[ 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: 28 KB, 620x460, faust.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3286844 No.3286844 [Reply] [Original]

How do we counteract the materialism that proliferates and threatens to consume and destroy western culture?

>> No.3286898

Communism

>> No.3286901

>>3286898

That's stupid. Any other suggestions?

>> No.3286906

By reading.

>> No.3286907

>>3286906

How do we make people read?

>> No.3286908

Capitalism

>> No.3286910

>>3286907
Why do you want to force people to do things?
What happened to personal responsibility?

>> No.3286912

>>3286910

They're not taking it, so someone needs to take it for them.

>> No.3286913

>>3286901
Anarcho-syndicalism.

>> No.3286917

>>3286913

Good. How do we accomplish it?

>> No.3286920

>>3286912
No, they'll do themselves in and if not then they'll find a reason to educate themselves. We don't need anymore self-appointed directors fucking about.

>> No.3286924

>>3286917
Dual power.

>> No.3286926

>>3286924

Elaborate

>> No.3286929

>>3286920

So, social Darwinism? Excellent.

>> No.3286934

the internet: ninety percent of the stuff purchased and or accessed there has no material component. You can have millions of books movies songs and pictures on a drive the size of a paperback.

Computers and scientific agriculture and manufacturing techniques are making materialism
old hat. Everybody's living in the moment because in the future it will be obsolete.

>> No.3286944

>>3286934

But everyone will need a computer, computer equipment, e-reader, monitors etc... Doesn't that increase materialism in some ways?

>> No.3286946

materialism is the only thing driving demand, which drives our huge economy

without it, we'd be fucked.

>> No.3286954

>>3286946

Elaborate.

>> No.3286956

National Socialism.

>> No.3286962

>>3286956

Good, that seems to be evolving quite well here in Sweden. How do we deal with the ubiquitous ignorance of the most vocal and successful advocates of national socialism, though?

>> No.3286966

>>3286944
Tools are not materialism.

If you want to go back to being a caveman you should've said so.

>> No.3286973

>>3286962

Who would they be?

>> No.3286979

>>3286973

I've noticed that most high-ranking members of National Socialist parties are ignorant, which pretty apparent in debates and similar. They only focus on the most apparent but least important issues.
Oh, and just for reference, apparently the leader of the nationalistic party in Holland said that art is only a leftist hobby.

>> No.3286993

>>3286934
>old hat. Everybody's living in the moment because in the future it will be obsolete.


can you expound on this idea for me?

>> No.3286997

>>3286944

nope. think of the things computers have replaced, and cellphones and smartphones and ipads. The repair and servicing infrastructure are also streamlined, and the materials are so recycleable that a used cellphone actually contains much more valuable minerals than a similar amount of the actual raw ores.

we are using less and less energy and less and less materials all the time to effect the same results.

Just run through a list of smartphone apps and think of how much the technology to perform the equivalent work would have weighed, cost, and consumed in the form of materials, and how few would have been able to afford them in nineteen seventy.

then google materials like grancrete and aerogel and any of the high temperature superconductors.

these advances will continue to bring the benefits of technology and culture to even the poorest societies. look at the solar cell battery charger and the LED lantern and how it has changed africa already.

we're building smart, small, efficient and cheap. and it will change the world.

make everything cheap enough, and political systems become as interchangeable as religions and sports team franchises.

>> No.3287005

>>3286993
obsolescence is driving innovation. apple has to be working three generations ahead in order not only to compete with samsung, but to compete with its own superior products.

the same goes for amazon, and even seed and fertilizer companies.

>> No.3287014

>>3286979

I've thought about this in the past too, It always makes me cringe when some idiot lets slip that he thinks "The Joos did it". Inevitably, movements like this attract a lot of idiots who need a scapegoat, although the anti-fascist groups seem to be a lot more aggressive than the so called 'nazis'.

I'm fond of the 'Third-position' movement, because, as well agreeing with most of the ideas, it avoids the negative connotations of 'national socialism'.

So in short: We need a revival of right-wing thought, and movements like the European New-Right and several organisations in the United States are certainly beginning to reach wider audiences.

>> No.3287024

>>3287014

Excellent, I agree with you entirely. You've inspired me to read some more books by Benoist - I'll get to it this evening.

>> No.3287057

>>3287014
>>3287024


Uh, what do the right and left wing, in terms of politics, have to do with materialism?

aren't they both antimaterialistic? By which i mean they concentrate on ideals and aspirations--spiritual goals and ethical/moral standards over material well-being?

And isn't that sort of beside the point?

I mean from a values standpoint the modern era is about as non-materialistic as you can get. so much so that we discard more stuff that our ancestors hoarded and endlessly recycled than any previous generation, and that's been a trend since the fifties.

I was thinking that the Randians and the Maoists would at least agree that things were going in the same direction materially and not want to interfere too much with it.

so again, how is materialism a political factor in the twenty first century?

