c2fab2 (14) No.895103>>895225 >>895311 >>899928 >>899951 >>900092 >>900226 >>900658 >>900909 >>911321 [Watch Thread]
SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK DOES IT AGAIN IN HIS COMMENTARY ON CHARLIE HEBDO ATTACKS
https://archive.today/Ud1Sotalks about white guilt
>We should, of course, unambiguously condemn the killings as an attack on the very substance our freedoms, and condemn them without any hidden caveats (in the style of "Charlie Hebdo was nonetheless provoking and humiliating the Muslims too much").
>Such thinking has nothing whatsoever to do with the cheap relativisation of the crime (the mantra of "who are we in the West, perpetrators of terrible massacres in the Third World, to condemn such acts"). It has even less to do with the pathological fear of many Western liberal Leftists to be guilty of Islamophobia.talks about the decadence of western man
>Long ago Friedrich Nietzsche perceived how Western civilisation was moving in the direction of the Last Man, an apathetic creature with no great passion or commitment. Unable to dream, tired of life, he takes no risks, seeking only comfort and security, an expression of tolerance with one another
>We in the West are the Nietzschean Last Men, immersed in stupid daily pleasures, while the Muslim radicals are ready to risk everything, engaged in the struggle up to their self-destruction.talks about how insecure muslims are in their beliefs
>When a Buddhist encounters a Western hedonist, he hardly condemns. He just benevolently notes that the hedonist’s search for happiness is self-defeating. In contrast to true fundamentalists, the terrorist pseudo-fundamentalists are deeply bothered, intrigued, fascinated, by the sinful life of the non-believers. One can feel that, in fighting the sinful other, they are fighting their own temptation.
>The problem with fundamentalists is not that we consider them inferior to us, but, rather, that they themselves secretly consider themselves inferior.talks about how liberalism is a weakling's ideology
>So what about the core values of liberalism: freedom, equality, etc.? The paradox is that liberalism itself is not strong enough to save them against the fundamentalist onslaught.
>Left to itself, liberalism will slowly undermine itself
>To think in response to the Paris killings means to drop the smug self-satisfaction of a permissive liberal and to accept that the conflict between liberal permissiveness and fundamentalism is ultimately a false conflict – a vicious cycle of two poles generating and presupposing each other.Seriously, for a Marxist, this guy is pretty based.
6cb747 (12) No.895225>>895245 >>914750
>>895103 (OP)>but, rather, that they themselves secretly consider themselves inferior.wow this is awesome
I want to get into Zizek. what do?
0da047 (1) No.895245>>895362
686166 (1) No.895291>>895362 >>895629 >>925230
You also missed this key quote:
>Left to itself, liberalism will slowly undermine itself – the only thing that can save its core values is a renewed Left. In order for this key legacy to survive, liberalism needs the brotherly help of the radical Left. THIS is the only way to defeat fundamentalism, to sweep the ground under its feet.
>"hey guys, we should save the planet from leftism by being more extreme leftists, dig up guys"
47ddb5 (1) No.895311>>895629
>>895103 (OP)"but kapitalism is not goot you see". Fuck this pathetic commie.
6cb747 (12) No.895362
>>895291>>"hey guys, we should save the planet from leftism by being more extreme leftists, dig up guys"this is exactlywhat /pol/ does, well, what /pol/ wants to do but not from left wing
>>895245I didn't know he likes to speculate that much. but it is still interesting.
can you recommend me a book by him? I struggle to understand his accent
bb4f27 (1) No.895404>>895513
http://withendemanndom.blogspot.com/2014/07/slavoj-zizek-philosophaster-and_9.html>Under the man’s name, clarity has appeared at last, owed albeit not to some unfogging of mind, but to plain old stealing. It was just this clarity that struck Steve Sailer as odd: “a reader inclined toward deconstructionism might note that Žižek summarizes [Kevin] MacDonald’s controversial argument [in The Culture of Critique] quite lucidly. In fact, the superstar professor achieves a higher degree of clarity while expounding MacDonald’s message than in any other passage I’ve read by Žižek”.1 The reason for the cat’s barking, the dog’s meowing, or rather, this obscurant’s lucidity, is simple: it is someone else’s summary, namely, Stanley Hornbeck’s, from a review that appeared in American Renaissance over seven years beforehand.
