/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13007267]

wtf I'm leftist now?

[Anonymous No.13007281]

>>13007267
That was based Zizek’s plan, he said as much, did Zizek, said he was only accepting the debating with the pontificating Peterson for purposes of propaganda, said he wanted to differentiate, did Zizek, between PC SJWs and Real Bona Fide Balls On The Table Marxism, yessir, and that’s what he did, did Zizek, many an anon have I since encountered with nary a qualm nor quibble with MARXISM, the name so long dreaded, since we were so long brainwashed by 70s TVs with encoded messages intermixed subtly with the goodnight national anthem.

[Anonymous No.13007282]

>>13007267

>Peterson's internal thoughts
>I'm gonna roast this fat marxist slob

>Zizek's internal thoughts
>hey free water

[Anonymous No.13007333]

Zizek is to the right of Peterson (who loves Jews and (((Capitalism))))

[Anonymous No.13007341]

>>13007281
Did Alex write this? Why did Ludovico's technique stop working on you? I need answers after reading that shit

[Anonymous No.13007390]

>>13007333
Yes, because marxists are to the right of cuck liberals.

[Anonymous No.13007401]

>>13007267
Did Žižek make a case for any leftist ideas?
He didn't defend communism at all, instead he agreed with Memerson on pretty much everything.

[Anonymous No.13007405]

>>13007401

[Anonymous No.13007411]

>>13007390
>left wing communism: a disorder

[Anonymous No.13007412]

>>13007390
Zizek is a European Nationalist who believes in Socialism. A National Socialist if you will

[Anonymous No.13007522]

>>13007333
>>13007411
>>13007412
The flux of /pol/tards feeling welcome here after the debate has dropped the IQ of this board quite noticeably. Can’t wait until they remember that they don’t read.

[Anonymous No.13007530]

>>13007522
Left Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder is a book by Lenin.

[Anonymous No.13007532]

>>13007282
You think you're joking.

[Anonymous No.13007541]

>>13007282
Wait why does lobsterman get San Pellegrino and zizek get plain flat water wtf

[Anonymous No.13007551]

>>13007401
He did not defend 20th century communism because he believes that dream is definetly and permanently dead, but he is still a marxist in the sense that he believes some form of communist society is necessary for our survival in the long term.
His opinion is essentially that the left has to reform and create a new alternative, communist at heart, but viable for the 21st century. Which more or less matches his philosophical project of reforming Marx by going back to Hegel.

[Anonymous No.13007556]

>>13007541
Its Evian and it comes from the french alps; btw evian and saint pellegrino are both products of nestle.

[Anonymous No.13007560]

As Hegel said "The more the ordinary mind takes the opposition between true and false to be fixed, the more is it accustomed to expect either agreement or contradiction with a given philosophical system, and only to see reason for the one or the other in any explanatory statement concerning such a system. It does not conceive the diversity of philosophical systems as the progressive evolution of truth; rather, it sees only contradiction in that variety."

[Anonymous No.13007569]

>>13007551
So basically he's not a commie, but he just calls himself one, to get attention? Got it.

[Anonymous No.13007571]

>>13007267
Can anyone honestly understand anything he says.. like not content wise but beyond the accent and weird speech thing?

[Anonymous No.13007577]

On the 22nd of April Peterson gave a talk at the Koch-funded Heritage Foundation.

Last year he gave a talk to the Koch-funded Manhattan Institute.

On his twitter he has often cited HumanProgress - a project of the Koch founded & funded Cato Institute.

He has also referred people to the Institute for Humane Studies - Charles Koch has been the chairman of its board since the early 1970s and between 2005-2017 alone donated 34 millions to it.

Peterson attends TPUSA events - TPUSA receives funding from 4 different Koch funded groups, and hosts other Koch sponsored pundits.

Peterson first came to public attention at Rebel Media. Rebels founder Ezra Levant did his college internship at the Charles G. Koch Foundation, later he worked at the Fraser Institute - the Kochs principal think tank in Canada. Rebel Media has received funding from Daniel Pipes racist Middle East Forum and it has in turn received funding from Donors Capital Fund - a 'blind trust' used by the Kochs and other wealthy elites to mask their contributions to climate change denial outfits and islamophobic groups like Middle East Forum.

