/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19224490]

At this point, Chomsky surely is the most prolific dissident to write about American power. Does anyone even come close?

[Anonymous No.19224536]

If he were a real dissident he'd either be dead or in prison. He's controlled opposition. And he knows it, to his credit.

[Anonymous No.19224539]

>>19224490
>dissident
>to write about power
>as a pathetically naïve theory of state

You know your right hand technically isn't a kiss-less virgin.

Try reading some CLR James or Raya Dunayevskaya or Selma James or Federici or Braverman or something.

READ CUNT

[Anonymous No.19224557]

>>19224539
>marxism
Your ideology shouldn’t come into this

[Anonymous No.19224596]

chomsky honk

[Anonymous No.19224638]

>>19224490
> Supported American intervention in Syria
> Dissident

[Anonymous No.19224662]

>>19224638
this is an oversimplification, but even then, it's one example compared to dozens. and even then, an academic isn't supposed to think in retarded binary like generic internet tankies.

[Anonymous No.19224672]

>>19224490
>Dissident
Real dissidents aren't celebrated by wealthy elites or get faculty positions at major universities. Julian Assange is in prison. He is a real dissident.

[Anonymous No.19224683]

>>19224490
>Chomsky
>dissident
Are you guys not ashamed of playing dress up like this lol

[Anonymous No.19224709]

>>19224490
The only good thing about this interventionist jew is that debate where he BTFO that French pedophile

[Anonymous No.19224711]

>>19224490
>Does anyone even come close?
more intelligent writers that wrote about the same topics with different subjects. if you're smart too, you could understand the relevance

[Anonymous No.19224715]

>>19224711
so name some, pseud

[Anonymous No.19224722]

>>19224715
and talk about them and why they're so superior. i guarantee it's either ideology or just you being a contrarian shithead.

>>19224672
this is /lit/. we're talking about writers.

[Anonymous No.19224731]

>>19224490
why are we taking a failed linguistics professor's opinion on american foreign policy seriously?

if you want a academic opinion, try finkelstein, he actually knows what the fuck he's talking about unlike his friend, chomsky.

[Anonymous No.19224736]

>>19224731
>a academic
i'm not going to read your recommendation

[Anonymous No.19224752]

>>19224731
Finkelstein is a student of Chomsky's who has admitted he'll never reach the same level as him. These are his words.

[Anonymous No.19224755]

>>19224736
then stop asking if anyone comes close to your idea of what a 'dissident' is if you're not gonna look at other people who made better points about American power, you cuntsky dick sucking faggot.

[Anonymous No.19224761]

>>19224752
>he'll never reach the same level as him.

yeah, as in he's above and beyond chomsky.

read finkelstein's works and you'll see he's better at explaining america's neocolonial power, especially over the middle east through israel.

[Anonymous No.19224763]

>>19224761
Finkelstein almost exclusively writes about Israel. It's hard to take this board seriously sometimes.

[Anonymous No.19224773]

>>19224761
Also, I've interviewed Finkelstein before, and read quite a few of his books as a result. He's not in the same league as Chomsky. On Israel, I'll take Finkelstein because it's his near exclusive focus. On any other topic, he's a GrayZone brand idiot, and kind of a sperg in general.

[Anonymous No.19224776]

>>19224490
When will people start to realize that "prolific" doesn't mean "good"? Both in the sense that Gnome having an opinion on everything out there doesn't mean any of his opinions are valid, and in that a shocking amount of people don't know the meanings of words.

[Anonymous No.19224777]

>>19224763
>Finkelstein almost exclusively writes about Israel. It's hard to take this board seriously sometimes.

And he's great at exposing Israel and America's cooperation through control over the middle east for both countries' gains.

AKA exposing how American foreign policy works.

And he's better at it than Chomsky. If anything, Finkelstein is a bigger 'dissident' than Chomsky because he actually sacrificed a lot when speaking about his views.

[Anonymous No.19224779]

>>19224776
All I was trying to say was this: he's clearly the most well known dissident in academia. No one has offered an actual critique of Chomsky's work, but it's kind of besides the point anyway.

