/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14258771]

Are there any books about the psychology of bootlickers?

[Anonymous No.14258793]

>>14258771

[Anonymous No.14258799]

>>14258771
any books that explain why women are so cold and heartless?

[Anonymous No.14258810]

>>14258799
She's right you faggot

[Anonymous No.14258815]

>>14258771
Most of them are fags with daddy issues who never got their fathers approval so they lick the boots of any authority figure

[Anonymous No.14258833]

>>14258810
what about me? am i right?

[Anonymous No.14258835]

>>14258793
This. The problem is believing that anyone has authority over anyone else to begin with.

[Anonymous No.14258843]

>>14258771
"eating the rich'' won't make you any richer either, unless you mean you specifically robbing rich individual rich people

[Anonymous No.14258862]

Bitching about them doesnt either im sure this roastoid will defintely be in the front lines of the class war though

[Anonymous No.14258880]

>>14258843
There is nothing more /lit/ than robbing tourists.

[Anonymous No.14258949]

>>14258843
If the rich are destroyed then the entire idea of being "poor" will be destroyed along with it.

[Anonymous No.14258964]

>>14258771

[Anonymous No.14258975]

>>14258771
This is why you shouldn't defend women and minorities

[Anonymous No.14258976]

>>14258880
I am all for robbing people, I have nothing against criminals, except that they can't complain if terrible shit happens to them in return
>>14258949
This is just not true, there will still be poor people and middle class people, the amount of money injected by taking the resources of the rich wouldn't change that much. Even if it did within a mere 5-10 years there would be new poor people.

Also worth thinking about that if you are thinking of a global revolution and you live in the West, redistributing the entire world's resources equally is probably going to make you poorer not richer

[Anonymous No.14259007]

The thing is, there should be no conflict between rich and poor. Instead, it must be about those who own the instruments of power to enrich themselves further and further when the middle class is shrinking and the income gap widens.
I am arguing for redistribution of power instead of redistribution of wealth. People all over the world are tired of filthy lies and corrupted politicians, we need a direct democracy now, where we don't vote for a representative in the House between a few candidates, but we choose to enact the exact policies based on our own needs and wants.

[Anonymous No.14259015]

>>14258976
>the amount of money injected
The money gets destroyed, anon

[Anonymous No.14259020]

>>14259007
>The thing is
dropped

[Anonymous No.14259026]

>>14259015
And then people generate new wealth rendering your sperg out pointless

[Anonymous No.14259043]

>>14259015
Money doesn't really mean much. I suspect our current version of money is just some kind of scam perpetrated by banks and governments, but I don't really give a shit one way or the other. There will still be power structures that decide how resources are distributed after an abolition of money

[Anonymous No.14259115]

>>14258949
This is untrue. Visit any socialist paradise. There is always inequality. It's just that the top is now the party leadership, not the owners of industry.

Wait, cut that last clause, since the party controls the industry, the party elite are still the owners of industry.

[Anonymous No.14259129]

>>14259115
Socialism doesn't seek to abolish hierarchies. Under these countries, they still have free housing, Healthcare and shit

[Anonymous No.14259151]

>>14259129
Sweden has free housing and healthcare and isn't socialist so what's the difference

[Anonymous No.14259165]

>>14258771
Are there any books about the psychology of twitter posters?

[Anonymous No.14259324]

I'm a friendless loser who grew up with the internet, but the more I think about it, the more I wish all forms of online social interaction were banned. Everyone is so hostile, insecure, and narcissistic now. We have this way of dehumanizing everyone around us, because as far as we're concerned, they're nothing more than small pictures on a screen. On top of that, anyone, no matter how ignorant or deranged, can easily find like-minded individuals and never have to worry about their ideals being challenged. We don't need to grow as people anymore because we can always retreat to our little comfort zones online. I'm terrified of what several more decades of this is going to do to people.

[Anonymous No.14259334]

>>14258771
I'm surprised to say this but, the Twitterthot is right

[Anonymous No.14259362]

>>14259324
It would probably be better without things that are connected to your real identity, like our current social media. Back when the internet was becoming popular, it was a common dictum to not put anything about your identity online, because it would make it public information. Somewhere along the way people stopped caring about their privacy and it led to what you have now.

[Anonymous No.14259398]

>>14258771

[Anonymous No.14259399]

>>14259324
Great, empathetic post. More like you are desparately needed in this modern world. Empathyanon, is the name I give to you. Based empathyanon. And I personally share your sentiments as well, and try to limit my internet socializing at this point because of it.

