/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17282113]

"no"

[Anonymous No.17282124]

>>17282113
KEK I haven't even read it and I think I used it in an essay. Shouldn't have done it.

[Anonymous No.17282138]

Orwell would be proud to know his book is still a reflexive byword for the runaway, slippery slope nature of tyranny. I will personally fuck in the ass anyone who tries to take people's freedom away, even the freedom to annoy me and be a retard.

[Anonymous No.17282145]

>>17282113
>please stop pointing out that our society in it's current state mirrors a purposely exaggerated dystopia
I'm honestly more inclined to compare our reality to the one in Harrison Bergeron myself.

[Anonymous No.17282159]

>guys, I know you're worried about your rights and everything but this analogy has been used too much!

[Anonymous No.17282163]

>>17282113
1984 references are so fucking gay, we are almost at Brave New World level with the globohomo transhumanism, but retards will cry all day about muh Big Brother

[Anonymous No.17282168]

>>17282163
This. Who doesn't like being faced with this? Neoliberals. Who are they? At least half of our current reddit-tier fellow men.

[Anonymous No.17282172]

>>17282163
Yes, it was Huxley. I didn't used 1984. KEK

[Anonymous No.17282181]

>>17282172
>I didn't used

[Anonymous No.17282184]

>>17282113
>Stop referencing 1984
God, this is just like 1984

[Anonymous No.17282189]

>>17282181
I'm an ESL and I haven't slept, anon. Give me a break KEK

[Anonymous No.17282194]

>>17282189
*yet

[Anonymous No.17282200]

>>17282189
I am also ESL and I haven't slept in about 3 or 4 days. No excuse for that sort of language around here.

[Anonymous No.17282208]

>>17282200
What? How? Lies. Pic of your eyes, anon. With date.

[Anonymous No.17282221]

>>17282113
I'm just so sick of America. Please start your race war or get nuked already or some shit. So fucking sick of this nation of retards polluting the internet with their infinite stupidity.

[Anonymous No.17282223]

>>17282145
>THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.
>Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.

[Anonymous No.17282226]

>>17282208
The only camera I have in my possession uses cassette tapes.

[Anonymous No.17282238]

>>17282163
i blame the globalists for corrupting the minds and souls of the middle class with the illusion of prosperity while they were pimping them out to the highest bidder

[Anonymous No.17282244]

>>17282226
based
do you make low res "aesthetic" movies on it for fun?

[Anonymous No.17282246]

Gonna be so hecking based when my comrades and other BIPOC folx are card carrying party members and the quasi-fascist ancaps are forced to work on high-speed railways and be separated from their families.

[Anonymous No.17282260]

>>17282246
take your meds tranny

[Anonymous No.17282262]

>>17282244
I don't use it much, I just film rabbits and birds in my yard if I see some.

[Anonymous No.17282319]

holy shit making to references to books for teenagers is so fucking smart and cool

[Anonymous No.17282326]

>>17282319
>1984 was written for teenagers

[Anonymous No.17282331]

>>17282326
yes, liking 1984 as an adult is fucking embarrassing

[Anonymous No.17282337]

>>17282331
What books are okay to like as an adult?

[Anonymous No.17282339]

>>17282337
homer, virgil, dante, shakespeare, etc etc

[Anonymous No.17282342]

>>17282113
What an Orwellian idea.

[Anonymous No.17282345]

>>17282319
The references are accurate pseud

[Anonymous No.17282346]

>>17282331
1984 was not targeted towards teenagers you fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.17282349]

>>17282345
read another book
>>17282346
sorry I should have said "at an adolescent level of sophistication"

[Anonymous No.17282354]

>>17282339
>Dante
>Shakespeare
>homer
All read by teenagers

[Anonymous No.17282355]

>>17282349
Teenagers probably can't get everything out of fiction, anon. Just saying.

[Anonymous No.17282372]

>>17282354
and by adults who spend their entire lives studying them
>>17282355
a smart 17 year old can fully grasp 1984

[Anonymous No.17282375]

>>17282339
>>17282349
3/4 of the english high school curriculum is Shakespeare. Macbeth, Merchant of Venice, Romeo and Juliet, Julius Caesar, Taming of the Shrew, Titus Andronicus. Are you fucking dense or something?

[Anonymous No.17282379]

>>17282375
lol, show me all the 1984 scholars please

[Anonymous No.17282381]

>>17282372
>a smart 17 year old can fully grasp 1984
There is no such thing as a smart 17 year old.

[Anonymous No.17282386]

>>17282319
Then why are you coping?

[Anonymous No.17282388]

>>17282326
>>17282337
>>17282345
>>17282346
>>17282354
>>17282355
>>17282375
>>17282381
Cope. Horseshoe theory proven yet again. Libtards have Harry Potter, conservatards have 1984. Both books for children.

[Anonymous No.17282397]

>>17282379
Academics is a grift, especially lit "scholars". Good on them for finding something they could convince people was intellectual work that deserved financial compensation.

[Anonymous No.17282398]

>>17282388
>NO, YOU ARE COPING

[Anonymous No.17282400]

>>17282345
No they are not you fucking pseud. There are dozens of dystopian novels more accurate than 1984. Where is the power of corporations in 1984? The question of technology radically changing the human condition? The rise of gay/tranny dictatoship?

[Anonymous No.17282402]

>>17282388
>Horseshoe theory
le ebin enlightened centrist

[Anonymous No.17282411]

>>17282400
Jeez louise anon, settle down right now. You seriously need to cool it.

[Anonymous No.17282412]

>>17282400
>There are dozens of dystopian novels more accurate than 1984
Make your own thread about them then. Inb4 you sperg out and make some excuse as to why you won't.

[Anonymous No.17282419]

>>17282388
>Libtards have Harry Potter, conservatards have 1984.
>Both books for children.
You're a fucking idiot, and a fool.

[Anonymous No.17282433]

I am in disbelief that there people on this board that there are people on this board that will defend 1984 like it's high art. How did this happen

[Anonymous No.17282438]

>>17282433
>I am in disbelief that there people on this board that there are people on this board

[Anonymous No.17282441]

>>17282438
sorry I just woke up

[Anonymous No.17282444]

>>17282433
You need to fucking chill bro, goddamn. It's a book. Could have an aneurysm with how much you're freaking over this shit. Settle down and stop samefagging.

[Anonymous No.17282446]

>>17282441
No you haven't.

[Anonymous No.17282454]

>>17282433
/lit/ isn't Enlightenment era Paris. On another note, you're a dumbass.

