[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 74 KB, 553x369, MIA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.2105696 [Reply] [Original]

what are the essential texts for a young political contarian? youth radicals should read what to your estimation>?

i nominate:

proudhon
bakunin
marx
zinn
hakim bey
cleaver
emma goldsmith


who else?

>> No.2105702

machavelly

>> No.2105700

de la rocha

>> No.2105708

plato republic

>> No.2105709

the exiled, you fucks. taibbi. dolan. fuckin' ames.

>> No.2105715

>>2105709
I think OP would be better off trying The Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

>> No.2105717

>>2105713
Ann Coulter

>> No.2105713

Extreme Right writings. Glenn Beck, Rush, that whack job woman that I can't think if at the moment. And also extreme left (I'm told franken, could be wrong). And extreme libert (I'm sure theres alot of popular people writing that kind of stuff now.). And if you can find it extreme centerism writing. It will show you were you truly stand.

>> No.2105723

>>2105717
Bingo.

>> No.2105726

>>2105713
For God's sake, at least read Buckley, not that trash.

>> No.2105728
File: 88 KB, 1070x1460, liberate_london.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

Deleuze
Foucault
Debord
Iain Sinclair
Chomsky

and it's tragic that everyone on that list is old or dead. where are the firebrands of this generation? On fucking facebook or drinking cheeky vimtos or planning a fucking riot on twitter to get new shoes, that's fucking where.

>> No.2105730

>>2105709
That migh be a good idea but have you tried _The Onion_?

>> No.2105732

>>2105728
Ames. Dolan. Taibbi. Levine.

>> No.2105735

>>2105728
LOL if you think ivory tower intellectuals count as legitimate revolutionariues

>> No.2105745

>>2105728
Have you heard of *Slavoj Zizek*?

>> No.2105759
File: 106 KB, 460x271, zizek460.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105745

>> No.2105772
File: 56 KB, 253x384, zizek_woman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105745
>>2105759

Have you read his thing in the London Review of Books about the London riots? All herp derp revolution without leadership hurr arab spring durr is this 1500 words yet can i have my cheque derp derp derp huuuurrrr.

Actually, it's better than that, but he's not exactly inciting the yout mandem to get out and man the barricades, is he? Probably because he's so fucking old.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/2011/08/19/slavoj-zizek/shoplifters-of-the-world-unite

For anyone who's innarested.

Excerpted:

>This is why it is difficult to conceive of the UK rioters in Marxist terms, as an instance of the emergence of the revolutionary subject; they fit much better the Hegelian notion of the ‘rabble’, those outside organised social space, who can express their discontent only through ‘irrational’ outbursts of destructive violence – what Hegel called ‘abstract negativity’.

>Are the shopkeepers a small bourgeoisie defending their property against a genuine, if violent, protest against the system; or are they representatives of the working class, fighting the forces of social disintegration? Here too one should reject the demand to take sides. The truth is that the conflict was between two poles of the underprivileged: those who have succeeded in functioning within the system versus those who are too frustrated to go on trying.

>> No.2105775

>>2105696

Stirner, The Ego and Its Own

>> No.2105786

>>2105745
Zizek is 62 brosef.

>> No.2105797

>>2105786
So what. Intellectual Thinkers never EVER come to prominence until they're like 50 at least

>> No.2105865
File: 29 KB, 207x246, 12993076.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>ctrl+f
>"Kropotkin"
>0 of 0

>my face when

>> No.2106096
File: 24 KB, 236x400, rules for radicals.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105696
Thomas Paine is great
I want to read Alexander Herzen's book someday

But you're all into Anarchists, so Kropotkin. Wrote lots more than Bakunin

>> No.2106298
File: 47 KB, 331x400, rosa_luxembourg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2106096
>>2105865
>>2105696

Bakunin, Kropotkin, Marx, bla bla bla.

These are the answers I would expect from a generation which seems to be increasingly incapable of formulating the rhetoric of conflict with authority. Unable to produce answers of your own, you're recycling the social contrarians of the past, while your own protests are an empty howl of anger, directd at vague targets, with little chance of effect.

