Shakespeare = Fraud

[Anonymous No.22599662]

>Shakespeare didn't write any of this plays
>it was the Earl of Oxford Edward de Vere
>even esoteric geniuses like Mencius Moldbug acknowledge this fact
>the image of the bard as a genius from humble origins is forever shattered
Please tell me this is bullshit /lit/

[Anonymous No.22599664]

Doubting Shakespeare's authorship is a very cheap way to (I guess) look intelligent.
Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before.

[Anonymous No.22599668]

>>22599664
Is your webm meant to be ironic? Because it comes off that way. You can just look at Shakespeare's signature as is preserved from several legal wills and documents, the man was barely literate let alone the greatest author of the English language.

[Anonymous No.22599670]

>>22599668
>b-but he wasn't educated!
he had SOVL.

[Anonymous No.22599674]

>>22599664
>Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before.
so you pseuds keep bitchin but i never see you put the so called proofs on the table

[Anonymous No.22599678]

>>22599670
i am anti stratfording but you are right, apparent level of education and everyday culturedness is hardly a strong proof for either case

[Anonymous No.22599681]

>>22599674
Anti-Stratfordians and historical proof have never been in the same conversation
Joe Rogan tier 'intellectual thought'

[Anonymous No.22599690]

>>22599681
so post unmistakable proof of pro stratfordianism so you can at least keep lurkers from falling for antistratfordianism you cuck

[Anonymous No.22599695]

>>22599690
>cuck
fuck off faggot, no one tells me what to do FAGGOT. how you like that BITCH?

[Anonymous No.22599726]

>>22599695
stratfordians have nothing. sasuga anti skeptic pseuds

[Anonymous No.22599730]

>>22599726
>demolished by tate
kek @ u

[Anonymous No.22599738]

>>22599662
>geniuses like Mencius Moldbug

[Anonymous No.22599743]

Why would anyone want to demolish a beloved literary figure and one of the greatest Englishmen of all time? Is it jealousy?

[Anonymous No.22599747]

>>22599670
There's no way anyone can buy that lie without first being brainwashed by egalitarianism.
The Oxford theory is comprehensive and accounts for every minor detail. No alternatives presented make sense. Sometimes these things are so obvious that they reveal anyone running on inertia from outdated academic work as mindless retards.

[Anonymous No.22599751]

>>22599747
>noooo you don't understand you HAVE to be university educated to write
it's for slow brains frankly

[Anonymous No.22599767]

>>22599751
University makes people dumber that doesn't change the objective and verifiable fact that Hamlet was written by the lord of Oxford who happened to have access to the only known copy of Beowulf at the time.

[Anonymous No.22599769]

>>22599747
mental illness

[Anonymous No.22599774]

>>22599767
wait how does beowulf play into the authorship of hamlet

what stops the proposal that oxford filtered some ideas to shakespeare who then relied on his own creativity

[Anonymous No.22599776]

>>22599769
When you promote incoherent nonsense because the people before you happened to believe that incoherent nonsense you're a mindless retard that doesn't understand the basics of thinking.
You're an example of an even dumber mindless retard. You don't even pretend to try to think.

[Anonymous No.22599780]

>>22599774
Nothing "stops" any retarded shit you can come up with. The totality of the data points to one conclusions and that conclusion is not the subversive egalitarian propaganda you're so desperate to spread.

[Anonymous No.22599781]

>>22599767
>>22599774
Also, considering he famously used sources like the Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus’s Gesta Danorum as a sourcebook for plays like Hamlet, it is entirely possible he could’ve gotten the gist of Beowulf in an indirect manner in such a way

[Anonymous No.22599782]

>>22599776
all i said was
>mental illness
you typed up a wall of text thus confirming the
>mental illness
hypothesis of anon authorship

[Anonymous No.22599786]

>>22599782
tough but fair.

[Anonymous No.22599789]

>>22599782
You have never put together a thought in your life and you'll work hard to undermine any hint of thinking on any subject. That's all you did here.
I presented thoughts. You tried to undermine the process of thinking. You are by definition a mindless idiot since you behave like a mindless idiot.

