This guy is /lit/ as fuck http://thebookshopper.typepad.com

>>8595390
Fuck off ashtray

>>8595283
Teddy is a genius and a tragic story of being born feeling inferior and getting mindfucked by the CIA in college. He was also a very brilliant mathematician and many graduate students run across one or two of his papers during their research.

>>8595779
He's right, though, everything he says is right.

>>8595785
In his manifesto?
No

>>8595789
Name three points he was wrong on.

>>8595917
name three he was right on

>>8595997
globalization being evil is right and it's such a significant point that it's worth three

>>8596011
kek
no and no

>>8596014
Are you implying that globalization is a good thing?

>>8596017
yes

File: lambo.jpg (27KB, 854x476px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 854x476px

>read a ton of books
>didn't get his Lamborghini

was Tai wrong, /lit/

>>8596020
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ha.html

>>8596023
cool, haiti

>>8596027
There has never been anything cool about Haiti.

>>8596031
thats probably true

>>8596035
Do you ever wonder why?

>>8596036
because of a revolution that pissed off the french and isolated them from the outside world and demanded a ridiculous level of reparations and left them with no economic or political infrastructure, leading to two centuries of no development?

>>8596038
If the French and Americans had taken their dicks out for a couple of decades during that 200 year stretch the country might have made some progress but even now the rest of the world refuses to stop fucking them.

>>8596042
that doesnt really support your point
foreign governments fucking with internal political affairs isnt globalism

>>8596044
Are you using the terms 'globalism' and 'globalization' interchangeably or are you trying to steer this thing in a new direction? Either way I think I've made my point badly. I'll try again.

The inevitable result of globalization is the destruction of all pre-existing social structures making way for a new near-universal low-point in which everyone is out for themselves and the only way up is to be the most eager to scrape and slave at the feet of those at the top.

Haiti's more of an example of why I think we should never support any power that isn't benign.

>>8596068
>Are you using the terms 'globalism' and 'globalization' interchangeably or are you trying to steer this thing in a new direction?
i guess i wasnt being exact, i should be more careful
>The inevitable result of globalization is the destruction of all pre-existing social structures making way for a new near-universal low-point in which everyone is out for themselves and the only way up is to be the most eager to scrape and slave at the feet of those at the top
thats assuming the consistent culture of need that was necessary for the creation of capitalism continues, which seems to be very unlikely. this would only happen if you could convince people that they need to be better than others, which was one of the most important social developments in the creation of market economies

>>8596077
Do you really think that our culture of need continuing far into the future is 'very unlikely?' Our population is declining in some areas but set to absolutely explode in others, leading to a large net increase, and all the while our energy needs are more and more straining and all of our natural resources, from food and water to The Great Barrier Reef are set to start dying off if we aren't careful, which we never are until it's too late.

I think that there are simply too many people for our current advances in agriculture and infrastructure to take care of at their current rates of progress, which will lead to mass migration, encouraged by politicians and business interests who see a horde of cheap labor and votes, which will lead to poor social integration and unrest, which will lead to division and destroy communities leaving everyone inevitably alone, hungry and hopeless.

File: population decline rekt.png (69KB, 973x857px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 973x857px

/lit/ why do we give aid to Africa when their population is exploding?

If we're to fight global climate change, shouldn't we want less humans and not more?

>>8596098
The pope doesn't want us giving them condoms, which would be the sane thing to do, but we have to give them something so let's just pour in mountains of food and money while ignoring the root cause of the problems plaguing them so that we can consider ourselves good people and get on with our day.

tl;dr mein gott *schniff*

>>8596089
>Do you really think that our culture of need continuing far into the future is 'very unlikely?'
yes, its arguably deteriorated in europe already. it may not end as quickly in america but the western world is likely going to lose its economic dominance soon because of it
>ecological stuff
i admit my knowledge of the environment is piss poor but ted never acknowledged it beyond saying others had already written about it
>I think that there are simply too many people for our current advances in agriculture and infrastructure to take care of at their current rates of progress
aren't most population models project the cap at around nine billion?
>which will lead to mass migration, encouraged by politicians and business interests who see a horde of cheap labor and votes
potentially, but as you can see thats becoming a very unpopular policy and dialectics seems to be taking care of it
>which will lead to poor social integration and unrest
if it wasnt that itd be something else
>which will lead to division and destroy communities leaving everyone inevitably alone, hungry and hopeless
thats kind of extrapolating it, it might lead to some friction but the kind of complete social breakdown is quite unlikey

>>8596111
I've seen the arguments made for 9 billion and they're quite compelling, but I think that there's a flaw with them. They assume that people will do the reasonable thing.

