/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18374622]

>Another curiosity about the intersectional movement is the camouflage it employs. For aside from McIntosh’s most popular document, the one thing that all the purveyors of the ideologies of social justice and intersectionality have in common is that their work is unreadable. Their writing has the deliberately obstructive style ordinarily employed when someone either has nothing to say or needs to conceal the fact that what they are saying is not true. Here is one sentence from Judith Butler in full flow:

>The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporarlity into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural tonalities as theoretical objects to one to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power…

>Prose this bad can only occur when the author is trying to hide something. “

[Anonymous No.18374637]

>Of course sometimes when it is nearly impossible to tell what is being said,
almost anything can be said and exceptionally dishonest arguments can be
smuggled in under the guise of complexity. This is one of the reasons why Butler
and others write so badly. If they wrote clearly they would attract more outrage
and ridicule. It is also one reason why this field finds it so hard to detect what is
sincere and what is satire.

[Anonymous No.18374675]

>>18374637
>If they wrote clearly they would attract more outrage
>and ridicule.
most philosophy is also this retarded. this is not a feminist homo thing this is human deception and retardation and the reason why everything will always be shit

[Anonymous No.18374713]

>>18374675
Sorry your field sucks, but in mine, clarity and brevity are prized.

[Anonymous No.18374731]

>>18374622

[Anonymous No.18376435]

>>18374622
Butler wants to claim the force of historiography, without having to do the hard work of historiography, and while keeping absolutist French categories.

If you can't read that you'd better stick with sociology. Hunting and killing the Butler requires bigger brains. The chief critique of Butler is of course that she's a bourgeois.

[Anonymous No.18376471]

>>18376435
> Best critique is pure adhominem
This is the power of Marxism

[Anonymous No.18376497]

>>18376435
The most important and biting critique of her is that she's a woman, making all her opinions wrong by default.

[Anonymous No.18376510]

>>18376471
>can't identify an ad baculum
Jesus stop being a shit cunt, I'm talking about killing her.

[Anonymous No.18376630]

>>18374622
You can use this fact against them. Just pretend Butler says X on page Y. If a statement Z on page Y is unintelligible, it (Z) cannot be proven, and the opposite (X) cannot be disproven.

[Anonymous No.18376649]

>>18374622
Steven Pinker cites the exact same quote in The Blank Slate, with the ellipsis in the same place. Naughty Boy Douglas

[Anonymous No.18376656]

>>18374622
I have noticed stupid people use a lot of vague and sweeping abstractions, instaid of sticking to concrete reality.

[Anonymous No.18376659]

What happened to that anon who sad he was working on translating Gender Trouble into plain English?

[Anonymous No.18376665]

That sentence is perfectly clear if you know anything about Marx and Althusser.

[Anonymous No.18376677]

That Butler sentence is a really bad sentence but what's your argument?

>The irony is I’m not even a particular fan of Butler’s work. But if you’re going to use her as your silver bullet example of everything wrong with academia, the left, and women who dare to string sentences together; then at the very least you should double-check you’re not fundamentally misrepresenting her based on an unflattering quote, taken out of context, in a glorified book review she once wrote.

>The greater irony is the very criticism of this infamous sentence proves her point about re-articulation. You can quite literally trace the genealogy of all these critics performatively making the same points about the same quote until it becomes established truth; despite the fact not one of them has bothered to read the article it’s from. And that, my friends, is how power works.
https://jxelam.medium.com/giving-an-account-of-judith-butler-a04eaaa7fed6

[Anonymous No.18376701]

>>18376665
This is a nazi green text thread. Do you really suspect they've read Marx, Althusser or Hegel?

[Anonymous No.18376723]

>>18374622
It’s so infuriating how the race-commie shitbags rely entirely on logical fallacy, sophistry, casuistry, gaslighting, and other rhetorical trickery to advance their cause.
One of their favorite tactics that I have noticed for a while but recently learned actually has a name is called the gish gallop.
It’s very commonly seen on Twitter.
They cram a bunch of dishonest or outright false assertions into a single tweet. It takes no effort to tell these lies, but in order to refute all of their points you would need to write a whole fucking essay, which obviously makes it impossible to respond on twitter.

[Anonymous No.18376748]

>>18376677
The point is that she makes her writing needlessly obscure
>the fact that so many people notice this just proves her theory hrmmm
This Alex Mason character seems like a real jerk

[Anonymous No.18376874]

>>18376510
you will never pass.

[Anonymous No.18376901]

>>18376656
Stupid people are the ones that stick to concrete reality since they lack ways of thinking in abstract forms, be a specialized language, mathematics or others.

[Anonymous No.18376909]

>>18376874
Nah mate, it was HDs and fails.

[Anonymous No.18376912]

>>18374731
I don't know who either of those are. Can someone pls help?

[Anonymous No.18376916]

>>18376912
Lurk more fucking tard

[Anonymous No.18376929]

>>18374731

One of these trannyfaggot went around raping kids

[Anonymous No.18376977]

>>18374622
So what does really it say?

[Anonymous No.18376999]

>>18374622
So what does it really say?

[Anonymous No.18377035]

>>18376999
In a short and dumbed down it says capitalism forms society, but not in a static manner, but in a way of constantly repeating and renewing its rules of power.

[Anonymous No.18377318]

>>18377035
Anyone who isn't a brainlet could have easily understood this

[Anonymous No.18377382]

>>18374622
I can actually understand all of this, but then again I have a degree in the humanities so I was neck deep in this shit for years. The phrasing has obviously been picked to be verbose rather than concise, though, so I can see why many people would feel annoyed.

