[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 21 KB, 259x400, 41WcjdYrDyL._AC_SY400_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
14244238 No.14244238 [Reply] [Original]


Who else has been radicalised into far right beliefs by toxic cult chambers of the internet, like /pol/, and is now working on de-radicalising?

What books have helped you gain clarity of mind?

For me it was pic related. The last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient, >duh left will make the sky fall down and the economy crash. Reading Conquest of Bread helped me realise that capitalism was far from the most efficient system out there and that it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people. I'm not sure I'm an anarchist, probably just a generic leftie, but I certainly recommend this book as a starting point.

>> No.14244254

What's the point of having political views?

>> No.14244321

Political views are how you make sense of the world

>> No.14244328

read carl schmitt

>> No.14244338

>switches to an equally radical ideology
Name a bigger sign that someone is a loser than this, organically evolving into communism or fascism or traditionalism or anarchism or whatever far-X ideology is worlds different to just jumping from extreme to extreme because you can't admit you don't fit in anywhere.
Unironically never gonna make it.

>> No.14244342
File: 400 KB, 1302x2083, 6140D287-DF13-425C-B707-5D4FE9826B8C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people.
Or any other living things. It’s just a madness.

Since there is no inherent meaning in life, only an array of purposes, men have taken up ideas into their heads. For various reasons we developed a ruling class and a ruled class. What is the point of that indeed.

>> No.14244355

>switches to an equally radical ideology
He’s figuring things out. What are you? A radical centrist? Radical NPCism?
You’ve unironically not made it. Enjoy stasis.

>> No.14244365

Politics has little to no impact on my daily life.


>> No.14244372

This book is one of the most dated things I have ever read, its hilarious reading it with the hindsight of what happened in the 20th century.

>> No.14244382

God forbid someone thinks and grows. I hope the ground beneath your feet fissures and you tumble into a sulfuric chasm to be marmaladed between the holy tectonics swallowing you like a bitter medicine. After enough eons, your gristle and gobs will petrify, a smear in life and death. One can only pray that a serendipitous excavation of your entombmemt can, once polished and finished, serve the distant children of >>14244238 as a coffee table on which to invite female guests to rest their beverages and bare feet.

>> No.14244402
File: 1.53 MB, 1183x1575, Pedro_II_of_Brazil_1850.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Just switch over to monarchism as I did. It's so aesthetic and you can still reject the world which liberalism has created.

Anything which challenges the status quo is "radical".

>> No.14244416

No impact? I highly doubt that. You work for some shareholder 40 hours a week, 50 years of your life. Thats political. And internally, whether you believe that everyone deserves basic rights and equal standards impacts your behaviour significantly to believing in a hierarchy and superiority of some people to others.

I haven't switched to any ideology yet, I've just stopped supporting capitalism, which is a fully clear minded and rational conclusion to draw. Its right wing and conservatism that relies on boogaloo mysticism to keep people enthralled, and coming up with reasons to defend a brutal hierarchy of people is what Id call radical.

>> No.14244420

Tell me how you envisage an anarchist society coming about and functioning, butters?

>> No.14244442

I can describe how it functions well. I can only suggest ways it can come about. The statists may just succeed in killing us all off if we don’t find some way to bring ourselves to our own powers.

>> No.14244444

>ou work for some shareholder 40 hours a week, 50 years of your life. Thats political.

Not really. And even so, there's nothing I can do about it.

>whether you believe that everyone deserves basic rights and equal standards impacts your behaviour significantly

Also, not really. Behavior is more affected by the need to conform to social norms than my opinions.

How I feel about the systems around is me irrelevant. They simply are, and I must make dealings.

>> No.14244449

>I can describe how it functions well. I can only suggest ways it can come about.
Well go on

>> No.14244457

theres a huge difference between being a battered wife that believes you are getting what you deserve and being a battered wife that knows she is being treated unjustly.

>> No.14244458

What the fuck are you talking about? You think Nazis believed in muh free markets? Being a libertarian doesn't make you "far right". SAGE

>> No.14244461 [DELETED] 
File: 16 KB, 500x375, « Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.14244462


>only the rightwing relies on irrationality

How many genders are there again and do you think a single Democratic candidate for president would say, on record, that there are biological differences between men and women.

>> No.14244475

Conformity is a political stance. It isn’t radical, of course. It is, in this case, this decaying status quo, a degeneracy.
Nice get.

... but I’m le tired.

>> No.14244479

I'm only going to assume you can't butters. A shame, I was willing to be converted.

>> No.14244480 [DELETED] 

do you have a goodreads account? >>14244442

>> No.14244484

Not even worth engaging with

Libertarianism is an illusion. You think you're being nice and peaceful by only going after direct violence but you fail to acknowledge that you're defending an unjust and violent system, which is capitalism.

>> No.14244512

Based even if that's not OP's situation.
Waaay to many pinko ex-Trumptards jumping on the edge train, and vice versa.

>> No.14244523

> Yesterday: "I've only ever mentioned Kroptokin once."
Fuck you butters.

>> No.14244528

I have sperged out before on occasion.
I’ll do something ITT later

>> No.14244535

That was a misunderstanding and you’re not even representing it right. Pshh
I should be napping

>> No.14244541

Jordan Peterson

>> No.14244557

>I’ll do something ITT later
I'll be back in 12 hours.

>> No.14244560


You won't engage with me because I'm right. The right may have had to make room, but the left has their own seat on the anti-science bench. They deny biology, anthropology, and psychology.

>> No.14244573


I'm coming to the viewpoint that the modern era, where the labor of individual human beings is continuously being devalued at unsustainable rates, might present an insurmountable obstacle to both capitalist and communist economic models.

>> No.14244575

No there isn't.

Only if you consider all human interactions to be political.

>> No.14244578

Love you butters, goodnight.

>> No.14244587

I unironically thought this said conquest of the beard.

>> No.14244591


>for various reasons

What is "the testing ground of spontaneous organization of human collectives for mutual benefit against brutal reality, yielding time and time again over history the development of hierarchies in which the strongest or most competent come to lead"?

>> No.14244601

The only leftists I can respect are the most cynical of Marxist rationalists. The rest all rely on giving human life far more value than it deserves. It’s vulgar sentimentalism and nothing more.

>> No.14244646

The words origin of course is “polis”, so yes, something like that.

It’s “vulgar” to you to want to see humanity grow the fuck up? Spineless bootlicker

>> No.14244664

>believing in free markets makes you a right wing radical
You were a larper then and are a larper now

>> No.14244677

>It’s “vulgar” to you to want to see humanity grow the fuck up? Spineless bootlicker
>not creating a system where all decent people are the boot
Social systems are infinitely more valuable than any human life and the lie that is the Human community.

>> No.14244688

>was far from the most efficient system out there and that it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people

because you are a brainlet and anyone who thinks like you is a brainlet who can`t spend more in a non-walmart store.
The basis of your enlightment is flawed and i know you wont accept it because humans are retarded and stubborn.

t. guy who spends more in his local markets from a country where small business can go toe to toe with the big guys
It won`t last tho...people think like you and they want to save a few dollars (two of them are a Swedish and a Canadian international business LMAO)

>> No.14244717

>The words origin of course is “polis”, so yes, something like that.
The ideologue is right. We’ve been living in the political shadow of Aristotle for a good 2000 something something years.

As a sidenote butter. Do you know why modern anarchist refer to themselves as anarchists. The word far predates the actual political thought and you guys copping it just makes you have to answer the whole “we don’t believe in no hierarchies, just unnecessary ones” shtick every 5 seconds. Wouldnt “reductionist” or something be a more accurate term?

>> No.14244733

Read Understanding Power by Chomsky. That'll cure you of any far right views and solidify your beliefs in leftist views.

>> No.14244773

I’ve read a good amount of his political work, and it hasn’t changed my mind. I tend to find his analysis interesting, but I disagree with pretty much any normative claim he makes.

>> No.14244774
File: 472 KB, 1253x1151, EFC6ZjCUEAAioJ4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Opposite for me. Used to be an anarchist in my teenage years and now I'm an absolute monarchist. There was no one book that precipitated the change, rather a broard survey of the history of governance and philosophy. Special attention was given to mimetic theory and power analysis however.

>> No.14244808


What does your response even mean?

