/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.5672746]

>mfw people think 4chan users are fascist

[Anonymous No.5672756]

post ur tits when 4chan users are facist

[Anonymous No.5672760]

>>5672746
>mfw I've been called a fascist for liking Wagner

[Anonymous No.5672768]

>>5672746
I'd say the site as a whole is very focused on freedom and advancing there; like Deleuze's war machine.

[Anonymous No.5672770]

[Anonymous No.5672783]

Welllll

[Anonymous No.5672839]

>>5672746
Reminds me of this

[Anonymous No.5672850]

It's only because /pol/ is so vocal.
Yet for one /pol/ you have /soc/, /co/, /lgbt/ and /mlp/ on the side of "degeneracy".

[Anonymous No.5672861]

a good number of people on 4chan self identify as fascists or nationalists

[Anonymous No.5672864]

>>5672760
obligatory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nS66IvbvcI

[Anonymous No.5672872]

>>5672746
...but we are

does nobody read "the mass psychology of fascism" today?

[Anonymous No.5672876]

>>5672746
I'm a fascist.

[Anonymous No.5672878]

>>5672768
>very focused on freedom
>not seeing all the reactionary self-straightjacketing going on in almost every post on every board

keep telling yourself that, idiot.

[Anonymous No.5672883]

>>5672839
>massive Shit That Never Happened thread

Why would anything remind you of that?

[Anonymous No.5672888]

We'll just have to keep Stalin posting to balance it out.

[Anonymous No.5672896]

>>5672839
>seriously implying any of that happened and this isn't something a conservatard would make up

[Anonymous No.5672898]

>>5672839
I broadly agree that fascist takeover of governments is a serious concern but lol if you think that the 2nd amendment is going to stop that in any way. you are a complete mentalist if you think that.

[Anonymous No.5672900]

>>5672878
But they aren't. Look how much emphasis those wannabe-fascists put on freedom of speech. They believe themselves fascists but they have little in common with the actual ones.

[Anonymous No.5672905]

>>5672888
Can do, comrade!

[Anonymous No.5672912]

>>5672900
>Look how much emphasis those wannabe-fascists put on freedom of speech.

That's because they're marginalised, the vestigial remains of a dead iteration of an ideology. "Freedom of speech" (ie, the reluctance to restrict speech acts facilitated by private means, such as 4chan for example, rather than the statutory guarantee of non-repression of speech by the State) is massively important to them.

[Anonymous No.5672913]

>>5672878

They're just roleplaying, none of them are really reactionaries. They pretend to be in their circlejerks, but whenever a news article comes up where something is being banned or censored by the government, they revert back to Libertarians and cry about how evil the government is.

[Anonymous No.5672924]

What political ideology does most of /lit/ identify as?

[Anonymous No.5672932]

>>5672888
nice trips comrade

[Anonymous No.5672934]

>>5672924
Centre of left I suppose. I'm not educated enough to assert solid political views.

[Anonymous No.5672936]

>>5672913
Libertarians are just modern day reactionaries, but their idol is the promise of laissez-faire capitalism instead of aristocratic feudalism.

[Anonymous No.5672944]

>>5672936

I'm a Libertarian, but although I value laissez-faire capitalism, non-violence and social freedom are the most important promises for me.

[Anonymous No.5672949]

>>5672944
>laissez-faire capitalism, non-violence

Who will defend your property?

[Anonymous No.5672956]

>>5672949
We will all band together and defend it, duh

[Anonymous No.5672959]

>>5672949

I love these questions. I don't know "who" would aside from me, I can't see into the future. Certainly not the government, who's main objective is to steal my property.

[Anonymous No.5672965]

>>5672850
It's also because /pol/ crosses so much with /r9k/
Angry virgins with persecution complexes galore.

[Anonymous No.5672967]

>>5672959
I thought I would impersonate you and give a dumb answer but yours is actually dumber. Or are there two Rusemeisters at work here?

[Anonymous No.5672985]

>>5672959
The Bourgeois state exists to protect property you dong, the point is you can't have "non violent laissez-faire capitalism" because violence is necessary for capitalism to function.

[Anonymous No.5672987]

>>5672967

If you ask a dumb question, you get a dumb answer. I don't who will defend my property aside from me in a post-state world just like you don't know how the government will enforce contracts in international waters when companies start mining vents at the bottom of the ocean.

[Anonymous No.5672988]

>>5672872
underrated post if i do say so myself :^) :^)

[Anonymous No.5672996]

>>5672864
Glorious

[Anonymous No.5672997]

>>5672985

I don't agree. The state literally exists to rob you and nothing more. Violence isn't necessary for capitalism, where people get that idea is beyond me.

