Do you read journals /lit/? What's your favorite?

The Economist is not a journal. It's almost entirely propaganda and it's pretty damn overt about it.

>>10007947
it's clearly not the economist. it's like reading a lame article 3 days after the event happened by the time which I've already read a dozen texts from different sides of the spectrum.
i mostly read in real time news or developing stories.
some are well documented articles.
some are not.

>>10007947
The Economist is fucking garbage, faggot. Wanna know how I know you're an undergrad?

>>10008108
this, desu

Not the Economist, which is globalist jewish propaganda owned by the Rothschilds.

>>10008108
All journals are propaganda, The Economist is just gruesome propaganda.

The fact it's written by anonymous know-it-alls sometimes makes it a liberal, polite version of 4chan shitposts.

File: death_to_the_bourgeoisie__by_xplkqlkcassia-d9ajfg1.png (294KB, 1280x2066px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 1280x2066px

>>10007947
>the economist
>mfw

I know this is a /pol/ tier comment but Economist is literally owned by the Rothschild family

File: 1504775028679.png (1MB, 3182x3482px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3182x3482px

>>10008166
All of your media is controlled by jews. That has nothing to do with pol, it's just a reality whites must face and reverse.

What are some thick journals, not the kind you see at the dentist?

>>10007947
i'd like to read literary journals, but they never seem to last beyond the third issue.

>>10008166
It is enough to say the wealthy own all major media outlets, –and they're looking to monopolize the internet.

The modern "patrician" class buys up all the media and puts out "pleb" garbage even when it's dressed up as "patric". And lit has threads every week about what's wrong with this pomo, cultural marxist, sjw world.
It's capitalism.

collapse
lacanian ink
lundi matin

>>10008204
>It is enough to say the wealthy own all major media outlets

stop criticizing 40% of the Jewish population, you anti-semite

Harvard Review
The Common
Pleadies
Lapham's
Poetry

File: depositphotos_6374619-stock-photo-two-girls-giggling.jpg (92KB, 1024x712px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1024x712px

>>10008110
>he follows the news

Let's talk about Advance publications:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Publications

who own Conde Nast
reddit.com (spun out)
style.com
thescene.com
Flip.com
men.style.com
Brides.com
epicurious.com
concierge.com
nutritiondata.com
stylefinder.com
arstechnica.com
webmonkey.com
Wired News
pitchfork.com
Allure
Architectural Digest
Bon Appetit
Brides
House & Garden
Condé Nast Traveler
Glamour
Golf Digest
Golf World
GQ
Lucky
The New Yorker
Self
Tatler
Teen Vogue
Vanity Fair
Vogue
W
Wired
The World of Interiors

> owner
> Samuel Irving Newhouse Sr.
> Typically, he would acquire a city's oldest newspaper and then purchase the city's second newspaper thereby allowing him to set advertising rates. Although he would generally promise to keep both papers in business and in competition, he typically would merge the two (which generally meant closing the afternoon paper and keeping the morning) effectively establishing a monopoly and then using the profits to purchase additional newspapers.
> Net worth USD $1.5 billion at the time of his death (approximately 1/1681th of US GNP)
> Spouse(s) Mitzi Epstein (1924–1979)

>>10008257
That's how the Invisible Hand actually works and it's certainly not constrained to the publishing industry.

There's no better literary journal than the NYRB, and it is already shit.
Get over it, plebs...

>>10008257
Don't leave out the most important part:

>Newhouse was born Solomon Isadore Neuhaus in a tenement on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, the eldest of eight children born to Jewish immigrants.

Then ask yourself why jews think it's so important to own all the media in your country.

>>10008166
1. Rothschild is a recent owner, the magazine was previously owned by Pearson and it was just as toxic

2. The biggest stakeholder seems to be Exor (the Agnelli family)

3. There are several Rothschild families (with the same ancestor) that are rivals, in banking and other ventures

4. The Rothschilds are not that powerful compared to the Silicon Valley shitlords

>>10008195
>hurrrr there are Jews in New York!
>and they're rather liberal wow!!!!!

Breaking news.

>>10008293
> lol it's just a subculture in a city, it's not culturally significant to the entire world
> lol it's just an industry full of likeminded editors, they can't have that much of an impact on everything you hear and are
> lol not all rich people! The Jews are scrappy underdogs, it's the rich (and middle class and poor) white people who are the problem

>>10008287
>The Rothschilds are not that powerful
From the research I've done, the opposite is true.