>> No.14244906

The libertarian-socialist society looks like everyone is in charge, but feels like no one is. We would prefer it that way. I would think.

I think he wants robot fascism

>> No.14244955

So you have something to sound important with on social media

>> No.14244959

is this shopped this bitch looks fucked up

>> No.14244962

>he's not a right wing anticapitalist
i am lmaoing my ass of at your life rn

>> No.14244988

>I think he wants robot fascism
Those people tend to have a rather reductive view of technology even if they are right in wanting to exalt technology over the human existence. They tend to ignore that social creation is better suited to the transcended of “humanity” than machines alone are.

>> No.14244995

>right wing anticapitalist
An oxymoron.

>> No.14245024

>what is monarchism
>what is fascism
>what is prussian socialism
>what is distributism
Brainlet you are.

>> No.14245032

Don’t argue with these total brainlets, they still believe in the retarded left-right spectrum where the right is capitalism and the Left is Marxism and there is no other choice

>> No.14245064
File: 49 KB, 590x525, 1548205505763.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

tfw fascism is not capitalism

>> No.14245074


>> No.14245087

I was radical way before I got on line newfag.

>> No.14245104

I hate materialists so fucking much guys

>> No.14245112

Tricks you into thinking you matter.

>> No.14245115

You have any specific examples you're thinking of? I'm always interested to see why people might reject certain claims by chomsky since I find everything he says to be so obvious.

>> No.14245118

Funnily enough, many of the original fascists were exactly like that.

>> No.14245126

All those use money and hierarchies.
Capitalism and pre-capitalism systems aren’t what the “left” are aiming for. Just admit it. You just want to fix capitalism.

The only “rightwing” anti capitalists I can conceive of are Ted K sorts of an-prims. But I haven’t read his thing

>> No.14245142
File: 9 KB, 258x386, Debt_Graeber.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You have a narrow (i.e. liberal) conceptualization of the poltical spectrum. Read pic related. Money and hierarchies aren't "things" but rather moral principles. They are found everywhere, together, across cultures and across time.

>> No.14245167
File: 81 KB, 900x900, unnamed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Not sure what sort of reception you expected posting this here but I'm happy for you comrade.

>> No.14245183

According to your 4th grade understanding of science they do. The debate about gender is first and foremost a philosophical one, not something that can be solved by conflating terms and mindlessly repeating dead helicopter jokes.

>> No.14245198
File: 964 KB, 500x255, 5643F692-1DD4-4736-B2FD-3F9288F0434D.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>moral principles

We can do better.

>> No.14245234

Are you daft? Graeber isn't making a prescriptive claim. He's simply noting that hierarchy, exchange and indeed communsim are universally observed, society-guiding moral principles. It is only within this liberal paradigm that we find ourselves that they are thought of as incompatible.

>> No.14245260

>fully automated egosexual reclusion

This but unironically.

>> No.14245285
File: 41 KB, 360x720, 1557028995167.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Radicalizing into the other polar extreme is not deradicalizing.

Why not take the pragmatic pill and just stop trying to preconceive the world and experiment with what works and doesn't in your own life and observation of others around you?

Why do you need an ideology and criticism to think for you?

>> No.14245298

It's mostly just another form of impotent consumerism.

>> No.14245670
File: 68 KB, 720x540, 1546899584246.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I think that the book argues that sharing is more universal than exchange.

>> No.14245678

> 'free markets' are right wing ideolog
Are you utterly mad? Are you retarded? What next, calling Ayn Rand a """conservative"""?

>> No.14245690

>falling for the pragmatism meme
im so glad that the economic global downfall is making all righties and centrists fucking wrong about everything

>> No.14245709
File: 1.05 MB, 876x657, 1571078913861.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Who else has been radicalised into far right beliefs by toxic cult chambers of the internet, like /pol/, and is now working on de-radicalising?

Yes, though it is still something I am struggling with. There are days when I seem to be doing well but ill make the mistake of spending too much on the internet or global news and I wind up with that same feeling of anger and despair that I was trying to escape from.

>What books have helped you gain clarity of mind?
To be really honest none, though reading quality apolitical fiction and religious texts got me away from reading political works which helped calm things down even it it was ultimately escapism.

I deeply regret ever having an interest in politics, Im just not intelligent and emotionally mature enough to deal with this material.

>> No.14245716

If you consider blind pandering philosophy

>> No.14245750

You're heavily loading your language with emotional, subjective language and un-examined assumptions based on feelings.

Pretending that things which make you uncomfortable are not true does not make them false. Pushing reality away with words like "toxic" does not insulate you from its ravages. If that's what you mean by "de-radicalising" then you're defining "radical" as "rational."

>> No.14246027


And the second part of my question?

>> No.14246077

Lmao how does it feel being a boomer faggot
I'm far right, and the only other people I can tolerate are far left. I can't comprehend how anyone can be in the centre for any reason other than greed

>> No.14246095

>last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient,
>left will make the sky fall down and the economy crash.
>helped me realise that capitalism was far from the most efficient system out there and that it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people.

So you were a useful idiot for Jews, and you learned about how usury is bad. How'd you get from that to advocating for utopian internationalist terrorism (leftism)? You know anticapitalism is one of the most significant elements of the right wing?

>> No.14246126

His concern for market efficiency, especially how he conceives of it, demonstrates an internalization of leftist values and conceptions or politics.

There's no need to go blaming the Jews for everything.

>> No.14246135

>There's no need to go blaming the Jews for everything.

"Judaism has held its own alongside Christianity, not only as religious criticism of Christianity, not only as the embodiment of doubt in the religious derivation of Christianity, but equally because the practical Jewish spirit, Judaism, has maintained itself and even attained its highest development in Christian society. The Jew, who exists as a distinct member of civil society, is only a particular manifestation of the Judaism of civil society.

Judaism continues to exist not in spite of history, but owing to history.

The Jew is perpetually created by civil society from its own entrails.

What, in itself, was the basis of the Jewish religion? Practical need, egoism.

The monotheism of the Jew, therefore, is in reality the polytheism of the many needs, a polytheism which makes even the lavatory an object of divine law. Practical need, egoism, is the principle of civil society, and as such appears in pure form as soon as civil society has fully given birth to the political state. The god of practical need and self-interest is money.


The god of the Jews has become secularized and has become the god of the world. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange."

>> No.14246152

Far left is just as retarded as far right, BTW.

>> No.14246237

>Reading Conquest of Bread helped me realise that capitalism was far from the most efficient system out there and that it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people.
Capitalism is the single greatest force for lifting people out of poverty in human history. The facts on that could not be clearer.

>> No.14246247

>somehow the opposite of the far right
It doesn't matter what you read because you know nothing about history. Hitler's entire ideology was a reaction against capitalism, what do you think NAZI stands for? Why do you think he was always going on about the international bankers? Are you a complete simpleton?

>> No.14246255

>The last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient
You could have studied and understood the limits of markets, the mismatches they have with human needs, and the ways they can be manipulate at the expense of the collectivity.
But no, you had to read some communist drivel that never was accurate and learn nothing.

>> No.14246304

As always I admire your taste in books and knowledge of classical history, yet would never invite you over for a dinner party due to your atrocious personality.

>> No.14246334

There's nothing "far right" or "radical" about loving and appreciating your own people.
>What books have helped you gain clarity of mind?
Good question. I'm starting Satre's Anti-Semite and Jew soon and hopefully I can unfuck myself a bit in this regard. If anyone else has any other recs (re:antisemitism/JQ) that'd be appreciated.
>The last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient, >duh left will make the sky fall down and the economy crash.
Literally nobody on /pol/ is talking about markets.

