/lit/ - Literature

Its assumptions were incorrect

It didnt, its never been stronger

black people

Because niggers

Because the Postmodern neo-Marxists infiltrated academia and deconstructed the Western Civilization.

liberalism is a failure because it brought us to the end of history. there is obviously nothing else for it to add now that we have reached that point

>>15739911
liberals are treacherous snakes who believe in nothing and will always sacrifice the workers on the altar of order

>>15739911
White males are afraid of losing their power, that's literally the only reason. Everything else is denial from that group.

>>15739911
the jews, obviously

>>15739932
This but unironically

>>15739927
>>15739929
history will vindicate this position

>>15739921
This.

>>15739921
What are its assumptions?

>>15740161
everything that anon doesn't like

>>15740011
it was a joke at he expense of conspiracy theorists, retard

>>15739911
There are inherent contradictions within the system that doom it to failure.

>>15740247
such as?

>>15740161
psychic unity of mankind

>>15740278
Private property and universalist ideals are not compatible, for one.

>>15739911
The enlightenment and the industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for humanity

>>15739911
Because liberalism hates liberty.

Liberalism died at the start of WW1.

>>15740289
if only that was a core assumption of liberalism..

>>15739911
People dont act according to reason and rationality.

>>15739911
it turns citizens into consumers who are in turn incapable of providing the virtue necessary for the continued operation of liberalism. basically like peak oil, subjectivities are a nonrenewable resource

>>15739932
i bet college professors would love to have a fraction of the power and influence that r*ghtoids attribute them

>>15740278
absolute individualism is incompatible with political consensus

>>15740462
Okay jogger

We misjudged the ideal role of liberalism. Liberals are only productive and beneficial to society when they're the underdogs. The very formation and existence of liberalism relies on a more practical, less tolerant society to support it. When liberals get into power, things invariably go to shit. Inviting the entire third world to put their feet up on the table didn't help either.

>>15739911
Because now they clutch at straws to find a problem in the first world. They don't bother with actual issues, like the iPhones they get woke on being made by actual slaves who don't get real attention because they ain't black, or the same with the shoes they protest in, the clothes on their back, etc. They focus on anything else that was never a problem to begin with, like vidya gaems being non-inclusive and comic books being every ist and phobic under the sun, so when an actual problem like police brutality rears its ugly head they complain about it and stand around (or lay around) in a mockery of actual protesting, and as with the case with CHAZ they devolve into the ugly animalistic beast we're supposed to have risen above being. They'll believe all women unless those women don't side with them, they'll support and ally with every faggot and monkey-faced coon that's on their side, but God (or gods, as they will use, as if any of the gods have any true power over science) help you if you wrongthink. You're a bad little pet if you don't think the same way, and their tribalism, victim mentality, and Oppression Olympics that they do will ultimately leave them to ruin as their "side" becomes more and more unlikeable and the other "side" becomes more attractive.

>>15739911
Everything fails eventually.

>>15740989
>>15741028
>t.doesn't know what "liberal" refers to

>>15739951
Yes, our biggest problem now is boredom.

>>15741050
>dude you don't get it!

These are the fruits of neoliberalism. Yes, your current quasileftoid social group is a PRODUCT of it. You are not special, you are not counter culture, you are not subversive. You are a faggot.

>>15739911
fail to do WHAT? give you sex and meds?

>>15740659
it is. liberalism is untenable in a world where not everyone is a white male

>>15739911
It didn't fail, at least not directly. Neoliberalism failed as it allowed economic freedom to intrude upon traditional liberal values. It allowed for immense corruption and destroyed proper representation of elected officials. It also led to postmodernism as a reaction which is the basis (or lack thereof) for all this blm and systemic racism horseshit

Any society based on liberalism will always fail rather rapidly because liberalism focuses on enhancing and supporting what makes the inhabitants of that society different and "diverse". What society fundamentally needs to function is that people have things in common.

Hey guys, Google liberalism so you know what we're talking about. It's not the common American usage

>>15741069
Transhumanism will blow his asshole out. ''Muh end of history''.

>>15741050
>>15741169
>this entire shtick
>every single time
Define the values of liberalism. Go ahead.

>>15741169
It's essentially the same thing, you only have to understand the larger historical context of liberalism to understand that.

>>15739932
Go back

>>15741204
wrong lol

>>15739932
>>15740247
>>15740934
Fuck off randroids

>>15741207
poo

>>15741207
Natural rights, freedom of speech and discussion of ideas, the social contract, individuality, small decentralized governments, life, liberty, property. Google it.

>>15741210
What do you mean

>>15740161
Somewhere along the line it seems like 'All are equal under the law' morphed into the fundamentally wrong 'All are equal', which can only lead to compensatory discrimination that descends into a positive feedback loop of failure.

>>15741338
It has led to progress for marginalized groups however, and that's a good thing.

>>15742206
lol @ this

>>15742206
>good thing
Now so?

>>15741077
Neoliberalism is an economic term, redditard. Your gods Reagan and Thatcher, which you limp-wristed neocons like to fap to were neoliberals.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
>>15741207
The political theory that was born in the Enlightenment that still persists today and includes things the other anon listed >>15741274.

>>15739911
>Helping people is morally right
>I support an ideology that "helps people"
>I must be morally right
Failure of logic basically.
When someone disagrees with you on a fundamental issue, it becomes easier to dismiss everything they present to you.
Whereas if someone agrees with you fundamentally, it becomes easier for them to present ideas as truth when they aren't.
This happens on both sides of the political spectrum but increasingly in the left because they have an added factor of "moral superiority" as they claim to hold an ideology which helps the most people.
However, feed a man a fish and all that is a good example to use. The left has become increasingly akin to a person with Munchhausen by proxy syndrome, not actually fixing the issues because soothing the symptoms has become their means to feel good.
On the right you have people becoming increasingly insular and apathetic to people outside their circles, whichever that means to the person.(family, friends, etc.)
I have given up hope of reconciliation between these two opposing sides without some real shit happening as disagreements become increasingly violent and decreasingly intelligent.
Harmony is always found in the middle.
This is all just opinion and speculation though.

>>15742367
>Your gods Reagan and Thatcher

Impressively wrong right out of the gate.

>>15742653
>This happens on both sides of the political spectrum but increasingly in the left because they have an added factor of "moral superiority"
I'm pretty sure both sides have this added factor. Everyone thinks that their beliefs are 'morally superior', otherwise they wouldn't believe in them.

>>15740161
the main problem is that it conflates the idea of free will with the act of reasoning about a choice, when reason should rather be framed as an act which takes will into account. this leads to the ultimate conclusion that we should be forced to choose every little thing in order to experience the most freedom, when that's not really how freedom works. politics have been reduced to a debate about what choices we should be allowed to make rather than what should actually be done in the first place.