So what is the deal with the Kochs interest in Jordan B. Peterson?

[Anonymous No.13007580]

>>13007571
It's pretty easy to understand if you're not a nasty Anglo.

[Anonymous No.13007589]

>>13007577

[Anonymous No.13007590]

>>13007571
His English is pretty good, honestly, and the ticks and lisp are nowhere near as bad as they were at certain points in the past.

[Anonymous No.13007592]

>>13007577
sounds like a conspiracy theory desu

[Anonymous No.13007594]

>>13007569
He is not a traditional Marxist-Leninist or an anarchist, but he is still very much on the far left and does believe and desire a communist society, just not the kind that Marx and most 20th century communists envisioned. There are plenty of communists that do not share Marx's original ideas or Lenin's or Mao's implementations of said ideas.
It's hard to pinpoint his position exactly, because he himself is not sure on where to stand. As I said, his whole philosophical project is to reform Marx through Hegel, and the product of such thing is not as evident by himself. Still he is undoubtably an anti-capitalist.

[Anonymous No.13007595]

>>13007589

[Anonymous No.13007598]

>>13007577
antisemitic dogwhistle

[Anonymous No.13007599]

>>13007569
No, not basically that at all
Why do /pol/acks always refuse to even try and engage with an idea on any level

[Anonymous No.13007601]

>>13007592
Stating verifiable facts is a conspiracy theory?
I have drawn no conclusions based on these facts. I have not presented my own opinion on what they mean.
I only ask why is it occurring.
>>13007595

[Anonymous No.13007602]

>>13007571
Are there any Europeans who seriously think Zizek is impenetrable due to his way of talking? Always seems to be americans

[Anonymous No.13007606]

>>13007602
OBSESSED

[Anonymous No.13007610]

>>13007267
>two neo-liberals promoting their own flavor of neo-liberalism
>muh epic left vs right debate

Will we ever see a mainstream debate with someone who dares to think outside of the established narratives?

[Anonymous No.13007616]

>>13007598
The Kochs openly hung out with Holocaust Deniers from the 1960s to at least 1980 when the Cato Institute was publishing this

[Anonymous No.13007618]

>>13007602
I normally like The Last Psychiatrist but I reread an old post recently where he shittalked Zizek for speaking too academically in one of his books, and it disappointed me

[Anonymous No.13007625]

>>13007610
How is an openly Marxist communist a "neoliberal"
Do you just use words whose definitions you don't understand

[Anonymous No.13007627]

>>13007569
>>13007599
/pol/acks identify as Nazis to trigger the left, but a leftist identifies as a Stalinist to trigger rightoids and everyone loses their minds

[Anonymous No.13007632]

>>13007627
The man has devoted his entire adult life to Marxist academia and communist theory
I know it's unusual on this place to encounter anybody who isn't a larping fag, but you should occasionally remind yourself that the real world isn't always like that and grown-ups tend not to do most things for the purpose of triggering anybody

[Anonymous No.13007639]

>>13007577
I suspected Peterson was a lowly salesman. This confirms it.

[Anonymous No.13007656]

>>13007625
Because when asked for any concrete ideas he offers nothing except neo-liberalism.
>we must come together to solve the problems of commons like ecology
Wow, so radical, so insightful.

He won't even dignify the nationalist position (besides admitting that some immigrants do in fact cause trouble) with anything but the typical strawman arguments, because he's that deep in the neo-lib mindset.

[Anonymous No.13007664]

>>13007267

You weren't before? Unironically fuck you.

[Anonymous No.13007665]

>>13007639
A salesman for what?

[Anonymous No.13007678]

>>13007656
Lol his point is that we do need communism, but not th eold and dead idea of communism. Read his work, idiot.
And of course he won't dignify the "nationalist position" he is well aware of the fascist that harbors behind someone holding such views. And if you actually paid attentiont to what he said, he is very critical of neo-liberalism, but his discourse is more on an ideological level rather than on single policies.

