[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 13 KB, 229x300, chomsky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14308228 No.14308228 [Reply] [Original]

Who should I read after I've read all of Chomsky?

>> No.14308232

Baudrillard

>> No.14308246

>>14308232
>Baudrillard
>was a French
hmm

>> No.14308308
File: 743 KB, 1900x2720, 37A2BABF-63EB-4D39-878B-9E4A9D96F43E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14308308

Take the McLuhan pill.

>> No.14308335

something good

>> No.14308342

>>14308228
Where to start with Chomsky? I've heard his lingustical stuff is amazing, but that he kinda off when it comes to politics and philosophy. Is that right?

>> No.14308344

Errico Malatesta, Rudolf Rocker, Bakunin and Kropotkin

>> No.14308349

>>14308342
>but that he kinda off when it comes to politics and philosophy. Is that right?
No, not at all. He’s very astute on politics and world events

>> No.14308477

>>14308228
kys
Chomsky sucks fat cock

>> No.14308503
File: 62 KB, 528x581, images (97).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14308503

>>14308228
>>14308344
See this is why chimpsky is a left gate keeper. People read him and then dont do shit they just keep reading. Fucking organise! The world is burning!

Bookchin probably though.

The ivory tower, twit sphere preppy left fags around here are a real shame.

>> No.14308514
File: 42 KB, 750x886, 1541566348145.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14308514

>>14308335
based

>> No.14308516

>>14308344
Butterfly. Your so cheeky. You know all of that is redundant, idealist, hollow propaganda. Your. A. Spook.

>> No.14308537

>>14308228
Acquiring Sex by OP is a Fag

>> No.14308659

>>14308228
Skinner. The best arguments against Chomsky

>> No.14308712

>>14308228
Regarding linguistics/psychology/philosophy... or politics/economics?

If the latter, then the book "No gods, no masters: An anthology of anarchism" is a good historical introduction. Available for free download here: https://libcom.org/library/no-gods-no-masters-anthology-anarchism

>> No.14308853

>>14308228
Crispin Sartwell.

>> No.14308985

News journals

>> No.14309026

>>14308228
Chomsky is god. Chomsky is the end game. There is nothing else. There is nowhere else to go. When you finish reading Chomsky you finish life.

>> No.14309123

>>14308659
Are they secret arguments?

>> No.14309204

>>14308228
Parenti

>> No.14309443

>>14308228
Ellul

>> No.14309607

>>14309204
This.

>> No.14309620

>>14308228
Der ewige Jude

>> No.14310078

>>14308228
Whoever you want, stop reading shit to look cool on an anonymous imageboard, read whatever you want, read for yourself, not for anyone else.

>> No.14310090

>>14308228
Wait did this guy actually write a book called "Manufacturing Consent" and not once mention the institutions exclusively educate the journalists, aka the ivy league?

>> No.14310504

>>14308228
>>14308344
these and parenti

>> No.14310582

>>14308246
french > anglojew

>> No.14311226

>>14308349
He supported the Khmer Rouge and Maduro. He's an idiot and a scumbag.

>> No.14311992

>>14308228
Read his influences (Orwell, Stuart Mill etc.)

>> No.14312010

>>14308342
http://www.chomskylist.com/where-start-chomsky-best-books.php

>> No.14312048

>>14310090
What? Sounds like you never read the book.

>> No.14312057

Rothbard and Mises.
In fact stop being a brain dead socialist in the first place.
Imagine wanting to live in poverty.

>> No.14312063

http://www.paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/200chomskylies.pdf

>> No.14312066

>>14308503
>dude read these authoritarian lmao
>>14308344
>dude read these authoritarian lmao

>> No.14312076

>>14308344
How does it feel that your ideology is a fucking joke and nobody is going to take it seriously?
Left wing "anarchism" is never going to be implemented. Sorry.

>> No.14312147
File: 12 KB, 258x245, lmao.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14312147

>>14308503
>Fucking organise! The world is burning!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Why are commies so pathetic?

>> No.14312416

>>14312076
It literally exists in two places in the world right now.

>> No.14312708

>>14312416
I assume you mean Zapatistas and Rojava?
Those two places are just small states though. They have rules and laws like all other states do. They also have money and markets.
Their living standards aren't even that much better than anywhere else.
They live in poverty compared to the western world.

>> No.14312738

>>14312708
>They have rules and laws like all other states do.
Anarchism is no rulers not no rules. Learn anarchism before you talk like you know anything.
>They also have money and markets.
Same with this. Anarchism can have money and markets.
>Their living standards aren't even that much better than anywhere else.
Living standards is the only thing that's important to you? What about have control of your own life and community?
>They live in poverty compared to the western world.
I mean they are in Syria in the middle of a war can't really blame them for that.

