Friendly reminder that using the term "neo-liberal" in a serious academic discussion (or merely in one that aspires to a minimum of rigidity and consistency) is tantamount to using terms such as "cultural Marxist", "patriarchal" or "degenerate".
Picrelated: the worst fucking offender.
>take sociology course at university
>talks about how neoliberalism caused 2008 financial crisis and is killing a bunch of third world countries
>constant use of the word without really giving a rigid definition
I felt so lost.
As long as it's well defined I don't see a problem. A teacher on political philosophy casually mentioned neo-liberal and libertarianism being used interchangeable but that we for the sake of the course would use the word libertarian instead.
Really, neo-liberalism and libertarianism is the same thing. It's defined as such in the dictionary and when used by people. I don't see what the problem is.
I change my mind, while it isn't a big blunder it's preferable to use libertarianism if you mean libertarianism instead of neo-liberalism as to avoid confusion.
I also suspect this is a bigger problem in the US than the rest of the world since liberalism in most of Europe means you're, well, liberal.
> Libertarianism isn't much of a philosophical concept either btw.
Libertarianism is well-developed philosophical concept. Nozick's libertarian criticism towards Rawls is a cornerstone of today's political philosophy; so far that students tend to be assigned to read both books at the same time.
While not forming a coherent philosophy or social idea, neo-conservatism is at least a somewhat consistent political tendency with recognizable policy attributes. It is also sufficiently distinguishable from other forms of historical and contemporary worldviews, and as a movement consists of socially identifiable actors. So I would say that unlike "neo-liberal" it's at least a legitimate political label, even if it tends to be applied in a somewhat inflationary way.
>"neoliberalism" can mean literally anything from Friedman to Rothbard
>literally always used as a pejorative
>nobody actually identifying as a "neoliberal"
This is how you know it's a buzzword and not a real thing
>always used as a pejorative
This. The words "marxist" or "fascist" are buzzwords as well, but at the very least, there are objectively people out there who identify as marxists or fascists. Not the case with "neoliberalism", literally every time someone uses this word it's used to criticize this boogeyman.
>mentioning cultural Marxism, and degeneracy
>that not-so-subtle jab at /pol/
Why are you faggots constantly on the look out for /pol/?
Why are you constantly trying to oppose the ideas and cultures of that board specifically?
Every other thread on here somehow has to confront the ideas of /pol/ as if they are some sort of omnipresent boogeyman.
Why not think the same of /b/, /r9k/ or even fucking /lgbt/ or something.
Very few people from other boards even know that /his/ exists.
he didn't bring up /pol/ in his post once you fucking retard
My goodness, I think /pol/ and /b/ might be right about how we get insane amounts of Redditors coming in everyday.
Both /b/ and even /r9k/ are infamous for the real life events they have caused.
Suicides, killing, shootings, and all sorts of trolling.
They outdo /pol/ by far.
You would know this if you actually have on this site longer than a few months. Or read any online news magazine in the last couple of years.
>completely missing the point of the first few sentences I wrote
>in fact completely missing the point of my entire post
>being this retarded and new
read his post again you fucking retard, he didn't mention /pol/ once, if anyone belongs on reddit its you
Neo liberalism is used to describe the process of primitive accumulation restarted after a prolonged period of stagflation following the social democratic consensus in the post world war period. It has some pretty well documented features which I can elaborate upon. Comparing it to a fringe unhistorical theory like Cultural Marxism is low quality baiting.
>Why are you faggots constantly on the look out for /pol/?
I'll tell you a little story about two villages, one called Hiz and the other called Pol. Hiz was full of people who loved to talk and Pol was full of people who loved to shit in their bathtubs and roll around in it all day. Sometimes, people from Pol would go into Hiz and try to join in the conversations. But the people from Hiz would smell the shit clinging to the filthy Pol-ites' diseased bodies and would reject them. "Fuck off, /pol/tard!" they'd cry. No matter what the hapless Pol-ite did or said, the only response was "Fuck off, /pol/tard!"
And the people of Pol were sad. They brought their problem to the smartest man in all of Pol and asked his advice. He got his biggest bathtub, filled it with the foulest shit he could find and sat in it for a week, stewing. Everyone in Pol grew more and more tense the more he pondered. They knew he was very clever and wise - some folks said he could read without moving his lips, though most were sceptical about talk of such feats - but could he crack this nut?
Finally, the smartest man in all of Pol emerged from his bathtub of shit and announced that he had found a solution. Everyone gathered around to hear his wisdom.
"What we will do," he told them, "is this: Whenever they say 'Fuck off, /pol/tard!' we will-" he paused, furrowing his brows for a moment in intense concentration, as though he had lost grip of his momentous idea. Then he started. "Yes!" he cried. "We will... uh... yes! We'll tell them we aren't from Pol!"
Silence greeted this extrusion. A young man in the crowd put his hand up.
"But... we ARE from Pol," he said, bewildered.
"Yes," said the wise man, "but, and it's very complicated and tricky, I know, BUT, what we do is, we... TELL them that we're not. And then they'll have to talk to us!"
The young man put his hand up again.
"But... we ARE from Pol," he said again.
The wise man sighed and began to speak once more.
It took several months of classes and speeches and diagrams and tutorials, but after much effort, most of the people of Pol were fairly sure that they could manage to say that they weren't from Pol. And so a contingent was dispatched to Hiz, in high spirits at the prospect of their inevitable success.
As soon as they entered Hiz, the people there began to yell at them "Fuck off, /pol/tards!"
The Pol-ites nudged and winked and grinned at one another. "We're not from Pol!" they cried.
But the people of Hiz responded: "Of course you're from Pol, you fucking /pol/tards, we can smell the shit all over you! Fuck off, /pol/tards!"
