/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20101788]

is it any good?

[Anonymous No.20101790]

read it in one sitting. its not anything revolutionary desu.

[Anonymous No.20101888]

>>20101788
it's a free pdf + short + kinda depressing so yeah

[Anonymous No.20102153]

>>20101788
yes i liked it a lot.

[Anonymous No.20102177]

>>20101788
Read this after, kinda similar but more neurotic

[Anonymous No.20102191]

>>20101788
capitalism sucks dude

[Anonymous No.20102199]

>>20102191
"Capitalism" is a word that socialists invented to blame everything on people who have money.

[Anonymous No.20102231]

Only if you're familiar with postmodern literature/philosophy.

I only understood like half of it because I was not familiar with the works of Zizek, Baudrillard, etc.

Those philosophers talk out of their asses, so I guess I will never understand them.

[Anonymous No.20102633]

>>20102231
shut up about baudrillard, you don’t understand

[Anonymous No.20102707]

>>20101788
no, its gay

[Anonymous No.20102711]

do drugs and pretend to be communist maaaaan

[Anonymous No.20102789]

>>20102199
you are so stupid

[bagel !!IUmfnzC35TC No.20102804]

>>20101788
his lectures are much better. really this is only popular because it was shilled so much, it doesn't even really touch on the core parts of his work. it's a little gay

[Anonymous No.20102867]

>>20102231
>I’m not familiar with Zizek or Baudrillard
>those philosophers talk out of their asses
How would you know if you’re not familiar with them? Sounds like YOU’RE the one talking out of your ass, anon.

[Anonymous No.20102877]

>>20101788
Stating-the-obvious-core

I like Mark but this book is kind of redundant. Why write a book about people being unable to offer an alternative to capitalism if you can’t offer an alternative to capitalism either? No wonder he killed himself, his project was marked by an insurmountable fatalism that would weigh on anyone’s conscience.

[Anonymous No.20102894]

>>20102877
If history shows anything, it is that change is inevitable, so anyone who thinks capitalism will last forever as an economic system is simply of the losing side of that argument.

So the fact that he can't "imagine" an alternative to capitalism is simply a form of psychologism, who the fuck cares if anyone can imagine it or not, it's going to happen eventually anyway.

[Anonymous No.20102915]

>>20101788
>the rise of mental illness will help people see that capitalism cannot be the end all be all
In 2022, people on tiktok and twitter celebrate their diagnoses and meme themselves into Munchausen's

[Anonymous No.20103206]

>>20102915
I think autism is a gift actually
>>20102877
that's why my most infamous video dissing on him caught so much vitriol.

[Anonymous No.20103215]

Fukuyama's End of History is more worth the time.

[Anonymous No.20103230]

>>20103206
link vid

[Anonymous No.20103299]

>>20102894
> anyone who thinks capitalism will last forever as an economic system is simply of the losing side of that argument
Fukuyama would like a word.

> it's going to happen eventually anyway
This is just classical Marxism with extra steps

[Anonymous No.20103316]

Is communism truly the continuation of capitalism? Things like barter, mercantilsm and feudalism eems to have more of the "fingerprints" in capitalism but communism doesnt seem like the natural continuation

[Anonymous No.20103336]

>>20103316
Theoretically it’s not a continuation of capitalism but the final stage that arrives after the internal contradictions of capitalism causes it to collapse in on itself. Unfortunately this idea is essentially outdated since it became apparent that capitalism thrives on the contradictions it engenders

[Anonymous No.20103416]

>>20103336
If its the final stage why does it get to disregard the foundations of what came before it if the other economic system were the natural continuations of the former?

[Anonymous No.20103463]

>>20103416
> the other economic system were the natural continuations of the former?
I disagree with this, each economic system has arisen out of the ashes of the former; there is nothing “natural” or continuous about it. History is not a constant stream of cause-and-effect but a sequence of discontinuous breaks or ruptures.

[Anonymous No.20103788]

>>20103299
Fukuyama changed his fucking mind.

Capitalism going away doesn’t mean it will change to socialism. All is flux, but not determined. The belief that socialism is inevitable is incorrect and dangerous vulgar Marxist bullshit.

[Anonymous No.20103790]

>>20101788
I thought it was "good," insofar as it is well written and has a good argument which is still pretty relevant. However -- and as >>20102877 said -- it is kinda redundant, stating the obvious. I didn't really find myself being like, "oooohhhh! I get it now!" during reading, it was more just like, "yeah, so true." But also I've already read a decent amount of Lacan and Zizek so I was already familiar with a lot of those concepts which he engages with.

My bigger problem with the text though was that it seems as though its project is to make a "psychoanalytic" or otherwise "theoretically informed" understanding of capitalism -- specifically, that its hegemony is not only economic per se but also psychic, or affecting the psychic economy -- approachable and understandable for people who have perhaps not read whatever theorists already. Yet the problem is that it is still too idiosyncratic to be revolutionary. Granted, it's a difficult project to undertake, like "how do we get the normies to wake up" or whatever you'd like to call it, when most of them are hella dumb and are so far from grasping even the basic mechanisms used by capitalism and neoliberalism to constrain you into participating in a repetition of their structures.

So basically I think it's good but fails in what it's trying to do. Maybe we need like, a Mao's Red Book type thing to do what this text sets out to do

[Anonymous No.20103791]

>>20103463
Correct

[Anonymous No.20103892]

>>20103790
I started reading it today and feel the same thing. Anon do you have any book recs that deal with the same subjects?

[Anonymous No.20104932]

>>20101788

[Anonymous No.20104952]

>>20103790
how do I start with Lacan? please and thank you

[Anonymous No.20105063]

I read it, but remember very little about it. Some obvious observations, pop culture references. And he does this thing that left leaning people love to do that annoys the fuck out of me, where they anthropomorphize 'capitalism' as if it were some supernatural entity with will and desires. Or pretend that greed or the desire for efficiency wouldn't exist but for capitalism.

[Anonymous No.20105145]

>>20101788
i like the movie references but reading it was no more useful than watching a left-leaning youtube essayist 2-hour diatribe on Disney's Atlantis

[Anonymous No.20105259]

>>20101788
I saw a guy reading this while drinking Prosecco on my flight from Milan to Berlin last month.