[Anonymous No.17282457]

>>17282444
if you tolerate people whose standards are this low then you should be sent to a labor camp
>>17282446
?
>>17282454
sorry you're taking it so personally

[Anonymous No.17282458]

>>17282400
What book better describes ideas like 'thoughtcrime', 'crimestop', 'doublethink', etc.

[Anonymous No.17282462]

[Anonymous No.17282463]

>>17282388
Most of them don't have full knowledge of the historical context behind it, anon. That is the reason why teenagers have book lectures in the first place.

[Anonymous No.17282477]

>AHHHHHHHHHH FUCKFUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK 1984!!!!!!!!!!
>IF YOU TOLERATE PEOPLE WHOSE STANDARDS ARE THIS LOW YOU SHOULD BE SENT TO A LABOR CAMP!!!!

[Anonymous No.17282486]

>>17282477
sorry your favorite book sucks man

[Anonymous No.17282487]

>>17282433
>it's high art
It's a good novel and I will defend it. I'll also defend The Hobbit, which actually is a children's novel. Stop forcing these stupid dichotomies.

[Anonymous No.17282493]

>>17282486
>>17282457
>>17282433
>>17282400
Can we get a janitor in this thread? Jesus Christ

[Anonymous No.17282499]

>>17282412
I won't make a thread, but here are a few books which are miles ahead 1984: We (by Zamyatin), Camp of Saints, Brave New World, Return to Brave New World, all of Philip K. Dick, Ravage (by Barjavel), Submission, Island (also Huxley), High-Rise, Hello America, The Road etc.

[Anonymous No.17282501]

>>17282463
on*

[Anonymous No.17282512]

>>17282499
Some of those are dystopian.

[Anonymous No.17282520]

>>17282493
Want to censor people who dislike your favorite book? That's like, totally Orwelian bro

[Anonymous No.17282524]

>>17282499
You haven't read most of these lol.

[Anonymous No.17282525]

Feel like some sushi.

[Anonymous No.17282533]

>>17282499
>Brave New World
Philip K, Dick
>calls Orwell teenage reading material
Those examples are of equal stature to 1984. These books also don't have "scholars" as you mention here >>17282379 You also haven't read Le camp des saints and just threw that in because you think it makes you sound like an intellectual.

[Anonymous No.17282534]

>>17282520
Did you agree to the site rules when you joined?

[Anonymous No.17282535]

>>17282462
orwellbros...

[Anonymous No.17282536]

>>17282512
They are all dystopian (Island could be considered utopian, but I would disagree)

[Anonymous No.17282540]

>>17282533
you're replying to two different people

[Anonymous No.17282544]

>>17282524
Bro you're a goddamn retard of such epic humiliating proportions. You realize that we talk about books on this board and 1984 happens up be a BOOK? How many captchas have you filled out at this point just because you can't understand that.
Pic related, it's you.

[Anonymous No.17282545]

>>17282462
Almost based. Should have said happens every 50 years instead.

[Anonymous No.17282546]

>>17282536
>everything by Dick is dystopian
No.

[Anonymous No.17282550]

>>17282544
Don't be rude you fuck.

[Anonymous No.17282551]

>>17282540
>you're replying to two different people
No, I'm not.

[Anonymous No.17282552]

>>17282520
Bro you're a goddamn retard of such epic humiliating proportions. You realize that we talk about books on this board and 1984 happens up be a BOOK? How many captchas have you filled out at this point just because you can't understand that.
Pic related, it's you.

[Anonymous No.17282554]

>>17282551
yeah, you are

[Anonymous No.17282558]

>>17282433
Nobody said it was high art, we said the comparisons are valid

[Anonymous No.17282560]

>>17282552
he's also taking about books, he just has a negative opinion about it

[Anonymous No.17282561]

>>17282524
I have read all of them, faggot
>>17282533
I read le camp des saints when I was just a teenager, its really not that intellectual you fucking pseud. And yes, Brave New World and K. Dick are more complex than 1984, otherwise they would be as cited by mouthbreathing normies as 1984
>>17282534
No.

[Anonymous No.17282565]

>>17282560
He's attacking the discussion of a book. It's a literature forum, you fucking mongrels. What are you people doing here?

[Anonymous No.17282568]

>>17282552
kek you just embarassed yourself even further. Another proof that Orwell's dick riders are the ultimate brainlets

[Anonymous No.17282570]

>>17282565
>He's attacking the discussion of a book
he's accusing the guy calling for jannies of doing that retard. epic reaction pics by the way

[Anonymous No.17282572]

>>17282113
Why are people still using this allegory when we are so much closer to Brave New World. Its clear that soft power, media manipulation, information overload, sexual liberation, pacifing population with drugs and porn...have all proven to be superior than brutish methods in 1984

[Anonymous No.17282579]

>>17282554
>yeah, you are

[Anonymous No.17282582]

>>17282561
>I have read all of them, faggot
Your characterizations of them is pretty telling lol. Why people feel the need to lie on an anonymous forum, I will never understand.
>>17282570
TOS has rules against samefagging, you gas huffing monkey.

[Anonymous No.17282586]

>>17282561
>its really not that intellectual you fucking pseud
I know, I was inferring you think it is.

[Anonymous No.17282587]

>>17282565
>saying that 1984 as a dystopian novel is shit because it is an outdated vision of what a totalitarian society would look like
>hurr durr you're attacking the discussion of the book
What are you mouthbreathing sycophants doing here? Go back

[Anonymous No.17282589]

>>17282568
>go to /lit/ board
>NO, NO!!!!!
>WHY ARE THEY TALKING ABOHT LITERATURE
>FUCK!!!!

[Anonymous No.17282594]

>>17282579
do you understand that in the screenshot you're replying to both me and someone else, which happen to be two different people

[Anonymous No.17282597]

>>17282589
KEK this anon is right.

[Anonymous No.17282601]

>>>>>>>17282587
>>saying that 1984 as a dystopian novel is shit because it is an outdated vision of what a totalitarian society would look like
>>hurr durr you're attacking the discussion of the book
>What are you mouthbreathing sycophants doing here? Go back

[Anonymous No.17282600]

>>17282582
there is more than one person attacking 1984 in this thread you fucking schizo, we don't even type the same

[Anonymous No.17282607]

>>17282594
>do you understand that in the screenshot you're replying to both me and someone else, which happen to be two different people

[Anonymous No.17282609]

>there is more than one person attacking 1984 in this thread you fucking schizo, we don't even type the same

[Anonymous No.17282614]

>>17282138
>FREEDOM!!!!!!

useless buzzword for Ameritards

[Anonymous No.17282618]

>>17282607
??? take your meds man

[Anonymous No.17282619]

>>17282499
>I won't make a thread
Wow what a surprise. Complete with spergout as well.