>Much of the plagiarism is word-for-word. Some passages are lightly rephrased. Below I give a side-by-side comparison. The passages from Žižek come from one continuous paragraph, which I have broken up into sections so that Hornbeck’s original might run parallel to it, making the comparison easier. To the same end, I have re-paragraphed some parts of Hornbeck’s original and removed Žižek’s page-citations. 7f72d8 (1) No.895437>>895513 >>895629
zizek is worth studying whether or not you agree with him, especially because of the hordes of sjw types who worship him as gospel.
i assume since this is /pol "study X without believing it blindly" is fucking assumed but who knows
6cb747 (12) No.895513>>895629
>>895437can you recommend me one of his book?
>>895404>However In response to the allegations Žižek stated "A friend told me about Kevin Macdonald’s theories, and I asked him to send me a brief resume. The friend send [sic] it to me, assuring me that I can use it freely since it merely resumes another’s line of thought. Consequently, I did just that – and I sincerely apologize for not knowing that my friend’s resume was largely borrowed from Stanley Hornbeck’s review of Macdonald’s book. […] As any reader can quickly establish, the problematic passages are purely informative, a report on another’s theory for which I have no affinity whatsoever […] In no way can I thus be accused of plagiarizing another’s line of thought, of »stealing ideas.« I nonetheless deeply regret the incident." c2fab2 (14) No.895629>>909957
>>895311>he hasn't read Feder's Manifesto for the Abolition of Enslavement to InterestCapitalism is bad because it runs on the premise of exponential growth rate, which is unsustainable.
>>895291>oh no, his subjective opinion on what solution to the objective problems is is contrary to what I believe, better disregard him completely!No. The whole fact that he pretty much denounced the "hordes of sjw types"
>>895437 makes this worth reading.
>>895513Haven't read any of his books yet, but since I'm from Slovenia myself I hear or read his ramblings pretty often. Regardless of the fact that I disagree with what he believes the solution is, I must admit that he often has a very good point about what is going on.
dc7ccb (1) No.895893
I guess a broken clock is right twice a day.
9 times out of 10 this guy is a gigantic fucking moron. Though this stuff is alright.
c2fab2 (14) No.896382>>899553
bumping for potential debate
c2fab2 (14) No.899553>>899635
>>896382bumping one more time
ceabe8 (2) No.899635>>899677
>>899553Too bad I don't have anything to add, but that graphic makes me realize that size doesn't matter, lol. I don't follow Zizek much, other than remembering him commenting on the band Laibach in one of their movies.
c2fab2 (14) No.899677>>899885
>>899635I like his commentaries, because they're usually very thought-provoking. He points out those little things that usually get overlooked, but deserve to be noted.
Also, he's a major troll. I wouldn't be surprised if his obsession with Marxism is more a running gag than anything serious.
081f48 (1) No.899760>>899935
I VAS READINK SHHHHTALIN ANT I FINK THAT COMMUNISHISM ISH GOOD NOW, YA?
ceabe8 (2) No.899885
>>899677It's hard for me to listen to him, sounds like he's got a mouthful of marbles. I used to enjoy listening to Tom Sunić's radio show back in the day. That and my Kosovo deployment when I was in the Army is all I have as far as knowledge of Slavic stuff.
3ceed4 (1) No.899922>>900103 >>900622 >>909598
He is pretty based.
I urge everyone to watch this.
4102e6 (1) No.899928>>899941
>>895103 (OP)what does /pol/ have against the new statesman?
2b949b (1) No.899935
8f39f5 (4) No.899941
>>899928nwo commie bastard
5f5ecf (2) No.899951>>899968 >>900460
>>895103 (OP)he's actually a fascist Leftist who hates liberals, which is why a lot of right /pol/tards like him.
fascism isn't unique to the right.