[Anonymous No.14259404]

>>14259324
The 2016 US election reflected a breaking point in the online/offline distinction. The incivility and hostility, and even the memes, of the darker corners of the internet, bled through the membrane threshold dividing "IRL" from online. The result was, at rallies and protests, a kind of savagery that normally would be sublimated and deflected to the internet, where it would be harmlessly reduced to mean posts and hurtful imagery. As this threshold between online and offline continues to be torn down and as socialization is increasingly mediated by digital interfaces, we can be sure to expect more of the hostility "captured" online to spill out into meatspace.

The sheer velocity and intensity of hatred and craziness spewed online has swelled it to the point that it bleeds and explodes outward into the real world. It can no longer be ignored.

[Anonymous No.14259419]

>>14259404
>tfw the internet was a memetic ritual to summon kek into the material plane

[Anonymous No.14259428]

>>14259324
>I wish all forms of online social interaction were banned. Everyone is so hostile, insecure, and narcissistic now. We have this way of dehumanizing everyone around us

I lived before the Internet existed. Believe me, it was the same.

[Anonymous No.14259434]

>>14258771
It actually will. I have a decent amount of wealth because I network with rich people who give me work. I go out to lunch with them and suck up to them. It works surprisingly well. A lot of rich people are always busy and have shitty households, so when you treat them like a family member should, they treat you well in return. Why would I go against my own interests? Dumb idealists, man.

[Anonymous No.14259442]

>>14259324
it's something people have never actually practically had to come to terms with before
fairly interesting to see what it does to relationships

[Anonymous No.14259459]

>>14259007
I don't give a shit about what poor people from the third world think, nor do I want to share with them. The world is built upon violence. You take what you can get. People only acknowledge power. That's the only way you can get respect from anyone. If you're meek, everyone just walks all over you. I've been there, done that. No thanks.

[Anonymous No.14259461]

>>14259404
Another way of putting this is that the hostile and unfriendly internet culture primes people to be distrustful and antagonistic in meatspace. The detachment and social distance of the internet, presents what appears to be the "underside" of society's beliefs and attitudes. When we see what people have to say online, we become distrustful of strangers on the street, as we are exposed to their hidden prejudices and hatreds online. So in sum, the internet erodes social cohesion IRL as it creates an illusion of cohesion in spatiotemporally distributed online echo chambers.

[Anonymous No.14259478]

>>14259461
>people in the past didn't know people would talk shit in private that they wouldn't in public
lol

[Anonymous No.14259484]

>>14259434
cuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck cuck

[Anonymous No.14259492]

>>14259434
what an embarrassing post

[Anonymous No.14259510]

And anonymity has a generalizing effect. If I cannot attribute a statement to a single agent, I am inclined to assign it to a kind of amorphous general consensus, expressive of a general sentiment rather than particular individual opinion.

[Anonymous No.14259512]

>>14259434
Based socially adept anon, may the poor and autistic suffer

[Anonymous No.14259516]

>>14259459
Transcend the cycle of violence, don't give into the meat grinder.

[Anonymous No.14259521]

>>14259478
The point is that we're exposed to it now, shithead. It's explicit now.

[Anonymous No.14259526]

>>14259478
but now it isn't confined to themselves but to the entire rest of the world
we know more about other people's lives than we did before tv and subsequently internet
people share their thoughts at regular intervals just for the rest of the world to speculate on, instantly, and discuss and confer and argue

that's a whole different ball park

[Anonymous No.14259528]

>>14259478
The internet removes all doubt that this happens. Haven't you noticed that people who are least connected to social media are also some of the most pleasant to be around IRL?

[Anonymous No.14259549]

>>14259478
>>14259484
Do you guys not know how social relations work or what? Is it cuckery to get closer to people with wealth so they transfer some of it over to you? Would you recommend I start screeching at them every time I see them in public instead? You have to play by the rules of the system. How is networking "cucked?" Do you guys even leave the house?

[Anonymous No.14259559]

>>14258771
>tfw some random girl on twitter makes a trite argument that's still better than nearly all political posts on /lit/

[Anonymous No.14259564]

>>14259528
>The internet removes all doubt that this happens.

I don't think there ever was any doubt.

[Anonymous No.14259582]

>>14259324
it's called freedom of association and is fundamental to mental wellbeing. it was banned in the real world with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s, so it's hardly surprising that people choose to exercise it online.