>> No.14246337

>What books have helped you gain clarity of mind?
industrial society and its future

>> No.14246361

I agree with leftists on many things but their weird xenophilia tendencies and self hating nature is questionable

>> No.14246435

>I agree with leftists on many things but their weird xenophilia tendencies and self hating nature is questionable

>> No.14246444

Don't forget their hatred of families and obsession with sexual hedonism for some weird reason

>> No.14246487


it's because none of them are reading lasch which is exactly what they need to be doing

>> No.14246491


The average person with a progressive mindset can't recognize that we've likely reached the end of progress, at least insofar as creating a pragmatically equal society before the law regarding race and sex (not social class, because it's demonstrable that the rich and poor are held to different standards). It also doesn't help that people living in first world nations are absolutely and in large part willfully ignorant of how our developed systems of affluence insulate us from the inherent suffering of existence that we've evolved to combat. At the turn of the 19th century, 60% of people died before the age of 17. That's a statistical condition that doesn't exist anywhere on the planet now. When I went to a friend's wedding in August and reunited with 100% of my childhood friends, that would have been so anomalous as to have been impossible in the time of my gransfather's grandfather.

tl;de We have it so easy it is driving us insane. We're piloting the biological machinery of Nature's prize fighter, the gold medalist physiology and psychology of evolution, and we first worlders have no opponent in the arena. We're Saitama.

>> No.14246492

We jump to radicalisation because liberalism / conservatism doesn't provide answers. That's why the far right is appealing to lots of vulnerable people who are suffering, but liberalism can't provide answers for why they are suffering. There is no liberal regime that has managed to successfully resist fascism. Shattering the illusion and understanding leftist theory is the only anti-dote.

>> No.14246501

>claims to love own people
>doesn't have international workers solidarity

Nationalism / racism is an illusion used to divide and conquer.

You don't understand sexual liberation then. Traditional sex roles are internalisations of capitalism.

>> No.14246556

the bible and dostoevsky

>> No.14246578

It's a man in makeup

>> No.14246596


In-group preference is evolutionarily ingrained and predates humanity as a species. I agree that "nationality" and "race" are social construct in terms of historical fluidity (e.g. "whiteness" being a modern concept that has excluded Italians or the Irish, something like a Japanese national identity carrying basically zero - heh - weight until the Meiji Restoration) but such identity markers are extrapolated because the tendency to do so is inherent in human psychology, same as a chimp or a wolf. So long as there is a basic heterogeneity of "self" and "others", the human animal is predisposed to classifying people around them to varying degrees of "like" and "unlike". You can unlearn and combat this tendency, sure, but it's harder for the average intellect if not impossible. The same thing is true of traditional gender roles (and I use "gender" intentionally, because a state of nature enforces a binary expression of male/female types; a calf with two heads is an outlier). To say that discrimination, in terms of judgment (not prejudicial animosity), and the male/female duality are attributable to any one or set of human ideologies is willful obliviousness of science and millions of years of evolution.

>> No.14246622


Sorry. To clarify "harder if not impossible to totally eliminate". I do believe that the human intellect, with proper education and upbringing, can override the impulses of animal psychology (see, uh, civilization). I don't want to come off as saying "these things are immutable so don't bother trying" because our capacity to strive for an ideal bettering the individual is the best thing about being a human.

>> No.14246625

Civilisation was never about following our animal instinct though. Its logically not strategic for various in-groups to wage eternal war on each other till humanity wipes itself out. Have autonomous tribes/communities but don't oppress your fellow man.

>> No.14246632

I was clear pilled by Moldbug

>> No.14246642


Yeah, I was clarifying myself >>14246622
while you were writing this, because I realized I came off as overly fatalistic about Man the Insect vs. Man the Individual. I'm just saying to ascribe the existence of bigotry or social roles wholesale to any -ism is boxing at the shadow cast by aspects of human psychology. You have to face the object of contention to deal with it.

>> No.14246698

That is nothing new even Marx recognized that.

>> No.14246766
File: 231 KB, 1684x1398, 3268422215073991.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.14246780

A contradiction, to be sure.

>> No.14246789

>doesn't have international workers solidarity
Not a thing mate. I dont give a shit about chinese farmers like how they dont give a shit about retail workers like me, and thats fine. We live on opposite sides of the world and we have nothing in common besides we both work, which really isnt anything in common at all. I have solidarity with my family because they share my blood, everything grows out from their with ethnicity then race then species then all living things. Sure I work like how someone in china might, but i also might work how a fucking ant might so it means nothing to me, ive interacted with spics, nigs and chinks and i know from that alone were different and no occupation will change that. Now, we dont gotta hate eachother but rather we should respect each others peoples, histories and cultures while sticking to our own business and working together on things that require international cooperation, not subject ourselves to the global favela weve been slowly growing into.

>> No.14246827

To deny nature is also folly, weve had Inter-nation warfare and conflict since we began but if we keep going the way we are humanity will kill itself from within, it will be nothing but eternal internal strife between ethnic groups or the obliteration of all that makes humans unique in favor of a worthless mono-culture that produces only garbage and waste. Id prefer our people go out with the bang then become a society of roaches, ever alive but never truly living.

>> No.14246833
File: 121 KB, 1024x679, white men expressing themselves.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Liberalism tells them their suffering is not real if they are white, and that if they persist in claiming to suffer they are racist monsters who deserve what ever happens to them.
Fuck that. It is okay to be white.

>> No.14246838

>Don't be radical
Freedom is more radical than any other position, and always will be.

>> No.14246844
File: 178 KB, 1024x1024, pepe comm dead white marx 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.14246847
File: 43 KB, 500x354, furtheworkers.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Pig socialism is real, but that doesn't mean all socialist are pigs.

>> No.14246849
File: 762 KB, 1324x1424, harvard anti white abolish white race.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>> No.14246851

Those people would be right wing if right wingers would own the media. They don't have convictions, they repeat what they've been fed. We are somewhat free from that trap because we digest conflicting information and numerous philosophical and metaphysical positions for breakfast. Though we do tend to stagnate to our world view around the age of 30.

>> No.14246866

> I dont give a shit about chinese farmers like how they dont give a shit about retail workers like me
A shame, because you're both victims of one economic system. Those barely paid chinese farmers grow soya beans which feed cattle which are made into burgers that you sell as a retail worker, and both of your labours are exploited to make the owner of it all rich. Its in your strategic interest to overthrow this wageslavery and help each other be liberated, and afterwards you may live and let live.

>> No.14246868


The strangest thing to me about the contemporary left is how they speak out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to human nature vs. social convention/engineering. They deride traditionalists and conservatives as ignorant science deniers and prudes (valid at times!) when it comes to creationism or sexual liberation or climate change, but absolutely refuse to entertain that evolution might have a role "above the neck" when it comes to trying to hammer out a utopia that takes no account of human nature.

>> No.14246870

I get you. I see the absurdity of the higher eschlons of popular discourse and feel like reacting completely contradictory to spit it’s holier than though lense. But simple contrarianism is equally as bound to to the status quo and subject to the same mistakes that one is disatisfied with.

>> No.14246879

Community & family are sources of happiness. Religion and nationalism aren't. Capitalism destroys the former and utilises the latter to pull wool over people's eyes. Also, if you are sincere about the suffering of white men, then you should 1. be criticising capitalism first and foremost as it is the main culprit in alienation, 2. have solidarity with people with even less fortune than you, such as minorities lower on the socio-economic ladder and the $1/day cocoa farmers that grow chocolate that you buy with 1st world wealth.

>> No.14246883

The left has mastered the rhetoric of dismissal. They've developed an entire lexicon dedicated to ensuring there is no challenge to their dominance over discursive spaces. The extent that they've managed to dominate highly decentralized spaces honestly makes me cynical towards the idea that anarchism in it's truest form wouldn't be more invasive and totalitarian than any dictatorship.

>> No.14246886

What if you are a relativist? I can kinda get the point of most well thought out viewpoints and they can often be reduced to essential disagreement in philosophy. Idealism or materialism, realism vs constructivism, dogmatism and in fact relativism. And then how those core thoughts are interpreted, so that even two different branches of the same idea may disagree.

>> No.14246902

I think the rich/poor dichotomy is a useful one, but not completely accurate. Reach/poor simply describes fiscal holdings, while the more central descriptore is public prestige. One usually corellates with the other, but they are not technically one in the same.

>> No.14246909

I’m actually nice and quiet. I write to a hostile audience here, and it shapes what you get.

Thank you.