>> No.3287062

>>3287057

Firstly, the difference between left-wing and right-wing is that left-wingers believe that all men are equal, and right-wingers do not. Basically.

The problem in our modern society is that we consume an enormous amount of materials and resources. We are the ultimate consumptionists. Our rampant capitalism and consumerism threatens to destroy not only ourselves, but our future and our planet.
I don't think material egalitarianism has anything at all to do with this problematic.

>> No.3287078

>>3286844

with the second psychedelic revolution

>> No.3287083

>>3286844

Materialism comes from the word mater, which means mother.

What we need to do is bring back the father figure, and prevent women from dragging us down.

>> No.3287085

>>3287062

still, you can't deny that capitalism, and the competition that it brings, is one of the driving forces behind the revolution in efficiency and low energy and low material goods. The cheap consumer goods remember are cheap because it didn't cost anyone much to mine, refine, manufacture, transport and market the goods. Nobody spends a dollar --or uses a dollars worth of material labor or energy--to make something he can only sell for fifty cents.

the massive efficiencies of market driven competition has been one of the main forces that have allowed the western world to move the standard of living as far down the social scale as it is. workers get paid less, but their money buys much more.

the guys living like the ones in "little house on the prairie" days were far more wasteful and inefficient, and the Indians they replaced were even moreso. (Old joke: what Tribe of Indians uses every part of the animal they kill, with almost no waste? The Oscar Mayer tribe.).

this is not difficult to confirm either, and common sens e will get you past the counterintuitive part if you just think about it.

>> No.3287090

>>3287085

Yet the reason for the need of such efficiency is that such massive amounts of unnecessary products must be produced to please the proletariat of the west. I don't deny that it also brings good things, but don't kid yourself into thinking that this system carries more benefits than problems.

Oh, and I don't really get what you mean by the wastefulness and inefficiency of yonder days of the past? The scale was much, much smaller and the repercussions were usually easy to handle.
And didn't almost every Indian tribe use every part of the animals they killed?

>> No.3287093

Islam will take over. There culture probably produces manlier men, they just need to get their states organized. Surely they have enough wealth with all that oil in the middle east.

>> No.3287102

>>3287085
>competition
>efficiency

these words need to fucking die because they don't fit the reality of the situation at all, and are outdated.

>standard of living

it's pretty fucking sad how all of the "primitive" societies of the past had "God", "Royal", "Excellence", etc. as their ideals and we're stuck with "standard of living".

>> No.3287106

>>3287093

Middle East is pretty much owned by the US and A now, so we're fucked on that department.

>> No.3287118

>>3287085
yeah but there's a problem with your little capitalism love fest...the standard of living for wage laborers in western europe and america only increased during the cold war due to industrialists being scared of communism, so to prove to their workforce that capitalism was more in their interest than communism they shared more profits and gave the workers higher wages...but now that communism is gone the bad old days of the 19th century industrialism is coming back fast, look at the efforts of Germany in the EU to force austerity on half the continent and dismantle the welfare state and don't even look at america.

>> No.3287124

>>3287093
it's sort of like how "archaic modern humans" outbred and outkilled the neanderthal race, neanderthals were by most measures superior to modern humans but eventually lost out to the violent and quickly multiplying modern man

>> No.3287146

Try getting rid of all the stuff you don't need, and then stop buying stuff and accepting gifts. Entertainment is the easiest place to start—no one really needs a tv, an ipod, personal books, CDs, games, etc. There are tons of free things to do. I'm getting ever closer to having only essentials, and I love having more space and fewer distractions (and expenses).

>> No.3287156

>>3287146
the only problem is, if everyone does this the economy will tank.

i actually don't see why a materialistic consumer society is bad? it gives people happiness, you work hard, make money, buy fun shit, repeat till you croak. otherwise, what are you going to do? sit around being angsty about death? go to church everyday?

>> No.3287159

>>3286946
Isn't this circular logic?
>people need to buy so that things are made so that people have work so that those people can buy

>> No.3287161

>>3287156
this is a bad post and you should feel dumb

>> No.3287165

>>3287159
it's the only way to maintain freedom. if you have the government just use robots to control some huge megafarms and then distribute the food while we all sit on our asses what's to stop another manufactured punishment famine like stalin did to the ukraine? i'm not even that enthusiastic about capitalism but as my edgy teen days recede farther into history i realize capitalism can actually be sort of fun if you participate and play instead of sitting on the sidelines being mad about it.

>> No.3287167

>>3287161
why is materialism bad though? seems like a mighty big assumption.

>> No.3287176

>>3287078
hell yes

Terence McKenna: I've always felt that Buddhism, ecological thinking, psychedelic thinking, and feminism are the four parts of a solution. These things are somewhat fragmented from each other, but they are the obvious pieces of the puzzle. An honoring of the feminine, an honoring of the planet, a stress on dematerialism and compassion, and the tools to revivify and make coherent those three.