[Anonymous No.14259632]

>>14258771
defending the poor is make me rich?

[Anonymous No.14259638]

>>14259549
playing by the rules is LITERAL societal cuckoldry. you should work to change the rules, or better yet, destroy them. you aren't even a person, you aren't even an autonomous, conscious being. you're like a fucking dog. a little dog trained to follow orders and commands. that's all you are. a dog and a cuck. a cucked dog. fucking embarrassing nigger, get off /lit/ and never come back

[Anonymous No.14259657]

>>14259549
>You have to play by the rules of the system. How is networking "cucked?"
I'll give you a very brief explanation because myfriedn is waiting for me

think of a vector, on one side there is anti-social behavior, on the other over-socialization

anti-social behavior |--------> oversocialization
imsure you can fill in therest, you domesticated swine

[Anonymous No.14259664]

>>14258810
She's attacking a strawman. "Temporarily embarrassed millionaire" is a copout rhetorical device.

[Anonymous No.14259667]

>>14259638
>>14259657
>you can't play within the system without being absorbed by it
Seething poorfags. Enjoy your twitter rebellions.

[Anonymous No.14259675]

>>14259667
ok enjoy "playing by the rules" and never actually making an autonomous decision in your life bugman

[Anonymous No.14259680]

>>14259667
HEY I GATHER AT MY LOCAL DSA AND BITCH ABOUT MICROAGRESSIONS AND ATTEND CLIMATE RALLIES

[Anonymous No.14259695]

>>14259675
It was my decision to network with rich people. I could just as well have chosen to seethe like you choose to.

[Anonymous No.14259707]

>>14258810
Just looked her up. She is rich herself. Belongs in a labor camp too.

[Anonymous No.14259725]

@14259695
>it was my decision to cuck myself to my superiors, u mad bro?

[Anonymous No.14259911]

>>14258771
funny because is women who keep alive capitalistic societies

[Anonymous No.14259929]

>>14259707
why is she rich?

[Anonymous No.14259945]

>>14258771
well sweatie. hating them wont make you rich either

[Anonymous No.14259956]

>>14259929
Has an easy life and does not work. I work 16 hours a day in misery and have few days off. Like I said, she belongs in a labor camp.

[Anonymous No.14259983]

>>14258964
USA exports as much food as it imports. Random "my dad worked for the KGB guise" fantasy shouldn't be used for actually forming opinions.

Not that socialists aren't dumbfucks.

[Anonymous No.14259997]

>>14259956
>16 hours a day
maybe you should work less then

[Anonymous No.14260121]

>>14258771
>leftists can't into networking
What's new?

[Anonymous No.14260140]

>>14259638
Gaining power through playing by the rules is a significantly easier way to start changing the rules. Refusing to network will bottleneck you hard unless you're one of the smartest people in the world. The only way someone is changing the rules without traditionally playing by the rules today is by pimping themselves out over social media by playing by the newer rules or through an immense stroke of luck.

[Anonymous No.14260167]

>>14258799
They're treating men the way they treat them.

[Anonymous No.14260184]

>>14260167
sounds like a defect-defect situation

[Anonymous No.14260989]

>>14259428
So did I and it most definitely was not.

[Anonymous No.14261438]

[Anonymous No.14261466]

Attacking the rich wont make me rich either

[Anonymous No.14261564]

>>14259997
>he has the luxury of working less without starving
Labor camp for you too.

[Anonymous No.14261571]

>>14261564
>he thinks that everyone who doesn't work like a slave is starving
this is how the chandala hatred begins

[Anonymous No.14261601]

>>14261438
>the reign of the people of color

[Anonymous No.14261609]

>>14261571
You and the woman in the OP picture belong in gulags.

[Anonymous No.14261612]

>>14261438
is this real?
is this ironic?
is ASS really this much of a meme?

[Anonymous No.14261617]

>>14261609
t. serf

[Anonymous No.14261619]

>>14259324
The health of the republic resides in having its population exposed to viewpoints different than their own before they make their conclusions.

But, yeah I agree to an extent; however, there are multiple other mind viruses that are responsible for the collapse of social harmony and those go back decades. The internet itself wasn't a problem when it was smaller, but as the masses got a hold of it, so did the corporations, and everything went to shit. You should read republic.com

[Anonymous No.14261677]

>>14258793
akshully given that Stirner is, above all, anti-authoritarian, he's also the bane of bootlickers. Read shit before you meme about it, retard.

