The problem is people stop caring.

[Anonymous No.12547800]

>>12547747
A lot of their idea such as events like the holocaust should be avoided should be common intuition.

[Anonymous No.12547805]

>>12547780
Well no they had important positions and worked very hard to get dissidents fired. Trying to pretend people who have positions in social engineering and writing books and who remove opposition are just writing books is silly

[Anonymous No.12547806]

>>12547733
>Wouldn’t it be rather impressive that a handful of thinkers could destroy an entire nation’s identity by writing books?
Together with the re-education programs implemented by the allies they laid the foundation for the left's cultural and academic monopoly which influenced whole generations, teachers, professors and students alike. It's not like they put out some books, and voilà, Germany is no more.

[Anonymous No.12547810]

>>12547798
He doesn't say that. You can educate people to be smart enough to avoid it without even mentioning the horrors.

[Anonymous No.12547817]

>>12547800
Not when avoiding it means pushing globohomo, no, but they think globohomo must be pursued to prevent another Holocaust. Derrida said the same thing

[Anonymous No.12547818]

>>12547806
Capitalism is the current model of society which is definitely not left wing.

[Anonymous No.12547833]

>>12547805
social engineering and *education

[Anonymous No.12547834]

>>12547817
What is globohomo and source on those things?

[Anonymous No.12547837]

>>12547818

[Anonymous No.12547840]

>>12547805
And how did they get to those positions?

>>12547806
And why was it them and not some other thinkers that re-education and social emgineers tool after?

[Anonymous No.12547858]

>>12547810
Smart people are some of the best at hurting others. If some vague ass humanism will work to prevent these things id say sure, but just given the nature of our further push to a more material envisioning of the world Id argue its easier to not care as much about others.

[Anonymous No.12547874]

>>12547840
Conference of yalta, reeducation programs implented by the allied and the soviet occupiers, de-programming of curriculums aka de-nazification.
http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=gvKVLcMVIuG&b=395077

[Anonymous No.12547888]

>>12547874
Doesn’t really answer the fundamental question of why them.

[Anonymous No.12547895]

>>12547888
but it absolutely does or are you just playing stupid in hopes i'll lose my patience and fold?

[Anonymous No.12547925]

Post-colonial theory often attempts to reduce systems of what it perceives as domination and power to color theory in spite of itself. To say that someone is 'white' is a bitter abstraction and a misuse of artistry, because there's only one color describable as white and that color rarely if at all appears on human pigmentation, which can often be described in many hues and shades. I, for example, am a ferra.
The realization of this abstraction discloses the true conservatism of post-colonial theoretics: what it seeks is a cling to tradition in a world where tradition is presented as disrupted. Tradition, of course, has never existed and if it did it never arbitrarily attatched itself to pigmentation.

[Anonymous No.12548000]

>>12547331
Yes Theo, the serfs must never again be permitted to defy their masters, we get it already.

[Anonymous No.12548006]

>>12547925
>Post-colonial theory

Kill yourself kike.

[Anonymous No.12548350]

>>12547686
it's ressentiment when the main goal of the movement is to re-arrange the distribution of power. i think marxists and marxist-aligned political beliefs are not in any way revolutionary because i suspect that the underlying motivation for those kind of movements is the desire primarily to change WHO is the beneficiary in the power distribution process. i'm not saying that nobody goes into the revolution with truly having the intention of creating a better society, but i am sceptical that this is actually ever the result of these kind of movements and i think the historical record is clear on this. revolutions change things but they are not satisfactory answers in the long-run. marxism especially is so tied to notions of class, capital, political power etc. that it cannot overcome them because its entire framework is built on them. you cannot overcome money or power by being pre-occupied by them. in marxism there is an unhealthy fixation on this, marxist thinking itself is completely fixed in the rules of this game. my claim is that the problem is not a material problem but a problem of will and spirit.

i think in marxism and communism alike you can literally smell the stench of the diabolic. and i would say even of diabolic ingenuity once you contextualize it in a broader scope. im not going to claim that marxism is the root of all evil etc. marxism articulated certain defects in our society that were already problematic. for a violent revolution to take place, usually something has to be wrong in the first place. the first diabolical genius in the revolution lies in the fact that it proposes an even greater evil to abolish the previous evil. if the problem before was the elite being too oppressive etc. to the masses, the problem now is not only that we still have this oppression but that everyone's very being is pre-occupied with notions of class, hierarchy, social status, etc. To abolish this stalemate is now impossible because the current prevailing thought only allows for a material response.

What has REALLY happened is that the spirit was abolished and that now it is only possible to suggest solutions within the framework of material conditions. The fact that you can come up with the most ridiculous socio-economic ideas and have them be taken more seriously than merely suggesting that the solution could perhaps be immaterial, is evidence enough of this fact. It's unthinkable to suggest that faith could offer a solution. The true movement in the last 100-200 years has really been the abolishment and the discrediting of spirit and the locking of human thought into material conditions. I don't blame marxism specifically for this, especially not marxism alone. This is a much more complex issue. The complexity lies in the fact that the human will had/has to assent to it, so to understand how it came to be, it is like visualizing how a viral infection would spread and mutate through time.

[Anonymous No.12548436]

>>12548350
To a human intelligence it would be too difficult to see and understand all instances of our will over time and how it lead into certain situations. It's obvious that our intelligence is not a good enough tool to grasp that complexity in full but it is possible to understand it conceptually, just like you can kind of understand what billions of stars are even if you can't see them one by one. So while I think some totalitarian regimes are obvious offshoots of a combination of diabolic activity and a long (in time) and wide (in numbers) sequence of perverse human will, it would be hard for us to pinpoint exactly the specific instances of what and to what degree contributed to the whole state of affairs at a fixed moment in time. By that, I find this whole discussion between capitalism, socialism, communism, whatever rather pointless because it operates within the framework of material conditions. To be honest, material conditions does not seem to be the best term, world-liness is a much better one. This more or less violent discussion between worldly competing systems can't be the solution. The only visual I see when I think of it, is millions of souls perishing while the devil makes the whole world jump rope. You're still jumping over his rope, to his tempo. The difficult thing of course is that when society goes through a transformation, some people are indeed victors. Practically, the victors of the revolution, and let's extend here the term revolution to any change of temporal power, do tend to enjoy actual fruits of that victory. Yes most likely you're going to live easy, have financial security, enjoy life, perhaps even have a happy family etc. But there is the flip side coin of this which is the misery and the collateral damage. You jump over the rope and some who have previously succeeded in doing that have now been smashed in the last spin and the vast majority is just getting smashed through every spin. My claim is that, ultimately to exit the game, you have to change the entire discourse. If we are talking specifically about marxism, not only does marxism not do this but it is perhaps the ideology that is the most magnetically attracted to the rope and it has brought millions to be smashed in that game.

[Anonymous No.12548462]

>>12547436
What do you think of Freud?

[Anonymous No.12548988]

>>12548350
>>12548436
Excellent posts.
>It's obvious that our intelligence is not a good enough tool to grasp that complexity in full but it is possible to understand it conceptually
I think about this nearly every day, and every attempt to disentangle it makes my head hurt. It's like a Gourdian Knot that can only be undone by a noumenal blade of pure logos. It's much easier to discuss the problem in metaphysical terms than material and historic terms.

[Anonymous No.12548999]

>>12548462
> What do you think of Freud?
Pseudoscience

[Anonymous No.12549017]