>> No.3287185

>>3287165
>capitalism can actually be sort of fun if you participate
Well sure, but there are tons of people that get fucked in the ass by it, too. And I really don't think that even those of us who benefit from capitalism are really well off; I sincerely believe that material prosperity has, at best, no impact on personal happiness.

>> No.3287192

>>3287176
i find most anti-consumption people are just driven by some irrational motives though...for instance they love to hate SUVs right? gas guzzlers and all that...but what happens in GM came out with a solar powered SUV next week? would you suddenly love SUVs and buy one? no, because the real reason you hate it is because it represents middle class suburban culture not because it's energy inefficient, it's ok to hate the suburbans, they sure seem awful to me, but let's be honest and not wrap up anti-middle class prejudice in some kind of hippy "love mother earth" horse shit.

>> No.3287210

>>3287167
“Nothing will so much tend to make you insensible to the best gifts of Providence, and callous to the purest pleasures of life, as the love of noisy and frivolous distinctions, the pursuit of vicious pleasures, and the tyranny of fashion”

>> No.3287217
File: 23 KB, 921x606, picard-facepalm[1].jpg_124093.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3287217

>>3287106
it's time to stop posting

>> No.3287224

>>3287192
Anti-middle class prejudice is the wrong reason to resist materialism. For me, getting rid of nonessential stuff just feels good, and also has a ton of practical benefits. I feel more free than I did when I worried about money, entertainment, and luxury.

>> No.3287226

>>3287185
well then what are you made about? if you don't care about material prosperity why are you jealous of rich people? why do you care if you're "well off" or not? i mean you don't care about material goods right?

>> No.3287228

>>3287176

All those things are gay.

>> No.3287232

>>3287167
>>3287210

basically, materialism is a distraction from greater Understanding.

>> No.3287235

>>3287232
understanding what exactly? see, basically you just want everyone back in church.

>> No.3287239

>>3287226
Who said I'm jealous of rich people? Who said I care whether I'm well off? Who said I'm made?

I'm happier living with a less-stuff mentality than I was without. I think other people would be happier that way, too. And if other people could realize that they can be happy without buying tons of stuff, I think our world would be way, way better off.

>> No.3287241

>>3287232
>Understanding.
you are so deluded

enjoy dying without "understanding" jack shit

>> No.3287243

>>3287239
if people are happier with less stuff shouldn't poor people be the most happy and everyone would be dropping out of school to try and get a piece of the poverty lifestyle, but for some reason that's not happening

>> No.3287246

>>3287243
>implying we're not subjugated to endless propaganda literally from birth telling us that a materialist, consumerist, possession- and wealth-driven lifestyle is the key to happiness

>> No.3287250

>>3287241
deluded from what? Where is it, exactly, that you find me lacking, and on what information do you base your analysis?

>>3287235
Church? I haven't mentioned church at all. I'm very puzzled to your reasoning, which is, perhaps, a side effect of your generalizing.

>> No.3287251

>>3287246
what about the taliban? they have created an anti-materliast paradise where everyone just studies religious texts and works on subsistence agriculture, ahh those noble savages are so much wiser than us!

>> No.3287261

>>3287243
Living with less stuff =/= poverty. There are definitely things (food, shelter, health care of some sort) that people need. I'm not advocating that we all become ascetics.

But why not work only for those basic needs? It's the endless striving for more and more stuff that goes beyond those basic needs that makes us miserable and is soiling the environment.

>> No.3287263

>>3287243
that's only true if you equate education with wealth, wealth with 'stuff', poverty with ignorance, or, ever further, trends with truth.

I would distance myself from so many binaries in the future, Anon.

>> No.3287266

>>3287250
> taking church literally

listen you autist i thought you were supposed to be "literary", ok i can see you aren't operating on a high level

>> No.3287268

>>3287251

>everyone just studies religious texts and works on subsistence agriculture

honestly that's pretty much what i'd like my life to be. but the taliban is also violent and oppressive as fuck so

i'd like a world without oppressive structures, without interpersonal power dynamics, where people derive their happiness simply from the fact of their existence -- or don't worry about happiness in the first place. i think politics should be centered around providing the necessities of life -- food, water, shelter, clothing, education, health care -- for all humans while acting respectfully and sustainably with respect to the rest of our Earth (plants, animals, minerals)

>> No.3287270

>>3287263
well how bad the "materialism = bad" binary. should i distance myself from THAT one?

>> No.3287272

>>3287251
what does it mean to be "wiser", and what's a "savage"?

Simply because someone doesn't excel within the limitations of your ideological beliefs doesn't mean you're right and they're wrong--it means, simply, that you are different.

>> No.3287273

>>3287268
well. i want a fucking pony

>> No.3287277

>>3287156
Maybe you're right. I don't know. I like to think there's more to life than just that.