>>15742830
hitler was the first neoliberal

>>15740989
>>15741028
>>15741044 is right, unlike the two faggots above. Liberalism refers to a movement opposing authoritarianism, mostly right wing in nature, because it's politics are capitlalistic. Liberalism and Libertarianism are sometimes used interchangably, in which case Liberalism may also refer to the absolute opposition to authoritarianism, which may also be left wing, such is the case with progressives. From what I've read in books and the wikipedia I prefer to call libertarianism the entire left and right against authoritarianism and liberalism is only it's right wing version. Only boomers won't understand this who think "libertarian" means conservative and liberal means progressive or semi-leftist.

>>15739911
Liberalism currently dominates most of the globe through NATO, so I find reports of its failure to be somewhat premature. China can hope, though.

>>15742830
What a clever deflection from the fact that you did not in fact know what the word neoliberalism referred to

>>15739932
That means it succeeded

because a book said so

>>15742905

o i am laffin

>>15742909
>Liberalism currently dominates most of the globe through NATO

It's not the 1980's anymore, newfag

>>15742959
good idea, laughter is the best medicine

>>15739911
it's failure is it's own teleology.
much like the teleology of chaos or entropy; it's bound to halt or undo itself at the end.

>>15742969
Now thats what I call ironic

>>15742909
the US is not liberal, it's an authoritarian oligopoly

>>15743045
Sounds pretty liberal to me. You must at some point use these words to refer to things that exist in the world, and not only in treatises.

>>15739951
The end of history was always a larp. Nothing about history ended. Fujiyama was wrong.

>>15739974
White males have never had power. Jews are the ruling class in America. You dumb leftists still can't see that your entire fight against white males has always been misdirection

The internet is fucking people's minds.

>>15739932
>>15739925
Niggas read the book, it addresses these point.

>>15743090
>White males have never had power.
Just because you're an incel loser doesn't mean that every white guy is. White males are still the most powerful group in America

>>15741204
>he thinks mankind is gonna reach some star trek esque future world instead of reverting back to feudalism after resource depletion and hard limits in the power of computing

>>15739911
Holy fuck no one in the thread has read the book. Liberalism failed because it has become entirely hegemonic, and entirely consumed all pre-liberal culture, religion, ways of life, etc. thus is now entering a stage where more and more authoritarian statism is needed to progress as an ideology.

>>15743140
I'm black, you stupid retard. Can you dumb leftist go a second without strawmanning people as incels? My God.
Also, 90% of white males don't and will never have power.
Jews are the most powerful group in America. Your designation of white males as the most powerful group is a classic use of the apex fallacy.

>>15743177
>I'm black
even sadder that you'd buy into white propaganda then

>>15739932
This.

>>15743166
This is the most retarded thing i've ever read.

>>15743229
But you haven't read it though, and neither has anyone else in the thread.

>>15743242
I've read the wikipedia page

>>15743271
At least listen to one of Deneen's lectures about it, they're only like an hour long and it will make you less retarded about politics.

It didn't, it's doing great. You're just too depressed to see that.

>>15739921

>>15740161
That the individual comes before society. Any notion or conception of a individual comes from a social center.

>>15743196
Address my point, you disgusting self hating cuck

>>15739974
>>15743140
>>15743196
lol typical shabbos goy useful idiot

>>15743400
If OP wasn't a retard, he would realize that the book says that. It failed precisely because it's fully become hegemonic and lacks real enemies now.

>>15740946
Not that I agree with his original post, but universities shape the minds of those who will (generally) become the most successful and influential in society. It seems fairly obvious that the universities hold a considerable amount of power over the people.

>>15743786
>it's fully become hegemonic and lacks real enemies now
I was thinking about that earlier today. Do you think the 'system' (sounds cliche, but for lack of a better term) has reached a point where it needs to manufacture enemies to remain relevant? That would explain the never-ending purity spiral cannibalization of leftists that can't keep up with the new dogma. Maybe it is even dependent on the creation of reactionary useful idiots, people like Richard Spencer and such.

>>15743918
>Do you think the 'system' (sounds cliche, but for lack of a better term) has reached a point where it needs to manufacture enemies to remain relevant?
Absolutely, which has been my explanation for all the anti-white stuff in the media, they want to create a white nationalist backlash. They need them as an enemy to justify their own increasing domination, which is why there's the constant fake hatecrimes and talk of the KKK. Politics fundamentally relies on an enemy to function. Hence why you had a jump to anti-communism after fascism was defeated, then a jump to Arab dictators and the Muslim world more broadly and then a jump to an internal enemy after that.

>>15742908
>he doesn't know there are left and right variants of Liberalism
>has never heard of the Overton Window, thinks Liberalism is right wing in essence and not just in convention

based retard

>>15743786
>>15743918
>>15743955
That's not his argument though I could see it being vaguely related to it. I'm grossly paraphrasing here, but the authors argument goes like this:

Liberalism is reaching its logical conclusion: the implementation of equal liberty. Contemporary US left and right both idealize this; for them it means the enlargement/centralization of the state (that enforces an equal realization of liberty) and the enlargement/advocacy of the free market (that allows universal perfect and fair choice), respectively. The real result is that both have grown immensely; economic and social liberties abound and we see new advances in it today. The state solves problems impersonally by imposing equal liberty on localized regions (ie: legalizing gay marriage/lgbtq+ rights in fiercely socially-conservative areas that would not do it themselves, social programs, etc) and the market is an impersonal forum from which people buy the goods they need impersonally. These impersonal institutions eliminate culture at the local level by elimination the need for human interaction. You no longer buy goods from the neighborhood farmer, or basket-weaver, or pillow maker; the free market eliminates these entities. You no longer attend your city hall to make laws and participate in local government, compassionately hearing arguments on either side from people you know and care about; the state eliminates the need for this: "This is free, and you will be free".

This destroys culture and introduces feelings of powerlessness and dissatisfaction. Equal liberty comes at the cost of the ability to participate and execute control over your governance. Localism is disposed of as a cost of equal liberty for all. The exultation of individualism comes at the expense of culture. This is civilization: denial of these qualities results in a barbarian or savage "civilization". This is the state we find ourselves in, where our democracy is not really a democracy, liberty is not really even liberty (the social contract is moot: the governors don't have the consent of the governed, disapproval at all time highs, etc). We have a democratic despotism. This is the situation we find ourselves in.

>>15744174

I am actually impressed you found an argument in Deneen's sophistry. I could not even get to the premises through his fallacies and outright lies, but can see how he made them up from his a priori conclusion that the conservative monarchy and hierarchical cultural Identity of the elites should not be challenged. When you start there, then any attempts at introducing a fair system are anathema.

What he fails to note is that the west has never been a society that was in any sense free, and so all conflicts with the exploitative system that are a reaction to that exploitation are twisted into being the "cause" of the problems BECAUSE people don't accept their slavery that the "culture" of conservatism demands.

Then he completely misses all of history that writes a systemic system of oppression in Neo-liberalism after the first one resulted in two world wars.

Even your addition of LGBTQ rights as a "equalization" show me your bias. There would be no need to impose laws guaranteeing rights if it weren't for someone activly trying to take them away.
The victim becomes the aggressor in every fevered tirade of the conservative.