>I was willing to be converted.
Convert from what though?
Simply put, we have crap people because of their crap lives which is a direct result of the crap system we’ve inherited and very much grown put of. “Why is the world so bad/evil/etc.?” 1. It works for some, 2. The rest are beholden to age old traditions and thought patterns. They work hard at nothing important so they can forget that they’re on a prison world. Changing it is so monumentally hard. It take far more than an individual or an army of individuals.... getting off track already and I don’t have anymore time

Feel like Invisible Man. L8r

>> No.14246921 [DELETED] 
File: 110 KB, 1900x283, 1574112281102.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.14246928

This is why I find most anti-capitalists very tiring. Not because of their end goal of dismantling the general construct known as capitalism, but they tend to reduce things to simple dichotomy. Instead of using a scholarly or truthful words like “seems” or “tends” they go straight to the “are” and “is”, assuming the object.

For example, what differentiates nationalism from community or family? Could you not say it is an extension of both, describing difference distances of relation? Most communist states use some form of nationalism in their cause.

Statistic differences in terminology simply leads to lack of the ability to instill nuance.

>> No.14246938

>Far right
>free market
I dont wanna pull the "but you never really were far right" card, but i cant see how anyone could ever have been on the far right and not realize that it's pretty hostile to free markets and laissez faire capitalism in general, with fascism wanting syndicalist economies and nazism wanting state run capitalism. Hostility to economic determinism is one of the most important defining characteristics of the far right, coupled with pro-hierarchical and anti-democratic views, coupled with a propensity for extreme violence. If you read any far right author, then you must have encountered these things. Schmitt, Heidegger, Spengler, Gentile, Sorel, etc. all ranted against free market capitalism.
Is this bait? Is this a /pol/ falseflag?

>> No.14246942

>grow up
>revolt against authority, FUCK YOU DAD

>> No.14246943

As an aside to all in this thread: thank you for the quality of discussion in 100+ posts. /lit/, as arrogant and contrarian as it is on average, when it hits its ceiling provides a intellectual outlet I don't find elsewhere and has honestly improved me as a person. Now someone call me a faggot.

>> No.14246996

>I write to a hostile audience here, and it shapes what you get.

I think you have good discourse skills, but your lack of an “ambivalent” persona or tact gets you more shit than you would otherwise. I don’t mean being nice or anything, you can be downright rude And no one will give two shits. But your inability, or unwillingness to engage in dynamic discourse. There are other anarchists who are more entertaining and blasé with their writing than you here. Of course you being a trip code doesn’t help. There are far worse posters on here, but they usually stay anonymous.

However, as an aggravative entity, you are effective.

>> No.14246997


>> No.14247001

Economics are gay and don't mean shit, I used to care about them but now I could care less, but I am more redpilled than ever on the race question and Jew question.

>> No.14247025

I think the problem is they fully believe that problems (or at least the problems they're willing to recognize as legitimate) amount to little more than lack of bodily comfort. It seems painfully reductive to me. They seem more like bete machine than human to me.

>> No.14247039

why do people think supporting capitalism is right wing?

>> No.14247054


They can't divorce their interpretation of social policy, economic systems, beliefs on personal freedom/conduct, or religion/philosophy from a black or white, us or them, left or right duality. A two-dimensional ideological realm is easier to navigate, even if it's delusional.

>> No.14247150

Will I be guranteed at least one braphog in the socialist future? If not whats the damn point

>> No.14247191

>Convert from what though?
>Simply put, we have crap people because of their crap lives which is a direct result of the crap system we’ve inherited and very much grown put of. “Why is the world so bad/evil/etc.?” 1. It works for some, 2. The rest are beholden to age old traditions and thought patterns. They work hard at nothing important so they can forget that they’re on a prison world. Changing it is so monumentally hard. It take far more than an individual or an army of individuals.... getting off track already and I don’t have anymore time
This doesn't answer either of my questions and is scarcely above "edgy 15 year old" levels of insight. Surely you can do better than this, it's your fucking ideology for Christ sake, it's practically all you yammer on about here.

>> No.14247248

For what purpose?

>> No.14247280


>beholden to age-old traditions and thought patterns

The equally negative counter-swing to reactionary traditionalism is this current paradigm of thoughtless revolutionary revisionism. Tradition is not by default bad; what we are handed down consists of things that work and things that do not work regarding mutually prosperous social organization (and some things that used to work but now no longer do). Dogma and superstition on as well as field-tested pragmatism or optimal practice both become unquestioned. if you accept it all without thought, you're a slave to it, but rejecting it all without question is just as ignorant.

>> No.14247450

Agreed. I feel like it’s hard for people to disentangle their process from their end goal.

>> No.14247637

It's literally the death drive vs the pleasure principal and the myriad ways they can manifest in different circumstances.

>> No.14247720

Can't believe this thread is a- still up b- filled with people earnest-posting their gay little ideas while the engine of history marches on undeterred or abated.

>> No.14247924

>i have absolutely no way no dispel this so i will dismiss it as absurd, gaslighting these few sane people

>> No.14247953


How have you responded except with ad hominem and denial? If all you have is greentext and insults, I done gotcha, my man.

>> No.14247967

Communism and anarchism still can't give everyone bread for free. Capitalism makes it a lot easier to do so. When HK was a shit hole decades ago thousands of chinese would try and flock there.

>> No.14248562

>current paradigm
But, yes, a reasonable reassessment is what’s being called for by “leftism”. And the majority, the people themselves, ought to be the ones to do the reassessment. Elitist lefties often worry about the masses capacity to make informed decisions but then fail to educate them on just how.

How about less bile? I told you I ran out of time.
What do you mean either? You never asked any direct questions. Where’s my starting point, there’s so much to cover?
The world is bad because we’ve set it up as fierce competition. All this talk of civility and civilization, and we’re no less brutish than Odysseus or Hammurabi. But people are NOT like this, this is not “natural”, it is a learned behavior. Most people aren’t weak and lazy or aggressive and violent. They just want to live harmoniously. Perhaps a little selfishly, but excessively selfish are encouraged by their circumstances, learned behavior again.
Competition in itself isn’t a bad thing, but it has led to quite a lot of strife. We’ve neglected all else in this capitalist world. Wipe capitalism, competition, out and you change the system, you change the way people think, you change the world. We place more value in money than in people now. After, we’d place value in each other.

Because leftism is anti-capitalist. Capitalists have a right and a left, but they both suck.

You want a woman to fart in your face after the revolution?

>> No.14248591

Money is basically required to run an economy. Once individuals are trading with strangers a medium of exchange is needed. Even if you had a perfect communist state run by a computer it would need to attach quanitative value to material, labor, and product. And deconstructing heirarchy is impossible.

>> No.14248619

Wait a fucking second ive seen that painting in person

>> No.14248652

Did you help him up?

>> No.14248661

ITT: cringe tier sargonite became a commie

>> No.14248671
File: 461 KB, 1147x645, A1AA03F0-F8DC-421E-A306-647E93498330.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Here. Read.

>> No.14248707

Lol, get a load of this guilty conscious retard. You're the political equivalent of a born again Christian. The cherry on top is the literal feel good kropotkin propaganda. Get over your slave mentality, it'll make you feel better.
The original Fascists organically became/created fascism.

>> No.14248716
File: 32 KB, 334x499, 5F2C5156-927F-4DE8-999C-1E27EDC99E6B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How do you mean “dynamic discourse” exactly?

The comparison assumes there is a proper “dad” in the picture, but there never was. People are like an extended family, but no parent is in the house. A jerky older brother has locked himself in the master bedroom and started dictating orders on how things are done.
So we advocate a big fuck you to that jerk.

Here’s a book I’ve been reading some from. As if I’m gonna be a farmer... I love it.

>> No.14248727

For me, I was never really a radical until I read leftist literature. Once I gazed into absolute insanity, I realized that fascism was the only force capable of truly saving us from the mental insanity that is leftism.

>> No.14248747
File: 57 KB, 464x638, 6541E605-B467-466B-9E3A-D7D9E5EAB10D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Care to be more specific?
Leftism is reasonable and compassionate. Fascism is just about establishing control and painting over everything with homogenous colors

>> No.14248898
File: 385 KB, 750x752, 1572417426528.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>"whiteness" being a modern concept that has excluded Italians or the Irish, something like a Japanese national identity carrying basically zero - heh - weight until the Meiji Restoration
The Japanese have almost always considered thememselves as one nation. The Emperor was always the symbolic leader of the Japanese people. In fact, of all the feudal kingdoms that birthed industrial ethnostates, the Japanese were among the easiest to unify.