I think that it's important to keep in mind that economic growth is the #1 priority of virtually everyone in charge of making decisions on an international scale, and barring some amazing advances in technology or humanity achieving a post-scarcity society I don't see how that's going to be possible without further population growth.

It's happening right now and I see no immediate cause for it to stop. Every country which is facing a declining population is taking drastic measures to keep their economy alive. Germany opened the floodgates to anybody self-claiming refugee status, Japan is coming up with social programs and benefits to get their young people reproducing while at the same time trying to make robots that can take care of old people and perform manual labour, virtually the entire first-world takes in significant amounts of foreign immigrants each year for the purposes of skilled labour to swell their workforces.

Money makes the world go around and in the world's current state you need people to make money and so the way I see it people are going to be in hot demand until some indefinite point in our future when global capitalism is made permanently kill.

And as for the social issues I agree that I tend to exaggerate this one but at the same time I see concerning signs and can't help but worry about them. I find the existence of retirement homes concerning. Sending our elders off to a quiet corner to die when we mostly have the means to take care of them ourselves feels wrong. If that's not a sign of eventual social breakdown I don't know what is. But then I post on 4chan so what do I know about anything social?

>>8596134
Germany actually has (or had until recently) a birth rate at replacement level, the refugee thing was for other reasons.
Japan has been having demographic issues since at least the 80's iirc, and clearly their natalist policies failed.
>until global capitalism is finally kill
It may not be killed but it's direction is going to shift significantly to Africa and Asia in my predictions because of the cultural shifts in Europe. The old Calvinist ideals about the economy that made it grow so quickly are fading and you can see that in the anemic economies of Europe.

Either way, I'm tired and going to bed. This thread will probably still be up tomorrow and id love to keep talking if you want

>Global warming is our biggest worry
>Bring more people into our first world countries thus contributing a lot more to global warming as people in first world countries naturally consume a lot more energy
>Africans, Arabs, and Spics always shit out a tonne of kids
>Sadly they don't do so well in school
>This plan to fight global warming is going to be really great with our >50% highschool drop out work force that consumes a shitload of resources!

I don't understand leftists. There is only one true solution.
Genocide the inferiors, take the resources, split the world in half with Asians taking one half and whites taking the other while we sign a treaty to not fuck Asian women and any man who does is publicly flogged, drawn, and quartered.

>>8596156
groovy, thanks for being a good sport about my fearmongering. I like being taken seriously every now and then.

File: Can't stable judge mabel.jpg (77KB, 600x622px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x622px

>>8596107

>Thinking they'd use condoms when they're still raping babies because they think it cures their AIDS

>>8596044
>foreign governments fucking with internal political affairs isnt globalism
haahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaa

>Martin Eden
Fuck, he has my favourite book in his stack.

>>8595283

Weird that we have this book in common:

Horacio Quiroga, The Decapitated Chicken and Other Stories, 1935

It's not like super popular, and he only listed 33 fictional books. (otherwise, we have 10/33 in common, but that will probably grow as I continue on with the classics)

File: He Did Nothing Wrong.png (607KB, 1022x727px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 1022x727px

He is based as fuck, only mistake in his work is assuming man's natural state of being and making a basic morality system wich he actually breaks up as wrong in his critique of anarcho-primitivism.

>>8595997
Another anon here. Read it and was expecting it to be bad, but some of the stuff was highly interesting.
I think he is spot on how technology forces a system upon us and we become depedent of it.

Just think about the car, our whole infrastructure is build upon it and you can hardly go by without. Similar stuff with the internet.

I feel tho that he ignored the social component of technology. Perhaps one can see the social component as part of the system.