I wonder sometimes if Orwell was correct, and our language has actually been refined to make it less possible to rebel.

>eh m8 u wan2 go Tesco 4 a riut lol

doesn't have the same ring(tone) to it as the the impassioned appeals to the masses of yesteryear. It's not exactly

>No Pasaran

We're all very disappointed in you, young people. Why aren't you tearing the arse out of this corrupt and teetering system?

>> No.2106299

>>2106298
>doesn't have the same ring(tone) to it

fuck you for using this construction

>We're all very disappointed in you, young people. Why aren't you tearing the arse out of this corrupt and teetering system?

be angry at the sun. no matter how mad i get, it's not going to change shit. people are just going to think i'm paranoid and insane and start avoiding me.

>> No.2106305

Braverman
Humphrey McQueen

>> No.2106321

Upton Sinclair

>> No.2106323

>>2106298
Because as a class, democratically, or as none.

Also you fucked up the 1960s-1970s mobilisation so bad that we cannot effectively fight neo-liberalism.

>> No.2108369

>>2105709

Taibbi???

The worst hack to diarrhea on the name of journalism in a long, long while.

>> No.2108377

schmitt

>> No.2108381

Are you fucking kidding me?

You read those books, and you're not going to be a political contrarian. You're going to be another raised-fist lemming screaming about ... whatever the college kids are screaming about.

You want to be a contrarian? Read an introductory economics textbook. Read the Federalist Papers. Read primary sources and make up your own fucking mind about them.

Saul Alinsky. Christ, what bullshit.

>> No.2108384
File: 171 KB, 800x1066, nightporter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105713
>>2105713


well what are some real, actually worth while right wing sources?

i am not going to waste my time with glenn beck or ruch limbaughs book.

i used to get both the wsj and the NYT, but the wsj response to the phone tapping was hella shitty.

is there something more american then the economist?

also, you guys like francis parker yocky?

>> No.2108389

>>2108381
You sir, are a faggot

>> No.2108392

>>2108389
what's wrong with reading primary sources and thinking independently?

>> No.2108398

>>2108392

Why not read both?

>> No.2108407

OK, so turning this on it's head, what would you recommend to a young authoritarian, a true man of the system who wants to know the best ways to gain and enforce compliance?

>> No.2108411

>>2108407

reeducation camp

>> No.2108412
File: 3 KB, 209x230, 1312083803820.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2108407
Gulag.

>> No.2108421

>>2105728
All these French people are overrated. The most interesting (and relevant to revolution) aspects are those inspired by Nietzsche. Read Max Stirner.

>> No.2108423

>>2105775
YES

>> No.2108425

>>2105696
talk to your professors, far left and anarchist claptrap is, and has been The Man since the 60's.

Read Sayyid Qutb and abu ala maudidi. Actually risk getting your anus violated in guantanamo. Rather than preaching a decades old hobbyist-revolutionary (Marxism/Anarchism) claptrap which is actually smiled upon by your faggot feminist-studies professor.

>> No.2108428

>>2105696
>>" political contarian"
>>just like everyone else at at uni
You really want a different outlook on politics?
Try;
Belloc
Chesterton
McNab
Arthur Penty
A. E. Senter
Hans-Herman Hoppe

'Monarchisms in the Age of Enlightenment'

>> No.2108433

>>2108425
>>Qutb
Read 'In the Shade of the Qur'an' and you will understand a lot more of what is going on in the Arab world, You won't sleep well, but you'll know more.

>> No.2108436

>>2108421
I disagree. I would much rather have the young revolutionary reading Focault than Neitzsche.

>> No.2108439

How young? A copy of "The Very Hungry Caterpillar" might be appropriate...