[Anonymous No.19224788]

Is Chomsky's babby first intellectual? People always bring his name up when they want to show they're 'smart'.

[Anonymous No.19224798]

>>19224788
you're the finkelstein faggot, clearly

[Anonymous No.19224819]

>>19224490
>Chomsky
>dissident
This is a man who told people to vote for Hillary Clinton.

[Anonymous No.19224821]

>>19224596
That's the worst of all.

[Anonymous No.19224823]

>>19224819
Maybe he thought the deep state was playing reverse psychology by fielding the most detestable politician of the modern era against a TV guy with no experience who would probably do whatever they say.

[Anonymous No.19224828]

>>19224819
>look it up
>it's true
holy fucking KEK

[Anonymous No.19224833]

>>19224779
>No one has offered an actual critique of Chomsky's work
This is absolutely false.

[Anonymous No.19224834]

>>19224819
>>19224828
Did he do it because he wanted Clinton to be president? Or did he just not want Trump to be president?

[Anonymous No.19224840]

>>19224834
The latter, which is fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.19224843]

>Chomsky
>dissident
He's an edgy faggot with an overinflated ego and no real insight to offer.

[Anonymous No.19224853]

>>19224840
Not really. 2016 election was just extremely fucking retarded. Americans could only pick between the two worst possible options imaginable, but one still managed to be blatantly worse than the other.

[Anonymous No.19224856]

>>19224853
>Americans could only pick between the two worst possible options imaginable, but one still managed to be blatantly worse than the other.
stop parroting other people's opinions

[Anonymous No.19224859]

>>19224853
Yeah and that was the one he told you to vote for. For fuck sake, burgers need to start putting iodized salt on their fries if they aren't going to tell the government to stop putting fluoride in the water.

[Anonymous No.19224862]

>>19224856
Okay, I will state my own opinion then. Here it comes:

2016 election was just extremely fucking retarded. Americans could only pick between the two worst possible options imaginable, but one still managed to be blatantly worse than the other.

In any case, wether this opinion is mine or not doesn't really matter, because we were talking about Chomskyhonk here, and it seems to be his opinion aswell.

[Anonymous No.19224864]

>>19224853
Those two options were picked by the amerifats themselves, they got what they fucking deserved
>b-but the parties
Trump was loathed by the Republican party and got the spot despite that, crushing all official republican candidates.

[Anonymous No.19224865]

>>19224862
>wether this opinion is mine or not doesn't really matter
eesh...

[Anonymous No.19224874]

>>19224856
retards here think that someone disagrees with /pol/ pathology and therefore is accepting a mainstream narrative blindly. meanwhile they follow /pol/ narrative blindly and fail to see the irony.

[Anonymous No.19224884]

>>19224874
>retards here think that someone disagrees
illiterate, i'm not going to finish reading your post

[Anonymous No.19224895]

>>19224884
explains your problem quite well

[Anonymous No.19224917]

>his linguistic theories
BTFO beyond all reasonable doubt
>his credibility as a political philosopher
In shambles
https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm

[Anonymous No.19224931]

>>19224557
Feel free to post bourgeois stooge theories of state. Start with Stalins.

[Anonymous No.19224936]

>>19224895
learn to speak before spouting your opinions. you made at least 3 grammatical errors in your post

[Anonymous No.19224964]

>>19224490
"The republican party is the most dangerous organization on the planet." Goodness, he sounds like a shill for the DNC. How does he not see that party lines are control mechanisms propagating forward agendas suited to their corporate benefactors? He also refuses to take any evidence for major "conspiratorial" events such as the JFK assassination. It might also be noted that he "insisted the unvaccinated be isolated." How is he so inconsistent in calling out and speaking against propaganda?
Manufactured Consent my ass, this guy is a tool used to control pseud retards stuck in the two party paradigm.

[Anonymous No.19225016]

>>19224936
lol point them out, pseud

[Anonymous No.19225027]

>>19224964
>How does he not see that party lines are control mechanisms propagating forward agendas suited to their corporate benefactors?

t. googled but never read

[Anonymous No.19225037]

>>19225027
He also refuses any "conspiratorial" evidence of 9/11. He is a major advocate for propaganda, not for educating people on how to understand and combat propaganda. Your a retard by the way.