3ad8b5 (6) No.899968>>899982
>>899951i always tought of fascism being the perfect centre,since its a mish mash of ideas from the left and the right.
c2fab2 (14) No.899982>>900460
>>899968Yeah, which also means that both sides of the spectrum can employ fascism as a political tool.
8f39f5 (4) No.900028>>900033
Slavoj Žižek described his involvement in European Graduate School:
There is an international summer school, the European Graduate School… What is interesting with this school is the selection of lecturers – there are well-known philosophers and artists from the whole world, including filmmakers Peter Greenaway and Volker Schlöndorff, theorists Donna Haraway and Sandy Stone, and philosophers Giorgio Agamben, Alain Badiou and I. We three are friends. We meet there each year, are engaged for three weeks. I can bring my wife, do a 90-minute lecture each morning and am free afterwards.
Video is Sandy Stone. He and Donna Harraway are postmodernist feminist lunatics. And they all circlejerk at the European Graduate School with Zizek.
e1ec1b (1) No.900092
>>895103 (OP)This guy strikes me as the incarnation of pseudo-intelectuals, which I figure is why he has such a large following of pseudo-intelectuals. The chicks follow the mama duck, no?
3ad8b5 (6) No.900098>>900154
>>900033Was she trying to exert authority as a male?
The ending part is oddly reminiscent of those UNCLE SAM NEEDS YOU posters but still falls flat on its head.Women biologically just cant do what she described,and thats just it.
6cb747 (12) No.900103>>900187 >>900862
>>899922Already did. Better than his Cinema's.
I want to read a book by zizek, but I don't know almost anything in philosophy which book should I read?
8f39f5 (4) No.900154>>900169 >>900281 >>900957 >>900972 >>901083
>>900098it's a tranny who says gender is performative
basically saying that if you are believe you are something and act as that thing, then you are that thing
it's postmodern fuckery
here's Donna Haraway. get a load of her delivery, she is so post modern and verbose that it is a b s u r d
these are all Zizek's buddies at European Graduate School
c2fab2 (14) No.900169
>>900154>it's a trannyI was just writing a comment how (s)he does such a good impression I don't think (s)he's actually a woman.
c2fab2 (14) No.900187>>900338
>>900103I'll try to deliver you recommendations tomorrow.
0c4637 (5) No.900226>>900448 >>900938 >>909985
>>895103 (OP)talking about the west is not talking about White guilt. He's one of those people who thinks the only thing that defines the west is secularism and liberalism
3ad8b5 (6) No.900281
>>900154Well it is up to a cetain point,but there is still aptittude to how well you perform, a tranny will still never be able to perform a gender to its fullest,unless its one of those imaginary genders which follow their own special rules.
I made it to five minutes,this goddamn woman is truly saying apsolutely nothing at all with hundreds of words.
6cb747 (12) No.900338>>908729
>>900187Thanks, do I need a foreknowledge?
24c39f (7) No.900383
Zizek is pretty fucking based.
0c4637 (5) No.900448>>900938 >>909985
>>900226this
this poster is based as fuck
10/10 anon
read that post
What a post. He's spot on. He knows it AND he gets it
24c39f (7) No.900460>>900495
>>899951>>899982you're mistakin fascism for authoritarianism you retards.
0c4637 (5) No.900495>>900517 >>912126
>>900460fascism comes from fasces for the sticks that romans used to keep the lower classes in line. stupid
fascism IS authoritarianism which is why stalin is called fascist too
24c39f (7) No.900517>>900572
>>900495Fascism is authoritarianism with a permanent nation state based on culture. Communism involves multiculture.
0c4637 (5) No.900572>>900602
>>900517Nonsense. Poland under communism was not multicult at all
24c39f (7) No.900602>>900714
>>900572No by multicult I mean the Soviets conquered peoples and then didnt force their culture on them intentionally.
They did accidentally wipe out cultures thought because they moved large populations around to the point where some small tribe of 20,000 had 5 people in each town it inhabited.
a2d96e (1) No.900622
>>899922i'm glad i'm not the only one who appreciates him. this movie was really great. over on halfchan people shat on him so much, barely anyone liked him
2f5c9f (1) No.900658>>900664
>>895103 (OP)Why is this fucking guy always sweating?