>>10008293
I think you missed the point.

>>10008257
>arstechnica
Tragic what happened to that site.

>>10008313
What happens in New York's publishing business is not very relevant out of the Anglo world. No one cares.

>>10008317
You can't take New York journals only, and act surprised when you discover it's full of Jews. Where are the 100% white literary magazines of Wyoming and Oklahoma, by the way? Why is no one interested by them? Surely they must be much better than the Israelite crap of New York?

>>10008334
>hand-wringing.jpg

File: 1485051804856.jpg (122KB, 1278x1181px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1278x1181px

>>10007947
>journal
>sensationalist and surface-level news roughly about economics but not really

>>10008334
New York publishing isn't relevant outside the Anglo world? Really?

Which part of the world, from a cultural perspective, isn't the Anglo world?

And once you've drawn that line: presumably it is the anglos who would be dictating the editing and ideology of publishing within the Anglo sphere, yet you are affirming what we know is true: they do not.

>>10008334
>Anglo world
is the world outside of china, you dumb cunt

>>10008334
Why do you expect whites to act like jews who turn urban centers into ethnic viper dens and scheme for control over propaganda outlets? White people in Oklahoma just want to live their lives, not compete with deceitful jewish scum. And they don't pay attention to what the lying jewish scum in control of those entities put out these days either.

>>10008365
Literary stuff that's written in English gets moderate to little attention in the countries where the dominant language is not English, especially if they have a solid tradition and a healthy publishing industry.

>>10008371
And where are those Oklahoma literary magazines that will inspire the rebirth of a white paradise on earth, free of any gross Hebrew influence?

>>10008403
> within the anglosphere, a minority of Jews control publishing, not anglos
> but it doesn't matter lol no one outside the anglosphere even reads it!

>>10008403
When whites remove your sick tribe of sociopaths and make it so our money isn't run by and distributed in the interests of a small group of gypsies who are happy to lose that money as long as it furthers their agenda, maybe it will be easier for whites in Oklahoma who want to start such things to do so.

>>10008411
>>10008429
It shouldn't be a problem for the brave and enterprising white race (which is 0% Jewish) to start one good literary magazine, no?

Is there a Jewish conspiracy to prevent that, too? Maybe the Jews are the superior race after all, if they are endowed with such powers.

>>10008458
Whites created nearly every one that jews are now running, you fool. Do you think jews created those things? Jews are parasites who can't create anything. Jews merely took them over from high-trust whites who believed jewish lies and let them in, then turned them into ethnic rackets. Hence the need for whites to now spread the word of jewish behavior, take them back, and expel your people once again.

>>10008468
So, what's your favorite journal?

if you actually read the economist and understood basic economics you'd be liberal too.

File: 38e.png (90KB, 238x276px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 238x276px

>>10008851
>being political
>taking economics seriously
mfw

>>10008851
to clarify, i mean liberal in the english sense as opposed to the american.

Economist is such a piece of shit. Most journals are shit, in fact. Journalists take very little time to actually understand what they're writing about.

The Spectator

London Review of Books

First Things

>>10008334
gee, I wonder who's behind this post

>>10008851
>The Economist
>is about economics

Not in this world, buddy.

Any mainstream publication is banker/ rothschild propaganda. So fuck journals

>>10009109

how's the LRB? they're having a neat discount on it right now and I was considering trying it out

I like Commentary, and the Jewish Review of Books.

>>10008166
I DONT CARE IF IT'S TRUE. IT'S RACIST AND POL TIER AND THE FACT MUST BE HIDDEN AND DENIED AT ALL COST

>>10008223
>40% of Jews own major media conglomerates
This is what /pol/ actually believes

>>10008334
>What happens in New York's publishing business is not very relevant out of the Anglo world.
This is just as retarded.

if the Economist is so shit what is an alternative for overview of world events and commentary on them?