[Anonymous No.22599792]

>>22599789
>AH BLOO BLOO WAH WAH STOP DISAGREEING WITH ME
epic friend, simply epic

[Anonymous No.22599798]

>>22599781
that seems a fairly available document of the time

wtf did beowulf have to do with it? i couldnt find any allusions to beowulf in hamlet. is that anon legit a schizo?

[Anonymous No.22599803]

>>22599781
>it is entirely possible
Everything you say relies on a chain of "it's entirely possible". This reflect the fact that you're an idiot unable to think about any subject.
>>22599792
You're not disagreeing. You're accusing people that say things you dislike of mental illness. You don't want to find anything out so stop pretending you do. Anyone with any hint of curiosity would not make the posts you do.

[Anonymous No.22599807]

ok im muting this freak they might as well be a bot

bye schizo

[Anonymous No.22599809]

>>22599798
they both tell the story of a young man in Denmark fighting. that's literally it. the stories are completely different in tone

[Anonymous No.22599812]

>>22599803
>AH BLOO BLOO WAH WAH STOP DISAGREEING WITH ME

[Anonymous No.22599815]

>>22599807
Look at this braindead creature and try to pretend I'm not absolutely right. Just fucking think retards.
>>22599809
>>22599812
You haven't even glanced at the case for the idea you're pretending to disagree with.

[Anonymous No.22599819]

>>22599815
You already got demolished ITT bro. gg

[Anonymous No.22599823]

>>22599819
I understand you think this is hilarious but you're just an actual tate tier retard. You have no clue how to begin to say anything slightly interesting.

[Anonymous No.22599834]

>>22599809
i think theyre a bot gone haywire. next theyll be saying hamnet was named in honor of the play

[Anonymous No.22599917]

>>22599662
TL;DR: Shakespeare's a naturalist hack, regardless of who wrote him.

[Anonymous No.22599952]

>>22599834
What's wrong with you? What kind of person acts like this? Why do you think it's ok?

[Anonymous No.22599964]

>>22599662
Retards on here seethe unbelievably hard at the idea that an illiterate bumpkin *didn't* write the greatest plays of our language. Boggles the mind. Show me one piece of proof that Stratford bozo even got near Italy in his lifetime (how else would he have known the exact geographical layout of its cities well enough to write plays there?) and I'll give up on the de Vere theory. I'll wait.

[Anonymous No.22599979]

>>22599964
>i write a play that mentions venice has canals
>retard on a chinese cartoon board 400 years later thinks that means I had to go to Italy to write that

[Anonymous No.22599983]

Any good well made yootoobe video explaining these theories?
t. curious lazy person

[Anonymous No.22599986]

>>22599979
You don't even try to pretend to be honest so what's the point of posting at all?

[Anonymous No.22599990]

>>22599986
You don't even pretend to be intelligent so fuck off and die, faggot. Hope this helps

[Anonymous No.22599992]

>>22599662
Why does it matter? They're just names from people who lived hundreds of years ago, just meaningless words.

Pretend we find something that proves beyond any doubt that instead of "Shakespeare", the actual author was "Edward de Vere". What changes? Absolutely nothing. The works themselves exist independent of their creator and the exact identity of that creator is completely irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.22599999]

>>22599990
We don't need to be intelligent to understand basic logic and that every post you make undermines the process of finding things out.

[Anonymous No.22600002]

>>22599983
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-aAUwAFZlQ

[Anonymous No.22600003]

>>22599999
nooooo

[Anonymous No.22600004]

>>22599999
>WAH WAH BLOO BLOO IT'S NOT FAIR THAT YOU DISMANTLE MY ARGUMENTS WITH FACTS
fuck off ESL RETARD

[Anonymous No.22600009]

>>22600004
This is not how arguments are dismantled. You seem confused about basic logic. Why not just stop being a fucking retard and start acting like a productive, reasonable fucking person?

[Anonymous No.22600011]

>>22600009
Keep complaining about getting dismantled, ESL. I won. Sorry.

[Anonymous No.22600015]

>>22600009
There's no hope for him, anon. Just let him be.

[Anonymous No.22600017]

>>22599983
https://shakespeareoxfordfellowship.org/discover-shakespeare/
>>22600011
All I'm asking is that you say something retard. I'm not asking for any kind of revolutionary insight, just the bare minimum which would be actually fucking saying something. You never do. You're too braindead.