[Anonymous No.19225088]

>>19225016
>retards here think that [when] someone disagrees with /pol/ pathology[, they are therefore accepting] the mainstream narrative blindly. meanwhile[,] they follow [the] /pol/ narrative blindly and fail to see the irony.
a native speaker or a white would have written it clearer.

[Anonymous No.19225096]

>>19225037
>Your a retard
Oh no!

[Anonymous No.19225108]

>>19225088
More clearly is the proper (white) way to say that, anon.

[Anonymous No.19225114]

>>19225108
my version was more concise and thus more correct

[Anonymous No.19225115]

>>19225114
Conciseness and correctness are not logically bound to one another.

[Anonymous No.19225124]

>>19225115
in english, one should always word something using as few words as possible. one must also use a negative as early as possible.

[Anonymous No.19225145]

>>19224884
>grammatical error invalidates the point

[Anonymous No.19225153]

>>19225145
if all posts with either slang or a grammatical error were deleted instantly, the quality of discussion would improve greatly

[Anonymous No.19225156]

>>19225153
true, but you should point out their errors and nevertheless continue with the core matter of the discussion. One has to elevate plebs somehow

[Anonymous No.19225159]

>>19225156
>One has to elevate plebs somehow
one does not improve by oppressing or helping the pathetic, but through their absence. this is why genocide is the most humane policy.

[Anonymous No.19225170]

>>19225159
holy shit. please kill yourself, you unbearable faggot. it is beyond apparent that no one loves you.

[Anonymous No.19225174]

>>19225159
rather than immediately dismissing users of poor form as pathetic inferiors, one should test their willingness to accept superior form when it is introduced to them

[Anonymous No.19225250]

>>19224490
He's a scholar who has written more than 100 books on American foreign policy, the media, and neoliberalism. Of course he's left a sizeable footprint. The quality of his work is a separate discussion. I think of Chomsky as a sort of baseline. You'll notice that most people who read him branch off sooner or later. Some migrate to Parenti, others take up standard lib theory. In my experience, the former are idiots; the latter are ready to grow up and work within the confines of real-world analysis, and to not simply criticize systems. It's about deeper understanding. Chomsky can shit on neoliberalism for days, but his anarchism is bare bones. I'm serious. Read On Anarchism. It is pitifully underdeveloped.

Chomsky was my entry into anarchism, linguistics, foreign policy, media criticism, and a whole range of other topics that I'm forgetting, I'm sure. He offers a lot of great insights. His recent work has been disappointing, but that's expected. He's ancient. He still goes down in the hall of fame for dismantling behaviorism at a time when it was huge, shitting on every president up to Obama, and popularizing fringe politics among college students for more than half a century. Historians will no doubt take more of an interest in his opinions than, say, the New York Times.

You're not going to find any thoughtful discussion here. /lit/ will either him because he's a Jew, because he's somewhat normie friendly, or both. Never expect serious conversation here, especially when it comes to an author who isn't on one of those trash charts.

TL;DR: He's been hugely influential and occasionally brilliant. He can criticize endlessly, but when it comes to formulating alternatives, he's dogshit useless. His wide reach is what makes him unique, and it's honestly impressive how thorough his analysis is in spite of this.

[Anonymous No.19225256]

>>19224490
Peter Dale Scott

[Anonymous No.19225260]

>>19225250
who is most useful with respect to alternatives? who achieves the best non-isolated critiques, or the best critical analyses with respect to the whole?

[Anonymous No.19225263]

>>19225250
Nice blog post redditor

[Anonymous No.19225270]

>>19225263
fuck off nigger

[Anonymous No.19225274]

>>19224490
>dissident
>published by Penguin Books
lol

[Anonymous No.19225282]

>>19224864
Bernie was beating Hilary in delegates but all the superdelegates, aka corpo faggots, decided to ignore the voting trends within the party to get their more controllable candidate on the ticket.