[Anonymous No.17282620]

>>17282168
>Who doesn't like being faced with this? Neoliberals.

Pretty much

[Anonymous No.17282625]

>>17282614
KEK anon, it is an important thing. You don't value it because you take it for granted.

[Anonymous No.17282629]

Yeah well I'm gonna continue quoting 1984 by George Orwell however I see fit now

[Anonymous No.17282636]

>>17282625
Yes, it's important, but it's not this all encompassing "thing", that can be applied to every situation. It's specific to different contexts

[Anonymous No.17282640]

>>17282618
Who tf are you talking to?

[Anonymous No.17282642]

zoomers are ruining this place

[Anonymous No.17282644]

>>17282601
>mom look I posted the funny reaction again!!!!!

[Anonymous No.17282651]

>>17282644
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.17282652]

>>17282644

[Anonymous No.17282661]

>I won't make a thread, but here are a few books which are miles ahead 1984: We (by Zamyatin), Camp of Saints, Brave New World, Return to Brave New World, all of Philip K. Dick, Ravage (by Barjavel), Submission, Island (also Huxley), High-Rise, Hello America, The Road etc.

[Anonymous No.17282665]

>>17282168
The neoliberals hate it the overuse of the 1984 comparison, it's a perfectly apt comparison and the proletariat know of it very well. Therefore, the neolibs seethe.

Like twitter condemning the shutdown of Ugandan internet pre-election after suspending the presidentb

[Anonymous No.17282673]

>>17282388
1984 was not written nor targeted towards teenagers. Harry potter was, however

[Anonymous No.17282677]

>>17282661
nice rebutal orwellian fag

[Anonymous No.17282681]

Nooooooooooooo why are they talking about a well regarded classic of literature noooooo you cant do that in current year!!!!

[Anonymous No.17282685]

>>17282677
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.17282695]

>>17282677
The entire point of 1984 is that it isn't high art, you fucking idiot. Average people are supposed to be able to read it and talk about it, that's why it's a classic. This >>17282681 is literally you right now.

[Anonymous No.17282697]

The redpill is most dystopian novels have something to offer, and comparing irl to that book like how the family unit is destroyed and the entire population report on each other for example is a good way of doing it.
>handmaid's tale, 1984, brave new world, you are here but uniornically

[Anonymous No.17282746]

>>17282342
this

[Anonymous No.17282761]

>>17282113
> doing the job it was written to do
I.e., make fun of white people and God-given authority?

Leftists have only one "job", in that they are like bacteria.

[Anonymous No.17282774]

>>17282665
>it's a perfectly apt comparison and the proletariat know of it very well
How?

[Anonymous No.17282858]

>>17282673
The same way Harry Potter is a portal for the libtard to an idealized childhood, 1984 is a portal for the lesser vibe-conservative to a realm where his unrealistic vibe-con fears manifest. A realm necessarily separate from what we may refer to as 'reality'.
>muh doublethink, muh hatemob, muh thought crime
Facebook not allowing you to say nigger isn't compelled speech. 1984's ideas are interesting, but it's a very different dystopia than what we'll probably have to deal with now. Yelling ORWELLIAN every time jack dorsey selectively enforces his own platform's TOS is just as retarded as the eternal lib labeling Trump 'Voldemort'.

[Anonymous No.17282880]

>>17282618
>HE DOESN'T KNOW
>>HE DOESN'T KNOW
AHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.17282896]

>>17282858
>Facebook not allowing you to say nigger isn't compelled speech.
Your government employer forcing you to attend diversity conferences and participate in racial justice seminars under the pretext that if you don't you will not only be fired, but will be rendered virtually unemployable for the rest of your days, I would consider is compelled speech.

[Can intentionality be accounte(...) No.17282961]

>>17282858
>1984 is a portal for the lesser vibe-conservative to a realm where his unrealistic vibe-con fears manifest.
>Facebook not allowing you to say nigger isn't compelled speech.
The fact that twitter has the power to silence the president of the United States to speak in one of the major platforms for political (and other) speech is absolutely a danger to free speech, and Leftists of all people should know the dangers of a private institution without democratic accountability having the power to effectively censor the most powerful man in the world and decide what speech is allowed and what isn't. This mantra that big tech poses no threat to free speech and its all conservative fear mongering is completely divorced from reality.

[Anonymous No.17282963]

>>17282697
>handsmaid's tale
you will never be a woman

[Anonymous No.17282977]

>>17282858
>1984 is a portal for the lesser vibe-conservative to a realm where his unrealistic vibe-con fears manifest.
>Facebook not allowing you to say nigger isn't compelled speech.
The fact that twitter has the power to silence the president of the United States to speak in one of the major platforms for political (and other) speech is absolutely a danger to free speech, and Leftists of all people should know the dangers of a private institution without democratic accountability having the power to effectively censor the most powerful man in the world and decide what speech is allowed and what isn't. This mantra that big tech poses no threat to free speech and its all conservative fear mongering is completely divorced from reality.

[Anonymous No.17282982]

>>17282896
Imagine thinking this unironically. I worked customer service at Disney+, and such conferences were nowhere to be found. Of course they monitored how we interact with the customers for obvious reasons, but that communication is necessarily in the name of the company, clearly that much was 'compelled speech', but one already is compelled to speak in the way the company wants you to. In-office banter consisted of going to the lunch room and talking to our supervisor how many retards we got. And that's at fucking Disney. No company will ask you to monitor your behavior outside of work. If they do, why would you even apply? Where do you work anon, if that's the case?

[Anonymous No.17282989]

>>17282982
>Disney+
Disney is not a government entity, moron.

[Anonymous No.17282990]

>>17282961
True but even then 1984 is very outdated because it didn't predict the shift of power from the state to big corporations. It failed to see the social atomization of liberal society, the threat of new tech. The social engineering tactics described in 1984 are stalinian and thus very far removed from the subtle manipulations we face today

[Anonymous No.17283001]

>>17282138
>freedom!
you free, buddy? then publically name the jew

[Anonymous No.17283022]

>>17282977
True, social media is cancer. The fact that the President of the US can be silenced on the main lines of everyday communication mostly speaks of how weak the US president really is. A competent leader, or at least someone with so much power would never let this happen in the first place.