0c4637 (5) No.900664
>>900658Slavonian genetics. I have it too
3ad8b5 (6) No.900714>>900787 >>900921
>>900602
>they moved large populations around to the point where some small tribe of 20,000 had 5 people in each town it inhabited.Do you have a link for that?It sounds hilarious,i can already visualize a bureaucrat in Moscow just handwaving the entire proccess as its sent trough hundreds of layers of government offices.
24c39f (7) No.900787>>900921
>>900714>google "extinct ethnic groups">ethnic groups in russia comes upayyy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinct_indigenous_peoples_of_RussiaThere was this one specific Mongoloid tribe that was nearly wiped out and will die out soon I remember reading about in /int/ that ill try to find.
1007cc (5) No.900806>>900822
Warning: Zizek is an SJW schizophreniac who advocates marxist revolutions in which we will all be killed.
This man being able to write for a "respected" newspaper like the guardian proves that planning the mass murder of conservatives is still popular among leftists.
6cb747 (12) No.900822>>900838
1007cc (5) No.900838>>900990
>>900822Every word this man says is aimed at your destruction, don't be an idiot who is charmed because he critises liberals, he only does so because they aren't marxist enough for him.
7d3061 (1) No.900862>>911176
>>900103Will Durant is /pol/ approved
791eac (1) No.900909
>>895103 (OP)>We in the West are the Nietzschean Last Men, immersed in stupid daily pleasures, while the Muslim radicals are ready to risk everything, engaged in the struggle up to their self-destruction.This. I see that in our Western society everyday. We've replaced tradition with fads, goals with drugs, indolence, and mediocrity, God with money. Instant gratification is our motto and theirs is the death of everything the Western society stands for. We're utterly lost, and as expected, the culprits are marxism and feminism. /pol/ is always right.
Prepare yourselves, for kebab shall spare no one.
24c39f (7) No.900921>>900971
>>900714>>900787It wasnt what I was looking for but it's an example of Soviet blunders that devastated a small ethnic group by forcing them into large mutliethnic areas:
>following the Bolshevik Revolution in 1922, the new government of the Soviet Union altered prior imperial polices towards the Oroks to bring them into line with communist ideology.[10] In 1932, the northern Oroks joined the collective farm of Val, which was specialised in reindeer breeding, together with smaller numbers of Nivkhs, Evenks and Russians.[7] 5c5d5c (1) No.900938
5394f0 (1) No.900957>>901017 >>901034
>>900154Is there some kind of pathology as to why people talk like this? On the internet it seems to be some sort of individual which carries themselves in this manner and I will name them.
Autphag tales like this. Another was a woman I heard on PRI talk about her ebook wherein please sold and store their sleep in machines because of widespread insomnia. The third is this woman. I once knew a professor of russian history and public policy at my uni which prided herself on using outrageously uncommon words all the time to explain simple thing when we all know the purpose of voice is to exchange data easily.
Does anyone know if there's some kind of psychological complex you can label these people as?
Pic unrelated, I just wanted to post karen.
24c39f (7) No.900971
>>900921Oh here's another mass deportation of an ethnic group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Lentil_(Caucasus)Theres only 500 of them left now
1007cc (5) No.900972
>>900154>basically saying that if you are believe you are something and act as that thing, then you are that thingSo niggers really are chimps
3ad8b5 (6) No.900990>>901019
>>900838How marxist are we talking about here?
Perpetual Revolution?Apsolute subjectivism?His words seem pretty some weird combo of redpill trough marxist lens but dont give off the vibe of being written by a marxist.You understand what im getting at?
3edc82 (1) No.901017
1007cc (5) No.901019>>901025
>>900990He's a self described and a massive SJW, a combination of the worst of marxism. He wraps this in prosaic rethoric, but as he admits, what he really means is "gas the whites, class war now".