[Anonymous No.19225328]

>>19225260
You mean alternatives to the current political/economic system? I've regressed to liberalism, so I don't know.

But that wasn't my point, really. If you're looking for potential left-wing solutions, Marxism seems an obvious route. It's far more concrete than anarchism, and certainly more concrete than Chomsky's milquetoast brand of it. Even if you wanted to stay in the bubble of libertarian socialism, there are alternatives. Abdullah Ocalan has actually achieved something. So have the Zapatistas.

My main point was that Chomsky gives great criticism, but doesn't even try when it comes to formulating solutions. These solutions might work, might not. But they are earnest attempts at solutions.

[Anonymous No.19225330]

>>19225263
Sorry for trying to elevate the conversation when everyone was arguing over grammar. I know we're supposed to treat /lit/ like /pol/ now.

[Anonymous No.19225938]

>>19225330
The only item of interest you are elevating is your ego. Chromsky is a fucking hack who promotes propaganda. The fact that he is actively speaking in favor of draconian mandates that aim at funneling power into a private-public congruency speaks to where he stands on all matters and to the illusion that his followers may be living in. He is an institutional figure because of his ability at condoning behavior actionable towards institutionalizing the crowd.
>It's about deeper understanding
You are precisely the type of pseud retard I mentioned >>19224964

[Anonymous No.19225988]

>>19225938
You're not even familiar with his work, and it's apparent from your earlier comment. But no, I'm not an anti-vaxxer, and I don't think 9/11 was an inside job. Sorry. If by "mandate," you mean him saying that people who don't get vaccinated should isolate ... okay? That's the standard line for vaccinations for public schools in several states. I think it's pretty reasonable. But, then again, I don't think that the vaccine is going to kill me.

Either way, no one reads Chomsky for his thoughts on vaccines. I read Chomsky to hear his thoughts on US foreign policy and the like. Is this really a worthwhile conversation to you? It's so stupid.

[Anonymous No.19226007]

>>19225938
also
>freaking out because I said "It's about deeper understanding"
I was criticizing Chomsky. I was saying he can criticize institutions, actors, etc. all day long, but he doesn't provide any kinds of solutions or alternative frameworks to look at problems with. I don't know why you're on my ass about it. I get tired of the pointless toxicity here. It makes it impossible to actually discuss things when everyone is so desperate to act like this.

[Anonymous No.19226028]

>>19224536
>controlled opposition says the state is illegitimate
wut
anyway, the reason why he hasn't been silenced is because they dont have that sort of power anymore
that is why propaganda has become the primary tool
>>19224638
opposed it, supported the Kurds who were put in harms way by Americas meddling

[Anonymous No.19226036]

>>19226028
>supported the Kurds
kek a lot of tankies equate this with any support of intervention, as if everything is so black and white. not sure how it's the same to be fully embroiled in syria versus to keep some troops there to protect the kurds a little longer, but that's what leftypol does to the brain, i guess.

[Anonymous No.19226076]

>>19226028
>controlled opposition says the state is illegittimate
Of course they do: it's an empty statement that only appeals to undesirable criminals and insufferable intellectuals, both of which will bring nothing but bad publicity to your cause.

[Anonymous No.19226925]

this right?
>The lifting of the veil of Maya and the subsequent banishment of the banality of existence is necessarily a transient phenomenon, for as soon as the veil is lifted it endeavors immediately and forcefully to reassert itself, just as the blood rushes to clot an opening in the skin. The will endeavors to gain in both lower and higher intellects an ideality through which relations between individual objects and the whole itself may be understood. This is how the vanity of the will asserts itself in consciousness, by insisting on systematizations which are on the one hand necessary for a continuation of life itself, but on the other hand act as the primary antagonists of sublime experience. Only on rare and fleeting occasions do we observe those sublime experiences which defy classification, but as quickly as they come they are integrated into our subjective vision of the system of reality and rendered commonplace. The easiest example to point to is that of music: a new song permits of a full appreciation of its sublimity, but upon subsequent listening it becomes commonplace and diluted. The more subsequent experiences we encounter, the more comprehensive our systems become, so that even fresh experiences contain so many traces of what has already been encountered and compartmentalized that they themselves impart less and less of the sublime as time marches on. This is why the dreamlike age of childhood is so giddy, and why the lot of aged men is so banal and toilsome.