[Anonymous No.5672999]

>>5672839
I only read to the Boys State part. I don't know if he's defending that organization or what, but I also went there in high school, and it was some Nazi youth shit. Seriously a fucking indoctrination camp. Maybe it varies from state to state, but in PA they had us marching in step to history re-education classes. Not joking, they literally called them re-education classes.

[Anonymous No.5673010]

>>5672997
>The state literally exists to rob you and nothing more.

lol

[Anonymous No.5673032]

>>5672997
>Violence isn't necessary for capitalism

OK here's an example, you work hard and start a business, it's very successful and you make a lot of money, you retire to a big house filled with nice expensive things, I'm a lazy cunt who's never worked in my life, what's to stop me killing you and taking your big house and nice expensive things?

Answer, the threat of state violence, it's against the law for me to do so and the police will work to enforce your property rights. Without the threat of state violence people will not obey the laws of capitalism.

[Anonymous No.5673049]

>>5672999
What were they re-educating you about?

[Anonymous No.5673068]

>>5673010

Name its function. There is none other than to rob you. All the shit about public services is just to pacify you while they take a portion of your labor.

>>5673032

My gun. Threats don't stop people doing things. If that was true there would be no prison population. Far more important is the fact most people don't like confrontation and most people like community approval.

Without a state a group of people can still have property rights and you can still punish people without being violent by withholding cooperation. And a human who doesn't have the cooperation of others is doomed. Where this "its impossible to have order with an organized theft ring" is beyond me, people say it like the state is some fundamental force of nature that stops violence. In reality, they're just an extremely well-organized group of bandits.

[Anonymous No.5673072]

>>5672999
What did they reeducate you about? American Neocon shit ala Limbaugh?

[Anonymous No.5673082]

>>5673068
>All the shit about public services

There you go. You already knew you were wrong. I suspected as much.

[Anonymous No.5673090]

>>5673068
>Threats don't stop people doing things. If that was true there would be no prison population
>If something doesn't work on 100% of people it doesn't work at all

Libertarian "logic"

[Anonymous No.5673100]

>>5673082

They're not public services, that's why I called it shit. They're public services about as much as the mafia's "protection" is a public service.

>>5673090

No, I'm saying it literally doesn't stop anyone killing you. Owning a gun is the only thing that's going to stop someone bent on killing you. Anyone who is perturbed by threats likely isn't violent enough to harm someone else anyway.

[Anonymous No.5673119]

>>5673100
>Owning a gun is the only thing that's going to stop someone bent on killing you

mmmmmm no, generally if you're not under 24/7 protection by professionals then there really isn't anything stopping someone from killing you

you could just be walking down a busy street and the person wanting to kill you could very easily walk up behind you and knifing you in the neck, no gun is going to help you there

[Anonymous No.5673122]

>>5673049
>>5673072

Yes, straight neo-conservative propaganda. Re-educating us about Vietnam (US victory, hardly anyone got drafted, no war crimes whatsoever), WW2 (America saved everyone and did everything and tried really hard to save all of the civilians everywhere), and how when the Soviet Union dissolved, communists infiltrated governments around the world, and that's where Europe and American liberals came from. Also covered the topics of the Persian Gulf wars and Afghanistan.

Shit was ridiculous. They were literally teaching conspiracy theories about communism as if they were fact. One old fucker said that research into concussion prevention was a socialist plot to pacify Americans.

Fucking seriously. I only went to the camp cause my grandfather was paying my family's rent at the time, and threatened to stop if I didn't go. The kids there were all either /pol/-tier retards going into the military or autists being groomed for politics.

[Anonymous No.5673131]

>>5673119

With "going to stop", obviously I wasn't implying owning a gun makes you invincible.

[Anonymous No.5673159]

>>5673122
Sheezus. Consider writing a book about it, mane.

[Anonymous No.5673174]

>>5673100
>They're not public services

Well this is like saying that birds are not birds. Manifestly, 'public services' are in fact public services.

>They're public services about as much as the mafia's "protection" is a public service.

Meditate on this statement for a while. Hint: the fact that it is actually true does nothing but undermine your case.

[Anonymous No.5673181]

>>5672936
>Libertarians are just modern day reactionaries

How? How can it be reactionary when there is no iteration of it in the past? Libertarianism has no reference in the past, it can only look forward.

[Anonymous No.5673193]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky-zdHMNFNM

[Anonymous No.5673202]

>>5673181
A lot of libertarians, at least in the US, are obsessed with the Founding Fathers, the Constitution etc., and want to return to an idealized vision they have of the early US, when government was tiny and liberty was sacred. Ron Paul is a good example of this.