1007cc (5) No.901025>>901081
>>901019*self described stalinist
9416f7 (2) No.901034
>>900957its called "faggotry"
6cb747 (12) No.901081>>901122
>>901025> stalinistI think he despises stalinism
>Many observers have confused Zizek’s statements on Stalin with approval or intellectual accord. Zizek on Stalin:
>Many observers have confused Zizek’s statements on Stalin with approval or intellectual accord. Zizek on Stalin:
>"Better the worst Stalinist terror, than the most liberal capitalist democracy. Stalinist ‘totalitarianism’ was the capitalist logic of self-propelling productivity liberated from its capitalist form, which is why it failed: Stalinism was the symptom of capitalism.Better the worst Stalinist terror, than the most liberal capitalist democracy. Stalinist ‘totalitarianism’ was the capitalist logic of self-propelling productivity liberated from its capitalist form, which is why it failed: Stalinism was the symptom of capitalism." 9416f7 (2) No.901083
>>900154tl;dr version of this video-
"nobody listened to my crazy long winded and pedantic verbal masturbation when i was a man so i got a wig and did HRT. I am now a professor. Suck my boyclit, shitlords"
3ad8b5 (6) No.901122>>905238
>>901081Well doing a bit of googling it seems this guy brand himself a "old style marixist" who criticizes everything but has no viable alternative other than magic marxism which would be some kind of weird communo-anarchism.Am i getting this right?This guy is truly trying hard to be the special snowflake among special snowflakes.
01f9ef (1) No.902412
He is an old school commie. He want's to rule majority, that's what all communists want at the end.
c2fab2 (14) No.905238
>>901122Yeah this is pretty close.
4e4c71 (1) No.907299
This is all you need to know about Zizek
2c27b5 (1) No.907326
>Hebdo
More like Heebdo amirite
c2fab2 (14) No.908729>>914694
>>900338Okay so from what I was told:
The Sublime Object of Ideology: his first work in English, and I've heard it's a bit more structured than his later stuff… and it pretty much includes everything typically Žižekian, ridiculous jokes all over the place, Hegel, Lacan, Hitchcock.
In Defense of Lost Causes: might be quite /pol/-related, since it talks exactly about stuff in OP and about how modern man is weak and society needs something harsh to reset and return to solid grounds (guess what he recommends about that). Basically critique of liberalism in modern society from a hardcore Marxist viewpoint.
Žižek's Jokes: (Did you hear the one about Hegel and negation?): If you want ridiculous jokes that you're supposed to take seriously.
The Parallax View: regarded his magnum opus; it's basically what one should read to fully understand Žižek's viewpoint. But, of course, it's a heavy read and it might not be the best book to start with.
How to Read Lacan: Introduction to Lacanian psychoanalysis. Don't know much about Lacan though so I don't know how relevant it might be.
f8ad2f (1) No.908993
It's actually quite hilarious to watch people so incompetent ridicule something they have absolutely no knowledge of as Slavoj Shits directly on their faces. But because of their ignorance they can't tell at all.
0b4de0 (1) No.909598
>>89992215 minutes in, seems pretty interesting.
Whenever I look into his work, a single, important question keeps coming to mind:
Who would win in a fistfight, Stallman or Žižek?
301f9d (3) No.909957>>909998
>>895629>Capitalism is bad because it runs on the premise of exponential growth rate, which is unsustainable.No it doesn't you chode, it allows consumers and producers to negotiate the price of goods and people to save or spend as they see fit.
There's nothing about the model that requires infinite growth
301f9d (3) No.909985>>914694
>>900226>>900448Nice lefty astro-turfing, I'm glad nu/pol/ has IDs
f46982 (1) No.909998>>910021 >>925259 >>925290
>>909957>There's nothing about the model that requires infinite growthActually yes. Systems that require investment and interest require perpetual infinite growth for continued existence. Unless you are going to argue capitalism can work without the owners of capital demanding back more than they lent or invested?
301f9d (3) No.910021
>>909998If goods become increasingly scarce up until the point of extinction the system will remain capitalist until such extinction occurs. You can spend and save up until there are no goods left to trade, you don't need infinite growth you need living bodies and available goods.