[Anonymous No.19226929]

>>19226925
oh wait wrong thread

[Anonymous No.19227184]

>>19224536
the men behind the curtain leave some dissidents alive, as a means of discrediting them in the eyes of radicals. Not saying Chomsky is one of those, but they don’t harass or kill every threat.

[Anonymous No.19227968]

My Labour federation has him on for a conference now pretty cool. Personally I prefer David Harvey

[Anonymous No.19227984]

Chomsky is a pop intellectual and a very good one. Not in years of studying political economy, sociology, capitalism, labour markets, work, globalization, neoliberalism has a professor ever assigned something he wrote though. I think there's about a literal million of us at a certain age that started with either him or Naomi Klein in a highschool library but then moved onwards and upwards

[Anonymous No.19228932]

>>19224490
is complaining about the bombing and manipulation of third world nations the best these guys can do?
If i was American don't think its care too much about that

[Anonymous No.19229149]

>>19225988
>big pharma apologist
>sucking Chomsky’s cock
Why am I not surprised

[Anonymous No.19229604]

>>19225250
begins with
>He's a (gentleman and a) scholar
ends with
>TL;DR (he's epic)
yep I'm thinkin you should go back

[Anonymous No.19229623]

>>19225988
Mr "manufactured consent" really doesn't have anything to say about the combined propaganda efforts of enormous pharmaceutical companies, corporate owned press, and corrupt officials?

[Anonymous No.19229669]

>>19226028
If corporations viewed Chompsky as a legitimate threat the would excommunicate him like they do to other threats.
Collaborate to boot him off every platform to stop his message. Then use the fact that he can't defend himself publicly to spread slander about him. Then threaten any sponsors or publishers he has. And if they really hated him, they'd follow up by removing his access to finance and transport services.

They don't even skew results against him or hide his content on Google. We can tell he's a hack because he made his name by attacking power, and power is perfectly happy with him.

[Anonymous No.19229810]

goddamn I hate /pol/

[Anonymous No.19229864]

>>19229623
Go ahead and lay out your anti-vaxx conspiracy in detail. Should be entertaining.

[Anonymous No.19229890]

>>19229864
>j-j-just take the mRNA vaccine for a 99.9% survivable "disease" bro
>Y-you won't? NO JOB FOR YOU

[Anonymous No.19229902]

>>19229864
I notice you didnt address the fact that he doesnt mind this instance of obviously manufactured consent

[Anonymous No.19230268]

>>19226028
>anyway, the reason why he hasn't been silenced is because they dont have that sort of power anymore
Chumpsky fangays have the weirdest copes

[Anonymous No.19230271]

>>19226076
>>19229669
it's kind of hilarious people act like Chomsky is some kind of radical wrench in the system when it has taken less pains to censor him than it has Alex Jones screaming about gay frogs

[Anonymous No.19230274]

>>19230271
Take the Tedpill. If it's taught at college and isn't mathematics, it is worthless/propaganda.

[Anonymous No.19230292]

>>19229890
It’s more like 98%

[Anonymous No.19230307]

>>19230271
The official reason Jones was banned was Sandy Hook stuff, they claimed he was inciting harassment of the parents through his show, might also have been libel or something I forget.

[Anonymous No.19230320]

>>19230307
the official cause of death for Epstein is suicide, officiality is a pretext

[Anonymous No.19230346]

>>19230292
Overall yes, but not for the majority of people that the vaccine is actually being forced upon.
70+ year olds and extreme diabetics generally aren't working anymore.

[Anonymous No.19230375]

>>19230271
Chomski happens to be a very, very, very big guy in academia, backed by thousands of colleagues and big uni money - because he has scientific authority, and people are paying sick bux to have their children sit at his lectures. When you try to stomp such a figure you just inevitably cause a discourse over your tyranny in this circle. And the motherfckers are not even poor.