>> No.3287281

>>3287272
bro i'm referring to all the "noble savage" crap of early modernity and the age of exploration, that shit was discredited as embarrassing racist b.s. a century ago, ok i don't think there's much point in going on much more here

>> No.3287283

>>3287273
Do you really, though? I hope that people can realize that so much of the stuff they think they want actually wont bring them happiness. That's what I believe, at least.

>> No.3287286

>>3287266
Is this the argument you give your teachers when they tell you your writing is vague and needs refinement?
I can understand the contours of your basal argument--I'm trying to help you control your language so as to not be viewed as a child.

>> No.3287295

I got my parents on board with a no-gift Christmas. We didn't exchange any gifts. Instead we hung out together and had a nice meal. My parents don't need anything because they move a lot and, as it is, are trying to get rid of most of their accumulated junk. And I checked out from the library National Geographic's "Visual History of the World," which fucking rocks. None of us needed anything. We didn't buy anything. It was nice.

>> No.3287300

>>3287281
And I'm referring to the sarcasm veiling your own insecurities through an attempted rationalization of your life and choices.

Simply referencing phrases you've heard someone say doesn't change the incorrectness of your point, nor does it impress anyone that is beyond their junior year of undergraduate studies.

Perhaps you should spend more time researching these ideas instead of arguing about them online, bro.

>> No.3287304

>>3287273
what if a world without oppressive structures doesn't bring you happiness? then what are you going to do?

i used to think i would be happier after a communist revolution then i realized that hot chick i like will stick be fucking fratboys instead of me just they'll be members of the communist youth instead of phi theta beta or whatever, whatever is wrong with your life has nothing to do with ipads, iphones or gas guzzling trucks.

>> No.3287308

>>3287304
if you think that's the way the world will always be then you're really misunderstanding radical feminism, buddy

>implying gender will always exist

>> No.3287309

>>3287300
i don't have any insecurities about computation, i fucking love my ipad, my degree and my 50 dollar underwear, deal with it.

>> No.3287312

>>3287304
also
>whatever is wrong with your life has nothing to do with ipads, iphones or gas guzzling trucks.
that's just objectively false

>> No.3287313

>>3287308
but don't you think eliminating gender is oppressive to people who delight in gender for instance transsexuals? are you telling a transman it's wrong to get pumped up on hormones and grow a beard? now i think you're the one perpetuating oppressive structures!

>> No.3287316

>>3287312
so the reason you're depressed and your life is shit is because some rich guy has an ipad! ok, glad you cleared all that up!

>> No.3287318
File: 11 KB, 300x299, 1341177347963.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3287318

>>3287312
>objectively

>> No.3287322

>>3287309
Well, then, this is the perfect opportunity for me to say that you haven't experienced life without those things, in this moment, and until that happens you're ignorant to truth

>computation
I don't understand the connections of mathematics to materialism, maybe you're confusing words?

>> No.3287326

>>3287322
so until i go to a monastery and become a monk i haven't truly "experienced life", there you go again with your subconscious religion crutch

>> No.3287341

>>3287326
Anything differing from your perceived reality is not religious, Anon. I would argue that monasteries are also confuting the actuality of our existence through the spread of traditions and sacrality.
You need to find yourself: no church, no institution, no company, no macbook or bottle of wine will show you who you are.

>> No.3287352

>>3287341
i know what i am, a biological system on a blob of matter floating in a big ass empty void, there is no "true self", "soul" or another mumbo-jumbo, dude

>> No.3287360

>>3287352
If you admit your insignificance, then, what makes me wrong and you right?

>> No.3287373

What is materialism and why does everyone hate it so much?

>> No.3287381

>>3287373
the notion that we will be happy when we get the stuff we want

>> No.3287390

>>3287381
But I'm not happy either way. I keep flipping between near-nihilistic existentialism and materialism and both suck.

I can't find a way to be happy or add meaning to my life.

>> No.3287392
File: 13 KB, 297x307, beardneck.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3287392

>>3287352
>mfw someone thinks he has it all figured out

>> No.3287406

>>3287392
i didn't "figure it all out" but i know sitting in a cave staring at the wall waiting for my "true self" to show up isn't the way to go

>> No.3287417

>>3287090

And this is true of all primitive (that is: pre-industrial) cultures to a greater or lesser extent. There was a simply huge amount of waste. even recently, with the change from every city building from an individual coal-fired furnace to distributed power and gas powered furnaces, an unbelievable savings in energy, pollution and cost has been realized. Indians would certainly have liked to use all parts of the animal as well, but a lot of times they just didn't have the means to transport, store or preserve it, or in some cases any use for it. And like any culture, they tended to waste what they had plenty of. And over exploit resources in order to prevent competing cultures from using them. (the salmon fishing industry of the northwest is a good example).