Capitalism spurs on growth but it works in a decline as well, an economy that's shrinking remains capitalist it no more needs growth than any other system that relies on human beings to exercise that system, which is to say as long as their are living persons you can have capitalism.
If capitalism required infinite growth capitalist systems would cease to exist when economies shrink, they do not.
3dbfb4 (1) No.911176>>914105
>>900862>Baconliterally Redddit: The Philosopher
22abf7 (1) No.911321>>911405 >>911682
>>895103 (OP)
>the terrorist pseudo-fundamentalists are deeply bothered, intrigued, fascinated, by the sinful life of the non-believers. One can feel that, in fighting the sinful other, they are fighting their own temptation.What the fuck is this Neo-Freudian shit Zizek is trying to pull here? What?
ebb6e3 (1) No.911405
>>911321actually it reminds me of evola's notion of greater and lesser holy war
>The "enemy" who resists us and the "infidel" within ourselves must be subdued and put in chains. This enemy is the animalistic yearning and instinct, the disorganized multiplicity of impulses, the limitations imposed on us by a fictitious self, and thus also fear, wickedness, and uncertainty; this subduing of the enemy within is the only way to achieve inner liberation or the rebirth in a state of deeper inner unity and "peace" in the esoteric and triumphal sense of the word.
>In the world of traditional warrior asceticism the "lesser holy war", namely, the external war, is indicated and even prescribed as the means to wage this "greater holy war"; thus in Islam the expressions "holy war" (jihad) and "Allah's way" are often used interchangeably. In this order of ideas action exercises the rigorous function and task of a sacrifical and purifying ritual. The external vicissitudes experienced during a military campaign cause the inner "enemy" to emerge and put up a fierce resistance and agood fight in the form of the animalistic instincts of self-preservation, fear, inertia, compassion, or other passions; those who engage in battles must overcome these feelings by the time they enter the battlefield if they wish to win and to defeat the outer enemy or "infidel". 700107 (1) No.911682>>914125 >>917282
>>911321It's just Zizek being retardly loquacious. Simple explanation: it's called "projection". Muslims struggle with degeneracy (ie. goat-fucking), see decadence in the West, and therefore believe that by attacking the West, they are curbing their own impulses. Pseudo = false, they are not really "fundamentalists" (according to Zizek) for this reason.
If you want an explanation of the concept from an actual psychologist, here you go:
> To use the frequent example of "homophobia": a guy feels gay impulses and can't "handle it" but he doesn't get rid of them by putting them onto someone else, he confuses them as coming from someone else. He smells gayness, "Where is it coming from? Me? Impossible! Jesus washed my feet. Must be that guy." Sorry, wildman, whoever smelt it dealt it. Amusingly enough, it's followed by this remark:
> You could be happy, too, dude, if you weren't so invested in not being happy. If you want a partial understanding of why 19-21 Saudi/Egyptian terrorists could live in America and enjoy our strip clubs but still want to crumble our architecture, there you go. There are plenty of clips like this of Zizek floating around. Before seeing this I had written him off as a hack, as being associated with Foucault (ha!) or Derrida is almost never a good sign. Turns out he's not so clueless after all.
But I tire of his excessive verboseness and hilariously awful accent. His ideas have been made simpler by men of clearer mind.
95e4f5 (1) No.911711
Sometimes things get too progressive even for Zizek.
5f5ecf (2) No.912071
Racist Jokes are great progressive things!
6f68e3 (1) No.912126
>>900495>which is why stalin is called fascist tooby no educated person.
Fascism is a specific ideology originating from Benito Mussolini, not some blanket term for authoritarian government.
c2fab2 (14) No.914105
>>911176Roger Bacon, the proposer and formulator of the Scientific method during the 13th century? Sounds about right.
c2fab2 (14) No.914125
>>911682>his excessive verboseness and hilariously awful accentIn case you're wondering, his accent sounds retarded even when he's speaking Slovene.