>> No.2108441

>>2108436
>>I'd rather not have any young revolutionaries

>> No.2108455

>>2108441

well shucks it's almost as if by virtue of being a married oldfag you have a vested interest in the shitty status quo

>> No.2108460

>>2108455
>>2108455
So what are these 'young revolutionaries' going to do? My guess, exactly what the last few generations of 'young revolutionaries' did; spend a lot of time at college spend their parents' and governments' money getting a lousy education where they think Marx was right and Zinn is smart, smoke weed errday, have promiscuous sex, make giant puppets and march to oppose some stupid fucking thing. Then they'll graduate, get a civil service job (because of the shitty education and weed they can't do much else) where they continue to rely upon the oh-so-despised government for food, clothing, and shelter and look back in fondness at when they peaked at 21 years old shouting slogans fed to them by a 45 year old former 'young revolutionary'.

I don't want more 'young revolutionaries' that think and believe the exact same fucking things as every other young revolutionary since 1880 or so, I want young people who are capable of independent, rational thought and are instilled with the 4 Cardinal Virtues; young people who reject the self-contradictory BS of 'relative morality' and realize that there are objective moral principles that cannot change; young people smart and educated enough to realize the false dilemma of Left/Right//Socialism-Communism/laissez-faire Capitalism is preventing people from finding actual solutions to problems.

In other words, I reject the status quo that the 'young revolutionaries' *are* in favor of actual change

>> No.2108462

>contrarian
>leftists and anarchists
they're too mainstream now bro, you have to be contrarian even to those..

>> No.2108466

ITT:
>implying that the leftist revolutionary angle isn't totally played out and is now being peddled exclusively by shameless hucksters like Zizek and Chomsky

Don't waste your time, OP. Go to school, get a job, buy a house, start a family, do something meaningful. Being a productive member of society is far more contrarian in this day and age then any amount of mindless anti-(insert left-wing bogeyman here).

>> No.2108477

it's hilarious how leftists still think of themselves as edgy contrarians when they are actually the biggest conformists out of anyone. maybe when all the trendy college students realise this the right wing will come back into fashion?

>> No.2108479
File: 53 KB, 360x275, 1315578520732.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2108407
proudhon
bakunin
marx
zinn
hakim bey
cleaver
emma goldsmith

>> No.2108526
File: 114 KB, 679x470, PHO-10Mar16-213010.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2108460
>>2108466
>>2108477

>> No.2108538

>>2108526
>>Fuck libertarians and fuck the tea party
Did you miss the part where I reject laissez-faire capitalism?

>> No.2108544

>objective moral principles that cannot change
stimulus does not equal morality

>> No.2108550

>>2108544
wtf?
what does 'stimulus' have to do with anything I wrote?

>> No.2108557

>>2105775
this

>> No.2108585

>>2108557
do you dislike Objectivism?

>> No.2108594

>>2108585
Yes, I also dislike psychological egoism.

>> No.2108602

>>2108594
Would you care to expand on why you recommended The Ego and its Own (if indirectly) in response to OP?

>> No.2108607
File: 19 KB, 400x300, the-tea-party-man-thumb-400xauto-13863.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2108538

>> No.2108610

>>2108602
Because he thinks that it captures the reality of relations between individuals.

>> No.2108620

>>2108610
not far off, might do to restate it as "because it captures the 'reality' of the individual".

Stirner gives a competent 'fuck you' to the insipid platonism inherent in christianity, liberalism, socialism and humanism. Stirner is a great hyperborian and cleanser of the human spirit (and I'd like to think Stirner would retch at the very mention), he just washes all of this ridiculous garbage away to leave the individual and everything that it can lay claim to. I can't really care to think of an idealist politics after reading Stirner, or any politics if it weren't for realpolitik.

I'm not saying Stirner pulled ideological critique off entirely successful, but what he did manage to do he did in a profoundly healthy way.

>> No.2108622

>>2108620

henry kissinger?

>> No.2108621

>>2108620
Don't worry. We are living in a time where 'right' and 'wrong' are not jus naturalis.

>> No.2108629

fhg

>> No.2108635

>>2108544
This, although i think that thanks to base human needs, there is a correlation between the two.