And the repercussions being easier to handle is also wrong: one reason for massive urbanization is that natural disasters of even brief duration and small effect tended to have terrible impacts on farm communities. They were better insulated against transport loss and widespread disease and such, but local problems tended to be devastating. we see this in Africa even now. as well as parts of India and even china.

>> No.3287423

>>3287417

Now don't assume this is an apology for capitalism, since I really don't have a dog in that fight. I will heartily support any system that provides the highest level of liberty, security, and opportunity to its citizens, along with the highest level of comfort and the greatest variety and highest quality of goods and services. Also, the fewest restrictions.

i just see too many people who seem not just eager to toss out the baby with the bathwater, but to drown the baby and burn down the bathhouse. The rapid advance of technology has solved far more problems than can be blamed on it, both for guys at the top and guys at the bottom. Cheap and easily available goods and efficient means of production and distribution should be everybody's goal, regardless of ideology. And let the purchaser of the goods decide whether they are unnecessary, regardless of market system.

>> No.3287426

>>3287406
you've been a troll this whole time, or you're an idiot.
There's more than two options; you're not stuck choosing between contemporary materiality and the life of a Neanderthal. The point of breaking away from materiality isn't to stop progress, but to separate our ideas of satisfaction away from objects and onto ourselves.

>> No.3287435

>>3287426
Well said. I can stop posting now.

>> No.3287441

>>3287226
Some people don't even have the social necessities to live (shelter, healthcare, food) no matter how hard they work. Their managers, executives, and bosses screw them over for their own profit. My closest friends are this way, in fact. But it's okay, because "capitalism can be sort of fun if you participate".

>> No.3287448

>>3287426
wait so you're saying we should all become self-obsessed narcissists? well, that's different i suppose, lel

>> No.3287453

>>3287441
well your friends should try going to school and stop being fuckups.

>> No.3287474

>>3287453
>School
>Teaching you anything
>Not being societal indoctrination
>Apparently luck doesn't exist, because some people just get shit on their whole life and there's nothing they can do about that.

>> No.3287480

>>3287474
i never said school teaches you anything but it will improve your wages, which is what you were crying about wasn't it?

>> No.3287489

>>3287480
It used to improve your wages. Also, I'm not the guy that you were originally responding to.

But in today's economy, schooling doesn't mean shit, and you're still exploited by a never-ending hierarchy of bosses and managers.

>> No.3287493
File: 46 KB, 610x412, 610x.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3287493

>>3287078
>dat american police state

>> No.3287505

As a conflict this seems pretty much unsupportable. Anybody who wants to have a communal, simple, primitive existence with few or no personal possessions is usually perfectly free to do so in most western cultures.

And unlike the bad old days of the soviet system, nobody seems really eager to force that system on anybody else that doesnt at least think they want it.

And since the capitalist system, and other forms of materialism are thriving, anybody that wants to take advantage of those systems canas well.

It seems we're going in the direction of the best of all ideological worlds. Where here's freedom of political thought just as there is freedom of religious thought.

Good on us, I say. Let a thousand fuckin flowers bloom.

>> No.3287512

>>3287165
>Stockholm Syndrome

>> No.3287521

>>3287512
well i see your have that base fascist desire to be ruled by a farmlord who tells everyone when and what they can consume

>> No.3287742

>>3287286

>basal

No, I prefer my arguments acid.

>> No.3287776

>>3287505

I would be like totally fucking okay with rampant fucking capitalism, if it weren't for the simple fact that it destroys the earth. The rainforests are cut down, every day over a hundred different species go extinct so that you can have your fucking hamburger at McDonalds. If I take a walk in the forest on the fucking countryside, there are fucking cars everywhere. Even if I walk straight into the forest, I can still fucking hear them. If I look up into the sky I see the fucking planes or whatever the fuck that is blinking red and blue. It doesn't help going even two hundred miles into the wilderness, the cars might be gone but the fucking planes and satellites or whatever the fuck it is are still there to leer at me. Then I go to the fucking lake, and I realize that it's fucking acid and half of the species that lived in it a hundred years ago are extinct.
Oh, and I like people. I like nice, respectful, honourable people who can think for themselves and examine their own nature. But fuck this western society. I'm ready to embrace anarchy, as long as we tear this fucking shit down.

{/rant}

>> No.3287784

>>3287261

And knowledge. It should be the "right" (I take issue with inherent rights, that's a constructed term) of every citizen to have free access to knowledge and the possibility to express himself in whatever non-destructive way he desires.

>> No.3287810

>>3287776
have you checked out how the environment fares under communism? have you checked out how the environment fares in countries no central government at all? capitalism is actually merciful on the environment since consumers can decide to spend their money on environmentally friendly products or vote for a stronger EPA, but with no government if a clan of dickheads wants to burn down every forest on earth how are you going to stop them other than total war?

>> No.3287832

>>3287810

Firstly,

>he thinks people actually care about the environment and vote for shit that doesn't directly concern them

Secondly, I never advocated communism.