[Anonymous No.22600019]

>>22600017
Already dismantled your retarded merchant in venice argument
GG EZ NO RE

[Anonymous No.22600023]

>>22600019
>alternatives are possible
Can always be used no matter what the subject matter is. It tells us nothing. It just reveals that you're an idiot incapable of saying anything about any subject.

[Anonymous No.22600028]

>>22600023
Yes, retard, unless someone got a camera and filmed shakespeare writing the actual plays there will always be alternatives. by your retarded logic, there are alternatives to de vere which makes that also invalid.
Try writing in proper English next time. Are you Slavic?

[Anonymous No.22600032]

>>22600002
Why are all the consensus retards dishonest?
They statistically compared the body of work to itself and concluded it's therefore written by its author.
You really can't think at all. There's no mind there.

[Anonymous No.22600042]

>>22600028
We're getting to the root of the issue which is your absolute and verifiable inability to think about any subject.
>there are alternatives to de vere
Is what I fucking said in the post you're replying to you illiterate cancer on humanity.
The Oxford model accounts for every detail without needing special pleading. For every detail mentioned you have to say "there could be an alternative explanation".

I direct you to a gas station down the street, you walk down the street and find a gas station there. It could be a different gas stations but only an absolute retard would try to argue that based on the given information.

[Anonymous No.22600045]

>>22600042
>The Oxford model accounts for every detail without needing special pleading
Except that De Vere was kill in 1064, years before The Tempest was released, fucking moron. Have you even read shakespeare? Aren't you slavic?

[Anonymous No.22600061]

>>22600045
An actual inconsistency would be more relevant than anything you said so far if it was accurate which it isn't.
>desperately trying to fish for irrelevant personal information
What is wrong with you? I'm very serious, you have deep issues and they infect everything you touch including this board.

[Anonymous No.22600065]

>>22600061
Oh, I guess De Vere didn't die in 1604 and the Tempest was written almost a decade after now

[Anonymous No.22600077]

If you think an illiterate, uneducated, failed actor wrote the works of Shakespeare, you have brain damage.
That is all.

[Anonymous No.22600081]

If you think a financially bankrupt and failed aristocrat wrote the works of Shakespeare, you have brain damage.
That is all.

[Anonymous No.22600094]

>>22600065
We don't know when it was written. At least read the points the Oxfordians make if you want to pretend to have an opinion.
>Dozens of writings raising questions about the author’s identity were published for decades before Shakespere’s death in 1616.
>The title of a 1611 epigram did so openly and with startling bluntness: addressing “Shake-speare” as “our English Terence.” Terence was an ancient Roman playwright notorious as a suspected frontman for two hidden, aristocratic writers.
De Vere was praised by more than one who read him as a great playwright but nobody today has seen any of those plays. They were valued, plays like that don't just vanish. After he died the plays we attribute to Shakespeare got released over a few years with introductions that imply the author is already dead.

[Anonymous No.22600096]

>>22600077
This is a point in favor of Oxford.
>>22600081
This is deranged noise from a mindless retard.

[Anonymous No.22600098]

Illiteracy and lack of education are relevant factors that can negatively influence the quality of a work of literature. Financial bankruptcy and failed aristocracy are not; one may even argue that it can positively influence the quality, kek.

[Anonymous No.22600106]

>>22600094
And De Vere's remaining poetry today sucks ass. Not even close to Shakespearean sonnets.
Macbeth was written after De Vere's death and contains references to the Guy Fawkes plot, which literally happened after De Vere died in 1604.

I'm sorry to have an important belief of yours torn apart limb from limb on 4chan.org, but really, you should do more research about these things.
hope this helps

[Anonymous No.22600112]

>>22600098
Shakespeare wasn't illiterate, idiot. His education would be the equivalent of a classics degree from a state school today

[Anonymous No.22600116]

>>22600106

[Anonymous No.22600132]

>>22600106
Is this really the best you have? I should ignore the debate about the authorship that was going on during the years the play was being released because you interpret one very abstract part of one play in a very specific way. But alternatives are possible, there's nothing even slightly approaching definitive here. The fact that people at the time were arguing is much more definitive.
My point is don't accept established consensus just because it's the consensus. Your model is not better than the Oxfordian one and both could be wrong. You don't act like you grasp these basics of thinking.