[Anonymous No.14261717]

>>14259324
Pretty based. But on the other hand, the internet has taught me everything my parents and schoolteachers were supposed to have but didn't. It's literally saved my life and lifted me out of poverty.

The internet as it was originally intended was for academics to share material. What you are looking to complain about is net 2.0 social media, which is the greatest source of pozz on the entire planet. But hey, the TV and radio talkshows were also pozz distribution centers, so what the hell.
>>14261438
Funny how similar the words "slav" and "slave" are, but hey, let's forget history and pretend all light-skinned people are responsible for the sins of the eternal angl*id, the g*rman, and the d*tch.

[Anonymous No.14261808]

It's futile to gripe over any wealthy individual. You can't blame someone for benefiting from the system. How about instead question the system and how it functions, how it produces gross divergences in outcomes, irrespective of individual merit? How about we question those rich who, controlling most of the world's money, also control politics and bias the system to favor the continuance of their oligarchy?
Most rich people aren't politically important until their wealth starts numbering in the several billions. Everyone else can be written off; good for them, but they're not part of the problem because they're not important. They don't cause this gravitational sink well of power attraction because they're so insanely rich the world depends on their money to function.
Once you rise above moralism and view the problems from a systemic, almost engineering lens all the fog clears.

[Anonymous No.14261839]

>>14261438
This is fake righg?

[Anonymous No.14261849]

Resenting them won't make you rich, either.

[Anonymous No.14262038]

>>14258799
They're hurt inside so they put up an uninterested and cold "I'm beautiful and I can get whatever I want from betas" attitude

[Anonymous No.14262271]

>>14261717
>Funny how similar the words "slav" and "slave" are
Slavs aren't called that because of the word slave. I hate this meme. Do you also think Anglos have something to do with angles?

[Anonymous No.14262300]

>>14258799
When in a position of power/hierarchy, women assert full force/will without contempt.

[Anonymous No.14262490]

>>14259983
Russian Empire was a net exporter of food. Didn't stop Bolsheviks from creating famines

[Anonymous No.14262528]

>>14259983
>Not that socialists aren't dumbfucks.
you fucked up here

[Anonymous No.14262725]

>>14259007
>middle class is shrinking

[Anonymous No.14262731]

>>14259459
cringe

[Anonymous No.14262752]

chapo trannies go back

[Anonymous No.14262753]

>>14259582
Freedom association = I get to kick the fucking niggers out of my land so they won't fuck my women

Back to /pol/ retard

[Anonymous No.14262787]

>>14262753
dilate

[Anonymous No.14262805]

>>14260140
>Gaining power through playing by the rules is a significantly easier way to start changing the rule
How many power does a dog gain by following commands? More good boi bones? Conditioning for servitude makes obeying commands an easier way for sure.

[Anonymous No.14262832]

>>14262271
Yes. Half of them are literally descendants of Angles. Which seem to be based on them living originally on the Angeln peninsula. Which means "Peninsula Narrow", or alternatively - Peninsula Angular. This is quite an often used description all over Europe to denote people, cities or whole lands wedged in "angles" between two rivers or estuaries or so. Like an old Russian city Uglich, with basically means on-Angle.

Also, we here in Russia have a new word "tadzhik" used for denote illegal labourers regardless of their ethnicity, though originally Central Asians and more narrow the Tajik people. And a verb "tadzhichit' ", that is to do tadzhik things like all but forced labour for scraps. Tajik seems to descend from Middle Persian word "tazik" used to denote Arabic invaders, that was taken by Turks of Central Asia to denote their Muslim enemies, as well as by Indians to denote the recently converted Persians.
So a Middle Persian name for an Arabic invader or Muslim convert now basically means "a slave" in Russian, because Central Asian Muslims are treated as slaves here. It just happens regularly.

[Anonymous No.14262852]

>>14262725
>hurr durr cherry picked data
100,000$ is not a lot of money in many places in America, particularly where that kind of income is the norm (Silicon Valley, for example). How about you post real buying power instead? Or home ownership among young people?

[Anonymous No.14263135]

>>14262271
Wow. A genuine retard.
>slave
>From Middle English, from Old French sclave, from Medieval Latin sclāvus (“slave”), from Late Latin Sclāvus (“Slav”), because Slavs were often forced into slavery in the Middle Ages. The Latin word is from Byzantine Greek Σkλάβος (Sklábos), see that entry and Slav for more.
>English
>From Middle English Englisch, English, Inglis, from Old English Englisċ (“of the Angles; English”), from Engle (“the Angles”), a Germanic tribe + -isċ; equal to Angle + -ish.