[Anonymous No.5673205]

>>5673159
Already working on a story, fictional characters but otherwise exactly what happened. It wasn't traumatic or anything, and was only a week and a half. Not enough material to get a whole book out of it. Still a disturbing experience. Strangest part was that most of the people there were really nice.

Oh, also, we got 5 hours of free-time a day, and that included sleep and "home"work. So you'd get 4 hours of sleep if you were lucky, and then would be marching around all day like that, making you really susceptible to just going along with whatever the fuck they did.

Oh, also, this >>5672839 is really far from what the one I attended was like. I doubt even half of that story was true. We had an element of political simulation, but it was mostly just used as another propaganda tool (raise minimum wage? no one goes to college and there's a shortage of doctors! put twice the number of cops on the street? crime stops completely!) and it wasn't free form at all, far from what that screencap describes.

[Anonymous No.5673219]

>>5672985
I disagree. There would be no taxes and no eminent domain if that were true. The state exists first of all to perpetuate itself and expand. It will happily devour private wealth to achieve that end. Also if anything violence is an hindrance to capitalism. War often translates to a drop in international trade and GDP. The ultimate end-state for capitalism is a border-free and stable world where business knows no bounds.

[Anonymous No.5673230]

>>5673219
>There would be no taxes

"If the state really existed to protect property it would magically be able to do it for free."

Yeah, no.

[Anonymous No.5673233]

>>5672924
Dirty Trotskyite whore. Cliff is love, Cliff is life

[Anonymous No.5673250]

>There are people on /lit/ who don't accept that Marxism-Leninism is the only true science.

[Anonymous No.5673251]

>>5673032
That's not exactly true. The state is only interested in protecting your property insofar as it considers itself the only entity allowed to profit from it. The state protects you in the same way a farmer protects hens from foxes. He cares not for the hens but preserve them to get the eggs.

[Anonymous No.5673257]

>>5673205
>Oh, also, we got 5 hours of free-time a day, and that included sleep and "home"work.
That's nuts, makes it sound like boot camp or something

[Anonymous No.5673280]

>>5672924
Democratic Socialist, but I actively push for Marxism, because the more popular and accepted Marxist ideas become, by extension Democratic Socialist ideas get more popular and accepted as well.

[Anonymous No.5673281]

>>5672850
/co/ used to be more against "degeneracy". Tumblr foothold ruined it.

[Anonymous No.5673293]

I think that we need fascism to get rid of all the shit, then a revolution to get rid of more shit. Then we can finally be free. Hot stocks of potato rocks, order now at hotpotato com

[Anonymous No.5673307]

>>5673010
>The state is benevolent and will never do us harm
>this is what marxists actually believe

[Anonymous No.5673313]

>>5673202
I see. But if it's only an idealized vision of past events that makes them reactionary then all political movements are reactionary. Anarchists have 1936 Spain, Socialists have the Paris commune,Trotskyists have early USSR, etc... I guess there's still transhumanism as a forward-thing ideology

[Anonymous No.5673321]

>>5673307
2/10, patrish (cuz ya know, fuck the upper class) tier insult

lk srsly bro, gotta smash the bourgeois state

[Anonymous No.5673323]

>>5673281
>newfags seriously pretending to be oldfags
I just don't understand.

[Anonymous No.5673327]

>>5672864
I find CYE really awful but this is fucking glorious.

[Anonymous No.5673334]

but seriously, they're both bundles of sticks, you can't blame people for mixing it up with faggots sometimes. many times i thought i was going to a national socialist party and it turned out gay sex party because they wear leathers and acidwash to their meetings too. we should really get separate words for these things at least if we can't get the wardrobe sorted out.

[Anonymous No.5673339]

>>5673307
>there is a person literally made of straw saying silly things on the internet
>this is what retards appear to believe

[Anonymous No.5673343]

>>5673280
Someone who gets it. Social democracy will only be revived by a renewal of the class struggle. The turn to neo-liberalism is the death of SD parties everywhere. Compare Syrizia to like anything else

[Anonymous No.5673344]

>>5673313
>But if it's only an idealized vision of past events that makes them reactionary then all political movements are reactionary.
Not all of them.

[The cats No.5673376]

>mfw mod doesn't delete this thread cuz he's 2 busy persecuting a girl who made him butthurt 2 months ago

We should get more /pol/ to /lit/

ayyyyyyyy lmao

[Anonymous No.5673393]

>>5673376
>We should get more /pol/ to /lit/

Current levels (just enough to laugh at, not enough to destroy the board) are fine.

[Anonymous No.5673399]

>>5673376
How do you find the motivation to do what you do?