>> No.14312778

>>14312738
>Anarchism is no rulers not no rules.
If the collective tells me I cannot trade or own property or do what I want with my property, then yes, they are my rulers.
>Learn anarchism
I did, that's why I want to live like they did in the american midwest in the 1800s, you know, ACTUAL anarchism(the kind that existed for thousands of years before this dumb ancom stuff was invented)
https://mises.org/library/not-so-wild-wild-west
>Anarchism can have money and markets.
Some forms of ancom can, most other forms can not(as if they are banned)
>Living standards is the only thing that's important to you?
No, but they're extremely important.
>What about have control of your own life and community?
I would have that under anarcho-capitalism.
>I mean they are in Syria in the middle of a war can't really blame them for that.
zaps don't have it that much better
taking over the means of production isn't all it's cracked up to be

>> No.14312821

>>14312778
>If the collective tells me I cannot trade or own property or do what I want with my property, then yes, they are my rulers.
The slave owners would say the same thing.
>I did, that's why I want to live like they did in the american midwest in the 1800s, you know, ACTUAL anarchism(the kind that existed for thousands of years before this dumb ancom stuff was invented)
lol ok cowboy
>Some forms of ancom can
So then don't make definitive statements about things if they aren't true.
>most other forms can not(as if they are banned)
Really which?
>I would have that under anarcho-capitalism.
Yeah by being a wagecuck to your boss and having democracy be bought out by corporations.
>taking over the means of production isn't all it's cracked up to be
The economic literature is against you.

Also question how do you build the roads?

>> No.14312884

>>14312821
>The slave owners would say the same thing.
Then the slave owners would be wrong. Slavery is taking someone elses rights.
My point still stands, left anarchists are just authoritarians.
>lol ok cowboy
Stay mad that my system actually fucking worked and was quite peaceful and productive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NSWW0nLeZI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law
You have no idea what anarchism actually is.
It existed in medieval ireland too for a thousand years.
>Really which?
Catalonia, various examples of left wing anarchism in history
>wagecuck to your boss
Economic productivty would be extremely high and we would have sound money with a deflationary currency. We would probably have to work 2 days a week and retire much earier.
Compare that to ancom when you have to work the same long hours because there isn't really a mechanism to underconsume capital and invest it to increase production.
>be bought out by corporations.
Corporations don't exist in ancap, firms do and they actually have to obey the law and can be sued much easier, but okay.
>The economic literature is against you.
But it's not.
You wouldn't be able to consume any more products or work less hours if the workers took over production.
The workers are ALREADY consuming virtually all consumer goods.
What more can they get than what is virtually everything? Dummy.

>> No.14312918

>>14312884
>Then the slave owners would be wrong. Slavery is taking someone elses rights.
How do we decide which person is right?
>Stay mad that my system actually fucking worked and was quite peaceful and productive.
>It existed in medieval ireland too for a thousand years.
lol
>Catalonia, various examples of left wing anarchism in history
Catalonia had markets and money
>Economic productivty would be extremely high and we would have sound money with a deflationary currency. We would probably have to work 2 days a week and retire much earier.
Wow you are delusional if you aren't baiting. You gotta any data on that?
>Corporations don't exist in ancap, firms do and they actually have to obey the law and can be sued much easier, but okay.
So what are some of these laws that are gonna be in place to protect us from the unlimited power of the firms?
>But it's not.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2524912?seq=1

You didn't answer how you are gonna build the roads.

>> No.14312933

>>14312884
>Then the slave owners would be wrong. Slavery is taking someone elses rights.
So is the concept of property in general.

>> No.14312934
File: 145 KB, 662x1000, 71yA9XEdY5L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14312934

>>14308228
Start with me! =)

>> No.14312960

>>14312933
>So is the concept of property in general.
Wrong. If you aren't allowed to own property, you legitimately aren't free.
You people are insane and have it backwards.
Society can make rules on how much property you can own and where you can own it, but the point still stands.

>> No.14312967

>>14312960
>Owning people who have to rent themselves to you to live is being free.

>> No.14312968

>>14312960
>If you aren't allowed to own property, you legitimately aren't free.
That's nonsensical. Property can't exist without an authoritarian state to enforce it.

>> No.14312994

>>14312918
>How do we decide which person is right?
My feelings do, that's all morals are. Slavery is wrong.
>lol
Why are you coping at what actually legitimately happened in reality?
LOL
>Catalonia had markets and money
They were also extremely authoritarian to the working class.
>You gotta any data on that?
Yeah sure, during the late 1800s, we had no central bank and a relatively free market, real wages rapidly rose to be the highest in the world, while the workweek dramatically shrunk. This was all while unions were only 1% of the workforce and had no political power.
>So what are some of these laws that are gonna be in place to protect us from the unlimited power of the firms?
If they use violence against you or your property, use fraud against you etc, you can sue them, or people can use class action lawsuits etc. Polycentric law, it fucking worked before.

>https://www.jstor.org/stable/2524912?seq=1
>Chris Doucouliagos was awarded his PhD from Monash University >in 1996. Prior to joining Deakin University in 1985, he worked at >the ANZ Banking Group.
>He is Associate Editor of the Journal of Economic Surveys and is a >member of the editorial board of the European Journal of Political >Economy. His primary research interests are the political economy >of collective action, development aid, inequality, and trade unions, >and the development and application of methods for research >synthesis.
Some biased lefty that probably leaves out context. I'll read it later.

>You didn't answer how you are gonna build the roads.
Too lazy desu.
In fact I'm going to sleep right now and won't read your reply.