[Anonymous No.22600135]

>>22600132
>no, the British Museum is wrong, not me
I'm diagnosing schizophrenia. Sorry bro.

[Anonymous No.22600139]

>>22600112
How? That's not normal. Who taught him classics? Was he a priest? You have make special exceptions again to make your fantasy fit.
>>22600135
Again the structure of your argument is pure appeal to authority. You're telling me over and over that you don't understand the basics needed to think about any subject. You just automatically appeal to whatever is the consensus.

You literally, demonstrably don't think and don't appear to know how to begin.

[Anonymous No.22600143]

>>22600139
reading books is appeal to authority bro
logical facts is appeal to authority bro
People dying and then making references to events after their deaths is appeal to authority bro

[Anonymous No.22600149]

don't care about shakespeare, never did. unrelated tho i 'ate fags.

[Anonymous No.22600151]

>>22600143
So you really don't understand the difference? This is exactly what I've been trying to tell you.
Look up examples, try to grasp the difference.
>schizo
Is the same structure, instead of engaging with what's presented you find ways to dismiss the person saying it. You find ways to avoid thinking, like by having the British Museum think for you. When I suggest that you might want to explore the idea for yourself instead of deferring to others your reaction is to dismiss me, the person before even considering the idea.

[Anonymous No.22600157]

>>22600112
He couldn't even sign his own name and there's no evidence of him having received a formal (or informal) education. Next.

[Anonymous No.22600159]

>>22600151
I did consider the De Vere hypothesis, but considering De Vere was kill before Macbeth (which contains events after his death) and The Tempest, it isn't possible. It's fun to think about though, don't you think? :)

[Anonymous No.22600162]

>>22600157
?

[Anonymous No.22600164]

>>22600159
>it isn't possible
It is. You have nothing definitive. Just wishful thinking that supports your favorite propaganda narratives.

[Anonymous No.22600166]

>>22600164
Think whatever you want to think, friend. You find ways to avoid the Stratfordian thought. It's okay. Don't worry, we are all friends here :)

[Anonymous No.22600168]

>>22600162
What? You're reading what he may have studied if he'd gone to school.
But there's no evidence that he receiving any schooling.
>verification not required.

[Anonymous No.22600178]

>>22600166
I want good things for you but you're not my friend in any sense. You're Gmork from Neverending Story. The embodiment of the Nothing and my eternal nemesis.

[Anonymous No.22600181]

>>22600178
>getting this mad over getting called friend
sorry friend :(

[Anonymous No.22600184]

>>22600181
More dishonesty as expected by an evil retard that's most definitely not my friend in any sense.

[Anonymous No.22600187]

>>22600184

[Anonymous No.22600201]

>>22600187
Again an appeal to some external thought you don't understand the point of. Just mindless noise using words you don't understand.
I want the best for you, everything I've said has ways to be productive. I didn't try to to shut anything down, unlike you and as a result we even found out together what you need to do to not be a retard all the time.
Your posts are all about projecting evil onto the world and trying to oppose it but all you accomplish is acting evil yourself.

[Anonymous No.22600206]

Sorry, you've deflected every piece of evidence for the Stratfordian side just as I have dismantled the De Vere side. Don't play games with me bud. You're the one calling me an evil retard, acting like a bully on the internet kek. I GUARANTEE you would never say that in real life. 100%.

[Anonymous No.22600222]

>>22600206
We went over this. They're just models. One model has far more data supporting it than the other. Declaring you have some irrefutable interpretation like you did when you appealed to the British Museum can not possibly serve the process of finding things out, no matter what the truth is. Even if Stratfordians are right you do the process of inquiry a disservice with every word you post. The issue is not your position on this subject but your apparent inability to sincerely explore any subject. You can never resist deferring the thinking to someone else. If the British Museum says something, that's the end of it. This is evil.

[Anonymous No.22600226]

>>22600222
I accept your concession

[Anonymous No.22600232]

>>22600226
If you value inquiry dishonesty is counterproductive. It's evil.