Not only is the infastructure build for cars, it is socially expected. In the same way that you are expected to have other technologies.

I was not impressed by his 'psychoanalysis' (as in pseudoscience) of the left. All it said was HIS association with the left i.e. his experience and feeling.

>>8596396
>>8596467

I've only read the manifesto itself. I don't know about neo-ludditism but his thoughts on the left, socialization, surrogate activities were very thought provoking.

How are his other works? Technological slavery and anti-tech revolution?

>>8596098

Because if we stopped giving aid there would be mass starvation but African countries can't set up the tariffs on foreign grain and food imports that are needed to help their own farmers start producing a bunch of food because the (((WTO))) and (((IMF))) would kick up a fuss and make it hard for them to get developmental aid and loans.

File: 1474231622870.png (11KB, 313x188px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 313x188px

He was actually more /sci/. Pretty sure he was the youngest person to ever teach at Berkeley at the time, or maybe just the youngest to teach math.

File: Comft Zizek.jpg (349KB, 619x1000px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 619x1000px

>>8596512
Technological Slavery is the manifesto with diffrint essays like his Criticism of Anarcho-primitivism wich is brutal and honest. It also includes two essays on his study on the french and russian revolution and how they relate to our current conditions and an essay on how the system coop's rebelliouse impulses to serve its own interest (Like COINTERPRO operations guiding leftist organisations or islamic organisation to work in its interest to expand its controle on the population) Also his letters with some prefessors fill in some interesting questions and it also includes an intervieuw on his life and what ultimatly was the desire of him to lead it. It actually is pretty nice and kinda buddhistic as his desire ultimately was tranquility. (Wich is self dissolving in buddhistic sense)

Check this interview.
http://wildism.org/rca/items/show/38

Reminder that Kaczysnki was a victim of the US government.

>>8596168
im back
>>8596308
you can argue that its an inevitable result of globalism but its not the definition
>>8596467
i guess i should expand my criticism. i found his work seemed to be either blatantly obvious shit (like how technology changes cultures and lives) or stuff that was wrong (trying to revert to a pre-technological state). the idea about surrogate activities and the power process is just political existentialism repackaged

File: juggalo6.jpg (113KB, 745x494px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 745x494px

>>8595917
His justification of violence as a means to an end

>>8597370
Literally every state was born from violence.

>>8596038
t. literally knows nothing about the Haitian revolution

The primary failures of the revolution was the removal of the Mulattoes (aka the only educated blacks there who could run a country) and trying to have a sugar economy without slavery before industrialization

Not to mention all of their diplomatic failures with the First Republic, the British, and the Spanish early on that could have completely turned things around

>>8596467
>Not only is the infastructure build for cars, it is socially expected
He did speak about social aspects of technology tho, i think its not in his manifesto but in one of his letters about the general resistant of non participation of the system by not using a car. The car sets the standart of transportation and eventually you are forced to use it to be the most usefull person to be utilized for the system. I think he does speak about it in the manifesto of the chapter.. ''Technology is a More Powerful Social Force than the Aspiration for Freedom''

>>8597338
>blatantly obvious shit (like how technology changes cultures and lives)
Did you think that it was also obvious how technology can restrict freedom?
For me it sort of was but only because I thought so myself.
>or stuff that was wrong (trying to revert to a pre-technological state).
In what way wrong? Morally or the wrong solution (implying you think there is a problem).

>>8597885
>Did you think that it was also obvious how technology can restrict freedom?
i personally dont think freedom can truly exist so that was a null point
>In what way wrong?
implying it would be in any way better than current existence.

>>8597891
>i personally dont think freedom can truly exist so that was a null point
Vague. If you said that technology will never restrict freedom in ways that are unbearable and so on and so on, I could perhaps agree.
>implying it would be in any way better than current existence.
But I think the guy argues that the future will be worse.

>>8597939
>Vague. If you said that technology will never restrict freedom in ways that are unbearable and so on and so on, I could perhaps agree.
i literally mean freedom as a concept is inherently self contradictory and will never last, especially since it's practically begging to be taken advantage of.
>But I think the guy argues that the future will be worse.
he does, but i dont buy into that either. the shittiness of life is rather constant in the long run