>> No.14313012
File: 73 KB, 853x415, v.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14313012

>>14312967
>>Owning people
If people voluntarily trade their labor to me for something, I don't own them, stupid.

>who have to rent themselves to you
Under ancom, they are also forced to trade their labor to the commune for resources.
The capitalist provides them with more resources than they would at the commune, the capitalist also provides other benefits picrel

>>14312968
>Property can't exist without an authoritarian state to enforce it.
How retarded do you have to be to honestly believe this?
People LIKE owning property and under every example of real anarchism or statelessness in history people DID defend their property with lethal force. People recognized that others liked to own property so they came up with rules and courts to mutually benefit each other and protect each others property
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law
You're so ahistorical and have no idea what you're talking about.

>> No.14313059
File: 176 KB, 447x591, gilded.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14313059

>>14312994
>>14312918
I forgot the pic on the data.

>> No.14313256

>>14312994
>You didn't answer how you are gonna build the roads.
>Too lazy desu.
>In fact I'm going to sleep right now and won't read your reply.
This is all anyone has to read.

>> No.14313282

>>14313012
>How retarded do you have to be
Blah blah blah. Bottom line is, property cannot exist without a third party to mediate property disputes and enforce rulings, and that is what the state is.

>> No.14313649

>>14313282
The concept of property can and does exist without a mediating state as do property disputes.

>> No.14313708

>>14313649
A subjective notion of property is of course always possible. Two people can each subjectively believe that a given plot of land is "their property", but they both can't be right in an objective sense. A consistent objective concept of property is only possible if there is an external agent or mechanism that determines who owns what.

>> No.14314885

>>14308344
>>14308349
>>14309123
show tits

>> No.14314926

>>14308342
>I've heard his lingustical stuff is amazing
lmfao

>> No.14314937

>>14308349
>He’s very astute on politics and world events
He really isn't. His worldview is reductive and he hasn't bothered to understand the history of the constitution, economics, etc. He's another sloppy boomer who thinks "Duh system man" is still edgy enough to satisfy peoples without looking too deeply into causes and effects.

>> No.14315104

>>14313282
>property cannot exist without a third party to mediate property disputes
Yes and these things can be bought in market anarchism, this isn't complicated.
>>14313708
>Two people can each subjectively believe that a given plot of land is "their property"
That's all that matters.

>external agent or mechanism
You mean like a claims association backed up by polycentric law?
It's almost as if this actually fucking HAPPENED in market anarchism.

You left wing "anarchists" are so fucking stupid it's unreal.

>> No.14315621

>>14314937
Can you tell me why he doesn't seem to understand economics/history of the constitution and any beliefs he has that you think are incorrect?

>> No.14315664

>>14315104
If a bum is sleeping on what you regard as "your property" and you want him removed, how is this polycentric private mediator supposed to resolve anything? You think the bum is going to sign up for your preferred mediation service? Also, I assume the state no longer has a monopoly on violence under your proposed scheme, otherwise the private mediator would be impotent since his rulings would be toothless. In which case, how is this entity not best described as a state in itself?

>> No.14315670
File: 895 KB, 480x317, 51586DBA-A7D3-4FB6-ABA0-F5520D4DE623.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14315670

>>14314937
>he hasn't bothered to understand the history of the constitution, economics, etc.

I suppose you’ve read Adam Smith

>> No.14316238

>>14315621
>Can you tell me why he doesn't seem to understand economics/history of the constitution and any beliefs he has that you think are incorrect?
Mainly because he pretends to be a rebel and outsider who only cares about the truth, but really dives right into cultural sensibilities the second his thought would cause any real controversy. For instance, he wants rational anarchy but he also wants arms prohibition, which would required a force far greater than the combined/isolated persons possessing firearms.In the meantime he uses the bill of rights as a buffer against the government and deems it useful insofar as it brings the country a small step closer to weak government, but he is openly willing to relinquish the bill of rights the second he runs into some pet issue. So here we have someone who claims to be so radical that his doctrine, if implemented, would change society from top to bottom, but he cannot even take the first step that might bring the censure of our elite institutions.

Moreover, he misunderstand why the bill of rights as a series of rights given the people by the Federal government, instead of a series of limitation put upon that government by the people in deference to the power of the States. Ironically, if he knew this, he would also know that California and Texas can pass strict gun legislation or outlaw guns altogether while the federal government cannot. This original interpretation would bring the country much closer to his vision of liberty but he cannot embrace because--it would also permit genuine self-government to those nasty texans and those rube South Carolinians and we can't have that. We need government of the people (my people), by the people (who agree with me), for the people (the good ones).

>> No.14316341

>>14308342
read chomskys political shit like you would a history book. there's no theory involved. i dont think hes really set forth some kind of original political theory. hes written about shit he agrees with and even that was decades ago

>> No.14316665

>>14315664
>You think the bum is going to sign up for your preferred mediation service?
The vast majority of people would. Those that don't(ie. refuse to engage with society) would be physically removed.
>otherwise the private mediator would be impotent since his rulings would be toothless
Private mediators will use violence as a last resort.