[Anonymous No.17283032]

>>17282982
>Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgement. It may evoke changes in them such as cognitive dissonance or low self-esteem, rendering the victim additionally dependent on the gaslighter for emotional support and validation. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs.

https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/9782-diversity-training.html

[Anonymous No.17283046]

>>17282989
Then what the fuck are you even talking about, where does your oppressive government compel you to newspeak? Oh you can't say bad things about the jews, or spics, or niggers? Then how could you even post here, faggot? Cry me a fucking river, just because the blackies can hate white people in the open, you must immediately go apenigger mode and do the same in public (truth is, the fact that they can openly hate the whites, means that they are held to a lower standard). You can express yourself well enough within the bounds of any TOS thrown at you, even Xi's WeChat can't monitor hungarian banter and we are practically reciting Winnie the pooh episodes at this point with a chinese qt. Get fucked, if you are retarded enough that you can't deal with this time and age, maybe 1984 really is for you.

[Anonymous No.17283051]

>>17283046
Why are you so obsessed with niggers?

[Anonymous No.17283061]

>>17283051
I am assuming the /pol/tard perspective for better clarity.

[Anonymous No.17283074]

>>17283061
You're an idiot, and you're so off point you can barely string a coherent sentence together. Maybe stop pitching your hissy fit and you'll be able to compile your thoughts in a comprehensible manner wherein you don't sound like some histrionic obsessed with projecting about niggers.

[Anonymous No.17283080]

>>17283022
What on earth are you talking about, the president of a democratic country can't just violate the law whenever he feels like it. The takeway is that platforms like twitter should be regulated by the government, not "orange man weak".

[Anonymous No.17283086]

>>17283080
>the president of a democratic country can't just violate the law whenever he feels like it
Actually anyone can violate the law whenever they feel like it.

[Anonymous No.17283101]

>>17283022
they did that so his misinformation won't provoke further violence from his herd. Since you know, in a free world we should respect rights of other humans and not promote a violation of said human rights given to all?

The moment something promotes or urges violence, it becomes something that can't be protected by freedom of speech. Just like how bombthreats aren't protected under freedom of speech. We don't live under true democracy because of this, and it never will be true democracy.

That being said, I can see why some people complain about it. If this control over free speech is overdone it will eventually lead to heavy censorship and loss of any Democracy, like China in the moment. It's kind of a dangerous line they're meddling with, imho. Idea of ''dangerous thinking'' itself condemns diversity of opinions, which would lose any reason for democracy to even exist. I think more of libs and conservatives should observe eachother's ideology, reasoning, thought process instead of condemning a certain stance and blocking them out. Only then, will democracy actually hold a meaning.

[Anonymous No.17283111]

>>17283086
just because you can doesn't mean you shouldn't

[Anonymous No.17283117]

>>17283111
>just because you can doesn't mean you shouldn't
If anyone tells you this sincerely in relation to anything, it means you should probably do it.

[Anonymous No.17283122]

>>17282963
just referencing the meme bro

[Anonymous No.17283136]

>>17282113
>i taught high school english please unquestionable defer to my shitty opinion

lmao

[Anonymous No.17283161]

>>17283136
Teachers are everyday heroes bro. Just like our health workers

[Anonymous No.17283188]

>>17283161
that doesn't make their shitty opinions on a piece of literature, undeniably correct. just because their profession requires some amount of dedication and self sacrifice doesn't mean they get to define the rights and wrongs of a tangible work of art that's meant to provoke thinking provoke different thought and takes to each individual

[Anonymous No.17283232]

>>17282113
>I thought high school English, and trust me
no

[Anonymous No.17283235]

>>17283188
No bro you don't get it. They literally, like, make you mind a weapon to like, become more free and stuff. Their opinions are super important and valid, and simply worth more

[Anonymous No.17283269]

>>17283074
If all you got out of my post is imagining me upset and racist, then I must reiterate: you are probably at the level where you'd also consider 1984 profound.
>>17283086
The president of the US? What the fuck are YOU talking about? Are we not talking about the same country? The one that tramples on international law, incites countless proxy wars, is able to largely fool the retarded populus into choosing the 'lesser of two evils' each 4 years? Give me a break. The president could almost get away with anything if he has the 2 braincells to sell it to the public. Besides, government regulating these for-profit social media giants is not a solution. Expecting tech-retarded policymakers to comprehend their related issues would be futile.

[Anonymous No.17283281]

>>17282342
With a Huxleyan a clown-world touch courtesy of today's professionals in double-think who pervade every goddamn thread on this goddamn site if it pertains, however slightly, to politics or statecraft. If this place isn't a planned disaster to discourse I don't know what is.
>>17283086
>there is no rule of law whatsoever
You wish.

[Anonymous No.17283305]

>>17283235
they don't make anybody anything, if the students are unwilling to learn the teacher has no power. Open minded students who seek to better themselves, make themselves more free through learning, the teacher only aids in it.
A doctor doesn't literally heal patients, they only aid the patients to heal, the body does the healing itself, if the patient refuses treatement then doctors have no power. Same thing, the jobs are just there to aid someone but ultimately its up to the individual to change.

[Anonymous No.17283308]

>>17283269
>If all you got out of my post is imagining me upset and racist, then I must reiterate: you are probably at the level where you'd also consider 1984 profound.
I'm not imagining you upset and "racist". I'm pointing out that you sperged out and instantly started going off on disconnected rants about niggers when it had nothing to do with the subject. The fact that you were in such a rage you couldn't even read my original post, and thought that Disney's policies were in any way related to government training programs just goes to show how out of your depth you are. Take a break from posting for a good while man it's bad for your health.

[Anonymous No.17283315]

>>17283281
Laws don't exist.

[Anonymous No.17283328]

>>17283269
>The president of the US? What the fuck are YOU talking about? Are we not talking about the same country? The one that tramples on international law, incites countless proxy wars, is able to largely fool the retarded populus into choosing the 'lesser of two evils' each 4 years? Give me a break. The president could almost get away with anything if he has the 2 braincells to sell it to the public. Besides, government regulating these for-profit social media giants is not a solution. Expecting tech-retarded policymakers to comprehend their related issues would be futile.
You alright buddy? Didn't even mention the US once.

[Anonymous No.17283332]

>>17283315
laws exist, a single intangible interpretation of the law don't exist

thats why we have courts judges and councils

[Anonymous No.17283339]

>>17283332
Courts, judges and councils are made up and their processes are just rituals.