I would applaud your tenacity in sticking out this piece of propaganda if it weren't for your obvious ignorance of both the facts and the sophistic techniques that made the rest of us throw the book out after the first three pages.

>>15744174
Finally someone that has actually read the book

>>15744257
cringe

>>15744257
Care to point out any of the fallacies or outright lies? His ideal of culture I've typically found to be rooted in local culture; he uses examples from his township in lectures.

If the West has never been free, what does your idea of a free society look like?

The "rights" that we often speak about as having their roots in liberalism, ie as natural rights, are typically not actual liberal principles. What "rights" are you talking about?

Do you care to elaborate or enlighten us on any of the sophistic techniques that were used in the first three pages of the book?

And the example came from an example he used in the same lecture: regarding Canada, he talked about recent LGBTQ+ legislation as illiberal liberalism: as "biology is an obstruction intruding upon our ability to be equally free."

>>15743196
>white propaganda
Lmao literally the only parts of the world where saying that Jews control the west is seen as propaganda is white countries. Everywhere else is thrown around like an obvious joke. Isreal is heavily promoting itself in East Asia right now because they see Jews as subversive people who control western media and politics. There are videos online just interviewing random Chinese and that is the normal opinion. I'm an Arab and it doesn't even have to be said, we all know. Then you go to white countries and the average person is shocked about this and sees it as a tiny white supremacist conspiracy theory. As an American Palestinian I got a wake up call for this very early in life trying to explore how my ethnicity is treated by every single facet of the system on all sides of the political spectrum and then following the logical conclusion on the identities of the people in control.

>>15744257
>systemic system
lol

Your comment seems far more naive and vacuously rhetorical than the one it's responding to. That anon is talking about liberty in a pragmatic sense, and detailing a shift in social dynamics that the older of us have lived through the tail-end of. You are merely spouting vague platitudes and pejoratives — hoping no one will notice the lack of any argument.

>>15744174
You're mostly on the point, but the collapse of localism isn't the point of the whole book, of course it is an important part of his argument though. It's important to note that he argues that Liberalism has smashed all pre-Liberal ways of being, which is where I'm saying enemies. Liberalism sought to liberate the individual from circumstances of birth and being, which does include place, but also includes family, nation, religion, etc.

As far as democracy is concerned, he argues that Liberalism is increasingly less reliant on democracy as a source of legitimation, and that the future is increasingly going to become either Liberalism without democracy like in Western states like Canada or the UK or democracy without Liberalism such as places like Hungary.

>>15740022
Lmfao where is this from I need to read it.

>>15744473
>>15744174
Based Rousseau was right. Liberty is making laws for yourself and following them.

>>15744567
That all existed before Rousseau, that was the classical and Christian view of liberty.

>>15744607
But for Rousseau it was small, non-rational, and moral in nature: the lawgiver preferably had recourse to the Divine and the community was stressed

>>15739958
Republicans are literally rationalizing the deaths of the sick, the poor and the elderly as necessary to prevent an economic recession. But of course you blame liberals, because... reasons.

>>15744719
Republicans are right liberals and Democrats left liberals. It's essentially the same and both have their roles in maintaining hegemonic ideology.

>>15744719
>doesn't know what liberal means part 1234990452390590

>>15744719
they are liberals to begin with

destroying social cohesion and letting poor people die just so people can freely interact with the economy is actually the most apt description of liberalism there is

>>15739911
Because all civilizations are organisms with a natural lifespan and an inevitable decline. However, democracy rapidly devolves into rule purely by those with money- money is exalted above all else and determines everything. Corruption is therefore intrinsic to democracy and quickly overtakes it unless certain conditions are met. This is why liberalism fails. Because deterioration and corruption are baked into the ideology itself.

>>15742206
No it has not. Black people grow up without fathers in appalling numbers and crime + drug use rocketed as a result. When the caste of traditional mores was removed, everything went to shit. Which was only partially fixed by the implementation of mass incarceration in the 80's and 90's. But that's bad too, because mass incarceration is a huge burden on the state and leads to the interests behind the prison complex becoming very brutal and powerful- which spreads the breakdown to other areas of government.

Progress for minorities is a good thing inherently, but just like decolonization, the way in which it was pursued was horrific and people are unwilling to change it.

>>15745433
*cast, not caste

>>15744719
Democrats banned asking if COVID patients had been to protests in NYC to push their political narrative:
https://www.businessinsider.com/nyc-contact-tracers-not-asking-people-attend-george-floyd-protest-2020-6
Also, 1/2 of all COVID deaths have been in nursing homes. Cuomo killed people by forcing nursing homes to accept covid patients.

>>15739911
Before we have this discussion, it's important to highlight a definition of liberalism, what is yours? Then define how it has failed.

>>15742206
actually the opposite, future politicians are just going to campaign about meaningless issues about less than 5 of the population while further globalization and economic inequality but hey at leas fags can get marry because we are good people.

>>15745433
FUCK
NIGGERS

>>15742905
Marx was the first neoliberal
>workers should own the means of production
kek literally what every coach in every company said to their wagecucks to empower them.

>>15744719
Which Republicans? Those are you allowed to see?

>>15742206
No it's not. Some groups need to be marginalized because their practices jeopardize the existence of a society in the long term. Without rigid and solid morals, and a certain limited social plasticity, everything collapses.

>>15744719
Dust to dust

>>15739911
Liberalism contains contradictions with the nature of our biology: there is an inherent drive of competition but liberalism assumes this just between individuals when in reality it extends out to wider kinship groups, ie going out as far as different races, the plurality Strives for by liberalism lacks stability because of this (along with suppression of other biological drives like reproducing and allowing abberrations like self castration).
>>15739921
So basically this, that wrong assumption being that all humans are of equal worth

>>15744719
Hey look, I spotted an american!

>>15745433
>Progress for minorities is a good thing inherently
No it isn't, and you can't just slap that down and then walk past it.
Why is it good, it sure as fuck isn't inherently so.

>>15744719
First of all:
>Implying both aren't fucking liberals

Second of all:
>Republicans are literally rationalizing the deaths of the sick, the poor and the elderly as necessary to prevent an economic recession.
Because more people will die from economic collapse if they don't.
What's more, these are potentially healthy and productive members of society dying, rather than:
>The sick, the poor and the no longer useful
Call it callous, but if the choice is between
>Fewer and less useful
And
>More and of greater use
You'd be a retard or a bleeding heart something or other to pick the former.

>>15744719
>Not knowing republicans are also definitionally liberals
Fuck off and lurk more before you post newfag, I know your gay subreddits just got closed but that doesn’t excuse posting this retarded crap from ignorance of word meanings. If you pretend you were baiting, that just makes you more gay and retarded to do so in such a stupid way.

>>15746744
>Some groups need to be marginalized
Can you give some examples? Do non-whites need to be marginalized?

>>15744719
Isnt the opposite side rationalizing people dying from the protests because its righteous or whatever?