Dont care if im a "brainlet" the Economist tends to bring light to events which I would otherwise never get access to

> See an interesting thread about journals on lit
> Of course no one talks about journals, just about how they hate the economist for being too centrist compared to their political alignment
> Rapidly spirals into /pol/-posting and general stupidity
> just another day on 4chan's most intellectual board

this could have been a good thread

>>10009786
Stop reading the news, start reading the Greeks/Romans/Renaissance authors. They have proven their aesthetic and intellectual value by still being relevant hundreds or thousands of years after their creation. The news is just another form of pop culture, worthless garbage that is not only time wasting but is actively poisonous to the mind. Remember: news is a business, and the model is to get you as addicted as possible to their endless streams of useless information. Anything you actually need to know will trickle down to you regardless if you consume the news or not; you didn't need to read the news to learn that Donald Trump was elected POTUS, for example. Remove yourself from the vortex of shit that is mass media

>ITT autistic 14 year olds that have never read economist try to be contrarian based on the cover and 2 minutes of browsing their site
Sad. Economist and FT are basically the only two decent British publications left out there.
>>10007947
Cicero is bretty entertaining in German.

>>10009780
>fact is literally public
>oy vey shut it down!!!

You guys must stop thinking the Rothschilds are the devil's super sekrit klub or something.

>>10009783
The latest fads of the New Yorker don't really matter in Spain, Japan or France.

The Economist is pretty good. Are you guys larping or what?

I know its almost all current affairs, but what does /lit/ think of private eye?

>>10009872
The Economist is better than other news outlets, if for no other reason than it is issued less frequently. In the same sense that 20 tons of shit is more desirable than 40 tons of shit, the Economist is less harmful than daily or weekly news sources because it is not constantly pelting its reader with the histrionics of the day.

That doesn't make it good. The Economist, or Brookings Institution, or any other pseudo intellectual tentpole organization are black holes for meaningful erudtion

>>10009852
The Economist is truly annoying, you can guess its take on almost every subject before reading it. When was the last time a The Economist article surprised you, or made you reconsider your thoughts on anything?

Okay for the FT.

>>10009907
>you can guess its take on almost every subject before reading it
That's true of any publication that you've read long enough. That's why you don't read just the one. The Economist is at least self-aware and has some integrity compared to the wide majority of British press.

I just wish they would stop with all the punny subtitles on every fucking page

>>10010000
So you're not just advocating reading a news outlet: you're actually saying that one should waste even more time and energy by reading several of them? Are you insane?

>>10009789
your ideology is showing

I liked the SUPER SPOOKY special edition they released before the November elections to make sure everyone was afraid of Putin

Thanks lynn

>>10007947
you still haven't answered me doe why tha FUCK ain't millenials buying diamonds???

>>10009491
So what publications DO you conspiracy theorist read?

>>10009833
>Stop reading the news
But how else will I stay informed?

>>10011457
Stay informed of what? Whatever storyline the news media has latched on to because they believe it will generate clicks? Do you consider staying up to date on Game of Thrones as "being informed" as well? News is not valuable information; it has the exact same usefulness as a television show, or a movie, or any other object of pop culture. They are all narratized semi-realities engineered to extract money and attention from their sheep audience (you). Stop it.

>>10010000
I think that the FT represents a much wider array of opinions, first of all because the articles are written by people with names. The Economist has this unpleasant "anonymous hivemind" effect and doesn't bring anything new to the table.

File: 20170909_171851.jpg (996KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 2560x1440px

Do you guys know where to get recent past issues of the Mass Review?

>>10011499
You're not wrong, but the goal of reading news is to stay informed of the narrative itself. The events themselves have little importance, just like plot details are secondary in any serious fiction.

>>10007947
whatever I happen pick up off the free book table at my university

>>10011773
Figuring out the narrative requires nothing more than a glance at the Wikipedia current events page, followed by a Google search of any specific happening to see what spin major news media is putting on it. Anything more in depth is staring into the abyss; the intellectual equivalent of poison.

The difference between (good) fiction and news is that the fiction has some aesthetic value, or provides some lasting insight into the human condition. News can only produce a resentful bitterness (if you disagree with it) or smug self-superiority (if you concur). It can't be profound because it, by design, is made to be obsolete almost immediately after creation.

>>10011852
People who read newspapers just read the titles, and don't delve seriously into most articles; which is not far from what you advocate in practice.

>>10009071
You're not even remotely wrong, friend.

>>10011852
Also, the news are literally "what the power says". Here is the only value of the news: to know how power tries to represents itself, how it tries to mold people's minds. That makes outlets like CNN or The Economist more valuable than any kind of "red-pilled" or "alternative" news source.

>>10011979
I'm not exactly sure what kind of logic you're using here, but it seems like bullshit.

>>10011997
It's just postmodern "muh power structures" logic. Ignore it.