Whiteness is also nothing new. It was just called Chistendom before the modern period, in which a new name was needed to distingush europeans from colonial converts. The Irish and Italians were always considered "white", the real ethnic friction came from their catholic faith. They were never excluded to the same degree as blacks, or for any of the same reasons. For basically all of western history intermarriage between christians, whites, was normal. The English and Irish intermarried constantly, and the Italians intermarried with the French and Austrians constantly. The idea that whites, christians, europeans, or whatever label you wish to use are distinct from the muslims and people from the far east is at least 1000 years old.

>> No.14248923

Ban yourself, red liberal. You are a secular Jesuit. You and your orbiters add nothing to any thread.

>> No.14249034

All these right wing arguments seem to stem from a crippling ignorance of history. Once you start studying history you realise that human nature is a lot less fixed than the rightoids want to believe, and all the wondrous traditions that they keep appealing to, such as nationalism, the family and even modern expressions of religion such as protestantism are revealed to be a mere few hundred years old. All of a sudden these traditions start to seem a lot less sacred.

>> No.14249068

kill yourself

>> No.14249081

We appeal to them because they are good, now because they are sacred, flesh-worshipper. They are the creations that have redeemed us from the disgrace intrinsic to our natural form.

>> No.14249105

The traditions previous to the ones we have now were also good until they stopped serving their purpose. There is no reason to suppose the same won't happen again. In the end, most "traditionalists" such as yourselves are revealed to be modernists in another form, and you have no defense against the ravages of capitalism.

>literally no argument

>> No.14249144

>Fascism is just about establishing control and painting over everything with homogenous colors
It's the opposite. Fascism is the celebration and defense of the unique constellation of colours which makes up the nation.

>> No.14249150


Culture and Counter-Culture by James McAuley. A short article by a poet who was an anarchist, then a Guenonian Traditionalist, and then finally a sober Catholic.

>> No.14249157

OP, I have a degree in African-American studies so I can guide you in the cleansing of your Thought-Sins. First, acknowledge your racist-ness before our lord and savior Martin Luther King (pbuh). Second, say fifty "Believe All Women" prayers. Third, watch one full season of Martin (the first season is the shortest but it's not very good-go with the second or the third). Finally, with real sincerity pray to Our Black Savior "Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King Junior, I acknowledge my irredeemable racist-ness before you. Please let your forgiveness enter my heart, harambe"
With this you should be able to date that qt3.14 latina art or journalism major with a clear conscience.
MLK be with you.

>> No.14249164

>All these right wing arguments seem to stem from a crippling ignorance of history.
Tell me more about all those POC in Medieval England.

>> No.14249194

It doesn't. In fact it notes that hierarchy and exchange are even older than commonly claimed. The value judgment and argument enters when Graeber explains how markets are manufactured and maintained.

>> No.14249216

>One semester of Anthropology is a dangerous thing.

>> No.14249239

The only people upholding traditions older than a few hundred years old are the reactionaries. It's you leftists that are championing all these enlightenment constructions and metaphysical justifiers. What does that mean for your philosophical/political position? The fact that it is in many ways the apotheosis of the liberal traditon it claims to oppose.

>> No.14249332

Why does every far-left YouTube suck Kropotkin's dick? It's like the only book they've read.

>> No.14249348

far-left YouTuber*

Thought Slime and Noncompete are examples.

>> No.14249397

>The last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient
>OP goes from edgy 14 yr old 4chan nazi to edgy college sophomore groupthink communist in five years
OP tiny tweener girl mind is going to be blown by every ideology like the shallow memer that he is.

>> No.14249503

You never had political opinions or an identity in the first place, you never arrived at your own beliefs through study, discipline, and inquiry. Your joining of the "far right" was fake and your so called "de-radicalization" will be too. You were never a radical, you are and always will be pathetic,trading identities from one to another until you come close to realizing your own lack of self and revert back to whatever other identity is offered to you to fill the void of your own non-existence.

I doubt you ever even read far right political theory or any political theory at all, and spend all of your time on the internet reading infographics without citations and just gulping down whatever mixture of beliefs are given to you. What use will reading your way out of radicalization be when you never even read your way into it?

>The last bastion of my right wing ideology was >but muh free markets are the most efficient, >duh left will make the sky fall down and the economy crash. Reading Conquest of Bread helped me realise that capitalism was far from the most efficient system out there and that it efficiently provides only for capital and not for the majority of people. I'm not sure I'm an anarchist, probably just a generic leftie

You fell hard into right wing opinions and beliefs, only to read a single book and suddenly become an anarchist leftie? You believed yourself to be one thing, and now don't even know if you are another while you denounce the former? What a fucking child you must be, go to reddit if you want to be a know it all without ever knowing anything.

>> No.14249534

"de radicalization" aka brainwashing yourself. Capitalism is cover art. If your big bad views were corresponding to this they weren't "radical" whatsoever

>> No.14249542

pro pedophile bait post

>> No.14249556

Biology is meaning. Ignore your biology and see how long you survive for. You also project moralisms while at the same moment throw venom.

Figuring things out VS your own enemy ideology. I see through you.

>> No.14249608

The mention of "family" is more about extended family, even non-related people becoming a part of a household, as opposed to the "nuclear family" that isolates themselves.

Maybe because you're watching youtubers who have read Kropotkin recently. Look for Bookchin now.

There are legit hierarchies! The problems in the world are there are tons of illegit ones. You have a Punk band lyrics worth of understanding what anarchism is, and you read Graeber?

And their fantasy must be strictly enforced, I know, I said that.

>Figuring things out VS your own enemy ideology
I was more or less where OP was once. It was quite gradual, the whole time I thought I was just being sensible, but so much was concealed from me. I'm embarrassed to say I've only been an anarchist for about nine years, and embarrassed that I was a progressive liberal before, and embarrassed that I was a christian conservative in my youth. I take more pride in being a listless nonconformist goth in between the last two.
You see through nothing

>> No.14249630

I see through you you dance through word games like denial of Metaphysics, and meaning for the sake of justifying your own meaning. You live in an Ego bubble, it's notable for most tripfags who always try to embed their moralisms through their identity in this board. The Chans have seen a thousand people like you. Your isms and ists only serve as a beacon for those lurking of your double edged hypocrisy and subversion. You claim op is having problems. Synchronized non comfority is what you stand for. It's a wonder how you keep justifying this game to yourself.

>> No.14249644

>Will I be guranteed at least one braphog in the socialist future? If not whats the damn point
Actually, kinda

Under socialism and communism, automation will free up humanity's time, noone will be exploited by circumstance to do porn anymore, and instead there'll be lots of amateur fetishists waiting to fulfill your wildest fantasy.

>> No.14249651

Automation will be humanity's time. The future is a bubble of entertainment, obesity, and subserviant consumers. I think of those furrjes who have severe fetishisms as the future unless we destroy the current doctrine totally, erasing the books from existence in a contemporary library of Alexandria.

>> No.14249658

when you know such capitalism and Communism all share the same origin you know it's all an illusion

>> No.14249669

Then they herd you with concepts like right and left. Your entire world view was crippled from the start.

>> No.14249672

I haven't expressed any opinions regarding anarchism, how would you know what level of understanding I hold? And who/what ordained you as the arbiter of legitimate hierarchies? I could very well claim that hierarchies you deem to be illegitimate are in fact legitimate; providing my own metaphysical justification. Now what? Is this just a battle of wills?

>> No.14249673

Human life is indeed the battle of wills, sometimes against others and mostly against your own

>> No.14249680
File: 279 KB, 640x360, discordianism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Ah, the "Chans"
They've seen people like me. Funny though. I've been here for quite a damn while and have not seen anyone like me.
I guess you don't like Nietzsche or Stirner and probably haven't heard of Malaclypse the Younger and Omar Khayyam Ravenhurst
There's no hypocrisy, only artistic liberties to achieve a temporary balance. But this is getting off topic. We could talk elsewhere later if you like

>> No.14249685

This post proves you are venom. Word games that lead to Katyń

>> No.14249700

Because of your lack of some basics about it. Like
>And who/what ordained you as the arbiter of legitimate hierarchies?
We would collectively ferret that all out for ourselves, of course! This is makes it plain you're new to this. But you're studying and here, so not trying to offend.