>>15747728
Sexual deviants for example

>>15747728
Yes. Or better yet, genocided.

>>15744257
>I am actually impressed you found an argument in Deneen's sophistry. I could not even get to the premises through his fallacies and outright lies, but can see how he made them up from his a priori conclusion that the conservative monarchy and hierarchical cultural Identity of the elites should not be challenged. When you start there, then any attempts at introducing a fair system are anathema.

>What he fails to note is that the west has never been a society that was in any sense free, and so all conflicts with the exploitative system that are a reaction to that exploitation are twisted into being the "cause" of the problems BECAUSE people don't accept their slavery that the "culture" of conservatism demands.

>Then he completely misses all of history that writes a systemic system of oppression in Neo-liberalism after the first one resulted in two world wars.

>Even your addition of LGBTQ rights as a "equalization" show me your bias. There would be no need to impose laws guaranteeing rights if it weren't for someone activly trying to take them away. The victim becomes the aggressor in every fevered tirade of the conservative.

>I would applaud your tenacity in sticking out this piece of propaganda if it weren't for your obvious ignorance of both the facts and the sophistic techniques that made the rest of us throw the book out after the first three pages.

Why did you delete your post, big guy?

>>15740659
That's the founding assumption of liberalism.

>>15743857
it's like going to public school and thinking the teachers there have total control over your mind. you can't force a person to believe anything, they're only going to go along with what you tell them if they're already inclined to do so
>tl;dr where'd all the red pills come from then

>>15743073
oh really? what opposing ideology has emerged to challenge the liberal capitalist world order?

>>15744719
You cant expect people to be communitarian when their communities are full of low iq niggers out to rob them and asians/jews out to swindle them. The problems of US communities lie in the demographics of the US and how they effect the cultivation of a proper national identity that would allow people to put others first. No economic changes will fix this issue.

>>15744719
But aren't they suppossed to be Christian? Why are they going against their religion?

>>15748323
There's no ideology yet but the chinks are a challenge to liberalism or rather to woldwide liberalism (as they don't mind the west sending them dollars and their industry). They aren't going all out yet but something tells me we'll see fun shit in the next two decades

>>15740937
And much like peak oil
It's a retarded theory with no bearing on reality?

>>15748584
"Authoritarianism" is such a meaningless concept. It basically means "when an Anglophone identifies power exercised by the government, as opposed to the government forcing a business to exercise power."

>>15739925
/thread

>>15747728
They need their own country because diversity destroys social cohesion, which is a necessary ingredient in real democracy, or in the plebs having any ability to organize and defend their interests.

Really we just want to not get blamed for their personal shortcomings though - which are primarily a result of genetics rather than a phantom race-wide conspiracy to keep them down despite outwardly worshiping them. This too is a fault of liberalism, that large swathes of the population have come to expect equal outcomes between different people. Just dumb stuff, really.

>>15748740
based

>>15748306
>they're only going to go along with what you tell them if they're already inclined to do so
Are students not inclined to please their professors and avoid being ostracized by their peers?

>>15739911
the whole point of liberalism is to arrive at a conclusion not to continually perpetuate liberalism for liberalism's sake.

Europe deserves to be ethnonationalist but not America.

>>15740247
Self-replicating systems that naturally accumulate short term power gains at the expense of long term survival. This isn't 100%, that whole "rational flaw" crap is baloney. But there are problems with the very structure of the system which make it highly likely to revert to earlier states rather than pass through them.

>>15743857
people who come out of academia are dipshits like obama or buttgieg
they have no imagination and no ambition besides padding their cv and maintaining power.
there is no leftist conspiracy anon, anyone remotely leftist is completely marginalized in academia and never seen on any mainstream news network,
leftist sites are being denied traffic by google.
the left is dead.

>>15739932

>>15751043

>>15751087

post more rare jordans

>>15751207
>>15751043
I think he's an idiot but I do like me some socialist realism.

>>15751393
>socialist realism.
boring, boring, BORING

>>15751393
Those Ruskies did build some damn nice architecture...

>>15751478
Your loss libtard

>>15751507
heh

>>15751493
Did you see the new military cathedral that was built? Very beautiful blend of traditional and modern architecture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KOCkjEjFhw

>>15751525
I love how they make Jesus look vaguely Russian.

The best thing about Russian architecture, and you definitely see this reflected throughout the centuries with regime changes and ideological shifts, the ebb and flow of imperialism and shit, the best thing about Russian architecture is the "fuck you" to God inherent to the obsessive plurality of towers. It's never enough to just have one tower, clearly we need a fucking cascade of gilded orbs ornamenting the skyline. Crazy goddamn Russians can never do anything in moderation.

>>15751493
they used to, they don't anymore, haven't in ages. russian architecture has always felt like a bastardization of what came before. it's never felt authentic, never been wholly and endemically Russian, it's always borrowing from this or that or trying to emulate Western culture. i guess the best way to describe it is that it feels plagiarized in the way that a high school freshman thinks they can copy and paste Wikipedia into a Word doc without changing the formatting over, so you get half a paragraph of 12pt Times New Roman followed by a straight rip of whatever your browser happens to be displaying in.

i guess that's to be expected from a country that's never had a lasting identity, always interrupted or erased by revolution of world war of cultural alcoholism, so they're constantly grasping at the straws of the past while simultaneously being forced to move forward.

We need to save liberalism, even if it's becoming totalitarian it still is better and less totalitarian than communism or fascism

>>15751660
>a fucking cascade of gilded orbs ornamenting the skyline
this has always really intrigued me about their churches. It looks like a bouquet of flower bulbs and stems or something. My favorites are the ones like this with large plain white surfaces and tall thin windows

>>15751660
>I love how they make Jesus look vaguely Russian.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhtOGkUqVTU

>>15751718
>We need to save liberalism, even if it's becoming totalitarian it still is better and less totalitarian than communism or fascism
Why be stuck in the 19th and 20th century with three political ideologies?

>>15751777
that's just neofascism in disguise

>>15750851
This
I don't care about America, I care about Europe sadly what happens in America is going to happen in Europe

>>15742905
Privatization was invented to define what the nazis were doing

>>15751011
I don't think there is necessarily a "leftist conspiracy", but do really think that leftists are marginalized? Just look at the recent (seemingly coordinated) swift and simultaneous crackdown on 'hate speech' by several large tech companies. They targeted mainly conservatives but also progressives deemed not progressive enough, the so called 'TERFs' and such. I know I am conflating leftism and progressives, but it's very rare nowadays to find a leftist that isn't a progressive, in America at least. So much so that can be considered a core belief of the modern American left. People are losing their jobs after being outed as even vaguely critical of progressive dogma.