I.e. - trying to ban Chosky would inevitably create a few thousand more Chomskys. We've already gone through that in the 50s, and we know that trying to push that line to the end does you in like it did with the Soviet Union.

Pretending that the discourse doesn't exist is literally the optimal strategy for the establishment in such cases.

[Anonymous No.19230756]

>>19230375
complete cope
the system can easily smear or kill Chomsky whenever it wants, he is an asset not a threat and there's no way around that if you have at least 2 braincells to rub together

I mean here you are describing how he is a clown for the idle rich and neuters politics by turning it into some mainstream storytelling game and yet you suggest the administration fears acting against him unless it creates thousands more Chomskys? That's exactly what Chomsky himself is doing now, with total approval of the powers that be

[Anonymous No.19232158]

>>19224596
underrated

[Anonymous No.19232350]

>>19224490
>most prolific dissident to write about American power.

[Anonymous No.19233756]

>>19224490
This entire thread is a perfect reminder that /lit/ is only a slightly more verbose version of /pol/. Retard Land.

[Anonymous No.19233760]

>>19224490
>the most prolific dissident to write about American power.
That's Molbug

[Anonymous No.19233834]

How can you be more radical than Chomsky and not be considered extreme?

Take for example his stand on jobs. He talks about wage slavery and how we companies should be owned by the workers. That is already radical by a lot of people, and common people dont even think about it.

[Anonymous No.19233864]

>>19233760
Isn't that the fag who supports some sort of corporate monarchy or some shit?

[Anonymous No.19234273]

>>19224788
The opposite is true. He's the guy that 'smart' people bash when they want to act like they have cred, but almost all attempted criticism of him is effectively 'meta-criticism', bashing him as a person without addressing anything he's written. Anytime you say "Chomsky wrote X in work Y, what are your issues with his arguments?", they inevitably shut up and reveal they're never engaged with him at all. People who can provide serious intelligent criticism of Chomsky are rare.

[Anonymous No.19234319]

>>19233834
Yeah I agree totally, workers are dumb, that's why we organise students, buy my trot groups newspaper where we talk about how workers are dumb and need us smart people to tell them what to do.

[Anonymous No.19234828]

>>19224490
>most prolific dissident
Academics aren't dissidents, they are intentionally left to rebel against the inefficiencies of the system to draw attention to themselves and satisfy their ego, while the commonfolk get irritated at him which drives attention away from the real issues.
Paraphrased to be a 4chin post from "Neatest trick of the system" by Kaczynski.

[Anonymous No.19234833]

>>19225938
What game is that in your pic related?

[Anonymous No.19234840]

>>19224773
Wha... What's wrong with the GrayZone?

[Anonymous No.19234870]

Chomsky is promoted as a dissident academic because he is useful in herding educated midwit pedants in directions that are non-threatening to the establishment.

[Anonymous No.19235418]

>>19224596
I just came into this thread to write this, thanks for already having done it anon.

[Anonymous No.19235742]

>>19230375
Real dissidents get barred from academia on a regular basis idiot. It's very very clear that the jew chomsky was selected to be a court intellectual that never goes beyond the barest surface level argumentation.

[Anonymous No.19235753]

>>19233834
I don't know try criticizing homosexuals or Judaism. Leftists are so fucking sheltered it's actually painful. When will you people understand that your harebrained economic theories and "REVOLUTION MAN!!!!" rhetoric is not threatening to literally anybody. The only time you people are anywhere near serious shit is with unionization efforts which take an enormous backseat to worshiping black people and transexualism and reaffirming system values in general.

[Anonymous No.19235840]

>>19234828

[Anonymous No.19236212]

>>19224731
>failed linguistics professor
Bub, Chomsky is eminent in his field, his work bleeding over into even the theory of computer programming languages

[Anonymous No.19236256]

>>19235753
>Hey men look oppressing minorities is against the system, and the system is bad, therefore oppressing minorities is good!
Neck yourself fatass

[Anonymous No.19236268]

>>19236256
His point was that you are not against the system.