They went home, as dejected as they were mystified.
People that post /b/-isms get told to go back to /b/, people that post /r9k/-isms get told to go back to /r9k/, people that post /lgbt/-isms get told to go back to /lgbt/. So when people post /pol/-isms, they get told to go back to /pol/.
Why don't people get told to go back to those places more often? Because things associated specifically with those boards are less commonly used to shitpost here. It's really that fucking simple.
things are that simple
You can tell a pol poster because of the things he says
when you identify with something, say heavy metal music you look and act like someone who listens to heavy metal, you grow your hair long and scho on
The thing pol posters think they are always right and so they just say shit without any evidence which is why they are wrong
They are that simple. /pol/ is an unceasing wave of effluvium battering against our walls. If we were constantly getting OPs and thread derails about furshit, we'd have a culture of telling furfags to yiff in hell or whatever. But we're not, so we don't.
>thread derailing by meta circlejerking
>thread derailing by meta circlejerking due to /pol/ infestation
If we explain why /pol/ is wrong then the sentiment behind them being right all the time will die
Only then can we have actual discussions
also try using the board during Australia and Nz hours, it's better
>If we explain why /pol/ is wrong then the sentiment behind them being right all the time will die
But /pol/ has never been right about anything except whether or not various celebrities are Jewish. Ever.
>If we explain why /pol/ is wrong then the sentiment behind them being right all the time will die
wew I know this is a history and humanities board but someone here took 18th century Enlightenment a tad too seriously.
Oh for FUCK sake why did you have to fuck up a perfectly good thread.
Cultural Marxism is a retarded term for anyone who know even a little about the subject; it's been discussed to death. The discussions have been geared towards "It's a retarded term but maybe you mean something else, let's bone out and make sure we're using the correct terms".
But we just cant have nice terms before some /pol/tard have their feelings hurt so they have to resort to shitposting.
/pol/ don't want a conclusion or a resolution. They want a neverending festival of shitposting. It's like ISIS, you know? Attacking them is exactly what they want.
What you're advocating is: Let's all argue with /pol/ and treat their ideas seriously and explain how and why they're wrong, then study and absorb their responses to that, then offer our own responses, then so on ad infinitum.
IOW: Let's give /pol/ exactly what they want and turn this and any other place into a themed extension of /pol/.
To which I say, "No."
You can tell a lot about a poster by how frequently they use the verb versus the noun, though.
Yea they are
people are motivated by emotion and reason, which is why /pol/ posters are effective in spreading their ideology they get you angry and scared and they imitate smart books to think that it is legit
That's literally the two methods of persuasion that Aristotle discovered
logos and pathos
Yea that's why we shouldn't attack them but be genuinely nice to them, pity them
living life being so afraid of everything must be a pretty shit existence, so if we are genuinely nice some will listen and the others are beyond saving
They use words that will intentionally try and bait you but deep down they want to be smart because they know it's a better life
>It's like ISIS, you know?
You just lost all credibility with that shitty cliche.
Pretty much the last resort when someone on facebook or anyone else wants to make an argument agains "muh racism" or "muh xenophobia".
First it was "y-your'e like Hitler", now it's "y-you're just like ISIS"!
>muh Trump is just like ISIS!
>muh Oregon militia is just like ISIS!
> muh anonymous 4chan board is just like ISIS!
>buying this much into le ebin board warz!!
>being retarded enough to ignore the fact that a single person can browse multiple boards and obtain ideas from all of them
You do realize that there a lot of boards on here, and most people don't restrict themselves to one right?
Take me for example, yes I started on /b/, moved to /adv/ and /pol/ and now I pretty much browse everything from /sci/ to /fit/. I've even checked out /v/, /fa/ and even /x/. Not a big fucking deal.
Maybe /pol/ actually makes good strong arguments and people like what that board usually offers, that's why they have quite the zealots and by far the best recent may-may output.
My point on >>568785 was that this redditor-infested board is retard-tier in the way it approaches the whole issue with /pol/. When your sticky has a rule about /pol/ you know people are going to break that rule for the lulz. When every other thread on here bashes /pol/ you draw even more attention to the issue as well.
Take the high road about this shit, just like the fags at /sci/ do.
Okay tell me what you believe i'm open to hear your ideas
Im smart enough to know I don't know everything
but I am confident enough to know I can learn anything
I agree people like to break the rules
Why are you interested in what I have to say? That whole point of my post is that just being from /pol/ doesn't define my points of view. That's why I like to browse different boards; I like to see different point of view.
With the exception of tumblr and reddit though, I've never been there.
I don't really care about this /pol/ meme in one way or another, but after seeing one of the few boards you explored was /adv/ I kind of stopped reading.
It's like saying "Guys I love eating my own feces, and I also invented a cure for cancer." Nobody would listen to the second part of your sentence.
Yea good, 4chan shouldn't define your views, so go visit Tumblr and Reddit and see if the memes are true or not
all the oldfags left after gamergate
so for a while this place was shit, but now the smart ones are coming back because they realise that 4chan is important, a place where you can say anything without worrying about anyone else is a place you can really bee yourself
speaking of which, I'm off to /gif/ now, time for an evening fap session.
Good luck with your shitty board, newfriends.
Uhh explain? I've got a gf btw, I'm just traveling for work. Gotta make do somehow am I right?
Austrian pussy is the best btw.
Well it's true that people will find confidence alluring, so tell your girlfriend she is beautiful, if you believe it she will believe it, if you want a more analytical answer I guess you could explain it in terms of a placebo, but it only works if you believe it, girls love romantic shit because they have been fed romantic ideals from every movie and book that they read. It's easier to build people up and you both will benefit from it
Well thanks I guess mate. Best of luck to you.
I dunno I've not got it saved. Daily reminder that meme magic is real btw.