>>15751777
fuck off Dugin, your ideology is part of those 3

>>15752416
>>15752416
>crackdown on hate speech
it's liberal virtue signaling. big companies like to paint themselves as "woke" and inclusive to justify the economic exploitation they perpetuate.
and besides, they also banned some of the biggest leftist subs on reddit too, because muh "both sides" and "horseshoe theory"
you need to understand that there exist three groups:
a right, what you call the conservatives, who cater to angry rednecks.
a center/liberals/centrist types, which like to paint themselves as progressive and try to appeal to urban people and minorities, but in the end they are owned by the same rich bastards the conservatives are, and their purpose is to be a controlled opposition and to destroy any threats from the left which is the 3rd group.
notice how the democrats end up passing most of the legislation the republicans propose while making a big fuss about some bullish trump says to draw attention away from it.
notice what happened to Bernie sanders:
the entire democratic nomenkulatura joined forces against him. fucking Obama came out of retirement just to make sure he isn't elected.
You can look beyond the usa to see how Jeremy corbyn was treated by both the liberals and the conservatives and the media. they all joined ranks to demolish him and make sure he lost.
or you can look at Greece and see the tragedy that was syriza.
this is how politics works: right wingers and liberals always join forces to crush the left, while those liberals occasionally do some symbolic gesture to pretend that they "care"

>>15751818
>>15752455
>is explicitly anti-fascist
>claims it's fascist
How is 4PT fascist?

>>15752577
Huh, pretty funny that the Conservatives and Center/Centrists/Liberals are owned by "the same rich bastards", but the Left is free from such things.

Very, very interesting. The Left, as you point out, is apparently free from such corruption. I guess they really are saints.

>>15752663
the objective of the left is to deprive the rich bastards of their wealth if not, let's be honest, straight up murder them
why would they finance such a group

>>15752719
The American left is totally and 100% under control of the professional and elite classes. They're all trust fund kiddies, with hardly a working class person in them. Leftism in the US today (not historical variants) solely exists for preventing working class organization.

>>15752887
the left was always composed of rich(ish) dilettantes with enough time to pay attention to politics

>>15752719
You’re not American, are you?

>>15750734
how many posts have you read on here by anons complaining about their pozzed classes? if the total mind control powers of professors was real those would never have been made

>>15753193
no fbi-kun, you have no power over me

>>15748584
authoritarian liberalism is still just liberalism. and it already exists in the UK

Deneen's argument is unnecessarily rooted in baseless narrative and conjecture; the Tocqueville passages that his entire work are based on are much more concise and clear.

As power in the State centralizes and grows, the central ideal of liberalism, equality before the law, will inevitably grow in scope as well. Equality before the law shifts from preventing members of a community from acting unjustly to an individual to preventing communities from acting unjustly towards groups of individuals as the State grows in size and scope. Democracy ceases to become representative as communities become unable to govern themselves at the state and local level meaningfully. Now unable to govern themselves, communities become both separate from and reliant on the State to solve their issues. As local democracy is reactive to the issues of its people and the ever-larger State is not, instead becoming a vast bureaucratic network, injustice at the local level abounds. When the problem becomes large enough for the State to solve it, it must only do so materially; it is realistically too late to revert meaningfully. Thus material well-being comes under the scope of the State. This is the point of no return, as now equality before the law involves equality of material well-being, and we spiral to the state we are in now.

Keep an eye out for my book where I detail exactly how and when the US hit each one of these steps.

>>15752577
Interesting take. I think their is some truth in it but a lot of misunderstandings as well. One big red flag for me is that you seem to take the 'left' to be the only authentic political group; I'm always skeptical of people who claim that their side is the only valid perspective and everyone else is a useful idiot. Reducing conservatives to the redneck-pandering group is a pretty extreme oversimplification. Sure, that's a partly true, but you should read some good conservative writers like Carlyle or some-other if you want a more realistic understanding of the authentic right. Grouping the liberals and centrists together is casting a wide net as these people don't seem to get along very well; in my experience centrists are more accepted by conservatives than liberals. Likely because the conservatives feel they are fighting an uphill battle and will take any allies they can find. This same desperate tactic often works against them when it encourages them to overlook extremist members in their ranks, the neo-nazis and such people.

>>15753203
I'm not saying that professors are brainwashing students, I was going to clarify that in my post but I thought it would have been clear. All I'm saying is that when young people find themselves in a respected institution wherein the vast majority of authority figures hold a certain set of beliefs and a significant portion of their learning will focus on asserting the validity of that set of beliefs, it is only natural and expected that there is a much higher chance (again, not a certainty) of them adopting those beliefs. Are we to say that children's minds are molded by their parents but as soon as they reach college age they are no longer influenced by authority figures? Maybe to a lesser degree, but the influence is still there.

>>15753203
>>15753405
See pic related.

>>15753203
>>15753423
Notice that conservatives are mostly equally represented among all levels of education, as opposed to liberal views being positively correlated with time spent in universities and mixed views negatively correlated with the same.

>>15752719
Because the volatility present in your stupidity is a very powerful tool. You are like mad dogs they can sic on whomever they want. Also its an open secret that most of you are relatively rich.

>>15741077
ebin

>>15742830
Shitler was worse than both

>>15753304
his arguments aren't baseless they're pretty evident by just paying attention to what the liberal world is becoming

>>15739911
Because of changes in the long term debt cycle. We've been on the upswing since WWII and it's starting to bottom out. The more people think they're success is based on their own value as a citizen, the less empathy they have for the have nots. Thatcher said her biggest achievement was moving the leftists further right. It's all a cycle. Unfortunately, we're here to witness the end of this one.

>>15753224
It's "authoritarian" capitalism, capitalism is not another word for liberalism, we're talking about China after all

Bump

>>15741098


Interesting point of view.

>>15744174

Reminds me of some of Christopher Lasch's criticisms in the Culture of Narcissism. It's insane to think historians like Lasch and Chomsky and a social democrat like Bernie Sanders all saw this coming literally decades ago, tried to warn everybody, but all of it fell on deaf ears.

>>15744174
>>15744473
This is actually fascinating, and I appreciate both of you for summarizing the text. What's worth reading after Deneen? I'd like to get a better sense of where Western politics and ideology is headed.

>>15739911
Because once the objective of classical liberalism was completed, there is nothing left to do but be a conservative. Todays "liberals" aren't really liberal, they are just morally abject degenerates who promote all forms of disgusting behavior.

>>15755859
Watch it, your preconceived biases are showing.

>>15755881
>having a distaste for feeding 12 year olds estrogen and castrating them for a role in a homosexual porn parade is prejudiced
Take your meds.

>>15755904
Yes, because that defines the whole of the liberal bloc. Get over yourself.

>>15755922
I thought you pedophile loving freakshows were all about solidarity and unity?

>>15739911
read this

>>15755922
>"Get over yourself."
>is emotionally distraught over the left being described accurately in a negative light

>>15755933
and this, bitch

>>15755936
He wanted me to say they are stunning and brave for mentally torturing young boys with homosexual propaganda and telling black kids some imaginary faceless boogeyman is going to shoot them in the face for the color of their skin.

>>15755928
>>15755936
>>15755948
You don't even believe this, though.