File: pensive potabo.jpg (58KB, 625x628px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 625x628px

>reading journals
>when you could be reading books

>>10008195
Jews are white you fucking nigger.

>>10007947
I really like frontiers in ecology and evolution. It's always entertaining

>>10007947
Nature Reviews Genetics
Nature Methods
Science (NY)

>>10012041
>confusing post modernism and structuralism
>A wee baby wew lad is coming your way
We la

>>10012106
Most definitely not.

So everyone just shits on The Economist cause it's pro markets? Are you all Europeans or is this board lefty?

>>10011997
"Know thy enemy."

>>10012041
Wrong.

>>10012175
Most seem to hate it because the Rothschild family owns a minority stake in that paper.

so what's the verdict /lit/? is the economist good or not?

>>10012235
It's a lot better than most normie magazines but that is a pretty low bar

In 2010 it seemed like a relatively unbiased rag, but not anymore. (I'm not saying it was unbiased then, but it reads like the Daily Show now)

>>10012106
> t. gentile

>>10012143
>>10012267

Y'all are clearly from bumfuck and haven't met any Jews.

>>10012175
Free market fundamentalism is one of the most revolutionary, non conservative movements in human history. It destroys all tradition and anything resembling tradition in favor of constant upheaval, "creative destruction" as described by its supporters. It is an inherently liberal political orientation.

the economist is weak shit for pseuds, i'd rather read fast company or some shit

>>10008272
T I M E S
L I T E R A R Y
S U P P L E M E N T

>>10012273

So few Jews positively self-identify as "white" (unless they can disparagingly use it as a means to criticism their "fellow white people, who really need to make some changes and be more accepting", that is).

So few Jews make positive claims based on their European heritage, and their parents instruct them that they are not white.

So few Jews draw positive ethnic identity from "whiteness" (a cultural identity, not a skin tone competition), because their Jewish identity has more meaning than that.

It's possible to be from Wyoming or Arkansas to understand this, there are Jews there, too

>>10012308
This is true.

TAANSTAFL broke this dynamic down recently, as well:

http://age-of-treason.com/2017/06/21/jews-debate-whiteness/

Tl;dr: they ain't white.

>>10012325
>>10012308

I don't get why gentiles get so defensive about this issue either

So many SJW sympathizers think this is "totally racist" until you hear it from actual Jews, who don't want anything to do with "white culture" (hence, you know, actively staying out of it for thousands of years)

Yet people are afraid to even admit this observation that the average Jew would claim plain as day, ESPECIALLY Israelis.

Probably because "whiteness" in America is such a nebulous classification to begin with that more or less means your family was part of upper middle class Anglo culture, or your ancestors were smart enough to raise you+your parents as if you were. Jews mostly reject this, and it's fine to be proud of.

>>10008195
(jewish)

>>10012350
>Jews mostly reject this, and it's fine to be proud of.
As long as they learn to accept that this rejection will lead to their own physical rejection from white countries for the however hundredth time.

Again with this anti Jew shit. Don't you realize that decadence, self hatred, and all the other things you delusionally attribute to Jews are just the logical conclusion of the modern condition? Is it so difficult for you to understand that technology has bred this nihilism into western culture, rather than some external force? Jews simply are at the forefront of this because they are the most urbane and educated, not because of some batshit insane conspiracy.

>>10012462
Nah, dude. This begins and ends with you and your ability/willingness to process information that is easily available to you. I don't want to claim that you're a jew if you're not, but I think I can claim with pinpoint accuracy that if you are not a jew, you are a white guy who uses the Internet to whine like a bitch instead of using it to educate yourself about the jewish problem. This isn't about anyone else but you.

>>10012350
Do you mean "white culture" as sieg heiling, pepe cretins or do you mean mainstream elite white culture? Because every Jew I know is fine with the latter. Grandma might not be fine with some goyish grand-son-in-law but everyone else is.

>t. goy who dates JAPS

I initially liked the New Criterion but I don't think I will be renewing my subscription as it's just the right-wing equivalent of "liberal outrage" with each issue. I'm sympathetic to what they say and I do like their literary and historical articles, but I feel as if I don't need further iteration that our universities and intellectual life is in a state of decline. I also feel as if they're too Ivy League for me; sometimes I feel as if they're just a bunch of smug rich snobs.

>>10012530
came here to post this (kind of)
>sometimes I feel as if they're just a bunch of smug rich snobs
top down populists? idk.