[Anonymous No.22600233]

>>22600232
You're the internet keyboard warrior trying to bully people by calling them evil retards kek
what would your mother think

[Anonymous No.22600239]

>>22600232
Meds

[Anonymous No.22600243]

>>22600233
You're doing it again retard. Absolute refusal to engage with any kind of thought. Absolutely mindless cancer actively trying to destroy anything you touch.
>reading books is appeal to authority bro
>logical facts is appeal to authority bro
>People dying and then making references to events after their deaths is appeal to authority bro
You retards actually said this when I pointed out the evil shit you're doing. That you don't think can be objectively demonstrated to anyone capable of thought.

[Anonymous No.22600249]

>>22600243
>cancer
>evil retard
>evil
>EVIL
wow, so convincing intellectual much impressed

[Anonymous No.22600252]

>>22600243
Calling people evil isn’t an argument, this thread is near on 100 posts of you seething

[Anonymous No.22600256]

>>22600249
I've made it very clear what that references but you don't care. On this subject like every other you'll work as hard as you possibly can to make sure no thinking actually happens. Even if simple word choices don't please you that's enough justification to stop thinking. To you everything is a justification to avoid thinking, it's all you do here. That's evil, counter productive to all states goals like the process of inquiry.

Why are you like this and why doesn't it ever occur to you to simply stop being an evil fucking retard?

[Anonymous No.22600258]

>>22600256
hardest challenge for you: get through one post without saying evil or retard

[Anonymous No.22600261]

>>22600252
You have no clue how to begin to think about any subject but think you can declare yourself an authority on what is an argument and what isn't.
Just fuck off braindead retards. Stop pretending you're interested in thinking when all you do is undermine the process.
>reading books is appeal to authority bro
Deal with your retarded shit retards. Learn to fucking think before infecting others with your cancerous shit.

[Anonymous No.22600263]

>>22600258
Fuck off evil retard. This is yet another excuse you've found to avoid thinking or engaging with anything said to you. Pure evil, absolutely dishonest and with no hope of ever having any kind of productive result.

[Anonymous No.22600264]

>>22600261
You don’t need to be upset, everyone loses arguments

[Anonymous No.22600265]

>>22600261
>your STOOPID
>FUCK OFF STOOPID
>STOP PRETENDING YOUR not STOOPID
>YOUR STUPID
>LEARN TO NOT BE STOOPID
here's a sentence by sentence recap of your post, fren. I really liked it :)

[Anonymous No.22600266]

>>22600263
lol
lmao, even
challenged failed

[Anonymous No.22600267]

>>22600264
Always the exact same pattern. Never even the slightest hint of deviation from the dishonest horseshit.
>>22600265
It references clarifications made earlier. You pretend it doesn't so you can avoid thinking. Illiteracy or dishonesty are the only explanations.

[Anonymous No.22600270]

>>22600267
>if i call them dishonest and evil, that means I win!
no, it just means your argument sucked bro but please, if you have any more evidence to throw at us have at it

[Anonymous No.22600272]

>>22600267
Is English your second language or something?

[Anonymous No.22600273]

Periodic reminder that a 17 year old British kid educated in classical grammar school in the 17th century was smarter, better read, and had way more sex than anyone on /lit/ and 99% of Shakespeare hate is cope

[Anonymous No.22600276]

>>22600273
kek and true

[Anonymous No.22600278]

>>22600273
True, but also I went to a grammar school and they’re just a place to turn sexually frustrated teens into homosexuals

[Anonymous No.22600290]

>>22600270
>I win!
You keep signalling that you don't understand the point I'm making on any level. That means I'm not "winning" since the fucking point is getting you to stop acting like a cancerous retard that undermines all thought.
Why do you still apparently not have any clue what point after all this? After I spoonfed it to you many times you now act as if you don't understand any of it. You're either pretending or something is seriously wrong with your brain.
>>22600272
Are you completely incapable of structured thinking? You can't even imagine thinking without these sorts of heuristics for braindead retards?

[Anonymous No.22600292]

>>22600290
>tl;dr ad hominem from a mentally ill person

[Anonymous No.22600293]

>>22600273
Another example of a retard that doesn't grasp logical structure on any level.

[Anonymous No.22600294]

>>22600290
>nooooo stop acting in a way I don't like!
I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, cunt. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep bitching and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?