>>15755961
Don't listen to them anon. They are just homophobes. It is perfectly natural to teach prepubescent boys to dance sexually hipgrinding against adult men and that is why love and neoliberalism will prevail.

>>15755961
>You don't even believe this
Yet you all believe America is systemically racist and can't name actual laws or policies which are explicitly designed to negatively impact black people without being able to name them?(Can evidence quite the contrary though, however)

>>15755988
You're inferring an awful lot about my position with absolutely no basis for doing so.

>>15756007
>no basis
Oh, so you colossal retards will ruin each others lives for not marching lockstep on every issue but when it comes down to having to rationalize your disgusting behavior you are suddently independent free thinkers? Get out.

>>15753605
i never understood how being rich invalidates a persons political positions.
besides, at the same time as right-wingers criticize the affluence of some those on the left they also criticize criticize the poverty of others on that side. look at AOC, who was made fun of for working as a waitress before.
you can never win with the right, you are either a hypocrite or a loser.
i am beginning to think your arguments are not in good faith and you just want to shut your opponents up

>>15756022
I'm pretty sure you're just trying to bait me.

>>15739911
Finding causes by looking at history is the same as jerking off to pictures of yourself, dumb book for dumb people in a dumb area of "knowledge"

Liberals got fooled by the left, in a few years progressivism will meet the same fate as liberalism.

>>15757851
Imagine not knowing literally anything about political ideology and then making a post on this website.

>>15757891
retards will inherit this earth anon

>>15757891
Its true.

Niggers

>>15756063
>you can never win with the right, you are either a hypocrite or a loser.
and with the left you're either a racist, sexist, transphobe, homophobe, etc, or a loser. What a surprise, most braindead retards on either side completely lack the wherewithal to even explain their position much less defend it.

>>15756063
Being rich invalidates your discourse because of the fact that you think you speak for the 'working class' which let's be honest does not care for revolution at all, they just want better conditions and not symbolical stuff. Hence the fact that the left had to turn to minorities of any kind to even have political relevance.

>>15758180
You think that's why the working class identifies with the conservatives?

>>15739921
Why did the thread even continue past this post

>>15754832
capitalism and liberalism are two peas in a pod

>>15740161
That niggers are actually human

Gay book, stop shilling.

>>15753405
>>15753423
>>15753445
you don't think that might have more to do with professional-managerial class consciousness, e.g. the very group of people who pursue post graduate degrees? you're still implying that a person is either arriving at college with zero opinions or their politics are changing radically, both are patently ridiculous claims

>>15758996
It's also a contributing factor that university is an intentionally intellectual undertaking, whereas most blue collar work and shitty wage labor is define by rote, mechanical, learn-by-doing, if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it kinda mantras. The two attract entirely different types of mindsets.

>>15758996
>you don't think that might have more to do with professional-managerial class consciousness, e.g. the very group of people who pursue post graduate degrees?
Definitely a factor, but I don't think that alone accounts for the over-representation of liberals.
>you're still implying that a person is either arriving at college with zero opinions or their politics are changing radically
No, I understand that conservatives tend to remain conservative and liberals tend to remain liberal. What I'm asserting is that people who are not politically polarized and people who already lean left tend to move further left after attending university. Do you really think that 18-year-old kids already have their political beliefs set in stone?

>>15749393
>Really we just want to not get blamed for their personal shortcomings though
aka deny past crimes comitted against them which help explain their current shortcomings

>>15759579
I don't know where that study is, but
>https://econjwatch.org/articles/faculty-voter-registration-in-economics-history-journalism-communications-law-and-psychology
shows that younger professors are overwhelmingly more democratic (and hence at least left-leaning) than republican. Though this study is in the social sciences.

Either way it's not a far shot to respond to your question by saying that most of those who are 18 years old and not set in stone in their political beliefs are much more likely to hear left-leaning arguments (at least in the social sciences) than right-leaning arguments, and therefore are more likely to become left-leaning.

>>15739932
did they also infiltrate your post and make it gay, or was that just you?

>>15749393
Diversity doesn't destroy social cohesion, racism does.

>>15739911
So is this book worth a crap?

Why does everyone post it along side this question as though they either haven't read it or it doesn't answer it's titular question?

>>15759657
low IQ post

>>15759657
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227686732_E_Pluribus_Unum_Diversity_and_Community_in_the_Twenty-First_Century_-_The_2006_Johan_Skytte_Prize_Lecture
No, it really seems to be diversity.

>>15759614
>most of those who are 18 years old and not set in stone in their political beliefs are much more likely to hear left-leaning arguments (at least in the social sciences) than right-leaning arguments, and therefore are more likely to become left-leaning
Yeah, that's really all I'm saying. I don't think it's some grand conspiracy or anything like that. It's just the expected outcome when liberal professors outnumber conservatives in almost every field. Especially in social sciences where the ratio is something crazy like 40:1.

>>15759745
>Putnam says, however, that "in the long run immigration and diversity are likely to have important cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits.

>>15759862
>moving goalposts

>Diversity doesn't destroy social cohesion, racism does.
>immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust (even of one's own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer
cope

>>15739921
>>15740161
>>15740289
This thread could have easily ended here.

Liberals ignore how the biological influences the ideological. They naively think liberalism can continue functioning even after voting rights have been extended to the uneducated and the weak, and then to women and non-white people. Because it works in the here and now, and for quite a while, they think it will keep working generations later, forever in fact. What it does though is accelerate the aging process of culture, and once a culture is old and feeble, it collapses, with some other group picking up the mantle for some time or the mantle being lost entirely (see Ancient Greece and Rome and the Dark Ages).

>>15760023
I, too, enjoy going online and waxing philosophical by using words that appear to have meaning but are actually devoid of meaning in the context in which I am using them.

>>15760100
Which words are you referring to?

>>15739911
>Why did liberalism fail?
It's complex, but if I had to identify a few major reasons they would be as follows.

a: Liberalism's perverse intercourse with technocapital. Nobody could fully appreciate how culturally dominant companies like Facebook would become. In the current political climate all these corporations have to do to justify their obscene market caps is make a few token gestures toward liberal values. Turn their logo rainbow colored for pride. Make a vacuous statement about black lives matter and post the fist. Promise to hire more women coders. This is all it takes to appease tepid liberals. Never mind the lurid ways these companies relay their substantial secular power into deep state deals , sell personal data by the bushel, evade taxes and generally destabilize the economy with monopolies and distort the culture and politics through the control of information. For all its talk of equality liberalism is too comfortable with wealth inequality, particularly in exceptional circumstances like tech capital.

b: Liberalism presents a simplistic moral universe of polarized and antagonistic opposites that is insensitive to the analysis of objective material conditions. White is bad, black is good. Male is bad, female is good. This reductionistic morality operates as a screen to obscure the uninterrupted progression of capital accumulation related to point a. Within this simplistic moral cosmology certain societal afflictions such as the opioid crisis affecting mainly the white working class in post-industrial backwaters simply do not compute.

c: Liberalism's quest for equality is betrayed by a fundamentally infantilizing attitude toward minorities. Rather than rejecting racism liberalism merely adopts a mirror image of it. It accepts that concepts such as race, gender , etc, are the fundamental categories through which all social formations are filtered and informed. The standard liberal can only view resistance to an issue such as immigration for example as racism . To the modern liberal these identity categories are indelible and decisive. You cannot through your identity to a world of objective facts. This mentality is lobotomizing and ensures that any actual political problem solving will be stunted and restricted by the requirement that it conforms to these inescapable organizing principles of identity. On the other side of it, it means that you can't criticize a minority in good faith, which is itself racist. True equality would mean that concepts like affirmative action have no validity.