>>10012582
>top down populists
What do you mean by that? I think I agree with you, but I'm not sure.

I do like searching through the archive with my subscription, but the actual issues coming in the mail haven't been as great. I feel like they really pander to the WASP-Jew Northeast set. Maybe they have to do that in order to get their funding. Who knows.

>>10012530

I have no idea how anyone publishing a literary magazine makes any money.

>>10010067
That is what you should do, so you have a comprehensive view of what is happening , but more importantly why those things are happening. Then you can talk about that with your friends

>>10012308
>heritage
>cultural identity
Stop being spooked

>>10012610
In the case of the New Criterion, they get grants and donors from people who like their ideological stance. They do not run any ads in their magazine and it isn't widely circulated, therefore someone is lining their pockets. The editor in particular doesn't teach at a university, therefore I suspect he pockets a lot of the donations and gets dank grants.

>>10007947
Journal of East Asian Studies

>>10007947
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHA

THE "ECONOMIST"

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: 1200x630bf.jpg (52KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1200x630px

>>10009109
I agree with First Things.

/pol/ on both chans.

>>10007947
''The Economist is bad trololo''
can underages go ? it's tiresome to have them lambast what's the most stimulating material on the market without suggesting anything else. As if you guys were posers...

>>10009833
>>10011499
>>10011852
unironically kill yourself

>>10013581
Seconded

The ones I read are Standpoint, Spectator and Intersec.

File: emily-bronte.jpg (13KB, 185x224px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 185x224px

I'm going to pretend this thread is not a dumpster fire.

I mostly read literary journals for poetry. Here are some that I like:
- Poetry Magazine
- Ploughshares
- Rattle can be good sometimes
- I like The Paris Review, but don't subscribe because their poetry doesn't really work for me
- The Georgia Review is surprisingly good

>>10009789
it is good... faggot

>>10013581
>>10013591
unseconded, homos

>>10007947
physical review letters

File: rubbish.png (57KB, 1001x772px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1001x772px

>>10013602
>The Georgia Review
Do you get joy out of reading this trash? I checked your Rattle as well and saw some illegal immigrant's whiny blog post about DACA on the front page.

I bet you even think Heathcliff is a nigger. Shame on you.

>>10013866
Hipster garbage. There are far too many homosexuals and kikes on this board.

>>10012530
I know that feeling. I'm still on the fence though.

>>10015782
Don't get me wrong; I like their unapologetic stance of being defenders of high culture and that they even advocate the notion of high culture. There is no other magazine that is closer to my views.

I think what really drags me down is the fact I'll probably never get to write for them since I'm from the West Coast and am not a graduate of Yale or Dartmouth like the majority of their young interns.

File: eliz1-scrots.jpg (60KB, 370x495px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 370x495px

>not reading Jacobite, Social Matter, and Thermidor
>not being on the cutting edge of the new generation of right wing thought and literature

>>10016102
Never seen that portrait of Old Bess before. Nice.

As for your shilling, Jacobite and Thermidor look like rubbish. Social Matter might be OK.

For politics I read The American Conservative. Not all of the stuff they put out is good, but it's the closest to my own beliefs of any publication I've found so far

>>10016102

I just went to check out Jacobite, Social Matter, and Thermidor, and I can't remember the last time I regretted reading something as much as I regret the samples I just subjected myself to from those three "publications".

>>10016102
Thermidor looks cool. Danke! And I enjoy the others, though I myself wouldn't call them journals.

As an aside, I highly recommend to wandering eyes the classy-though-unseasonably-canceled Weimerica podcast on Social Matter. It has a welcoming grace.

>>10013581
Why? He's right and he gave good arguments for why reading the news is a waste of time. You didn't provide any arguments at all.

>>10016218
They're not "journals," no, but they basically serve a similar function, yes? They provide commentary on and analysis of current events and broader trends. Sure, they're not as professional or well-produced as something like The Economist, but that in itself sometimes accords them an advantage.

It's the same for left-wing sites. It's helpful to get perspectives from outside the mainstream publications.

>>10012484
A majority of Jews in Europe and Israel are right-wing and red-pilled as fuck. Explain this.

>>10016305
Okay, yeah I think you're right that they're effectively the same thing.

>>10016218
Oops, I meant "Weimerica Weekly".

>>10016251

You stupid faggots REALLY need to learn the difference between an opinion and an argument.

>>10017924
No they aren't, you fucking moron.