[Anonymous No.18377505]

>>18374622
That sentence is perfectly clear, it's just difficult to read because it contains a lot of information cramped into a single brief sentence and because it is not addressed to the common (wo)man but other academics who can be expected to be familiar with the terminology and also expected to consult the pertinent literature.
This whole whining about academics being obscurantists is just the standard brand of anti-intellectualism commonly utilized by smooth brained rightoids in order to pull the masses on their side without having to do mental work (which they are mostly incapable of).

[Anonymous No.18377515]

>>18376665
>>18376701
>Hegel, Marx Althusser
All hacks of the highest order in part for similar reasons of style. Bohm Bawerk had to paraphrase entire sections of the Kapital in full clarity, exposing the retardation of it all. Bolzano did the same to the extravagant claims of Hegelian logic and dialectics that fall flat as soon as you give them proper form.

>>18377035
>not in a static manner
>renewing
>constantly repeating
Managed to introduce ambiguous if not contradictory determinations in one sentence.
"Societal rules decided by [Jews, Kapital, etc] are not constant. They are updated according to the situation of the day, with constraints given by the previous ruleset." Etc.
You have to be the most dishonest person to write " brought the question of temporarlity into the thinking of structure" instead of "X is not constant", which is what is meant here. You could need temporal considerations even in a static state, so the bizarro formulations is not even on point.

[Anonymous No.18377519]

>>18377505
cope

[Anonymous No.18377692]

>>18377519
Cope for what?

[Anonymous No.18377720]

>>18377692
The part about rightoids. The other stuff you said is correct.

[Anonymous No.18377775]

>>18377505
And yet, leftists claim to be "for the people" and not the "1%" - they expect their academic bloviating to inform the implementation of social and cultural process involving the very masses they disparage from their ivory towers.
If the language you use can't be understood by the majority of your countrymen, then it is not an honest reflection of how they implicitly understand society and culture to work - it is representative of neither their engrained and subconscious, nor conscious hermeneutical, approaches to socialising in their individual lives.
As such, the only way these obscure academics can hope to actively influence public social life is by eroding the very democratic principle that asserts that all such common folk ought to have a say in the political process and not be unilaterally subject to an order imposed upon them by an elite. Which is fine from a certain perspective, but for the love of God, at least be honest about it!

[Anonymous No.18377833]

>>18377775
I don't think the philosophers have to be ones to preach to the public. Wasn't it always this way? There need to be activists (be it politicians or some other kind of "leaders") that take up the task of transfering abstract ideas to the collective conciousnes. If philosophers were always constained by being understandable by everyone I don't think we'd get that far.

[Anonymous No.18377838]

>>18377833
PEOPLE ARE READING POLITICAL PLATONISM BY ALEXANDER DUGIN

[Anonymous No.18377860]

>>18377833
If it takes some mediary activist or political exponent to translate the philosopher in terms understood by the public, then such mediary is doing the work such philosophers neglected to do - either something is lost in this mediate process, in which case it was superfluous for the philosopher to say it in the first place - or nothing is lost in the process, in which case there was no purpose to the philosopher's obfuscation and your assertion that philosophers wouldn't get that far by ensuring their intelligibility, is incorrect.

[Anonymous No.18377872]

>>18377775
That's because Butler and other bourgeois hacks aren't actual leftists. They don't care for the abolishing of hierarchies because they enjoy their elevated status in a society due to a mastery or obscurantist language and exclusionary pseudointellectual labor. Learn Polish (unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any translation for Anglos) and read Machajski (PBUH) or just read some secondary works on his ideas. He was right all along - the intellectual is an enemy of the worker just like the capitalist.

[Anonymous No.18377886]

>>18377872
yeah, pretty much. And thanks for the rec, I'll see if I can find anything English-language on him.

[Anonymous No.18377894]

>>18374622
retard rightoid cant read a simple paragraph. judith is literally just saying that the world has changed from the marxist conception of power structures (capital, state, etc) having relatively homogenous effects on each segment of the population to being splintered and effecting different groups in very different ways

[Anonymous No.18377946]

>>18377886
Do you read Russian per chance? I always assumed that Machajski wrote in Polish but actually it turns out he wrote in Russian, makes sense considering Tsarist censorship. There's the original version
https://archive.org/details/umstvennyi_rabochii_1968/mode/1up
But yeah, Makhaevism was a huge movement in Poland and Russia consisting of workers who wanted to transition (lol) to a socialist economy but couldn't be bothered by intellectuals and their bullshit and were suspicious of the infiltration of workers' movement by members of the intelligentsia

[Anonymous No.18377984]

>>18377946
I am, unfortunately, a monolingual English basic bitch.

[Anonymous No.18378038]

>>18377984
Well it sucks then. Definitely don't try learning Russian and Polish as your first foreign languages then, they are very demanding phonetically, vocabulary sounds alien to native English speakers and have a lot of declension (6 and 7 grammatical cases respectively). Maybe try Spanish? It's similar to Latin which is a source of much of English vocabulary and it's pretty popular with English speakers. As for Machajski I've got you covered with some 2ndary sources.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/topic/jan-waclaw-machajski

[Anonymous No.18378059]

>>18377838
PEOPLE ARE READING BUTLER
WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY?

[Anonymous No.18378070]

>>18378038
I would learn German and/or Dutch first and foremost, mainly because of my family background and native German/Dutch speakers in my extended family - I have an ear for those languages and prior experience of learning German in school.

[Anonymous No.18378310]

>>18378059
I am trying to say that you uhhh just did an epic ALEXANDER DUGIN REFERENCE.