[Anonymous No.19236295]

>>19236268
His point was that you are not against the system unless you go Right on the culture, as if anyone's goal is a general opposition to the status quo and not to to specifics aspects of it

[Anonymous No.19236393]

>>19236295
Why would the ebil capitalists(since you think that's who is in power) persecute people more for those things than for saying commie stuff?

[Anonymous No.19236437]

>>19236393
the cultural Left has won/is winning the culture war, and big companies always pander to the winning side because $$$

[Anonymous No.19236442]

>>19236437
So power isn't simply "capital"? There is a "culture war" which can order capital around?

[Anonymous No.19236465]

>>19236442
"Action" doesn't matter in modern society, only "image" and keeping up appearances
The truth doesn't matter, only what people believe to be true does.

[Anonymous No.19236479]

>>19236465
Why did capitalists create civil rights laws which force them to hire less competent people with race and sex quotas?

[Anonymous No.19236483]

>>19236479
To perpetuate the continued existence of the capitalist system itself

[Anonymous No.19236487]

>>19236483
They couldn't have done that without laws mandating they hire less competent people? Why did that become necessary suddenly in the 1960s?

[Anonymous No.19236533]

>>19236487
Not without risking the entire system crashing down, no.
As white people became gradually unhappier with the growing inequality they had to concede minor positions and holdings to minorities who were already unhappy.

If they left it the way it was they would've risked the increasingly disenfranchised whites (not part of elite circles) banding together with the existing, unhappy minorities to overthrow their system all-together.

[Anonymous No.19236564]

>>19236533
That would only necessitate laws preventing discrimination, not laws mandating quotas, and outlawing hiring tests. Why do those laws exist?

[Anonymous No.19236597]

>>19236564
Incorrect.
As it stands, black people still make a significantly larger of the unemployed population than white people do.
Without these laws this number would be even higher, and the worse cultural conditions that go along with that, not to mention the heightened awareness of their position in the system in relation to their CEO's and shareholders, would mean far more people would be willing to challenge the status quo..
BLM is an example of what will happen just with the current status quo (assuming it's not at least partially instigated by undercover american agents), so if these machinations were not in place, the situation would be even worse.
We'd be living in a state at war with itself,and regardless of people's feeling of their state in the hierarchy, seeing masses of people mowed down by troops marching down the streets, would reinforce the totalitarian reality. They'd be left with either no choice to fight back, or to completely submit themselves. The establishment wasn't sure if they could win that war or not in the 70s.

With current technology, they certainly stand a much better shot, but the cart is already past the horse.

[Anonymous No.19236612]

>>19236597
It is very cute how you repeat regime propaganda while pretending you are fighting the regime

[Anonymous No.19236614]

>>19236612
You mean the way Chomsky does exactly that?

[Anonymous No.19236623]

>>19236597
You notice the J6 guys are still in jail despite half the country being on their side while BLM guys who shot at cops are let off by DAs? Of course you dont, youre a coward

[Anonymous No.19236655]

>>19236612
>>19236623
I think you might have me confused
THIS
>>19236465
was my first post.

The guy who started this thread of posts
>>19233834
here is not me.
Chomsky says just enough things to blow the minds of freshman's everywhere who've never thought critically about the nature of our society before, uses a lot of buzzwords, but ultimately only backs very mainstream ideas useful to the their current regime.
>>19236623
To address your point here specifically, I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say here by calling me a coward or what your overall rhetorical question is referencing that I said.
I haven't followed that load of all around propoganda all too closely for either side, besides hearing rumors from friends them seeing protestors of some kind (antifa/BLM, etc) starting wildfires, or trying to.
Yet the media didn't want you to even think that was a possibility and refused to acknowledge it. Whether there is corporate or government insiders (what's the difference at this point?) instigating or simply just enabling, either way it all adds up very suspiciously.

Obviously they wanted to maintain tensions, whether this was with the goal of influencing the election or not, who knows, and the reason for this being the same as always.
Divide the people and keep them targeting each other while you silently keep robbing the vault.