[Anonymous No.13007689]

>when peterson said that the revolution will be bloody and violent and everyone cheered and he looked like he was about to cry

[Anonymous No.13007693]

>>13007656
probably want to learn what the word neoliberalism means before using it

[Anonymous No.13007696]

>>13007689
That was an awesome moment.

[Anonymous No.13007700]

>>13007678
at that point it's just a meme word

[Anonymous No.13007706]

>>13007689
>I'm genuinely asking, not calling you an illiterate idiot at all, I swear

[Anonymous No.13007711]

>>13007700
>trying to revitalize a movement that is for the most part dead in the western world by freeing it from the old values that brought the Soviet Union and China to degenerate in authoritarian states is meme-ing.
I shiggy diggy

[Anonymous No.13007717]

What do you think of this quick take? https://youtu.be/zQfEUeCZt8M

[Anonymous No.13007772]

>>13007717
>The Distributist
Can't say I'm surprised he doesn't know how to pronounce Slavoj Žižek. But, anyway, I'm not going to bother listening to all of that. I already know it's a bad take.

[Anonymous No.13007777]

>>13007772
How stereotypical of you

[Anonymous No.13007818]

>>13007717
so zizek was /ourguy/ all along

[Anonymous No.13007825]

>>13007777
>>13007818
He defends Zizek? Turns out I (>>13007772) was wrong.

[Anonymous No.13007837]

So can someone actually give a quick rundown on what are some actual arguments Peterson gave? I have not seen a single post discussing anything of substance he said. I wonder if he actually said anything because my attention span is too short for his speeches.

[Anonymous No.13007844]

>>13007837
bloody postmodern neomarxists are a good label for essjews because 25% of social science professors identify as marxist

[Anonymous No.13007863]

>>13007711
>communism without communism
Nice "movement", lol. Again, Žižek proposes no ideas that significantly deviate from neo-liberalism.
I can appreciate some of his insights into the current state of things, but he has no political ideas. He wants to stay morally neutral or at best stay in line with mainstream morality, which is typical for a professional intellectual.

[Anonymous No.13007865]

>>13007825
he defends Zizek in the sense that he think Zizek's points are reactionary rather than marxist

[Anonymous No.13007869]

>>13007689
>>13007696
That was pretty cringe, and just goes to show how many young people larp as communists just to be edgy.

[Anonymous No.13007870]

>>13007844
Zizek agreed that university leftists are scum but just thinks the label marxist is the wrong one to use

[Anonymous No.13007874]

>>13007869
well, you can't have revolutions without incels

[Anonymous No.13007884]

>>13007837
He started by admitting that the only Marx he's read is the Communist Manifesto. He then did a "takedown" of the "10 fundamental axioms of Marxism".
>labour is not exploitation because if you exploit your workers they work less or quit
By definition capitalist labour is exploitation under a Marxist framework because the boss gets to keep the product of your labour and benefit greatly from it while you get the minimum. Not to mention the numerous historical cases of "real" exploitation.
>hierarchy exists in biology therefore Marxism is wrong
Marxism is not the abolition of all hierarchies, only class hierarchy.
>class existed before capitalism! It can't be laid a time the feet of capitalism!
Marx knows this and spends a lot of his works dealing with feudal class societies and others. Even in the manifesto it says ALL HISTORY is the history of class struggles.
>there are more struggles than just class
Yes. But as you abolish class (one primary struggle) you can then set your sights on abolishing other personal struggles in your life.
>not everyone is the same! Not everyone wants to be creative.
They don't have to be under Marxism. They will have time and resources to pursue their other passions.
>hierarchy is necessary
Maybe. Class hierarchy isn't.
>binary class struggle
Marx deals with the various classes in society. Peterson just hasn't read anything beyond the communist manifesto.
>bourgeoisie is evil
No but the system which allows them to exist in relation to the workers is bad

Can't remember much more off the top of my head

[Anonymous No.13007885]