Thirdly, why would the environment fare any worse under communism? To me communism and the health of the world seem to be fairly disconnected concepts. The only thing I can see is that communism might mean less materialism and consumerism, which would be a good thing.

Fourthly: without a functioning economic system, how are people going to burn down 200,000 acres of rainforest a day "on accident"?

>> No.3287868

>>3287776
i have to correct this one every year in my Env Sci class. The beef produced in former rain forest grazing lands is usually marketed as Organic, because they don't use chemical fertilizers or pesticides/hormones to grow it. This doesn't mean you should avoid all organic beef but it does mean don't pay a lot for organically grown beef unless you know it's grown locally. Some jurisdictions require the phrase "product of Brazil" on every label, though this is more to reassure about not carrying prionic diseases..

And yes, technology is responsible for a lot of the noise and pollution in the world, though it has gotten measurably better in the past few decades, as i'm sure the oldtimers here can testify to.

>> No.3287883

>>3287832

communism might mean less consumerism and materialism if everybody believed in and supported it. As long as there are dissenters and opportunists, and, lets face it, pretty much most of humanity, there'll be work-arounds. There are in every "communist" government in the world, and yeah they do have horrible environmental records.

still, if everybody believed in and supported it, a lot of stuff would work.

>> No.3287887

kill all materialists

>> No.3287889

>>3287887

Good, any strategy you suggest specifically?

>> No.3287893

>>3287889
Harpoons.

>> No.3287894

>>3287889

break their ipads and watch as they wither away

>> No.3287905

>>3287894

I support this method. How do we avoid getting caught?

>> No.3287917

>>3287905
You break their iPhones too.

>> No.3287919

>>3287887
>>3287889
>>3287893
>>3287894
>>3287905


what about the immaterial materialists (those that live on social materials, or ephemeral phenomena, like music, conversation, television, walking in the park, etc? aren't they just as bad?

>> No.3287920

>>3287905

getting caught is part of our plan

>> No.3287922

>>3287919

That's us man, fuck off

>> No.3287946

We have to find a way to help jazz make a comeback.

Surely this will help.

Maybe it's just wishful thinking ;_;

>> No.3289182

Let it proliferate, let it consume, let Western culture die. Sometimes you need a good, clean burn in the forest, to allow new growth.

>> No.3289926
File: 623 KB, 1125x1746, Alperovitz - America Beyond Capitalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3289926

>>3286917
>>3286926
Gradually. Though a sudden demise of the corporate model is highly desirous.

>>3286929
Spencerism is dead.

>> No.3290115
File: 288 KB, 381x595, 1329345443000.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290115

>>3287894
>>3287917

Amazingly, this would work.

>> No.3290132

>>3287894

What about electric books ;_;

>> No.3290135

>>3286906
Every aspect of our culture is a commodity. Try again.

>> No.3290142

>>3287423
So basically your entire point is to concern troll people who want to make the world better?

>> No.3290147
File: 314 KB, 3788x1052, 1350651088685.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290147

>> No.3290151

>>3287192
I think the sole reason people hate SUVs is due to the gas consumption man, you're really not elucidating anything interesting. The middle class has so many more loathsome aspects to it it's hard to find a good starting point. It's also irrelevant in the long run.

>> No.3290157

>>3287919
They aren't ephemera, they're commodities. You people really don't know the first damn thing about capitalism.

>> No.3290161

>Industrial civilization will collapse because its very existence is based upon a finite amount of natural resources.
Give it a century and it will all collapse and we'll all go back to 1600s-tier.

>> No.3290164
File: 55 KB, 479x640, system1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290164

>>3287883
>As long as there are dissenters and opportunists, and, lets face it, pretty much most of humanity, there'll be work-arounds. There are in every "communist" government in the world, and yeah they do have horrible environmental records.

I have this image saved for a reason.

It's for people like you, just to be clear.

>> No.3290169

>>3287192

The SUV is the embodiment of "FUCK YOU I GOT MINE":

>towers over traditional vehicles, blocking the visibility for others
>bumper is above the level of cabin intrusion protection in traditional vehicle
>bigger wheels and higher drag profile reduce efficiency
>takes significantly more resources to manufacture
>lesser handling ability makes them more hazardous in the hands of a typical driver

Thus we end up with an arms race.

>> No.3290176

>>3287810
Oh boy, communism was worse, so we should simply accept a 4-6 degrees Celsius rise in temperatures globally.

>> No.3290235
File: 207 KB, 1280x706, President Hamilton's invasion.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290235

Step one leads to the next and so on
1. End the corporation
2. End corruption
3. End wars
4. End poverty
Etc.

>> No.3290366 [DELETED] 

Distributism is the way to go people

>> No.3290390
File: 2 KB, 480x684, cross2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290390

>>3286844

>> No.3290408

>>3286844
Mind your own business and live as good a life as you can while gently encouraging others to do the same and leading by example.

