[ 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: 6 KB, 250x229, 1697574401603118.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23306088 No.23306088 [Reply] [Original]

How do leftists cope with the fact that everything that critical theorists or whatever came up with was already thought up first by some random french counter-revolutionary, conservative revolutionary chud in germany, or an italian fascist?

>> No.23306093

they open up a textbook and read about ww2

>> No.23306094

They pretend it's all made by progressive leftists so they don't even cope in the first place. And if you try to argue against, they'll just swear at you and claim they won the argument.

>> No.23306098

what's a 'leftist'
I am not memeing, I genuinely don't know

>> No.23306100

You wrongly presuppose that they care about theory and about history.

>> No.23306109

A liberal

>> No.23306120

Most of them do not cope and state it like it is -- yeah, this "math is a relative scoial construct thing" I defend in this monograph was first proposed by Oswald Spengler.
So what? Only full on retards believe in intellectual american puritanism -- Kant and Hegel are le bad because Marx worked with their ideas.

>> No.23306121
File: 119 KB, 1160x770, 1626434550961.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Nothing, it's an empty signifier that idiots and midwits use.

>> No.23306125

How do chuds cope with being basically Foucaldians? It's you that complain about language being used as a weapon and biopolitics.

>> No.23306402
File: 93 KB, 1024x546, 1712934889929653.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>How do chuds cope with being basically Foucaldians?
By not being smart enough to even realize that

>> No.23306429

take this crap to /pol/, it's offtopic here

>> No.23307609

What does this have to do with actual philosophy or books.

>> No.23309050

it means communist

>> No.23309171

Have you met them

>> No.23309183

I'm not wrong in the slightest. It's an empty signifier and the fact that nobody can agree what exactly it means and that it changes over time just proves it. Use better language.

>> No.23309201

In the US context, a person who believes that reality is defined by weighted consensus based on clout, and who operates in a political strategy of high and low, centre and periphery vs middle. It's also just people who rely on the university. You could also say that it's people whose spirituality is defined by transgressive acts (war crimes, sexual violence, trying to profane their ancestors' religions).

>> No.23309204

I guess I just sit with the fact that it wasn’t.

>> No.23309208

Name 5 examples.

>> No.23309210

Yes, you are objectively wrong. What you said proves nothing and your meme wasn't relevant to the discussion. You are an idiot.

>> No.23309229

I'm objectively wrong how, exactly?
>your meme wasn't relevant to the discussion
Yes, it was. You're a delusional retard and you're seething about the meme because it's literally about you.

>> No.23309307

Are fouculdians chuds?

>> No.23309311

Is language being used as a weapon? Also, biopolitics is made up nonsense. Foucault onky chose to see power structures in a very specific way and outside of this lens it is worthless.
Also, how do you vope with the fact that critical theory is a woefully unoriginal fiels,