>> No.2108639

>>2108620
I am a bit confused because Stirner was an egoist....
I would like to hear your crtique of Platonism

>>2108621
I've heard of lex naturalis and ius naturale, but I haven't heard of jus naturalis.
Regardless, all times and places are subject to natural law.

>> No.2108658

chomsky.
nothing else matters.

>> No.2108660
File: 31 KB, 716x423, vidalderp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

O.P. is a angsty 15 year old mad at society because he is not getting any poon-tang. He has just read Zinn and now feels like he superior to the "sheeple" thanks to his political awakening. He now has all the answers, except the ones to his history tests.
We know that he has never read Emma Goldman because he could not remember the name he just remembers Zinn said some good things about her so he included her on this list. Eldridge Cleaver ( I assume that is who he meant) was a rapist who had a brief flirtation with radical black politics before recanting his views and becoming a Reagenite Mormon. Once O.P has become integrated into society in a low-level fast food position he will realize that his political views were more of a psychological defense than actual thought out opinions and that he was deluded.

>> No.2108666

>>2108639
>I am a bit confused because Stirner was an egoist....
Stirner was an egoist, but that was not the upshot of his work. To be fair to him, he made a competent seduction of egoism. Something that was absolutely missing in the tactless conceptions of objectivism and psychoanalysis.

>I would like to hear your crtique of Platonism
I'm sure you would, but other people have carried out such critiques perfectly well. See: Nietzsche, Darwin, Luther, Rousseau, Durer, Machiavelli, Diderot, Blake, Spinoza, etc.

>> No.2108675

>>2108666
so it *sounds* like
>>I don't like egoism, but Stirner's kewl, so....

and as for Platonism, Darwin didn't directly address it, Luther's attempts were buffoonish (and I am shocked you referenced him), Rousseau, Diderot, Blake, and Spinoza were inadequate to the task, Nietzsche fails because repetition != argument, and Machiavelli is irrelevant because although The Prince seems to oppose Platonism, The Discourses supports it, so he is at best divided.

>> No.2108679

>>2108658
Really? What are you, a 19 year old Peace and Justice major?

>> No.2108682

>>2108675
Yeah alright dude, you've had your moronic little snipe you've been waiting for that no-one gives a shit about, least of me, now fuck off.

>> No.2108683

if you are going to read Anarchist literature avoid Chomsky and CrimeThinc.

>> No.2108686

>>2108682
>moronic little snipe

Moronic, little snipe given in rebuttal to other moronic, little snipe. More news at 10.

>> No.2108688

>>2108686
But that's not what I was doing. I just told the moron to fuck off.

>> No.2108695

>>2108682
Sorry, but I was asking a legitimate set of questions and wanted more details. How is that sniping? I seriously don't understand how this 'I don't like egoism except for this one guy' works based upon the (IMO) scanty reply and am asking for your refutation of Platonism because i don't think the people you cited refutes it (or even addressed it, in a case or two).
tl;dr - relax!

Although, I must admit....
You do seem to have a pattern to your posting:
>>make broad statement
>>if questioned give very vague answers
>>if pressed refer to prominent authors who may or may not be related/adequate
>>if further pressed resort to ad hominems and move to another thread

Of course, that pattern is a large part of your charm!
Never change, D&E

>> No.2108696

>>2108682

d&e: 0
catholicism: 1

>> No.2108698

>>2108696


Anon: 0
The Duma: 7

>> No.2108700

>>2108695
No, honestly dude, fuck off. you don't understand the difference between critique and refutation. and even if you did, you wouldn't know what to look for in any of the people I've mentioned here (PROTIP: YOU'RE NOT LOOKING FOR A FUCKING "REFUTATION", YOU STUPID SHIT), least of all because your block head is sequested deeply up your stupid fucking asshole. So again, fuck off.

>> No.2108701
File: 379 KB, 446x600, wtfair.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

You are ALL .... Useless.

Forget it.

>> No.2108704

>>2108695
But all you've done is make very broad statements...
>Rousseau, Diderot, Blake, and Spinoza were inadequate to the task

All of these people quite credibly critiqued Platonism and are remembered partially for it.