[Anonymous No.17283344]

>>17283332
can you touch law, can you see it, breath it? no, then it doesn't exist

[Anonymous No.17283420]

>>17283344
thats like saying anything that doesn't exist in a Physical form doesn't exist at all. Concept of the number Zero exists, but cant be seen or touched or counted. Philosiphy doesn't physically exist but it still exists as a concept or an idea, within the minds of countless individuals. Just because its not directly precievable to you physically, doesn't disprove its existence. If a man goes blind light still exists in the world even if he can't see it. Just because you close your eyes doesn't make the world go away.

[Anonymous No.17283434]

>>17282223
Read Vonneguts 'The Sirens of Titan'.

[Anonymous No.17283437]

>>17283420
>Just because you close your eyes doesn't make the world go away.
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.17283444]

>>17283437
how

[Anonymous No.17283445]

>>17283420
The concept of law is only applicable to those who believe in it, and I don't believe in shit that doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.17283463]

>>17282858
How on earth do you put 1984 on the right? How can it lead you to conservatism? It denounces totalitarianism, propaganda and the abuse of power in general. It's a book for the little people and it's highly relevant today. You must either be a fool or directly benefit from the current system not to see that. This last year our rulers demanded so much doublethink from us even regular people have noticed. It was expected of us during months to praise BLM protest one week and condemn Trump rallies from spreading COVID another. I don't even care about Trump, but how else can you describe that but doublethink? Or that one day the media is publicly denouncing Biden for his racism and sexual harassment, the next day it disappears from the news once it's apparent he is the democratic nominee. I can only think of 'we have always been at war with Eurasia'. Or the new language police with regards to genders. How can you not think of newspeak? Blair's work is absolutely relevant today?

[Anonymous No.17283476]

>>17283463
>How can it lead you to conservatism? It denounces totalitarianism, propaganda and the abuse of power in general.
Conservatism is related to neither totalitarianism, propaganda or abuse of power. Those are products of revolutionnary ideologies.

[Anonymous No.17283484]

>>17283434
Thanks man sound like a good read.

[Anonymous No.17283485]

>>17283046
Oh OK so the tyranny described by Orwell is totally not occurring because it's being administered by multinational corporations richer and with more power than actual countries. Got it. Thank you for exposing yourself as a neoliberal stooge.

[Anonymous No.17283490]

>>17283476
You can't read.

[Anonymous No.17283508]

>>17283463
>How can it lead you to conservatism? It denounces totalitarianism, propaganda and the abuse of power in general. It's a book for the little people and it's highly relevant today.

This worldview, has been given to you by your systeem of education, it isnt true. You have been programmed to associate Conservatism with Totalitarianism or Elitism, not only is that not the case, but concepts like Totalitarianism or (implied by you) Elitism dont actually exist, these words themselves are newsspeak, meaningless abstractions.

Let me give Orwells worldview in concrete terms. He supports people owning guns, so do Conservatives.... this is a beginning, but the moment you actually study what someone wants and does, instaid of using newsspeak terms like totalitarian, propaganda and abuse of power, you will understand why people who appreciate hard work and enjoy to read about the past (conservative is newsspeak) appreciate Orwell.

[Anonymous No.17283517]

>>17283445
it exists but you're just denying it.

>what i choose to believe in is up to my limited perception of the world, what i believe in is how it is for me

your lack of considering the accept anything outside your perspective, is limiting your ability to discern facts from falsehood. perception by no means is a reliable determinating factor of reality.

[Anonymous No.17283520]

>>17283490
It's you who can't write properly. It seems that the second proposition follows the first one to show that 1984 and conservatism are incompatible because of what it denounces. Get fucked

[Anonymous No.17283529]

>>17282163
shut up and take your SSRIs

[Anonymous No.17283534]

>>17283490
>>17283520
Thats how I read it too.

Again, instaid of using abstractions, just describe things the way they are, if someone is a socialist, but supports hard work, the study of the past and rule of law and freedom for human consciousness, they will automatically be picked up by conservatives.

[Anonymous No.17283543]

>>17283520
OK so neither can you think.

[Anonymous No.17283548]

>>17283517
>denying it
What am I denying? If I walked up to you and handed you a piece of paper, told you it was a decree that said I could fuck you up the ass, and you said "no", would you consider that denying it exists? The law does not exist. Some ancient homo wrote on a piece of paper that he could fuck you up the ass and you're enough of a faggot to just sit there and take it.

[Anonymous No.17283550]

>>17283529
ESL cope

[Anonymous No.17283553]

>>17283463
conservatives aren't supporting totalitarianism, they have a different definition of it

[Anonymous No.17283556]

>>17283543
Read the post again you absolute ESL faggot

[Anonymous No.17283587]

>>17283548
it exists because enough people collectively agree to it. like how value exists in currency, if nobody believes in it its useless but if enough people believe in it then it exists all the sudden. As a social creature, those collective common value or ideas hold a meaning, and restrains you at the end of the day.

[Anonymous No.17283597]

>>17283587
>enough people collectively agree to it
No they don't.
>those collective common value or ideas hold a meaning
Collectively held values are those the most devoid of meaning.

[Anonymous No.17283615]

>>17283597
>Collectively held values are those the most devoid of meaning.
*source: the head up my ass

[Anonymous No.17283624]

>>17283615
Collectively held values are acquired through social osmosis, the values don't come from a lesson learnt. They are the mimics of values. Socialized traits.

[Anonymous No.17284698]

orwell and huxley are anglo copes for junger and zamyatin

[Anonymous No.17284746]

When they started putting televisions on gas pumps, that’s when I told myself that son of a bitch Orwell was right. Haven’t given it a second thought since, because we’re spiraling ever faster toward the drain and to fight the torrent is a benign effort.

[Anonymous No.17284758]

>>17284698
Zamyatin yes, but Junger how? He is not really a dystopian writer except for Heliopolis

[Anonymous No.17284800]

>>17282400
they're in Brave New World, the other dystopian novel everybody talks about

[Anonymous No.17284883]

Perpetuating the notion that "Orwell was wrong, Huxley was right" is cliche and tired as fuck. They were both right and if you disagree you're probably just willfully ignorant to the fact that the United States government possesses unilateral authority to spy on everything you do if it's deemed to be "in the interest of national security" via the Patriot Act as well as distribute state propaganda via the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act. You people are so fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.17284890]

>>17282113
Things really are getting similar to some aspects of 1984, though.