>> No.3290440

>>3290366

go to bed, married oldfag

>> No.3290441

>>3286844
abolish the state and reach a classless, stateless society

our overlords WANT to keep us materialistic

>> No.3290448

>>3290390
That doesn't work, that NEVER worked right in the first place.

>>3290408
That really doesn't work either


First we identify the problem or problems and then we start he unraveling process. Throwing off divine right was the first step, but now the economic royalists are sapping us dry.

>> No.3290453

>>3290441
>implying the state is necessary for hierarchy
>implying that even in horizontal societies some people aren't more capable or interested in leading than others.
>implying any revolution wasn't just a reshuffling of the ruling classes with the intellectually capable
>Even in hunter-gatherer societies hunters had a fuck ton of prestige.

>> No.3290462

>>3290448
Wanna bump cunts together?

>> No.3290463

>>3290441
Like crapping your pants where you sit. You need to go through steps to achieve a society that doesn't even care what a state is anymore. After the Stuarts, England couldn't just drop the idea of kings so they went out and bought the Hanovers, hell, some of them still would faint and kill themselves if the Royals all just abdicated en masse.

>>3290453
>implying any revolution wasn't just a reshuffling of the ruling classes with the intellectually capable
Thus far. Its not over till we get it right. Cynic.

>> No.3290467

>>3290462
Link to /soc/

>> No.3290468

>>3290463
>Thus far. Its not over till we get it right. Cynic.

lmao

>> No.3290474

>>3290463
You realize do that during a revolution the first to be killed would be female lesbians?

I think it would be in your best interest to be a cynic.

>> No.3290481

>>3290468
What? Are you the cynic?

The revolutionary age is ongoing. Your thoughts?

>> No.3290520

>>3290463
>Calling me a cynic
>Believing in the revolution with the same passion as if it were the coming of Christ.

Lol mechanization of labor and the consumer culture proves that all people want is time to live their lives and pursue their hobbies.

>> No.3290541

>>3290520
'Kay. A life of moderate comfort and reasonable freedom. And?

>> No.3290545

>>3290541
>People aren't interested in rebelling against a system that provides them with these things.
>American industrial proletariat simply doesn't exist.
>American lower class wants to wholly emulate the middle and upper classes.
>Only people who are incessant about their "glorious revolution" are yuppies living off their's parents dole.

>> No.3290551

>>3287093

Their culture produces dirty, smelly, misogynistic, hate-filled, xenophobic apes, who lope about while their women walk behind them carrying their shopping under a flesh-concealing garment (gaaay), other times they hoot and gather on statues and beat them with sandals.

Fucking savages.

>> No.3290556
File: 53 KB, 500x570, Thats So Reagan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290556

>>3290545
>Speak Marxism to me
Wat
So you're a libertarian?

>> No.3290578

>>3290556
No. I'm a political nihilist. As individuals we're an okay bunch but taken on the whole we're all just massive retards humping around in the dark.

So I'll reiterate.
>American lower class isn't interested in revolution. These are the people to whom the future belongs according to all respectable Communist/Anarchist theoreticians.
>The proletariat, being necessary for the revolution, does not exist. Ergo, the revolution will not happen.
>Vanguardism only replaces one ruling class for another. It is not a true revolution.
>People tend both towards individualism and communalism. It'd be a mistake to lean too much towards either.
>Anthropological conjecture shows we aren't moving towards communism but away from it. Humans having been in an anarcho-communism hunter-gatherer state for the vast majority of our time spent on this planet and then gradually forming agriculture and the state to protect private property rights.
>Marx was ass-backwards.

>> No.3290605 [SPOILER] 
File: 38 KB, 604x453, Zorro.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290605

>>3290578
You didn't have to reiterate, I am well aware of the various pitfalls to it all. I'm not a Marxist or obviously a nihilist, so just deal with it. Peace.

>> No.3290879

>>3286844
Such a thing is impossible until the ideal of a post-scarcity world is realized. Although a shift in culture towards having fewer children would work wonders.

>> No.3290915

It doesn't threaten western culture. For thousands of years, the cream of the crop has always been at the mercy if the stupid. Finally, they have found a way to control these people while the more heightened minds and intellectuals can live in piece. On top of that, justification for their intellectual journeys.

Why are wars waged in backwards third world countries ? To justify military expenditure which brings birth to new technologies. Same goes for all fields of science. Through means of propaganda, we are able to control the masses for the benefit of the upper class.

If you strive to be someone great, you would eventually see that this is the only way. Otherwise we would be at the mercy of an anarchic system controlled by fools so sure of themselves and their taboos that it would parallel the dark ages.

OP, you were never forced to watch jersey shores, watch x-factor, or listen to lil wayne. Quit seeing things from a plebeian perspective and join the proletarian class.