>> No.2108729

>>2108704
I agree, they did critique Platonism, and I appreciate their insights. But D&E wrote;
>>Stirner gives a competent 'fuck you' to the insipid platonism inherent in christianity
which, I'm sorry, differs from my reading of Diderot, Spinoza, etc. as they critiques Platonism. This is, yes, largely a matter of guessing what D&E means by his rather emotional term, but Diderot did not seem quite so... vitriolic as D&E. Added in with, say, Darwin and Luther it struck me as a dismissive and shallow attempt to simply not answer.

Also, I personally find some of these critiques rather poor (Luther's and Nietzsche's in particular) and wanted to know why D&E referenced them.

>> No.2108748

>>2108729
>which, I'm sorry, differs from my reading of Diderot, Spinoza, etc.
what the fuck does any of that have to do with stirner

>This is, yes, largely a matter of guessing what D&E means by his rather emotional term, but Diderot did not seem quite so.
none of that has to do with diderot

>as a dismissive and shallow attempt to simply not answer.
I don't give a shit what it struck you as unless it was enough to give you brain damage (although this wouldn't be much of a deterioration), and guess what, it's not a fucking answer, I never said it has, hence deference. Your problems with whatever the people i've referenced, even though they don't hold water because they are entirely misplaced and misdirected, have nothing to do with what I've said. Again, fuck off.

>> No.2108758

sure is tripfag in here

>> No.2108781
File: 53 KB, 231x379, dewey.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105696

Plato
Aristotle
Machiavelli
Rousseau
Hobbes
Locke
Mill
Marx
Nozick
Rand
Rawls
Thoreau
Russell
Chomsky
Foucault
Lacan
Diogenes
Epicurus
JOHN MOTHERFUCKING DEWEY
Rorty
Derrida
Voltaire

...read up on economics too, and at least social science, otherwise your just going to be quoting some random asshole without any empirical data to support your views.

And don't be a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, for fuck's sake.

>> No.2108785

>>2108781

>And don't be a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, for fuck's sake.

I don't think you understand what contrarian means.

>> No.2108790

>>2108781

Forgot Judith Butler and Martha Nussbaum. Guess I have to include some women.

>> No.2108791

>>2108781
I thought I wanted to have political opinions but that looks like too much work. Guess it's back to novels for me.

>> No.2108797

>>2108791

You don't have to read all of them directly. Watch videos on them, read summary texts (e.g., Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). The advantage of non-fiction is that not as much is lost in summarization and translation as fiction.

Many of there ideas are relatively straight forward, too. (With the exception of say, Derrida, Lacan, Foucault, and the other "post-moderns").

>> No.2108800
File: 26 KB, 350x250, The Mystic Wallpaper__yvt2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2105696

your choices are all common place.
exactly the opposite of what you want if you want a be a contrarian.

find books of an eastern perspective....you will realize that reason is the enemy for it allows anyone to establish their own truth...

ignore the path of logic and float in the ocean of wisdom

maybe something by osho to start

>> No.2108805

>>2108800

More people have heard that Osho than, say, Lacan or Nussbaum... Just because they are eastern doesn't necessarily mean they are unheard of or contrarian...

>> No.2108814

>>2108805

Lacan or Nussbaum are still based in reason.

I was suggesting directions to take OP out of that realm

leave the western direction of the line and its values of relativity and step into the circle

>> No.2108825

>>2108805

PROTIP: "Osho" was a terrorist cult leader

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_Rajneeshee_bioterror_attack

>> No.2108828

>>2108748
>>wtf does that have to do with Stirner
I have no fucking idea, which is why I wonder why YOU brought them up!

>> No.2108852 [DELETED] 

I'm not surprised to you see Taibbi on here. You guy love that dystopia science fiction, and he is probably the best to do it on the financial industry. God he is sad.

>> No.2109024

>>2108666
>Durer
u mean the painter?

>> No.2109046

>>2109024
Sorry, meant to type "You". Fuck, I'm really out of it 2day.