[Anonymous No.14263324]

>>14258771
why wouldn't it? they need to pay me if they want my defense services.

[Anonymous No.14263337]

>>14263324
She pooped in the tub. Your waifu needs diapers so she doesn't shit herself

[Anonymous No.14263376]

>>14262805
Save your lectures for after you learn English.

[Anonymous No.14263402]

>>14258771
>bootlickers

Can you imagine someone unironically using this word and looking like a decent human being? I can't.

[Anonymous No.14263420]

>>14258771
look up books about the savage nature of human beings and how the establishment of a ruling class provides those of weaker natures and constitutions with protection and security in exchange for their industry

[Anonymous No.14263425]

>>14261677
That was my point you fucking idiot. He asked what to read to understand bootlickers and I posted Stirner.

[Anonymous No.14263433]

>>14258771
Well, what will make me rich then? What does she suggest?

[Anonymous No.14263440]

>>14259707
so was Marx lol

[Anonymous No.14263496]

>>14263433
Invent an instantaneous method of toasting bread.

[Anonymous No.14263755]

>>14258771
>Are there any books about the psychology of bootlickers?

[Anonymous No.14263823]

>>14262490
The Russian Empire went on famine-to-famine. That didn't stop the Bolsheviks from putting an permanent end to the cycle.

[Anonymous No.14263968]

>>14262852
Money wasted on weed

[Anonymous No.14263993]

>>14258771
A lot of French postmoderns talk about this structurally, not so much on a level of individual psychology.

[Anonymous No.14264043]

>>14259459
Let me guess, you also hate pit bulls.

[Anonymous No.14264046]

>>14259638
Lol this one is REALLY mad about the “do you ever leave the house?” question

[Anonymous No.14264050]

>>14258880
based
I'm a pussy so all I do is intentionally give them wrong directions

[Anonymous No.14264063]

Because what you call bootlicking is in the interest of the mythical Middle of our societies. I mean I can see your point, that being “why support a social hierarchy that doesn’t allow you to explicitly exercise power” but this is kinda a smoothbrain take. The people wearing the boots and the lickers have an agreement wherein the lickers cede their decision-making power to the boots as long as the boots protect (or ostensibly protect) them and their particular form of existence. The problem with this relationship that our resident anarchists, foreigners, sexual deviants etc. have is that they are the reason the licker-boot alliance exists. The social Middle doesn’t want these people imposing their hostile forms of existence on them but they don’t have organizational capacity or will to beat them down themselves, so to resolve this they become authoritarians (that is, supporters but not exercises of authority). Not that confusing lol

[Anonymous No.14264102]

>>14259459
>NOOOOO!!! NOT BASED CAPITALISMOKINO DON'T YOU DARE TAKE AWAY MY SOCIAL INTELLIGENCERINO IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO EXERT MY POWERBEANO!!!!

[Anonymous No.14264117]

>>14258771
>thot
>tankie
>tranny lover
The holy trinity of nope

[Anonymous No.14264123]

>>14260140
>just network to change a globally accelerating system from the inside out bro

You're so incredibly deluded you have to be a woman or underage. Just admit you wanna play the game like everyone else

[Anonymous No.14264125]

>>14258771
this one is pretty great for that purpose I think. it is the story of a cowardly sexually immoral <70 iq draft dodging right winger who ends up as a spy in a group of honest and pious socialists during ww1.
my favorite passage was where the author claimed the act of swinging a baseball bat was how right wingers trained their bodies for whipping socialists during a lynching
the guy also managed to write a whole book about the american right including several lynchings without ever hinting at the existence of blacks

[Anonymous No.14264135]

>>14259324
The digital revolution and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

[Anonymous No.14264154]

>>14261438
>i'm so sorry, here's an amazon giftcard
>if kramer hadn't angered mandingos, we wouldn't have blackedraw hosting wedding reception venues and being booked out for the next seventeen months and growing
fucking lol

[Anonymous No.14264166]

>>14264125
is this one of those books where you read the book to laugh at the author?

[Anonymous No.14264170]

>>14262725
It's funny that this graph didn't take inflation into account. $100k in 1968 was worth much more than $100k today. According to an inflation calculator, $100k in 68 was around $700k today. I'm pretty sure that no more than 9% people are making that much per year, probably even less than 9%.