>> No.3290923

>>3290915

>join the proletarian class

uwotm8

Anyway, I see where you are coming from and I agree. But from an ecological perspective it is catastrophic.
I also believe the "upper class" could be greatly expanded if consumerism was not so rampant (instead of watching Jersey Shore people would read books, and eventually some people would read good books).

>> No.3290942

I would be into some 19th century bomb-tossing Anarchism.

Seems I'm alone in my yearnings though.

>> No.3290944

>>3290942

nope, I'm on

>> No.3290948

>>3290915
Take your gobbledegook elsewhere.

>> No.3290951

>>3290942

That entirely depends on where you're throwing the bomb

>> No.3290958

>>3290942
>>3290944
>>3290951

Let's become terrorists, fuck yeah

>> No.3290984

Lets blow up the stock exchange, and shoot up capitol hill.

>> No.3290992
File: 465 KB, 500x342, Spongebob Hippies.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3290992

>>3290984
>and shoot up capitol hill

>> No.3290994

>>3290984

Go to bed, FBI

>> No.3291002

>>3290994
>inplying justice ever sleeps

>> No.3291009

Embrace it.

As the proletariat grows, so does your elite status.

>> No.3291012

>>3290992
Hippies have no stomach for violent struggle.

>> No.3291014

>>3291012
Capitol Hill is one hell of a drug.

>> No.3291041

>>3286997
>we are using less and less energy and less and less materials all the time to effect the same results.

you are deeply misguided.

>> No.3291466

>>3291041
No, i research and teach this shit.

>inb4 ivory tower liberal academic STEM

>> No.3292828

Okay, here's a question: what was better twenty years ago? Forty years ago? Sixty?

There was more poverty, the water and air was more polluted, there were worse working conditions and worse pay, food was more expensive, cars broke down all the time, there was more disease, more war more corruption, hell, go back to the turn of the century and half of the forests east of the Mississippi were corn fields and every river was an open sewer, and horse dung was piled in piles sixty feet high along the road to most major eastern cities.

Things are getting better, guys, and they'll keep getting better. If you gave me a time machine I would weld that future lever to the fucking dash. Give me morlocks at ninety years an hour!

>> No.3292832

>>3292828

>what was better

Income inequality. By a long shot.

>> No.3292857

>>3292832
but what difference does it make to me if i have four cakes and lex luthor has forty million? i still got plenty.

>> No.3292860

>>3292857

Lex Luthor took those cakes from someone with a lot less than you.

>> No.3292872

>>3292860
I'm okay being anti luthor, but still, the whole "western culture materialism" thing is the reason there are cakes. I also disagree that Lex took the cakes from anybody; higher productivity and more efficient use of resources is a god thing. And better and cheaper and more easily available consumer goods is the reason we had an industrial revolution. Are you arguing that THAT was a bad thing?

>> No.3292898

>>3292872
>And better and cheaper and more easily available consumer goods is the reason we had an industrial revolution. Are you arguing that THAT was a bad thing?
No. However, best system so far doesn't mean a perfect or best possible system, nor does it mean the end of the development of society.

>I also disagree that Lex took the cakes from anybody; higher productivity and more efficient use of resources is a god thing.
Terms like "productivity", "efficiency" and "resources" are so vague as to be meaningless here, please be more specific.

>I'm okay being anti luthor, but still, the whole "western culture materialism" thing is the reason there are cakes.
So you don't think that the history of confectionary is the history of cakes? Or would that be the other way around? I feel this metaphor has somewhat overextended itself.

>> No.3292903
File: 5 KB, 251x219, 1303847436339.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3292903

We can't.

>> No.3293050

>Terms like "productivity", "efficiency" and "resources" are so vague as to be meaningless here, please be more specific.

Basically we have never been better at using less resources (energy, materials, labor) to produce and distribute more and better goods,

We make things more efficiently, so that things that only a few could have fifty years ago are everywhere now, along with, as i guess is obvious, things that not even the richest could have afforded then many of the poorest western citizens use all the time (smartphones, etc.)


The productivity of everything has increased so much as to be unbelievable, I worked with a seed salesman who had a hard time convincing people that his new strains of corn would multiply their yields tenfold with only double the fertilizer and less water per acre.

I know a lot of people are blowing the technology will save us horn right now, but it really does look like our best hope. I'm not sure why anybody disagrees, except maybe on some philosophical ground I don't get myself.

It's just that in my lifetime everything has gotten so much better. And if history has told us anything, this has always been the case, and mostly due to technological innovation.

>> No.3293316
File: 204 KB, 905x1500, 1354158058317.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3293316

>>3292903
>Q: How do we counteract the materialism that proliferates and threatens to consume and destroy western [and the rest of humanity's] culture?
>A: We can't

At first I laughed. You have to be joking.
Of all the things we can't do, this is not one of them, I assure you. Whether or not we do counteract these forces, is entirely up to a daring majority's actions, which it seems you are determined to not be a part of.