[Anonymous No.22600295]

>>22600273
>wake up after sunrise and greet the day
>no tinnitus so I can hear every bird and insect
>chomp on some fresh baked bread and new cottage cheese mum just made yesterday
>meet the lads for grammar school
>breeze through Greek and Latin
>write a play for funsies in the afternoon
>fuck the chambermaid
>wonder what dad will bring back from his trip to London for my 15th birthday

[Anonymous No.22600298]

>>22600292
Pointing out demonstrable examples of your inability to think is not an ad hominem.
Pointing out that you're misusing the term here is not an ad hominem either. The structure is the same, I'm pointing out reproducible and obvious breakdowns in thinking. Usually you do them on purpose, to avoid work.

[Anonymous No.22600299]

>>22600293
Another example of an autistic retard that doesn't grasp a joke on any level.

[Anonymous No.22600302]

>>22600298
Accusing people that disagree with your argument of being illiterate, retarded or evil is by definition, ad hominem. You’ve made bad faith arguments all thread and then cry out in pain when you perceive that someone is doing the same to you.

[Anonymous No.22600305]

>>22600298
>no you're stupid... because you're stupid
>noooooo don't use the term correctly against me, that's stupid
kek you're a lolcow

[Anonymous No.22600308]

>>22600295
based and frankly redpilled

[Anonymous No.22600313]

>>22600294
No. I'm going to continue pointing out retards that undermine all thought on all subjects. I explained to you in detail how you're being a retard and you simply don't care. As long as you don't correct yourself I'll keep noticing when you're being a retard and I'll keep calling you a retard for it.
>>22600302
>is by definition, ad hominem
No retard. A retard can put forward correct structured logic like anyone else. Who it comes from is not relevant, only the actual structure is. If I appeal to the fact that you're a retard to dismiss your idea that's the ad hominem logical fallacy.

[Anonymous No.22600317]

>>22600313
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, cunt. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep bitching and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>No. I'm going to continue bitching
MAMA MIA NOW THIS IS A LOLCOW

[Anonymous No.22600319]

>>22600305
Read about the subject of basic logic and ad hominems (appeals to the man). Then reexamine your posts here. The Oxfordian shit is not definitive but the objective fact that you consistently behave like retards is demonstrable. No appeals to subjective opinions are needed.
>>22600317
How can you pretend you're able to discuss any subject while misrepresenting the absolute basics of thought so blatantly?

[Anonymous No.22600320]

>>22599743
Classist envy

[Anonymous No.22600321]

>>22600319
>How can you pretend you're able to discuss any subject while misrepresenting the absolute basics of thought so blatantly?
translated from overcompensating ESL:
>Why are you such a mean liar by calling me a stupid bitch who keeps complaining that he got BTFO?

[Anonymous No.22600325]

>>22600321
This is an example of blatant dishonesty to avoid engaging with anything said. Subversion of the process of inquiry, the only thing this forum and thread could possibly be useful for.
You know you're being dishonest but still do it. It's still easier than thinking I suppose.

[Anonymous No.22600326]

>>22600325
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, cunt. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep bitching and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>No. I'm going to continue bitching
MAMA MIA NOW THIS IS A LOLCOW

[Anonymous No.22600337]

>>22600326
Remember when you decided to make it public that you don't understand what an ad hominem is? Remember a few minutes before that when you admitted you don't understand the problem with an appeal to authority?
Just think about these two points a little and you'll be a better person for it. Why wouldn't you? Everyone including you would benefit from you not being a dishonest retard anymore.

[Anonymous No.22600338]

>>22600313
You’ve lost the argument so your seething and name calling is just entertaining at this point, tell me more about how I’m illiterate, evil, and retarded

[Anonymous No.22600341]

NEW DRINKING GAME: EVERY TIME THE LOLCOW SAYS
>evil
>retard
>illiterate
>dishonest
DRINK A FINGER

[Anonymous No.22600343]

>>22600337
>I thought this was a thread about Shakespeare, cunt. Are you going to talk about him now and give more evidence on De Vere or are you going to keep bitching and complaining that your evidence should have been good enough?
>KEEPS COMPLAINING AND SEETHING FOR THE ENTIRE THREAD
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA
>Verification not required.