In short, you can't solve the world's complex problems with the modest palette of concepts that liberalism forces you to interpret it through. Liberalism is timid, a safe and unoffensive option, unsuited to an environment of political crises and instability.

>>15739911
I don't know but the lovely ladies at the Red Scare podcast told me so, it must be true!

>>15745409
poor Spengler all alone and unnoticed. i see you buddy

>>15760118
"Culture," "liberalism," "aging process of culture," "biological influences the ideological," "culture is old and feeble." Did I mention "culture"?

Yes, yes, Greco–Roman references, sure to set apart my pile of politically biased, subtly racist, rehashed and regurgitated pithiness echoed by every generation of would-be subjugators throughout history. We get it—every other instance of liberalism-gone-wild was acceptable given its context in history, but this whole "Black Lives Matter" thing? A step too far taken by the misguided and uneducated radical, millennial, blue-haired feminists!

>>15751718
You don’t know what communism means

>>15760120
>Liberalism presents a simplistic moral universe of polarized and antagonistic opposites that is insensitive to the analysis of objective material conditions. White is bad, black is good. Male is bad, female is good.
What a retarded misrepresentation. Opression/exploitation and abuse of power are what's bad, not 'whites' and 'males'. It's just that whites and males tend to be more guilty of doing this, since they hold more power.

>>15760120
> permanent wartime philosophies are good!

>>15760216
>politically biased
Who isn't?

>subtly racist
All intelligent people are racist.

>rehashed and regurgitated
Just because it's been said before doesn't mean it's wrong.

>every generation of would-be subjugators
All culture is subjugation. All culture is oppressive. Culture requires oppression and we can't conceptualize culture without oppression without deeply deluding ourselves on the meaning of these words (which you have done, not me). Liberals, and you, are always ignorant about this, which was precisely what I was getting at in my post.

>>15760334
Your clarification adds nothing of value and introduces no new knowledge.

>>15760346
What makes you think it was my intention to? I already provided value to those with working, non-liberal (read: non-schizophrenic) brains.

>>15760354
If you weren't writing with intention then it was just masturbation. Are you masturbating, right now, anon?

Look, I'm saying you can't expect to contribute to a philosophical discussion if you're arguing from a position of unabashed political bias. That's arguably the least fruitful of philosophical biases to hold if your goal is to get somewhere of value. All you contribute was delocalization and mass media, us-them mentalities (endemic to all vitriol at all points of the spectrum), and quasi-anti-racist racism (because the slaved were freed, what more could you want).

Moreover? You didn't even come close to addressing OP's question.

>>15760424
Sorry, least fruitful of ideological* biases.

Not that you're going to read this anyway.

>>15760424
>Are you masturbating, right now, anon?
No, I'm dealing with someone whose brain is hardwired in such a way that it literally and physically can't understand mine. So why would I bother with trying to clarify anything to YOU? I'm only responding to help clarify for others in the thread.

>Look, I'm saying you can't expect to contribute to a philosophical discussion if you're arguing from a position of unabashed political bias.
Why not, considering EVERYONE argues from such a position?

>Moreover? You didn't even come close to addressing OP's question.
According to you, the liberal / schizophrenic.

>>15760457
>>Are you masturbating, right now, anon?
>No, I'm dealing with someone whose brain is hardwired in such a way that it literally and physically can't understand mine. So why would I bother with trying to clarify anything to YOU? I'm only responding to help clarify for others in the thread.
>>Look, I'm saying you can't expect to contribute to a philosophical discussion if you're arguing from a position of unabashed political bias.
>Why not, considering EVERYONE argues from such a position?
>>Moreover? You didn't even come close to addressing OP's question.
>According to you, the liberal / schizophrenic.
Here, I'll pad your echo chamber for you.

>>15760474
>echo chamber
Says the one claiming that others' words have no meaning to them.

>>15740989
This.

>>15760266
neither do you tranny, dilate

>>15760289
ehhh, hard to come to that conclusion reading the literature behind the ideology (CRT)

>>15760266
>the state will wither away this time, I promise
>we'll just abolish the state all at once this time, I promise

>>15759679
Because /pol/tards want to talk about politics. However, the book is pretty good overall, and I would recommend it.

>>15755849
Schmitt is a must read, some of his arguments are in Deneen's book. Dugin is also a pretty good read and mirror's Deneen's analysis pretty closely.

>>15755117
Deneen references Lasch, although his book Revolt of the Elites, not Culture of Narcissism.

>>15760516
Not really, unless you have a poor reading comprehension.

>>15739958
I wish we literally sacrificed subhuman dregs on a literal altar of order.

>>15739911
current events low-brow schlock is not Literature no matter how bad you want to push your political agenda

>>15760571
Am I gonna be reading thinly-veiled neo-facism?

>>15760593
are you by any chance latino

>>15760604
It isn't low-brow schlock. Deneen is a professor and the book is analyzing everything from a theory perspective, there's very little current events in there. It's just there's only like 3-5 anons in the thread who've read it.

>>15742206
>marginalized groups
Are weak and retarded. They never should have been imported into human civilization and will at some point have to be returned to their dirt countries.

>>15760613
No I'm scandi but we need to get rid of them anyway and I like the idea, let the blood flow.

>>15760612
Schmitt is much like Heidegger, his involvement with the Nazis is controversial, but has little to do with his writing. He only got involved after 1933 for obviously opportunistic reasons.

Dugin's writings aren't fascist at all, that's simply just a smear used by liberals to discredit him. Dugin is opposed to racial analysis and doesn't engage in antisemitism, nor does he advocate for intense statism. He's much more in the traditionalist camp than anything.

> We need to unite the right, the left and the world's Traditional religions in a common struggle against the common enemy. Social justice, national sovereignty and Traditional values are the three main principles of the Fourth Political Theory. It is not easy to put together such a varied alliance. But we must try if we want to overcome the foe.
Uh huh.

> “Neonazi” today is a pathological parody which came from crude pasquinade Visconti (“The Damned”) or weak-minded trash-exploitation in the style “Night receptionist”. In the area of gender “neonazi” there’s ever-present entertainment attribute — gay club and classical decorations of sex-shop.
Okay.

>>15760578
Lol, you must not've read any of it then

>>15739911
Politics are degenerate

>>15760302
>we should refuse to adapt our thinking to extraordinary circumstances!