Also, I am starting to see an anti-Orwell strain rising up in the actually-existing-left. You shouldn't be surprised if he ends up being relegated to the same place where Pound, Kipling currently are.

[Anonymous No.17284902]

You can tell there are teenagers in this thread that assume any book written before 1960 is considered a classic.

[Anonymous No.17284905]

No, I will not stop criticizing the technostate.

Got a problem? Here's a package.

[Anonymous No.17284924]

>>17284758
>eumeswil is less dry than 1984 (orwell was an objectively motheaten writer)
>visit to godenholm predates doors of perception
>glass bees brings up the techno-futurist stuff, not that junger wasn't already doing that in like the 40s

[Anonymous No.17285023]

ive never read 1984 and bnw. is it worth it or are they just memes?

[Anonymous No.17285048]

>>17282433
peak πσευδ

[Anonymous No.17285440]

>>17284883
This, Huxley himself acknowledged in a letter to Orwell that 1984 would come about first and then proceed to lead in to Brave New World

[Anonymous No.17285445]

What is more Orwellian than trying to change the meaning of 'Orwellian'?

[Anonymous No.17285452]

>>17282636
>but it's not this all encompassing "thing", that can be applied to every situation
That is quite literally what it is.

Either you have free speech, or you don't. Either you have freedom, or you don't.

[Anonymous No.17285484]

>>17282113
Please stop replicating 1984

[Anonymous No.17285495]

>dystopia

So what exactly makes a time period qualify as dystopian? More specifically, I mean what makes 2021 qualify as a dystopian period?

[Anonymous No.17285507]

>>17282113
It is utterly bizarre to me to see people freaking out about dystopias like Brave New World or 1984. You guys do realize society is going to collapse due to global warming within our lifetimes, right? The current suppression will end in short order once ecological pressures make national governments impossible. There won't be a point in suppressing Twitter posts when everyone is fighting for survival.

[Anonymous No.17285541]

>>17282238
This. We live in a world run by psychopaths. We've been in hell all along.

[Anonymous No.17285562]

>>17282462
he should have said motherfuckers instead of duffers desu

[Anonymous No.17285593]

Exactly. It's 1985 now, and forever.
>>17285466

[Anonymous No.17285671]

>>17282113
I'll compare things to whatever I wish. This isn't 1984, you can't control me.

[Anonymous No.17285742]

>>17282462
Except the point of satire is to depict real things in a novel manner so that you reconsider the world you live in. Novels about the future are ALWAYS about the present.

[Anonymous No.17285798]

>>17285023
>>17284746
>>17285440
>>17282533
You should read 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World, A Scanner Darkly, and Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldrich if you want to dive down the dystopia rabbit hole.
Futu.re by Glukhovsky is great too.
All of them are coming true in their own right:
1984:
>forceful suppression of the masses
>two minutes hate
>anyone you know encouraged to turn you in for wrongthink
Animal Farm:
>All are equal; some are more equal than others
Brave New World:
>hanged by our own desire for pleasure
>easier for the government to simply make you irrelevant by sending you somewhere else
>intentional stratification by intelligence and dysgenics to achieve purposely dumb workers
A Scanner Darkly:
>Government surveillance is extremely widespread, but not particularly useful
>the most grave crimes are those committed against the state
>governments colluding with pharmaceutical companies to hook the population on a drug that they can't quit
Three Stigmata:
>Escapism not only allowed, but actively encouraged
>Not participating in escapism is seen as antisocial
>The only way to develop intimacy is through participating in escapism
Futu.re:
>reproduction tightly controlled by the government
>expanding lifespans have simply allowed people to participate in degeneracy more and destroyed humanity's initiative
>control of population with viruses which cause premature aging
>birth control available not as a tool for personal use but as a societal measure to control population dynamics

>>17285742
>>17282462
this
it's hilarious that people don't understand that dystopian fiction is making a statement of "based on what's happened before, this is what lies ahead for us if we continue this path"

[Anonymous No.17285805]

Read 1985 instead

[Anonymous No.17285817]

>>17285805
Filtered, it's okay few get it.
Read >>17285798 and it'll all make sense.
Didn't even put Clockwork Orange

[Anonymous No.17285862]

fun bird fact#34 - 1984 was a utopia, orwell wrote it because he wanted to see it happen

[Anonymous No.17285874]

>>17282113
>literally writing DUDE TRUST ME
What a shitty mentality for a teacher. No wonder high schoolers today are retarded

[Anonymous No.17285884]

>>17283001
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, pal.

[Anonymous No.17285891]

I'm tired of retards binging it up all the fucking time. At this point I think only low IQ people mention it

[Anonymous No.17285892]

>>17285884
Yes it does, fucktard

[Anonymous No.17285934]

>>17282163
It's both. They start off with brave new world methods but if you're not pacified by the media and pharmaceuticals they will silence you, fire you and make you an outcast or put you in jail.

[Anonymous No.17285972]

>>17285817
yeah, I forgot Clockwork Orange
also forgot Roadside Picnic by the Strugatskies - and watch Brazil
Clockwork:
>Being a sadist is fine if you do it within the confines of what the state deems acceptable
Roadside Picnic:
>no matter what is invented, humanity will find a way to use it for its absolute lowest common denominator, dumbest use
>If something is illegal, it's because the state just wants a monopoly on it
>Humanity consistently learns nothing from the myth of Icarus
Brazil:
>minor clerical errors can result in the police unceremoniously killing you for no reason
>vapidity and a rabid defense of the status quo are hallmarks of high society
>the state ensures that the punishment for a crime ALWAYS exceeds the harm done by the crime, because laws are meant as a forceful deterrent to suppress the individual, not a rehabilitative measure

[Anonymous No.17285977]

>>17285891
Patricians mention 1985

[Anonymous No.17285990]

>>17285972
Read 1985

[Anonymous No.17286041]

>>17285972
>>the state ensures that the punishment for a crime ALWAYS exceeds the harm done by the crime, because laws are meant as a forceful deterrent to suppress the individual, not a rehabilitative measure
Unless being a Swede is a crime that's certainly not true on Swede.