[Anonymous No.22600347]

>>22600341

[Anonymous No.22600395]

>>22599664
>Anti-Stratfordians have been demolished many times before
...and the holocaust is the most well docuented genocide in history, eh, moishe?

[Anonymous No.22600397]

>>22600395
Illiterate evil retard, stop being dishonest

[Anonymous No.22600402]

>>22599743
mere truth seeking.
Clearly you don't understand.
Look, goy, the big game is on, better go watch it or you won't have anything to talk about tomorrow..

[Anonymous No.22600405]

>>22599751
You don't have to be university educated to write, by you do have to know how to write to write.

[Anonymous No.22600408]

>>22599767
>>22599774
>wait how does beowulf play into the authorship of hamlet
I am 100% Oxfordian and I too have this quesion.

[Anonymous No.22600409]

>>22599664
Name one time Anti-Stratfordians were demolished?

[Anonymous No.22600413]

>>22599999
>>22599999
checked, fellow Oxfordian.
kek knows....

[Anonymous No.22600414]

>>22599983
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHN7SCKlsa9lPYJmqqQ2uIg

[Anonymous No.22600416]

>>22599983
btw-- when you're done with Shakespeare/Oxford, you should really look into that whole holocaust thing.

[Anonymous No.22600419]

>>22600011
>I won.
Jesus Christ, man! How much do you weigh and when was the last time you showered?

[Anonymous No.22600420]

>>22600408
Hamlet and Beowulf both have the same request as their dying wish.

[Anonymous No.22600423]

What does it matter? The plays exist regardless of who wrote them. It changes literally nothing.

[Anonymous No.22600425]

>>22600420
Have you even read Beowulf or Hamlet? Beowulf asks to for his ashes buried on the side of the cliff and for his nation to be strong
Hamlet asks for his story to be told
this thread fucking sucks

[Anonymous No.22600429]

>>22599662
The yarvin/moldbug oxfordianism comes from a place of pure racial envy and deep mischlinge self-hatred

[Anonymous No.22600432]

>>22600397

[Anonymous No.22600435]

>>22600429
You don't understand goy. you have to be (((wealthy))) and go to (((university))) as a (((background patron))) to make good art

[Anonymous No.22600442]

>this untalented hackish dysgenic half-jew can't grasp the concept of the commoner's SOVL

[Anonymous No.22600448]

>>22600442
Forgot picture of this disgusting creature.

[Anonymous No.22600455]

>>22600448
>>22600442
no goy. great things come from the (((synagogue))), not ordinary people... now get in line

[Anonymous No.22600499]

Reckon Bill done it coz I just do
Simple as

[Anonymous No.22601245]

>>22600448
>>22600442
>>22600455
>>22600435
>>22600429
Moldbug is smarter than you, fuck off with your pol jew seething.

[Anonymous No.22601249]

>>22599662
Oxonians lol...

[Anonymous No.22601253]

>>22599664
Lol some brilliant people, who unlike yourself have made a great impression on the world, had doubts about an illiterate, uneducated usurer and theater manager/actor could have created the Works. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyVjR9FNo9w

[Anonymous No.22601269]

[Anonymous No.22601276]

>>22601253
how could he have been some incompetent, uneducated theatre manager, but at the same time he had the power to plagiarize and steal from educated nobility with impunity and without any reprecussions? Something doesn't quite add up. On one hand, you claim he was a lowly peasant, on the other hand, he was somehow powerful, smart and capable enough to keep up the biggest ruse in literary history not only through his lifetime, but for centuries afterwards.

[Anonymous No.22601289]

>>22601269

[Anonymous No.22601327]

>>22600168
This is so insanely stupid and dishonest I don't know where to begin.

Shakespeare's father was a wealthy businessman who was an alderman and even eventually the Bailiff of their town. He married into some of the oldest landed nobility in England. There's a 100% chance he went to school.

[Anonymous No.22601338]

>>22600429
Moldbug isn't a practicing jew, there's nothing jewish about him in his beliefs or practices, take your meds anon. He rejects Shakespeare for the same reason he rejects lots of commonly established ideas, because he makes his money by grifting retards online pretending to be some contrarian guru.

[Anonymous No.22602314]

>>22601338
Kek
Pretty much this
Also all fields