6cb747 (12) No.914694>>915111
>>908729I heard that the "sublime object of Ideology" is a difficult read
also, are this books heavy? because I'm not adjusted in reading philosophical books.
Ans with which one shloud I start with?
>>909985kek
46e147 (2) No.914750>>914869
6cb747 (12) No.914869>>914969
>>914750I did this already. I also watched his Cinema's version.
What should I be reading now?
46e147 (2) No.914969>>915092 >>915111
>>914869why would you want to read his shit? His a charlatan with no intellectual influence in academia. People on fine arts schools with no philosophical knowledge love him for some reason.
Digging on Noam Chomsky work would be a better use of your time:
Manufacturing Consent, on how media portrays a narrow picture of the real worl that we live in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO51ahW9JlEMost important philosophical debate of the second half of the century
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wfNl2L0Gf8on neoliberalism:
http://www.bookdepository.com/Profits-Over-People-Noam-Chomsky/9781888363821if you have any interest in cognitive sciences:
http://www.bookdepository.com/Aspects-Theory-Syntax-Noam-Chomsky/9780262530071 6cb747 (12) No.915092
>>914969>why would you want to read his shit?I'm interested. Although he have a very extreme leftie thought, I like his psychoanalytical work. Very interesting stuff.
>love him for some reason.I think it is because he is not dry. And says words or jokes that regular academics don't. like "shit" or "racist jokes". Maybe they thing is progressive.
>Manufacturing ConsentI watched this, but didn't like it that much. I was very long and didn't said that much. Maybe because I already knew that the media manipulates.
> cognitive sciences:isn't linguistic a little advanced?
I barely know something of philosophy or related topics, what would you recommend to me?
c2fab2 (14) No.915111>>917277
>>914694I heard The Sublime Object of Ideology is easier to read than, say, The Parallax View…
>>914969Why not?
6cb747 (12) No.917277>>917282
>>915111>I heard The Sublime Object of Ideology is easier to read than, say, The Parallax View…but this doesn't make the book an easy read…
>actual psychologistwho?
6cb747 (12) No.917282>>917294
>>917277>>911682I meant to reply also to you
c2fab2 (14) No.917294
d66bae (3) No.925230
>>895291Yeah seriously.
I was with him up until that point.
The argument makes no sense. I'm no liberal, but why would you need to further shift in values to the left in order to combat an extremely right ideology? Does he think this is like tauting a string?
Why couldn't the democratic liberals just take up arms, themselves, why would we need some psychotic, self-hating anti-fa faggots in our streets throwing tear gas at other terrorists? And trying to kill anybody with right-wing sentiments?
I love how totally contradicts himself by with his "far-left is the answer" conclusion. At one point in the piece he says that things will always swing back towards fascism as a societal correction (he doesn't really mean fascism though, the dude just throws terms around meaninglessly) but then he doesn't reach his conclusion by saying the West needs to counteract the flawed liberal democratic ideology with "fascism".
Instead he implicates Marxism is the answer once again.
I swear to God even the most insightful commies have really awful tunnel-vision.
d66bae (3) No.925259
>>909998>Systems that require investment and interest require perpetual infinite growth for continued existenceYou do realize loan interests are payable if people are saving properly, right?
You have the "free-market capitalism" misconception like most economic lefies, where they think that our exponential "growth" is a symptom of capitalism and not gross mismanagement of the monetary base by the Fed.
An economy that lends must have savings to back it, which, in the U.S. and many Western nations, does not.
>Unless you are going to argue capitalism can work without the owners of capital demanding back more than they lent or investedThat makes no sense. If someone takes out a loan for a business they can obviously allocate money for that loan-interest after their business yields profits.
d66bae (3) No.925290
>>909998If that loan covers the business's cost of resources, land and of labor, then it follows that yes once that business has started up from those factors of production, allowed by the loan, spontaneous growth will happen from there. And will continue to grow as such.
Why is that inherently bad? Responsible monetary policy would be issuing currency somewhat relative to the supply of labor and wages, something the original Colonial settlers in America had right.
"In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one.” – Benjamin Franklin