>> No.14249704

The hypocrisy of preaching the death of morals while rebranding your own moralisms is nothing artistic but a necessity of human justification for its own biological reason to exist. You say words like compassion with attachments to base ideologies, easy for the lowest vibrations of person to succumb too like OP but for all others it is just a grim reminder that the self proclaimed escapees are the ones leading you right back into the asylum

>> No.14249716

Why isn't the state a legitimate hierarchy in the current moment?

>> No.14249723
File: 91 KB, 570x570, Nietzsche T.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Off topic

>> No.14249739

It's all off topic, tripfags are never trusted for good reason. You only serve as another model example for us all.

>> No.14249742

I'm not new to this, if anything you're new to what I'm presenting to you. How do you expect your anarchic democratic collective to get off the ground without mediation from the prevailing authority? It isn't really anarchic at all at the point, isn't it?

>> No.14249744
File: 216 KB, 458x397, Eccentric he says.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Have you red Stirner?

Have you noticed this entity and it's behavior and what it does to the "hearts" and minds of men put in place to steer it's awful maw?
I don't care how long it's been a thing in history. They're a danger to us all to maintain.

>> No.14249748

Anarchism is just eye candy. It's perverse because those who adhere to it are not trying to escape any hierarchy but deceptively form their own

>> No.14249752

>do away with god out of the misguided belief that human beings are intelligent, compassionate, and righteous on their own and have evolved past the need for religion
>create a power vacuum and temporary insanity
>the gap is quickly filled by an artificial god (social justice) that operates just like catholicism and fulfills just the same human needs

The fundamental problem of politics is that 99% of humanity are dumb monkeys in human clothing. I can't even find heart to argue that humanity deserves better governance. Every people gets just the government it deserves.

Injustice exists only for individuals, never for larger populations.

>> No.14249754

Arguing against the existence of states while being a tripfag is perhaps something to think about. I said before I see through you, you reveal far too much about yourself

>> No.14249764

Spare the lyricism please. I didn't ask if the state was pretty. I asked why it isn't a necessary hierarchy. How're even you gonna get your anarchism without a state? I ain't reading Stirner, I've got limited time and bigger priorities than a meme like him.

>> No.14249765

Legitimacy is a product of power. Cite your obscure German metpahysics as much as you'd like; power doesn't care. You hold no power, you have no legitimacy.

>> No.14249767

You're reacting to the wrong ideas of your past by sucking on the wrong ideas of your former opponents.

It's normal to embody the opposite when you reject what you formerly believed in. You'll grow out of it, eventually.

>> No.14249783

William James and Pragmatism for method. Whitehead for metaphysical framework. Marx for critique of political economy. Deleuze for my toolbox for power.

>> No.14249784

I agree. Which is why I asked the tripfag why the state isn't a legitimate structure. Are you retarded?

>> No.14249795

Replied to the wrong post >>14249765
meant for >>14249744

>> No.14249805

Now we talk about strategy for the achievement of such a thing. Okay.
Are you an ML/statist socialism guy?
It could be gradually achieved, but probably only with two components that I've mentioned before. The non-accumulative currency and democracy in the workplace. Without traditional money there's no bribery, with more responsibility in the workplace, there's less need for government agencies. Gradually every state representative will become rather unnecessary.
Still a rather simplistic scenario, I know.

Completely the opposite. What do you know of free Catalonia?

Whatever you think you see, you keep the secret good. As far as I can see you don't understand me at all.

It has become quite necessary to do away with it for the existential crisis alone.

Really? You're going to have to rephrase it to make sense

>> No.14249822

What existential crisis? More importantly, how're you going to fight states wothout making your own for safety?

>> No.14249854

You don't believe the science behind climate change? And you wanna know more details of my foolproof plan?
So what are you though?

>> No.14249870

101 stuff

>> No.14249882

How does climate change delegitimise the state as a necessary hierarchy? Does the opposite if anything surely.

Thanks. I'll read it tomorrow. If there's any short key bits copy em here and I'll skim them.

>> No.14249883

buttercunt don't you have a job or anything? you're always posting here. no one likes you. you're not particularly smart or clever and are not even well read. why can't you go felate a shotgun?

>> No.14249888

"I agree with lefties but I allow the working class to be divided in my head in this one crucial way deliberately engineered by my masters and it prevents me from challenging their rule."

There's a real elegance to the simplicity of how they mind cucked you.

>> No.14249908

First anon you replied to. I'm a formalist. The point I'm making is broader one. Power is the capacity to do; to effect change. How do you expect to effect this change 1) without power, and 2) when this change impinges upon the power of those that hold it; the powers that be are not simply going to let a competing power run all over it, they're going to stop it in its tracks. I suggest you look into the history of revolution and rebellion. These events did not occur without the patronage (i.e. the permission) of the powers that be. They served as political expedients for them. If you anarchic revolution can only occur with the permission of the powers that be (in which case it would be serving them as a political expedient) is it really a revolution at all?

>> No.14249920

Legitimacy isn't a real thing.

The question is if there's a possible hierarchy or lack thereof that you would prefer, or that most people would prefer if you subjectively value the happiness of others, which leftists tend to.

>> No.14249926

I was speaking inside the anarchist framework of on being against 'legitimate hierarchies'. That's why I used the term. Probably wouldn't've otherwise.

>> No.14249935
File: 48 KB, 613x531, 1530489623117.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.14249940

>the powers that be are not simply going to let a competing power run all over it
It can be done only through sheer numbers. We have always outnumbered them, and this is why they invest so much in breaking us apart and setting us on each others backs.
>they're going to stop it in its tracks
And we will approach human extinction all the faster for it.
>I suggest
I have actually read some and will read some more, thanks.

>> No.14249977

I suspect anarchists in that context are just using "legitimate" to mean hierarchies that are as minimal as possibly while still meeting some tangible and beneficial need or purpouse from the perspective of the community.

If you can reasonably point out something about a given hierarchy that's bullshit, superfluous, unjustified or inefficient, then it presumably wouldn't fit the bill, and that's very easy to do for the types of hierarchies anarchists are always complaining about.

>> No.14249989

I agree. But I think the state is neither superfluous or inefficient. Are there anarchists who think that? If not, then it's a little more complicated than you say.

>> No.14249996 [DELETED] 

Were you by my house today? :3

>> No.14250002

>But I think the state is neither superfluous or inefficient.
Then you're not paying attention.

>> No.14250008


>> No.14250024

That's not really a very convincing answer is it. Especially given what happened in anarchist Spain etc.

>> No.14250033

That’s not a very good argument

>> No.14250046

I think it is. If the state is illegitimate but you need one to fight them to have any chance of success then the state is not in fact illegitimate in the present moment. Which was the phrase I used in my first post.

>> No.14250055

>It can be done only through sheer numbers
Again; why would the powers that be even let a competing power get to this stage. Historically, they either haven't, or used such movements as political expedients. An obscure example: the formation of the University of Bologna is often seen as anarchic enterprise. Foreign students, in response to oppressive tax codes, collectivized with the aim of forming a institutional body (i.e. the university), that could resist these codes on a structural level. They achieved this primary through the formation of guilds. Guilds, however, were an officially sanctioned (i.e. mediated by authority) means of organizing at the time. If Frederick Barbarossa didn't want the students collectivizing, he simply wouldn't have allowed them to form guilds, as they would have to have gone through official channels to do so. It turns out he did, however, for politically expedient purposes lol.

>> No.14250093

Oh brother
I get this lazy response every time. Always this same cowards plea. “It’s never happened, so it never will”
Now a hint of “If your numbers overpower the state, you too are now a state”
>In the present moment
And didn’t I go on about a transitory phase?
It isn’t a good argument against it.

>Again; why would the powers that be even let a competing power get to this stage.
Why has the state created a caste of slaves? Why not kill them all off... actually, now that you bring it up. They’re kind of scared. Since we hit the labor surplus in the 1970s they’ve been quite careless with our health and well-being.
But again; they employ a lot of divisionary tactics to distract you.

>> No.14250115

It sounds like we mostly agree if you believe in some sort of intermediate/'transitional' stage. I'm goin to bed, later.