>>15760641
Sounds like I should just read Heidegger.

Thanks anyway.

>>15759614
18 year olds are full adults, man. you're talking about them like they're 8. they can fuck, smoke, drive, vote, and get sent to die in some desert for uncle sam. they can think for themselves. you're just being a subtle naive solipsist

>>15759579
no but 18 year olds definitely have their economic class expectations set in stone, which is a much greater predictor of subsequent political positions (i'd argue the sole one)

>>15760615
Hot take: professors are just as capable of writing schlock for (current year) political nitwits to bounce around their echo chambers

>>15760911
Dugin is very big on Heidegger, and translated several of his books into Russian. Personally, I think Dugin's Heideggerianism is his weakest point.

>>15761080
I don't disagree, but even the shittiest academic books are better than pundit tier trash. Deneen's perspective is mostly unique however.

>>15761096
>>15760911
Also, Heidegger's work is largely apolitical.

>>15760501
You don’t even know what a vagina looks like.

>>15760556
I’m not a tankie. That’s the point!
Whiter it away now is the anarchist strategy
Get your head outta your ass.

>>15760630
don't worry the arabs will to that to you soon enough. good riddance I say

>>15760972
how many 18 year olds do you know that know jack shit about politics

>>15759657
this has to be bait

While this is the most popular thread on the board, can someone please post the oxford "english rose" copypasta?

Failing that, we really need a /britlit/ general for are culture.

>>15761150
They'll try.

>>15760972
The issue isn't their cognition, it's their experience. They haven't held views which have turned out to be embarrassingly wrong beyond argument yet, they havent seen the promises of politicians be chipped away by compromise. They are unaware how fallible they are, and it breeds an arrogance which makes them wholly unsuited to politics.

>>15761343
A lot of political problems would go away if the politicians had the arrogance of the youth combined with their experience.

>>15761432
Very true, but I'm a populist so I'm biased towards that sort of vision I suppose.

>>15761133
Hey retard, that's what the bottom of the post is addressed to.

>>15761503
So do it

>>15761511
>literally who writes book that says it would be better if we lived as the USA was envisioned and not as it became
>tripfag posts it ad nauseum
pottery

>>15760972
I'm guessing you are very young. Being legally an adult means very little. There is a massive difference between a teenager and someone 25+.

>>15739911
Seems to me it's thriving not failing.
You guys are failing.

>>15761712

>>15761716
lol there's a difference sure, but not massive. wait until you're 40.

>>15761728
the masses are in the streets of the US basically demanding
1) that we make blacks worse off by reducing police presence in high crime (read: high black) areas
2) that we enact legislation that discriminates on the basis of skin color to provide benefits, assurances, and even cold hard money

>>15761750
the US is a racist country sadly, even the anti racist are actually racist. The world will keep turning tough.

>>15739911
Feminization of white men. Giving white women a voice. Zionists.

>>15761769
they're not racist, just completely and totally clueless. I'm not typically one to subscribe to conspiracy theories but they are complete and absolute pawns to the media. They even think they're doing it in the name of "equality"

>>15761737
I only hope I don't cringe as hard as I do now when remembering how I was in my teens.

>>15739911
Most of you don’t even know what liberalism is

>>15761805
Naw. Turns out it was capitalism all along.

>>15761961
Real question, do you think technological (and quality of life) advancement is possible on even the same order of magnitude without capitalism?

>>15761511
I'm unapologetically a statist, so no.

>>15739911
I don't know. But I hate the libtards. That's all. I had this discussion with a woman, if you can call it that... Guys. 10 minutes in she hits me with the "how do you know anything? you're never sure. I just have my opinions. I don't have to justify them. They're not false or true. Truth and falsehood don't exist." My God. To think I could've just ended her life with one good punch? And she's giving me this relativistic nonsense just so she doesn't have to defend ruining the world so that she can dress like a whore and NOT be approached for sex?!

What would you do in this situation, bros?

>>15761973
Leftists, more specifically Marxists, believe that capitalism is a now outdated mode of production like feudalism and will be replaced by more efficient socialism and then communism.

>>15761973
Once we hit peak resources, we’re going to have to outstrip the advances AND live with less. But we can learn to like that lifestyle again.

>>15761980
It won’t work. Cross your fingers for China all you want. Statism won’t willingly concede communism

>>15762036
If there was any clear lesson of the 20th century, is that communism will not happen. Socialism is the best man can hope for. The state is a constant of life.

>>15739911
Liberalism is a stepping stone to Communism.

>>15761973
Of cousre not. Communist country economics is a very simple thing to grasp. Ignore all their bullshit fantasy LARP novels and this is what they do:
>find largest production in country more often than not its agricultural
>collectivize it forcefully
>force these new collective farms to sell their product at below market value to the State who in turn is able to provide the illusion of re-distribution
>new collective farms struggle to make ends meet
>State then buys consumer goods from State-Run factories and sells them at enormously overvalued prices
The rest I'm sure you can fill in for yourself. Total disaster.

>>15762147
So you swear to uphold our path to extinction, or are you the eternal pessimist that swears humans can’t adjust themselves any better (even though they have)

>>15762168
Modern methods of production and warfare require complex state apparatus, there's simply no way around it. The bourgeois state can only hope to be replaced by the proletarian state.

>>15762175
So, we can’t fight wars without a state, is your reasoning for keep a state.

It failed because we can't behave responsibly in the presence of so much power i.e. oil. Any political system would've failed unless it somehow controlled our malignant growth.

>>15761973
It can be made MUCH HIGHER without capitalism, but it will require the annihilation of the species so that a very small and worthy group can achieve it. We are headed towards this future faster than we are headed towards any kind of communism, which is why the communists are scared and very active these days.

>>15762380
One of the reasons, a state is exceptionally good at violence, which can be a benefit in a violent world.

>>15762410
It’s the cause of a violent world.

Humanity has to grow up.

>>15762550
Dude, you're a Utopian moron if you think mankind will just enter a state of peacefulness after tens of thousands of years of constant conflict and brutality. You're a totally detached idealist. Standing armies and police have existed at all points in human history in one form or another, they're a historical constant. No amount of appealing to 'growing up' will change that.

>>15762550
Not him; the world is violent despite what humans do in it. Even the act of breathing is an act of violence against something, even if it's mere molecules. Not that this is an excuse for constant violence between humans, but there's no way to avoid it from arising perfectly.

Also, I don't think the other anon's point was that states are good for waging war and should be kept on that quality alone. The socioeconomic machine is too complex to maintain without the existence of the state. Eliminating the state will only occur if there are massive changes in the world (read: hundreds of millions of people are removed from the gene pool and generations are allowed to pass after this; immense violence, in other words). And after all is said and done, what do you think the remaining humans will do without the state? Live in peace? lol

>>15761343
>these doggone kids with their loud rap music
literally you

>>15759679
I get that people might be pissed off that its taking place on /lit/, but I always thoroughly enjoy these threads, they are interesting and often relatively civil with genuine effort posts and arguments.