/lit/ - Literature

>>15756173
>different beliefs and view points bad
Shoo shoo, redditoid

>>15756173
Because 4chan in general attracts conspiracy theorists and delusional brainlets of all kinds.

>>15756173
Hail Satan. Austria is eternally innocent. Operation Northwoods is real and MK-Ultra never stopped.
t. me smart

>>15756173
They probably got banned from those other places. This is probably the only place left before the deepweb.

>>15756173
>you are sharing a literature board with people who literally believe in Marxism, Transgenderism, and the subversive Jewish ideas of the Frankfurt school
Why is this board attracting so many people from the most braindead segments of society?

>>15756173
>Writing off conspiracy theories altogether

>>15756183
What’s good about any of those things?

>>15756205
Satan is an important cultural concept even if you don't literally believe in him, Austrian economics are autism but you will still learn something by reading about them, and quite a few conspiracy theories have turned out to be true, it is interesting anyway to imagine what the world would be like given different priors, and to understand why conspiracy thinking can trap people into paranoid thinking, and how to get out of the downward spiral.

>>15756173
You mean the most brain dead segments of 4chan...
Tourists

>>15756173
Well recently reddit had another ban wave so that's probably contributory. But let's make it better OP, what have you been reading lately?

>>15756173
What's wrong with austrian economics?

>>15756222
Didn’t think about it that way, interesting

>>15756230
This kills the hypocrite

>>15756173
>Austrian economics
kek. One of the better insult i've heard in a while

>>15756233
Nothing was wrong with the Austrian Economists when they were alive. The problem is that there exists a huge segment of people who today treat economics as though it were an article of faith and an expression of morality. Devotees of Hayek don't care whether a policy works or not, or even whether a theory is descriptive or not. They, like the Marxists they decry, craft policies and theories based on their own strange moral principles and then fabricate evidence and support later.

>>15756205
Doesn't matter if there's anything good about them. Other anon was just criticizing you for trying to create a hivemind on here like reddit has where only two ideologies are accepted.

>>15756173
>you are sharing a literature board with people who literally believe in Satan
Satan is real, but he doesn't take the form of a Devil...

>conspiracy theories
The way this term can be employed to safely disregard any idea too uncomfortable to entertain is really disgusting, and indicates genuine stupidity, or at the very least a diminished capacity for independent thought. Thought that actually challenges the status quo and I’m doesn’t need a bevy of approved sources. The idea that people in positions of power could be lying is so loathsome to the hater of conspiracy theories they shit their pants if it’s even brought up. These are the same people that denied an elite pedophile ring, that believe everything the “intelligence community” shits out (how are those WMDs treating you?), and lap mainstream media up greedily, saying thank you sir.

>>15756537
How do you determine whether or not a policy works if not basing it on some form of morality? “Works” is a meaningless descriptor unless it is qualified by an appeal to a moral system.

>>15757102
I dont think they even know what conspiracy means. They will describe a conspiracy by the CIA or something that really did happen, and then if anyone calls it a conspiracy theory they will get offended. It clearly just means 'insane person's delusion' to them.

>austrian economics isn't real
Huh? I'm fairly certain there are Austrian economists. I've met a few. I disagree with their views, but I don't think they were just faking

>>15756173
if you were not brain dead you would not ask a question why with a claim inside. FAGGOT. you are stupid pederast who learned to combine words and thinks it is an achievement.

>>15757106
What I mean is their economic proposals are almost solely deontological rather than teleological. The premise is the invisible hand is correct a priori and that we should accept as good whatever comes of it. I think instead economists have a duty to treat an economy as a system which can be affected to raise people out of poverty and generate labor utilization, not as a system which should be set up to be in advance to adhere to the philosophy of Mises, consequences be damned