>>13007869
in der Wirklichkeit it was cringe ofc, but his reaction made it hard not to laugh with them

[Anonymous No.13007968]

>>13007884
the biggest mistake that the typical mainstream pseudointellectual criticism of marxism/socialism/communism makes (which also happens to be shared by what seems to be a huge amount of online radlibs, tankies and anarchist bluehair types) is that Marx is making any kind of moral judgment on either workers or capitalists. The person paying your wages could be the kindest, unblemished angel and you the lowest, irredeemable wretch in the world, but he's still exploiting you whether either of you wants or knows it, just by virtue of the arrangement where you work and he takes some cut of the value created to sustain the business and pay himself

[Anonymous No.13007982]

>>13007267
That's...a lot of water. Do they really need all that?

[Anonymous No.13007996]

>>13007982
have you not seen how much saliva zhniff uses up during a speech?
have you not HEARD it?

[Anonymous No.13008002]

>>13007267
Well How could you not walk out a debate between two leftist and be anything but a leftist?
The Dialectic at work yet again.

[Anonymous No.13008012]

>>13007281
Accreate.

[Anonymous No.13008014]

>>13007996
how about peterson? does he sweat that much, or is it all crying?

[Anonymous No.13008020]

>>13008002
wouldn't you end up as a superfascist though the negation of a negation?

[Anonymous No.13008021]

>>13008014
equality of opportunity not of outcome

[Anonymous No.13008023]

The debate made me want to read Marx, so I can intellectually destroy left liberals.

[Anonymous No.13008034]

>>13008021
wtf i'm thirsty now

[Anonymous No.13008041]

>>13008023
>marx
>liberals
wut

[Anonymous No.13008046]

>>13008041
i'll beat them with capital volume 3

[Anonymous No.13008049]

>>13007627
Zizek doesn't identify as a tankie though.

[Anonymous No.13008056]

>>13008049
zizek loves cheekily saying that he's a stalinist

[Anonymous No.13008061]

>>13008056
He set up a picture of Stalin once for that vice interview but 95% of everything he has written about the eastern bloc and north korea is generally negative.

[Anonymous No.13008066]

>>13008023
Please do, I'm so sick of youtube commenter libertarians being the height of opposition

[Anonymous No.13008067]

>>13008056
Stalin was unironically a moderate.

[Anonymous No.13008069]

>>13008056
Also he was in the opposition party during the Tito days.

[Anonymous No.13008070]

>>13008061
do tankies actually pretend that NK is good? not just "it's the rest of the world's fault somehow" but that it's actually a good place to live?

[Anonymous No.13008071]

>>13008061
No, of course Zizek is a demsoc in practice, but we're talking about facetiously praising dictators in order to make people mad here

[Anonymous No.13008076]

>>13008070
Tankies say whatever they want because they are LARPers in the deepest, truest, most non-allegorical sense of the word

[Anonymous No.13008079]

>>13008070

[Anonymous No.13008092]

>>13008070
>Do people whose life style is secured by Western societies like to pretend to be edgy commies, if they won't suffer any negative consequences, other than some mean tweets at most?
Yeah, they do.

[Anonymous No.13008124]

>>13008070
NK is suffering sanction after sanction. Not saying I'm a fan of the regime but you'd be a fool to think that external pressure is having no impact on their economy.

[Anonymous No.13008157]

>>13007530
>>13007411
The context of that title is, of course, highly important.
In Soviet Russia there was a movement which claimed to be further left and focused on proletarianism when compared to the vanguardist Bolsheviks. From there was borne the ideology of "left communists", or "leftcoms", who were (and still are) highly critical of Lenin and his ilk. Lenin responded in turn with comparable harsh criticism towards them. In short, in his polemic he accused them of being unpragmatic and utopian, childish.

Naturally this does not mean there is a "right-wing communism", but that within the "left" there is a subjective "lefter" and a "less left", which have had (and still have) disagreements on how to move forward.

[Anonymous No.13008254]

who goes in the middle chair

[Anonymous No.13008271]

>>13008254
Sargon of Akkad