[Anonymous No.17286086]

>>17285972
>>17285990
this too
also FUCK
i forgot the ultimate overlooked gem that all middleschoolers were convinced to hate and forget about:
Fahrenheit 451:
>state influences population through destruction of media and control of their only media sources
>enjoyment of simplistic things such as walks in the night is seen as a red flag to the state
>all citizens are compelled and incentivized to CONSUME MEDIA
>Law Enforcement, despite being intimately aware of the hypocrisy of their jobs, handwave it away as "getting my paycheck"
>if you're a radical, the government tends not to give a shit about you if you sequester yourself in some far corner of the country, where you're powerless and not questioning their narrative

[Anonymous No.17286091]

>>17285892
How could anyone guarantee freedom from consequences?

[Anonymous No.17286104]

>>17282159
Yes. This book was an argument for socialism, considering Orwell's political beliefs. You need to use a better analogy.

[Anonymous No.17286183]

Ever notice how these articles only surface when it's right-wing criticisms that use 1984/Animal Farm/etc?

The guy's whole screed is about Donald Trump. The absolute state of 'academics'.

[Anonymous No.17286209]

>>17286183
Addendum -- it's even worse than I thought. This article is by a Mrs. Rachel Klein. I hate to admit that there's an undercurrent of always being right here, but I'll allow you to come to your own conclusions.

[Anonymous No.17286253]

>>17286209
>but I'll allow you to come to your own conclusions.
It doesn't take a whole lot of mental prowess to conclude that you're a clueless retard peddling hooligan propaganda.

[Anonymous No.17286260]

>>17285884
It does unless you’re commanding an action. Naming kikes shouldn’t get you in trouble, calling people to finish the German job should. Don’t be retarded, anon.

[Anonymous No.17286267]

>>17286253
Deeply truthful philosophical hooliganism.

[Anonymous No.17286276]

>>17286209
kek
Now read 1985 by Burgess

[Anonymous No.17286288]

>>17285507
Anyone's thoughts on this? I am open to being proven wrong but I don't see how one can refute this

[Anonymous No.17286296]

>>17286267
I'm not the one peddling lies and conspiracy theories in here, anonymous.
You might have more luck among your like minded fellows over at >>>/pol/ though.

[Anonymous No.17286303]

>>17286209
Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these: "/pol/ was right again."

[Anonymous No.17286316]

>>17286296
Are we going to pretend academia isn’t part of the establishment and anyone who thinks otherwise is a /pol/ack? That’s fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.17286326]

>>17282113
I bet this was a woman and I bet she mentions Trump at least once to say how “you can’t compare our side to big brother because we’re the good guys so everything is justified”

[Anonymous No.17286330]

>>17282113
>I taught high school English
So you have no idea what the novel means then.

[Anonymous No.17286346]

>>17286288
Global warming is a scam nobody takes seriously, it's something shitlibs whine about to be woke.

[Anonymous No.17286349]

>>17286316
Yes, they will pretend that because they’re morally and intellectually bankrupt

[Anonymous No.17286362]

>>17286326
Yes, and that's the entire premise of the article more or less. She also adds that 1984 is bad because people compare it to the regimes we've toppled, and that we need to look at our current 'fascist' government as the bad guy.

[Anonymous No.17286365]

>>17286316
I think he's referring to something about Klein, she and her friends are up to no good. Ridiculous how she and all her friends always respond the exact same way to these things, with their 'open-mindedness,' and intellectual honesty.

[Anonymous No.17286374]

>>17286346
does anyone say woke anymore?

[Anonymous No.17286382]

>>17286346
>The sole existential threat facing humanity
>people STILL think it's a hoax
We are so screwed

[Anonymous No.17286389]

>>17282221
Yeah we just need a civil war 2 to make things normal again honestly

[Anonymous No.17286403]

>>17286382
'It's the sole existence because I say it's the sole existence.'
'There's so much evidence.'
Please enlighten me, why anybody should bother to take it seriously, and why the same party who thinks wasting tons of money on diversity investments is effectively combating 'global warming.'

[Anonymous No.17286417]

>>17286316
>Are we going to pretend academia isn’t part of the establishment
Neither the academia nor the establishment are monolithical, unilaterally partisan entities and never have been, and by that I also hope you're specifically referring to the american ones in particular when it comes to that critique of yours.
>anyone who thinks otherwise is a /pol/ack?
One thing is thinking otherwise, another thing is invoking da joos and pretending "these articles only surface when it's right wing criticism" (while also not offering proofs of this).
>>17286382
People are too busy trying to frame some mysterious globohomo conspiracy ring of jews and marxists being the cause of all evil to worry about their own responsibilities.

[Anonymous No.17286422]

>>17282113
>high school English teacher
>as if this is some sort of authority on the subject

[Anonymous No.17286458]

>>17286417
There's more proof of Joos
than your global warming masochistic fantasy

[Anonymous No.17286468]

>>17286417
>Neither the academia nor the establishment are monolithical
Stopped reading right there

[Anonymous No.17286479]

>>17286346
>>17286382
it is a hoax
the carbon cycle ensures that the world stays more or less in carbon equilibrium. If plants, algae, and fungi didn't exist, yes we would be fucked.
>+carbon = higher average atmospheric temps, more CO2 = more plant/algae proliferation = higher rate of carbon sequestration by plants/algae
>-carbon = lower average atmospheric temps, less CO2 = less plant/algae proliferation = lower rate of carbon sequestration

only retards look at the ecosystem in isolation of one component. There is more biodiversity now than there ever has been. The entire ecosystem is a series of feedback loops that make it functionally impossible to throw it out of equilibrium unless you intentionally release some extreme force of destruction like nuclear war.

Just ask yourself about the proposed solutions. Force Africa and China to cease production of the massive amount of particulate air pollution they create? Apply pressure to South America to stop dumping so much plastic in the ocean? Limit fossil fuel usage and toxic chemical releases by China and India?
No, let's make Americans take buses and use paper straws, that should do the trick.

It's about capitulation, nothing more.

[Anonymous No.17286507]

>>17286086
If I could make a slightly different recommendation. The name is The Napoleon of Notting Hill. Its sort of a look at the slavery of boredom and tolerance and a way to revolt against it. I dont think it is as accurate as some of the other recommendations, but it seems to identity a problem and give a solution to it.

[Anonymous No.17286509]

>>17286382
It’s a global taxation racket. The climate always changes.
They’re literally trying to scare you into consenting to giving the government more money

[Anonymous No.17286527]

>>17286479
>the carbon cycle ensures that the world stays more or less in carbon equilibrium. If plants, algae, and fungi didn't exist, yes we would be fucked.
This would have been true if humans didn't mess things up

>There is more biodiversity now than there ever has been.
This is blatantly untrue, and we are damaging biodiversity greatly.