>> No.14250143

You think power grants us privileges for fun? Or because they're careless? You underestimate your superiors. You can try organizing without their mediation, but all it'll ever amount to is sitting around in the woods.

>> No.14250161

anarchists do agree on socialism as a transitional stage.

>> No.14250182

personally i never de-radicalized, in fact im far more radical than ever before. i'm talking full on domestic terrorism, political assassinations, firebombing government buildings, executing CIA conspirators and their entire families and so on. nobody ever said revolution would be pretty.

>> No.14250199


I’d prefer peaceful, but I know this isn’t going to be pretty. Take care.

>> No.14250217

Unless you're on top, you're a bootlicker whether you like it not. The only way to become the boot is to give it something it wants.

>> No.14250252
File: 142 KB, 210x442, BC59FA9E-2D42-4AE2-A780-D03FA52038FB.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You don’t get what it means?
You are a lapdog to power. I am a mere prisoner that hates them. I am low class and will never lick their boots in order to climb their ladder. I don’t want a boot for others to lick.

>> No.14250293

>when the glows are posting
4channel is a website of peace
little something called "righteous hatred". when you have a reason to be pissed off, you SHOULD be. it's a healthy response, and without it both organisms and civilizations DIE.
>clarity of mind
simply get gud

>> No.14250294

Do take advantage of any of the privileges, structural, material or otherwise, that power has afforded you? Take a diachronic perspective, and think of all the the aspects of your being that are, only because of those that have existed above you. You're a bootlicker whether you like it or not. This isn't a bad thing.
>To be is to inherit.
- Derrida

>> No.14250320
File: 102 KB, 814x578, BFB63905-F473-44B1-8192-700195ECAD32.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Read the post again >>14250252

>> No.14250378

We jump to radicalisation because liberalism / progressivism doesn't provide answers. That's why the far left is appealing to lots of vulnerable people who are suffering, but liberalism can't provide answers for why they are suffering. There is no liberal regime that has managed to successfully resist communism. Shattering the illusion and understanding leftist theory is the only anti-dote.

>> No.14250381

I knew you'd respond with that comic. Read my post again. I'm not speaking to any attempts to better society, I'm speaking to what you *are". You're only an anarchist because powers greater than you have given (functional) existence to the anarchic edifice. Think of who'd you be without the printing press or the internet or the physical communities your live in, and then think of the authorities that granted existence to those things. Extend this to every aspect of your being and across history.

>> No.14250421

>Think of who'd you be without the printing press or the internet or the physical communities your live in
All provided/funded by labor

>> No.14250430

Labor that just spontaneously occurred with the mediation of authority?

>> No.14250459

you're under the short sighted assumption that it can't organize itself and can't lead to novel/creative endeavors. in the end they arent anything without labor.

>> No.14250476

Kindpilled. Bless you anon.

>> No.14250515

If anything it is you that's short sighted. Spontaneous order in the vein of the contract theorists has been the prevailing (and unexamined) worldview for a long time now. What we find instead is that authority comes first, with labor and creativity being a function of that authority.

>> No.14250541

Organization is all made up. The time calls for new thinking. We are living in a time of urgency. The authority of today is nothing but a restraint which we could do without. It is time to move to something novel. You can look at history all you want but you arent accomplishing anything but being pedantic.

>> No.14250555

>It is time to move to something novel.
Cool. And what do the powers that be have to say about that?

>> No.14250566

The opposite

>> No.14250574

So you just expect them to experience a change of heart and go along with it?

>> No.14250580

No I'm not a utopian

>> No.14250602

How will you go about getting what you want then, without first giving them something they want?

>> No.14250617
File: 130 KB, 900x506, 952757F9-5A4D-489F-B944-AE7D49DC4EE9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I’m nothing but a wage slave with half my life gone. And witnessing the demise of my species as they act like a bunch a demented apes.
You are a bootlicking capitalist apologist

What do you get a power mad degenerate for Christmas?

>> No.14250624

organize workers

>> No.14250628

Exist your liberal political paradigm; I'm not a capitalist. I simply recognize the necessity for authority. I believe it can do better, and we can do better by it.

>> No.14250631
File: 24 KB, 1008x1459, EC185E7D-7F4D-4894-9B9A-F5E8ADA44170.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.14250640

You hide as you prod. What are you than if not an apologist?

>> No.14250652
File: 45 KB, 523x452, 1494442366654.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>You've been spooked by moral fags, not bend over and i'll educate you now egoism and the foundation of human society.

No but seriously you should check out egoism. Max Stirner is a good foundation for political thought, but his prescriptions are shit and to edgy. Similar to Thomas Hobbs and the state of nature.

>> No.14250656

all ideology. fashies are disgusting.

>> No.14250658

Will this organizing process involve the use of any resources mediated by authority? In such a case your organization will hold (some) power, but only by virtue of the powers that be. Or (putting aside the technical impossibility of this option) will it be well and truly "bottom-up"? In which case it will lack any power at all. See my other reply for more info >>14250055

>> No.14250662
File: 12 KB, 255x195, 1481870219358.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Post-Suffering Afro-Polar BINC-Egupt

>> No.14250664

I've already told you what I am. There's a difference between defending the actions of the powers that be, and recognizing the necessity of authority as such.
Not a fascist, dumb cunt.

>> No.14250672

Dont forget the pills

>> No.14250680

This is why education and spreading class consciousness must be the first step. Workers cant organize if they dont now why the ought organize.

>> No.14250686

the "powers that be" arent anything without recognition. it is an abstraction that you are mistakingly making out as concrete.

>> No.14250690

>What's the point of having political views?
Everyone has political views, most people don't recognize them because they line up with the status quo. Dumb people that is.

>> No.14250693

Again with the misunderstanding of unjustifiable hierarchies?

The word used... I don’t wanna look for it. Wasn’t recognizable as anything political to me. Just reveal yourself already, phantom.

>> No.14250725

How will you spread class consciousness on a systemic level without authority-mediated resources/the permission of authority?
Historical analysis reveals this to be backwards. It doesn't even make sense; how are those WITH the capacity to effect change beholden to those without? "No representation without taxation" holds more true than the inverse.
Read again. I'm a formalist.

>> No.14250740

Ah, thank you. Couldn’t find it.

n. One who adheres strictly to established custom, form, or usage, as in style, conduct, or procedure; one who is attached to the observance of recognized modes or methods; also, one who has undue regard to forms and rules.
n. In philosophy, one who denies the existence of matter and recognizes the existence of form only; an idealist.
n. One overattentive to forms, or too much confined to them; esp., one who rests in external religious forms, or observes strictly the outward forms of worship, without possessing the life and spirit of religion.

A bootlicker. All is clear now.

>> No.14250748

Didn't find the right definition, didn't present an argument either. Keep bootlicking the anarchist edifice.

>> No.14250773

Oh? Well it happens to me too. Capitalists dictionary doesn’t want to define anarchism in a good light.
So what definition are you? None of those?

>anarchist edifice
Haha. There’s just me

>> No.14250784

Everyone has a capacity for change. You are mistaking the abstract for the concrete.

>> No.14250805

>just me
You've read a bunch of anarchist literature and anarchist sympathetic philosophy and taken on the views expressed in these books. Functionally, the authors of these books have violently imposed their views, an expression of the their wills, on you. You lick Nietszche's and Stirner's boots every time you uphold and defend them. But, it mustn't be forgotten that they too are the product of those that came before them. As are those that came before them. Functionally, you are licking the boots of the entire history of human ideation every waking second.
>To be is to inherit.
- Derrida

>> No.14250814

Thanks anon now I know what I want done with my corpse.

>> No.14250821

you havent "de-radicalized" yourself, just moved into another group

there isnt

>> No.14250849

I’ve mixed and matched and even begun to think critically of them. I apply some Marxian economists ideas. I come up with things on my own too. What you call violet is more violence on my part.
You are the bootlicker

>> No.14250859

I want robo-fascism too

>> No.14250865

We inherit the past so what? What insight do you have to add? We have inherited the past but the future has yet to be chosen. We have been tasked with the infinite amount of possibilities ahead of us and we must be adventurous in our thought. I think you would do well in reading some Whitehead, anon.

>> No.14250892

>Mixed and matched
Doesn't matter. Still not your own. Either way, the techniques of synthesis and critique (and the impetus thereof) are yet more things that have been violently imposed upon you.
>I come up with things on my own too
Prove it. The fact that you formulate your supposedly original thoughts in a language and system of concepts you inherited is proof enough against this statement.
>more violence on my part
Correct; we all impose, we all force others to lick our boots. There's ALWAYS a bigger boot though. We're all bootlickers, but some (you, for example) are moreso than others.

>> No.14250899

So what? Inheritance is a violent, authoritarian process (I'm not making a value judgment here). Read my other posts, understand the ramifications. Also Whitehead sucks; read Derrida.

>> No.14250905

>i need to be a special snowflake that is different just for the sake of being different

these people bother me even more than the stalin/mao types

>> No.14250911

Derrida is reddit. This is a Deleuze board.

>> No.14250915

I don't even know what you're saying.

>> No.14250942
File: 83 KB, 800x533, 1574206433034.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Deleuze is tranny central, Derrida is chad.

>> No.14250945

Knowledge isn't inherited. The next generation doesn't inherit the knowledge of how to use the atomic bomb. Everything is learned.

>> No.14250972

We're describing the same thing. I never said everything is inherited faithfully. Inheritance is the condition for learning.

>> No.14250975
File: 15 KB, 150x387, 2F71CB24-9C41-45FF-8F95-75A77E4A4A6B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>not your own
No, it’s all mine now.

>> No.14250983

You are not just you. Your literal reference to Stirner is proof enough lmao

>> No.14250984

You ate describing it dishonestly. It also has nothing to do with the topic.

>> No.14250985

>not ultra-radicalizing and become NazBol


>> No.14250989

>reference to Stirner is proof enough lmao
prove it

>> No.14250992

I'm not, and it does if you've been following the thread up to this point.

>> No.14250996

>it’s cowardice not to step into crazy

You think you’re bothering me with the fact that I have influences. But the goal post was who here is a bootlicker

>> No.14250999

See >>14250805

>> No.14251004

You don't have influences, you have boots you lick. As do we all, and as all do to us.

>> No.14251010

A bootlicker is someone who kisses up to their oppressors. Total misuse of the word.

>> No.14251011
File: 895 KB, 480x317, 828269FF-1FFC-4D37-AC12-72E3E4D39DBA.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.14251019

It really isn't. Try to into abstract thinking

>> No.14251033

>far right
>still believed in free market economy
Clearly, you weren't radicalized enough.

>> No.14251040

It really is. I am looking at these posts and you are honestly a pseud.
Yes you are. We choose what to discard and with time something new is brought in. There is always a slight difference in everything. It is more akin to a network of conversations and events.

>> No.14251065

And she isn't licking boots she is literally using their ideas and concepts as tools for power.

>> No.14251077

You're not even trying to have a conversation. You just barge in here call me a pseud and tell me to read Whitehead. You're a cunt dude.
As for your second point: our choices are mediated by those that came before us, and those before them. I don't disagree with your statement regarding difference (I am in part a Derridean after all), but I do regarding it's mechanism; fundamentally it is an impositional one, not one of choice.

>> No.14251080

How else to you attain power but lick the boots of power? Power doesn't grow on trees.

>> No.14251081

There are no real right wing politics in the world currently. Everyone is either a centrist neocon/neolib, or an outright marxist. All of which are globalists abusing the free market to their own interests. We on the right wing want protectionists markets to avoid such abuse, but have no representation in our own governments. Then smug retards like you come along and pretend that this current system is somehow reflective of us?

>> No.14251125

>our choices are mediated by those that came before us
In the final act we are so conditioned by unconscious previous thought, as a matter of fact we have been determining that act by an enormous amount of rejection and selection. It all depends on what ideas are entertained and how we entertain them; some may be dismissed at once as horrible and repugnant, others dwelt upon as pleasant. After this rejection and selection has gone on for a sufficiently long period, the final act is conditioned, but we have had a large share in doing it.
You are using words that mean something else entirely I think you are just being dishonest >>14251010

>> No.14251163 [DELETED] 
File: 16 KB, 923x713, 1574814857472.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>obtain cheap kitchen sponges
>the kind without the abrasive surfaceon one side
>get a container of cornstarch
>get a roll of twine, or use dental floss
>mix cornstarch and water together 50:50
>saturate sponge completely with mixture
>roll sponge from small end and then fold in half
>wrap tightly with twine and allow to dry
>once dry, remove twine
>flush down shared toilet
>cornstarch dissolves and sponge returns to original size somewhere in the line
In minecraft.

>> No.14251170

The "I", the conscious choice making subject, is the collective memetic impulses of human society considered both synchronically and diachronically. Our conditions are conditioned by prior conditions, determinations determined by prior determinations, rejections selected by prior rejections and selections rejected by prior selections; we don't entertain ideas, rather ideas entertain us. The "I" only exists functionally, insofar as it merely appears to be the locus of choice.
And I'm not being dishonest. How about you try to understand me rather than calling me such?

>> No.14251179


>> No.14251200
File: 1.10 MB, 806x720, 1574333981697.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

/pol/ is a board of peace, fag.

>> No.14251267 [DELETED] 

The tools have already been given. Each generation services the next. Your thinking is backwards.
This is wrong and very flawed as it doesn't account for novelty. Thought is constantly impregnated.
I am sorry I was mean. I'm going to sleep now.

>> No.14251273

The tools have already been given. Each generation services the next. Your thinking is backwards.
This is wrong and very flawed as it doesn't account for novelty. Thought is constantly impregnated with something monstrous always coming out.
I am sorry I was mean. I'm going to sleep now.

>> No.14251422

>it doesn't account for novelty
Yeah it does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff%C3%A9rance

>> No.14251616

I wouldn't say i was radical - I was a classic liberal (wasn't on a pipeline, i was there for 2 years), and even hold some "typically" leftist views like all the ecology stuff. What made rethink many stuff was Philosophy Tube youtube channel. I started reading Capital, and it made sense this time. What's important is to stay benevolent, open-minded and willing to see world through new perspectives, and you won't end bad.

Congratulations on deradicalizing, anon

>> No.14251860

Politics is how you know if you're a useful idiot for the ruling class

>> No.14251957

>>i need to be a special snowflake that is different just for the sake of being different

>> No.14251965

This. Pretty funny how that works.

>> No.14252179

>rather ideas entertain us
Isn't it more that we should view subjectivity on a world-historic (class) scale rather than an atomised, individual one, rather than rejecting the possibility of emancipatory subjectivity out of hand?

>> No.14252188

Did you know the Philosophy Tube guy has fucked the tranny known as Contrapoints? How's that for an image lmao

>> No.14252199
File: 1.13 MB, 500x775, bread.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Not only nice, but VERY nice.

>> No.14252392

true, and the mad poltards are perfect proof

>> No.14252479

You're a complete fucking idiot. Pedro II was OBSESSED with the modern world and with liberalism. He said he'd rather be the minister of a republic rather than emperor. When he went to the U.S. (he was a self-hating Brazilian who wished he were American) he preferred to be called 'citizen', not 'highness' or any such shit. You don't even know the history of the guy you admire. But, of course, who would've thought you wouldn't be this dumb when you're a fucking MONARCHIST.

>> No.14252498

Thanks anon.

Thats hot AF and Id pay to bang Contrapoints.

>> No.14252646

Interesting. You're attracted to trannies?

>> No.14252783

Not that guy, but don't try to act surprised, it's common knowledge that there are people called "chasers", who are attracted to trannies

>> No.14252785

those are called fags, anon

>> No.14252795

I know that, I've just never spoken to one, so I was curious.

>> No.14252861
File: 52 KB, 554x762, 1566697768014.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't know if I was ever really radicalized, but I did have some /pol/ opinions.
Deleuze got rid of most of them
I'm still not a moralfag leftist tho

>> No.14253220

If that's the case, i'm sorry for assuming you wanted to ridicule the other anon

>> No.14253401

Make no mistake, I find the notion, and tranny stuff in general, disgusting. But yes, I was curious to hear the rationale.

>> No.14253617

I’m sure their xenophilia has nothing to do with a certain duplicitous ethno-religious group’s worldview constantly perpetuated through all media

>> No.14254108

everyone's entitled to their own opinion :)

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.