As for solutions, one must admit that China/India, while way worse than us, are improving their impact. We are doing nothing.

[Anonymous No.17286545]

>>17286527
IT'S TRUE BECAUSE IT'S TRUE
HUMANS MESSED THINGS UP I JUST KNOW IT
kek, get real

[Anonymous No.17286549]

>>17282113

[Anonymous No.17286565]

>>17286527
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-drop-under-trump-but-climate-experts-aren-t-celebrating/ar-BB1c8FdI?fbclid=IwAR0GG_m1cLKlfrUGX-7vGtQT9sUmkZPRbuxoe6R1jmd5Wvge3671To9nu90%255C
I wouldnt say nothing has happened.

[Anonymous No.17286589]

>>17286479
>Murrica is a gud boi we dindu nuffin
Is that how you justify fracking poisoning your water to your citizens?
>Force Africa and China to cease production of the massive amount of particulate air pollution they create? Apply pressure to South America to stop dumping so much plastic in the ocean? Limit fossil fuel usage and toxic chemical releases by China and India?
How many of those are caused by the economic interests of american companies?
Or am I gonna believe all those chinese factories are entirely devoted to produce tissues and I-Pads for Comrade Xi?

[Anonymous No.17286628]

>>17286479
> The entire ecosystem is a series of feedback loops that make it functionally impossible to throw it out of equilibrium unless you intentionally release some extreme force of destruction like nuclear war.
Or like a massive, world-scale outpouring of carbon in the atmosphere for decades on end?

Your argument is nice but it doesn't say anything about the actual variations in carbon concentration in the atmosphere, nor does it look at the natural mechanisms of elimination of carbon once it's been fixated in the atmosphere. It's exactly as convincing as saying "the feedback loops in the ecosystem have been thrown out of balance because air pollution is that significant".

>Force Africa and China to cease production of the massive amount of particulate air pollution they create?
China is already taking steep measures for their own interest, since it's become noticeably hard to breath in the big cities.

>No, let's make Americans take buses and use paper straws, that should do the trick.
Nice chery-picking, the solutions above have already been suggested, and some big polluters are already trying to change their energy mix.

>It's about capitulation, nothing more.
Your post sounds like capitulation. "Nothing is happening and people's solutions are bad and nobody will do anything".

[Anonymous No.17286635]

>>17286589
>Is that how you justify fracking poisoning your water to your citizens?
Nope that's to offset all the money we waste in diversity distribution, blame your party retard. Investing in a global government tends to be bad for the environment. The drinking water is a scapegoat and still better than the majority of the world. Nobody thinks fracking is good, except shitlibs (implicitly) and establishment conservatives (explicitly).

>How many of those are caused by the economic interests of american companies?
Gee idk, you're the one that clings to Amazon and Twitter's every word, so you'd support that more than me, creature.

>Or am I gonna believe all those chinese factories are entirely devoted to produce tissues and I-Pads for Comrade Xi?
Yeah, go fuck yourself faggot

[Anonymous No.17286636]

>>17286545
You aren't any more real than he is. He just countered your baseless opinions with his baseless opinions.

[Anonymous No.17286643]

>>17286628
Do you have any statistical data or are you just going to rehash unverifiable anecdotes.

[Anonymous No.17286649]

>>17286527
>This would have been true if humans didn't mess things up
and how exactly have humans messed things up? by taking sequestered carbon and freeing it? You do realize that this is a natural process that can happen when asteroids hit, volcanoes erupt, etc.

>>17286589
>Is that how you justify fracking poisoning your water to your citizens?
You do realize that the methane in the water in Flint was present pre-fracking, right? or are you a retard who believes everything in the 24 hour news cycle?
So the solution is to switch to nuclear power. Let's do that. Fine. Write your politicians. Problem solved
>How many of those are caused by the economic interests of american companies?
17.39% in 2019 according to the IMF and WTO.
so 82.61% of all products in China stayed in China

[Anonymous No.17286661]

>>17286549
its kind of a dumb cartoon because trying to force it into the jewish star means that it's 2 completely disconnected graphs... "banking" does not connect to "government" for example, neither does "the 1%"
please make smarter antisemitism, thanks

[Anonymous No.17286673]

>>17286661
oy vey goyim

[Anonymous No.17286675]

>>17286417
>while also not offering proofs of this

Do you want a dissertation or something? Come on.

[Anonymous No.17286691]

>ctrl+f "Brave New World"
>Gazillion hits
>ctrl+f "Player Piano"
>Nothing

One of the most accurate dystopian novels about the marriage of corporate and government power, the draining of life through automation, and the futility of fighting it is completely absent because /lit/ has only ever picked up books they were assigned in high school.

Also
>The Camp of the Saints
Unironically kill yourselves.

[Anonymous No.17286692]

>>17286635
>Diversity distributions are why fracking is a thing
Hilarious, doubly hilarious when you think I'm american.
>you're the one that clings to Amazon and Twitter's every word
Not really, but keep making assumptions, it's always the niggers and jews' fault isn't it? Just like libs are only left leaning people, as if Americans even know what the left is anyway.

[Anonymous No.17286703]

>>17286691
>muh dystopian library
No one cares to read the same book 1000 times

[Anonymous No.17286710]

>>17286692
>it's always the niggers and jews' fault isn't it?
No

[Anonymous No.17286712]

>>17286675
>Make claim
>Offer no proof
>but yeah it's the jews trust me bro

[Anonymous No.17286714]

>>17285593
Based

[Anonymous No.17286735]

>>17285798
AND WITH ALL 5 PIECES OF DYSTOPIA I SUMMON FORTH
THE REAL WORLD!

[Anonymous No.17286737]

>>17286091

You couldn't. That's why freedom of speech is a stupid myth, usually relied upon by people who want to avoid actual ideological confrontation for control.

[Anonymous No.17286769]

>>17286091
Depends on how you define "consequences"
Getting yelled at vs getting killed shouldn't be branched under "consequences"

[Anonymous No.17286772]

>>17286649
>You do realize that this is a natural process that can happen when asteroids hit, volcanoes erupt, etc.
And you do realize those are cataclysmic events which cause a lot of damage to the environment, right? Bro if you are comparing what we are doing to asteroid collisions and volcanic eruptions you're just emphasizing how bad this is going to be. There will be no dystopia by 2100 because there'll be no civilization to impose it on

[Anonymous No.17286802]

>>17286712
>DUDE BROOFS
Max midwitry.